Cargando…
Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method
Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) techniques continue to prove useful as an adjunct in select surgeries for reducing the incidence of various postoperative deficits in motor function through the monitoring of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). The Penfield and Taniguchi methods of dir...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9187213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35706721 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.24901 |
_version_ | 1784725121610547200 |
---|---|
author | Jahangiri, Faisal R Liang, Marie Kabir, Shabab S Khowash, Oly |
author_facet | Jahangiri, Faisal R Liang, Marie Kabir, Shabab S Khowash, Oly |
author_sort | Jahangiri, Faisal R |
collection | PubMed |
description | Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) techniques continue to prove useful as an adjunct in select surgeries for reducing the incidence of various postoperative deficits in motor function through the monitoring of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). The Penfield and Taniguchi methods of direct electrical cortical stimulation (DECS) stand in contrast to each other. Penfield’s method uses lower-frequency stimulation over a longer duration, while Taniguchi’s method uses a relatively higher frequency over a short duration. DECS motor mapping is considered suitable for tumor resections, aneurysm surgeries, arteriovenous malformation, and epilepsy surgeries. While subcortical motor mapping works efficiently with both methods, it aligns with Taniguchi’s method more effectively. Taniguchi’s method has a lower risk of seizures relative to Penfield’s method. While only cortical neurons are excited in Penfield’s stimulation technique, Taniguchi’s technique excites the whole corticospinal tract (CST), so it can be used for mapping in a stand-alone fashion. The Penfield technique remains the method of choice for language mapping. In all motor mapping, Train-of-Four (TOF) stimulation during the surgical procedure ensures that the patient’s muscles are not unduly relaxed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9187213 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Cureus |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91872132022-06-14 Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method Jahangiri, Faisal R Liang, Marie Kabir, Shabab S Khowash, Oly Cureus Neurology Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) techniques continue to prove useful as an adjunct in select surgeries for reducing the incidence of various postoperative deficits in motor function through the monitoring of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). The Penfield and Taniguchi methods of direct electrical cortical stimulation (DECS) stand in contrast to each other. Penfield’s method uses lower-frequency stimulation over a longer duration, while Taniguchi’s method uses a relatively higher frequency over a short duration. DECS motor mapping is considered suitable for tumor resections, aneurysm surgeries, arteriovenous malformation, and epilepsy surgeries. While subcortical motor mapping works efficiently with both methods, it aligns with Taniguchi’s method more effectively. Taniguchi’s method has a lower risk of seizures relative to Penfield’s method. While only cortical neurons are excited in Penfield’s stimulation technique, Taniguchi’s technique excites the whole corticospinal tract (CST), so it can be used for mapping in a stand-alone fashion. The Penfield technique remains the method of choice for language mapping. In all motor mapping, Train-of-Four (TOF) stimulation during the surgical procedure ensures that the patient’s muscles are not unduly relaxed. Cureus 2022-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9187213/ /pubmed/35706721 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.24901 Text en Copyright © 2022, Jahangiri et al. https://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 Jahangiri, Faisal R Liang, Marie Kabir, Shabab S Khowash, Oly Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method |
title | Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method |
title_full | Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method |
title_fullStr | Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method |
title_full_unstemmed | Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method |
title_short | Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method |
title_sort | motor mapping of the brain: taniguchi versus penfield method |
topic | Neurology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9187213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35706721 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.24901 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jahangirifaisalr motormappingofthebraintaniguchiversuspenfieldmethod AT liangmarie motormappingofthebraintaniguchiversuspenfieldmethod AT kabirshababs motormappingofthebraintaniguchiversuspenfieldmethod AT khowasholy motormappingofthebraintaniguchiversuspenfieldmethod |