Cargando…

Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report

Transcranial motor evoked potential (TCMEP) and direct cortical motor evoked potential (DCMEP) paradigms have historically been used contemporaneously or independently for supratentorial craniotomies. DCMEP provides focal stimulation to the cortical surface, whereas TCMEP stimulation is more variabl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silverstein, Justin W, Rosenthal, Andrew, Ellis, Jason A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6389021/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30820390
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3771
_version_ 1783397869343997952
author Silverstein, Justin W
Rosenthal, Andrew
Ellis, Jason A
author_facet Silverstein, Justin W
Rosenthal, Andrew
Ellis, Jason A
author_sort Silverstein, Justin W
collection PubMed
description Transcranial motor evoked potential (TCMEP) and direct cortical motor evoked potential (DCMEP) paradigms have historically been used contemporaneously or independently for supratentorial craniotomies. DCMEP provides focal stimulation to the cortical surface, whereas TCMEP stimulation is more variable and may be activating structures deeper than those at risk during a supratentorial craniotomy. We present the case report for a 65-year-old female who underwent a supratentorial craniotomy for the clipping of a right-sided unruptured middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysm. DCMEP recordings of the upper extremity degraded after the parent vessel was temporarily occluded with a clip. The recordings returned once the clip was released. The DCMEP lower extremity recordings did not deviate from their established baseline. TCMEP recordings (upper and lower extremities) also did not deviate from their established baselines. The permanent clip was placed without incident, and the patient awoke neurologically intact. This case study demonstrates the specificity and sensitivity of DCMEP vs. TCMEP. DCMEP activates the corticospinal tract more superficially; therefore, it was evident by the loss of the upper extremity DCMEPs without the loss of lower extremity DCMEPs that the temporary vessel occlusion caused an ischemic event focal to the cortical area perfused by the MCA. This ischemic event was not detected by TCMEP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6389021
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63890212019-02-28 Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report Silverstein, Justin W Rosenthal, Andrew Ellis, Jason A Cureus Neurology Transcranial motor evoked potential (TCMEP) and direct cortical motor evoked potential (DCMEP) paradigms have historically been used contemporaneously or independently for supratentorial craniotomies. DCMEP provides focal stimulation to the cortical surface, whereas TCMEP stimulation is more variable and may be activating structures deeper than those at risk during a supratentorial craniotomy. We present the case report for a 65-year-old female who underwent a supratentorial craniotomy for the clipping of a right-sided unruptured middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysm. DCMEP recordings of the upper extremity degraded after the parent vessel was temporarily occluded with a clip. The recordings returned once the clip was released. The DCMEP lower extremity recordings did not deviate from their established baseline. TCMEP recordings (upper and lower extremities) also did not deviate from their established baselines. The permanent clip was placed without incident, and the patient awoke neurologically intact. This case study demonstrates the specificity and sensitivity of DCMEP vs. TCMEP. DCMEP activates the corticospinal tract more superficially; therefore, it was evident by the loss of the upper extremity DCMEPs without the loss of lower extremity DCMEPs that the temporary vessel occlusion caused an ischemic event focal to the cortical area perfused by the MCA. This ischemic event was not detected by TCMEP. Cureus 2018-12-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6389021/ /pubmed/30820390 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3771 Text en Copyright © 2018, Silverstein et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Neurology
Silverstein, Justin W
Rosenthal, Andrew
Ellis, Jason A
Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report
title Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report
title_full Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report
title_fullStr Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report
title_full_unstemmed Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report
title_short Direct Cortical Motor Evoked Potentials Versus Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials for the Detection of Cortical Ischemia During Supratentorial Craniotomy: Case Report
title_sort direct cortical motor evoked potentials versus transcranial motor evoked potentials for the detection of cortical ischemia during supratentorial craniotomy: case report
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6389021/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30820390
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3771
work_keys_str_mv AT silversteinjustinw directcorticalmotorevokedpotentialsversustranscranialmotorevokedpotentialsforthedetectionofcorticalischemiaduringsupratentorialcraniotomycasereport
AT rosenthalandrew directcorticalmotorevokedpotentialsversustranscranialmotorevokedpotentialsforthedetectionofcorticalischemiaduringsupratentorialcraniotomycasereport
AT ellisjasona directcorticalmotorevokedpotentialsversustranscranialmotorevokedpotentialsforthedetectionofcorticalischemiaduringsupratentorialcraniotomycasereport