Cargando…

Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery

Constant-voltage and constant-current stimulators may be used for transcranial electrical stimulation of motor evoked potentials (TES-MEP). However, no previous report has determined whether the two monophasic stimulation methods lead to similar responses during intra-operative monitoring. We studie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Masuda, Keisuke, Shigematsu, Hideki, Tanaka, Masato, Iwata, Eiichiro, Yamamoto, Yusuke, Kawaguchi, Masahiko, Takatani, Tsunenori, Kawasaki, Sachiko, Tanaka, Yasuhito
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6405953/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30846708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39883-y
_version_ 1783401194869227520
author Masuda, Keisuke
Shigematsu, Hideki
Tanaka, Masato
Iwata, Eiichiro
Yamamoto, Yusuke
Kawaguchi, Masahiko
Takatani, Tsunenori
Kawasaki, Sachiko
Tanaka, Yasuhito
author_facet Masuda, Keisuke
Shigematsu, Hideki
Tanaka, Masato
Iwata, Eiichiro
Yamamoto, Yusuke
Kawaguchi, Masahiko
Takatani, Tsunenori
Kawasaki, Sachiko
Tanaka, Yasuhito
author_sort Masuda, Keisuke
collection PubMed
description Constant-voltage and constant-current stimulators may be used for transcranial electrical stimulation of motor evoked potentials (TES-MEP). However, no previous report has determined whether the two monophasic stimulation methods lead to similar responses during intra-operative monitoring. We studied differences in the lateralities of compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) during intra-operative spinal cord monitoring via TES-MEP using monophasic constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations. CMAPs were bilaterally recorded from the upper and lower limb muscles in 95 patients who underwent elective spine and spinal cord surgery. We used two monophasic stimulation patterns: pattern 1, right anode and left cathode; pattern 2, right cathode and left anode. There were no statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with respect to success rates, wave amplitudes, and efficiencies, with constant-voltage stimulation, however, there were statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with constant-current stimulation. In case of our stimulation condition, there were no statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with respect to CMAPs with constant-voltage stimulation; constant-current stimulation was influenced by the type of monophasic stimulation, which necessitates the switch the polarity of the stimulation to bilaterally record CMAPs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6405953
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64059532019-03-12 Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery Masuda, Keisuke Shigematsu, Hideki Tanaka, Masato Iwata, Eiichiro Yamamoto, Yusuke Kawaguchi, Masahiko Takatani, Tsunenori Kawasaki, Sachiko Tanaka, Yasuhito Sci Rep Article Constant-voltage and constant-current stimulators may be used for transcranial electrical stimulation of motor evoked potentials (TES-MEP). However, no previous report has determined whether the two monophasic stimulation methods lead to similar responses during intra-operative monitoring. We studied differences in the lateralities of compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) during intra-operative spinal cord monitoring via TES-MEP using monophasic constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations. CMAPs were bilaterally recorded from the upper and lower limb muscles in 95 patients who underwent elective spine and spinal cord surgery. We used two monophasic stimulation patterns: pattern 1, right anode and left cathode; pattern 2, right cathode and left anode. There were no statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with respect to success rates, wave amplitudes, and efficiencies, with constant-voltage stimulation, however, there were statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with constant-current stimulation. In case of our stimulation condition, there were no statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with respect to CMAPs with constant-voltage stimulation; constant-current stimulation was influenced by the type of monophasic stimulation, which necessitates the switch the polarity of the stimulation to bilaterally record CMAPs. Nature Publishing Group UK 2019-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6405953/ /pubmed/30846708 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39883-y Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Masuda, Keisuke
Shigematsu, Hideki
Tanaka, Masato
Iwata, Eiichiro
Yamamoto, Yusuke
Kawaguchi, Masahiko
Takatani, Tsunenori
Kawasaki, Sachiko
Tanaka, Yasuhito
Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
title Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
title_full Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
title_fullStr Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
title_full_unstemmed Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
title_short Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
title_sort monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6405953/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30846708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39883-y
work_keys_str_mv AT masudakeisuke monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT shigematsuhideki monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT tanakamasato monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT iwataeiichiro monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT yamamotoyusuke monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT kawaguchimasahiko monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT takatanitsunenori monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT kawasakisachiko monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery
AT tanakayasuhito monophasictranscranialconstantcurrentversusconstantvoltagestimulationofmotorevokedpotentialsduringspinalsurgery