Cargando…
Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy
OBJECTIVE: Pre- and postoperative comparative evaluation of neurophysiological tests and clinical trials. Analysis of the diagnostic value of motor evoked potentials (MEP) induced by a magnetic field after supraspinal stimulation. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of electromyography (EM...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6526546/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31198784 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/4576493 |
_version_ | 1783419909140643840 |
---|---|
author | Bryndal, Aleksandra Wojtysiak, Magdalena Moskal, Jakub Lipiec-Kowalska, Joanna Borowczyk, Martyna Tańska, Magdalena Grochulska, Agnieszka Huber, Juliusz Majchrzycki, Marian |
author_facet | Bryndal, Aleksandra Wojtysiak, Magdalena Moskal, Jakub Lipiec-Kowalska, Joanna Borowczyk, Martyna Tańska, Magdalena Grochulska, Agnieszka Huber, Juliusz Majchrzycki, Marian |
author_sort | Bryndal, Aleksandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Pre- and postoperative comparative evaluation of neurophysiological tests and clinical trials. Analysis of the diagnostic value of motor evoked potentials (MEP) induced by a magnetic field after supraspinal stimulation. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of electromyography (EMG) and MEP is achieved. METHODS: EMG, ENG, M-wave, F-wave, and MEP tests were performed on 35 patients with confirmed cervical radiculopathy in pre- and postoperative evaluations. The clinical trial consisted of evaluation of muscle strength, a sensory perception test and evaluation of tendon reflexes and pain severity. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the resting EMG and MEP tests is 24%-67% and 6%-27%, while their specificity is 43%-80% and 86%-100%, respectively. The postoperative evaluation revealed a statistically significant reduction in pain severity (p=0001), an increase in muscle strength in DP (p=0.0431), BB (p=0,0431), and TB (p=0.0272), and improvement of touch sensation in terms of dermatomal innervation in C5 (p=0.0001) and C6 (p=0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: Tests comparing MRI sensitivity to neurophysiological tests show that neuroimaging is more sensitive in diagnostics of patients with cervical radiculopathy; however, clinical neurophysiology tests are more specific in reference to clinical trials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6526546 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65265462019-06-13 Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy Bryndal, Aleksandra Wojtysiak, Magdalena Moskal, Jakub Lipiec-Kowalska, Joanna Borowczyk, Martyna Tańska, Magdalena Grochulska, Agnieszka Huber, Juliusz Majchrzycki, Marian Biomed Res Int Research Article OBJECTIVE: Pre- and postoperative comparative evaluation of neurophysiological tests and clinical trials. Analysis of the diagnostic value of motor evoked potentials (MEP) induced by a magnetic field after supraspinal stimulation. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of electromyography (EMG) and MEP is achieved. METHODS: EMG, ENG, M-wave, F-wave, and MEP tests were performed on 35 patients with confirmed cervical radiculopathy in pre- and postoperative evaluations. The clinical trial consisted of evaluation of muscle strength, a sensory perception test and evaluation of tendon reflexes and pain severity. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the resting EMG and MEP tests is 24%-67% and 6%-27%, while their specificity is 43%-80% and 86%-100%, respectively. The postoperative evaluation revealed a statistically significant reduction in pain severity (p=0001), an increase in muscle strength in DP (p=0.0431), BB (p=0,0431), and TB (p=0.0272), and improvement of touch sensation in terms of dermatomal innervation in C5 (p=0.0001) and C6 (p=0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: Tests comparing MRI sensitivity to neurophysiological tests show that neuroimaging is more sensitive in diagnostics of patients with cervical radiculopathy; however, clinical neurophysiology tests are more specific in reference to clinical trials. Hindawi 2019-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6526546/ /pubmed/31198784 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/4576493 Text en Copyright © 2019 Aleksandra Bryndal et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Bryndal, Aleksandra Wojtysiak, Magdalena Moskal, Jakub Lipiec-Kowalska, Joanna Borowczyk, Martyna Tańska, Magdalena Grochulska, Agnieszka Huber, Juliusz Majchrzycki, Marian Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy |
title | Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy |
title_full | Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy |
title_fullStr | Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy |
title_full_unstemmed | Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy |
title_short | Motor Evoked Potentials after Supraspinal Stimulation in Pre- and Postoperative Evaluations of Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy |
title_sort | motor evoked potentials after supraspinal stimulation in pre- and postoperative evaluations of patients with cervical radiculopathy |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6526546/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31198784 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/4576493 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bryndalaleksandra motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT wojtysiakmagdalena motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT moskaljakub motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT lipieckowalskajoanna motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT borowczykmartyna motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT tanskamagdalena motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT grochulskaagnieszka motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT huberjuliusz motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy AT majchrzyckimarian motorevokedpotentialsaftersupraspinalstimulationinpreandpostoperativeevaluationsofpatientswithcervicalradiculopathy |