The Journal of Practical Medicine >
Feasibility of monitoring the baseline of motor evoked potentials immediately after tracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in lumbar spine surgery
Received date: 2024-04-11
Online published: 2024-08-26
Objective To investigate the feasibility of monitoring the baseline of motor evoked potentials immediately following tracheal intubation without the administration of muscle relaxants in lumbar spine surgery. Methods A prospective study was conducted at Xuzhou Central Hospital， involving a total of 156 patients who were scheduled for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. These patients were randomly divided into two groups： a control group consisting of 72 cases （33 males and 39 females） and an observation group consisting of 75 cases （37 males and 38 females）. The control group underwent monitoring of motor evoked potentials （TceMEP） baseline after spinal exposure during the operation， while the observation group had immediate monitoring of TceMEP baseline after tracheal intubation without muscle relaxants. Hemodynamic changes， intubation satisfaction， and operation time during tracheal intubation were compared between the two patient groups. Additionally， the baseline success rate， stimulation threshold， sensitivity， and specificity of TceMEP were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences in hemodynamic changes and intubation satisfaction between the two patient groups during tracheal intubation （P > 0.05）. The control group had an intubation time of （6.52 ± 1.22） min， while the observation group had a significantly longer intubation time of （9.44 ± 0.84） min （P < 0.05）. The baseline success rate of TceMEP in the observation group was 100%， with an average stimulation threshold of （225.00 ± 22.13）. In contrast， the control group had a baseline success rate of 84.72% and an average stimulation threshold of （342.01 ± 31.07）V for TceMEP monitoring prior to nailing procedures. The success rate of monitoring TceMEP after nailing in the control group was 93.06%， whereas it reached 100% in the observation group， demonstrating a statistically significant difference between the two groups （P<0.05）. There were no statistically significant differences in sensitivity and specificity between the two groups for TceMEP monitoring results（P>0.05）. Conclusions The success rate of monitoring TceMEP baseline immediately after tracheal intubation without muscle relaxation is higher， with a smaller stimulation threshold. There were no differences in sensitivity and specificity compared to the baseline monitoring of TceMEP after spinal exposure during the operation.
Wei ZHENG , Na LI , Lei LIU , Songtao LIU , Hai ZHOU , Jie LIU , Zhengquan HU , Liwei. WANG . Feasibility of monitoring the baseline of motor evoked potentials immediately after tracheal intubation without muscle relaxants in lumbar spine surgery[J]. The Journal of Practical Medicine, 2024 , 40(16) : 2298 -2304 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2024.16.016
| 1 | SHIGEMATSU H， YOSHIDA G， KOBAYASHI K， et al. Understanding the effect of non-surgical factors in a transcranial motor-evoked potential alert： A retrospective cohort study［J］. J Orthop Sci，2021，26（5）：739-743. doi:10.1016/j.jos.2020.07.008 |
| 2 | KERDONCUFF A， HENRY P， COMPAGNON R， et al. Feasibility， safety and reliability of surgeon-directed transcranial motor evoked potentials monitoring in scoliosis surgery［J］. Children （Basel），2023，10（9）：1-9. doi:10.3390/children10091560 |
| 3 | WALKER C T， KIM H J， PARK P， et al. Neuroanesthesia guidelines for optimizing transcranial motor evoked potential neuromonitoring during deformity and complex spinal surgery： A Delphi consensus Study［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 2020，45（13）：911-920. doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000003433 |
| 4 | PHOOWANAKULCHAI S， KAWAGUCHI M. Updated review on the use of neuromuscular blockade during intraoperative motor-evoked potential monitoring in the modern anesthesia era［J］. J Anesth，2024，38（1）：114-124. doi:10.1007/s00540-023-03265-6 |
| 5 | YOSHIDA G， ANDO M， IMAGAMA S， et al. Alert timing and corresponding intervention with intraoperative spinal cord monitoring for high-risk spinal surgery［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 2019，44（8）：E470-E479. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000002900 |
| 6 | DAROSZEWSKI P， GARASZ A， HUBER J， et al. Update on neuromonitoring procedures applied during surgery of the spine - observational study［J］. Reumatologia，2023，61（1）：21-29. doi:10.5114/reum/160209 |
| 7 | YOSHIDA G， IMAGAMA S， KAWABATA S， et al. Adverse events related to transcranial electric stimulation for motor-evoked potential monitoring in high-risk spinal surgery［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 2019，44（20）：1435-1440. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000003115 |
| 8 | 李崟坤，邱俊荫，史本龙，等. 先天性多发性关节屈曲挛缩症伴脊柱侧凸与青少年特发性脊柱侧凸矫形术中神经电生理监测结果的对比研究［J］. 中华医学杂志，2023，103（23）：1774-1780. |
| 9 | DAROSZEWSKI P， HUBER J， KACZMAREK K， et al. "Real-Time Neuromonitoring" increases the safety and non-invasiveness and shortens the duration of idiopathic scoliosis surgery［J］. J Clin Med，2024，13（5）：1-24. doi:10.3390/jcm13051497 |
