14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring - a position statement by the American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring.

      Clinical Neurophysiology
      Arrhythmias, Cardiac, etiology, Bites, Human, epidemiology, Brain, anatomy & histology, physiology, Central Nervous System Neoplasms, physiopathology, surgery, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Evidence-Based Medicine, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Humans, Monitoring, Intraoperative, contraindications, methods, standards, Muscle, Skeletal, Neurophysiological Monitoring, Neurosurgical Procedures, Patient Outcome Assessment, Spinal Cord, blood supply, United States

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The following intraoperative MEP recommendations can be made on the basis of current evidence and expert opinion: (1) Acquisition and interpretation should be done by qualified personnel. (2) The methods are sufficiently safe using appropriate precautions. (3) MEPs are an established practice option for cortical and subcortical mapping and for monitoring during surgeries risking motor injury in the brain, brainstem, spinal cord or facial nerve. (4) Intravenous anesthesia usually consisting of propofol and opioid is optimal for muscle MEPs. (5) Interpretation should consider limitations and confounding factors. (6) D-wave warning criteria consider amplitude reduction having no confounding factor explanation: >50% for intramedullary spinal cord tumor surgery, and >30-40% for peri-Rolandic surgery. (7) Muscle MEP warning criteria are tailored to the type of surgery and based on deterioration clearly exceeding variability with no confounding factor explanation. Disappearance is always a major criterion. Marked amplitude reduction, acute threshold elevation or morphology simplification could be additional minor or moderate spinal cord monitoring criteria depending on the type of surgery and the program's technique and experience. Major criteria for supratentorial, brainstem or facial nerve monitoring include >50% amplitude reduction when warranted by sufficient preceding response stability. Future advances could modify these recommendations. Copyright © 2013 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article