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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jahangiri, Faisal R, Liang, Marie, Kabir, Shabab S, Khowash, Oly
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