| 10 | DIMARIA S， WILENT W B， NICHOLSON K J， et al. Patient factors impacting baseline motor evoked potentials （MEPs） in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery for myelopathy or radiculopathy［J］. Clin Spine Surg， 2022，35（6）：E527-E533. doi:10.1097/bsd.0000000000001299 |
| 11 | KOBAYASHI K， IMAGAMA S， YOSHIDA G， et al. Effects of preoperative motor status on intraoperative motor-evoked potential monitoring for high-risk spinal surgery： A prospective multicenter study［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 2021，46（12）：E694-E700. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000003994 |
| 12 | USHIROZAKO H， YOSHIDA G， KOBAYASHI S， et al. Impact of total propofol dose during spinal surgery： anesthetic fade on transcranial motor evoked potentials［J］. J Neurosurg Spine， 2019，30（5）：705-713. doi:10.3171/2018.10.spine18322 |
| 13 | TAMKUS A A， RICE K S， KIM H L. Differential rates of false-positive findings in transcranial electric motor evoked potential monitoring when using inhalational anesthia versus total intravenous anesthesia during spine surgeries［J］. Spine J， 2014，14（8）：1440-1446. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.08.037 |
| 14 | XIANG B， JIAO S， ZHANG Y， et al. Effects of desflurane and sevoflurane on somatosensory-evoked and motor-evoked potential monitoring during neurosurgery： a randomized controlled trial［J］.BMC Anesthesiol，2021，21（1）：1-8. doi:10.1186/s12871-021-01463-x |
| 15 | JIANG X， TANG X， LIU S， et al. Effects of dexmedetomidine on evoked potentials in spinal surgery under combined intravenous inhalation anesthesia： a randomized controlled trial［J］. BMC Anesthesiol，2023，23（1）：1-10. doi:10.1186/s12871-023-01990-9 |
| 16 | KIM S H， HONG J Y， SUK E H， et al. Optimum bolus dose of propofol for tracheal intubation during sevoflurane induction without neuromuscular blockade in children［J］. Anaesth Intensive Care， 2011，39（5）：899-903. doi:10.1177/0310057x1103900540 |
| 17 | KIM J S， KIM D H， JOE H B， et al. Effect of tracheal lidocaine on intubating conditions during propofol-remifentanil target-controlled infusion without neuromuscular blockade in day-case anesthesia［J］. Korean J Anesthesiol， 2013，65（5）：425-430. doi:10.4097/kjae.2013.65.5.425 |
| 18 | BRIDWELL K H， LENKE L G， BALDUS C， et al. Major intraoperative neurologic deficits in pediatric and adult spinal deformity patients. Incidence and etiology at one institution［J］. Spine （Phila Pa 1976）， 1998，23（3）：324-331. doi:10.1097/00007632-199802010-00008 |
| 19 | KRISHNAKUMAR R， SRIVATSA N. Multimodal intraoperative neuromonitoring in scoliosis surgery： A two-year prospective analysis in a single centre［J］. Neurol India，2017，65（1）：75-79. doi:10.4103/0028-3886.198189 |
| 20 | DAROSZEWSKI P， HUBER J， KACZMAREK K， et al. Comparison of motor evoked potentials neuromonitoring following pre- and postoperative transcranial magnetic stimulation and intraoperative electrical stimulation in patients undergoing surgical correction of idiopathic scoliosis［J］. J Clin Med，2023，12（19）：1-21. doi:10.3390/jcm12196312 |
| 21 | OH B H， KIM J Y， LEE J B， et al. Failure to obtain baseline signals of transcranial motor-evoked potentials in spine surgery： Analysis of the reasons［J］. World Neurosurg， 2023，170：e144-e150. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.10.082 |
| 22 | TOKI T， FUJITA N， ICHIKAWA T， et al. Factors affecting transcranial motor-evoked potential measurements using single-train stimulation with an increased number of pulses during adolescent scoliosis surgery： A prospective observational study［J］. J Clin Med，2023，12（13）：1-12. doi:10.3390/jcm12134433 |
| 23 | MOERMAN A T， HERREGODS L L， DE VOS M M， et al. Manual versus target-controlled infusion remifentanil administration in spontaneously breathing patients［J］. Anesth Analg， 2009，108（3）：828-834. doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e318198f6dc |
| 24 | VLAJKOVI? G， SINDELI? R， MARKOVI? D， et al. Endotracheal intubation without the use of muscle relaxants in patients with myasthenia gravis［J］. Med Pregl， 2009，62（9/10）：412-416. doi:10.2298/mpns0910412v |
| 25 | 钱玥，马正良. 快速康复外科理念下日间手术的麻醉与围术期质量控制［J］. 实用医学杂志，2024，40（8）：1042-1046. |
| 26 | LIU H， JIAN M， WANG C， et al. Effect of sugammadex during transcranial electrical motor evoked potentials monitoring in spinal surgery： A randomized controlled trial［J］. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol，2023，35（2）：224-231. doi:10.1097/ana.0000000000000820 |
| 27 | CHOI I， HYUN S J， KANG J K， et al. Combined muscle motor and somatosensory evoked potentials for intramedullary spinal cord tumour surgery［J］. Yonsei Med J， 2014，55（4）：1063-1071. doi:10.3349/ymj.2014.55.4.1063 |
| 28 | 刘洋，李楠，马蓉，等. 序贯法测定舒更葡糖钠恢复深肌松状态下腰椎融合术中经颅运动诱发电位的ED 50［J］. 国际麻醉学与复苏杂志， 2023，44（8）：816-820. |
| 29 | SHIDA Y， SHIDA C， HIRATSUKA N， et al. High-frequency stimulation restored motor-evoked potentials to the baseline level in the upper extremities but not in the lower extremities under sevoflurane anesthesia in spine surgery［J］. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol， 2012，24（2）：113-120. doi:10.1097/ana.0b013e318237fa41 |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |