JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Anesth Analg 2008; 106:930-934
© 2008 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181617508
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yamamoto, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Furuya, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yamamoto, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Furuya, H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Neuroanesthesia
Right arrow Anesthetic Techniques
Right arrow Pharmacology


NEUROSURGICAL ANESTHESIA

The Effects of the Neuromuscular Blockade Levels on Amplitudes of Posttetanic Motor-Evoked Potentials and Movement in Response to Transcranial Stimulation in Patients Receiving Propofol and Fentanyl Anesthesia

Yuri Yamamoto, MD*, Masahiko Kawaguchi, MD*, Hironobu Hayashi, MD*, Toshinori Horiuchi, MD*, Satoki Inoue, MD*, Hiroyuki Nakase, MD{dagger}, Toshisuke Sakaki, MD{dagger}, and Hitoshi Furuya, MD*

From the Departments of *Anesthesiology and {dagger}Neurosurgery, Nara Medical University, Nara, Japan.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Masahiko Kawaguchi, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Nara Medical University, 840 Shijo-cho, Kashihara, Nara 634-8522, Japan. Address e-mail to drjkawa{at}naramed-u.ac.jp.

BACKGROUND: Patient movement in response to transcranial stimulation during monitoring of myogenic motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) may interfere with surgery. We recently reported a new technique to augment the amplitudes of myogenic MEPs, called "post-tetanic MEPs (p-MEPs)," in which tetanic stimulation of a peripheral nerve was applied prior to transcranial stimulation. We conducted the present study to determine an appropriate level of neuromuscular blockade during the monitoring of p-MEPs with a focus on patient movement.

METHODS: In 15 patients under propofol/fentanyl anesthesia, conventional MEPs (c-MEPs) and p-MEPs in response to transcranial electrical stimulation were recorded from the abductor hallucis muscle. For p-MEP recording, tetanic stimulation to the posterior tibial nerve at an intensity of 50 mA for 5 s was started 6 s prior to transcranial stimulation. The level of neuromuscular blockade was assessed by recording the amplitude of compound muscle action potentials (T1) from the abductor hallucis brevis muscle in response to supramaximal electrical stimulation of the median nerve at the wrist. After the baseline recordings of c-MEP and p-MEP at a T1 of 50% of control, 0.1 mg/kg of vecuronium was injected and the amplitudes of c-MEPs and p-MEPs were recorded. Patient movement was also assessed with the movement score ranging from 1 to 4 (1 = no movement, 4 = severe movement).

RESULTS: T1, %T1, the amplitudes of c-MEPs and p-MEPs, and the movement score changed in parallel after the administration of vecuronium. The amplitudes of p-MEPs before and 15–45 min after the administration of vecuronium were significantly higher than those of c-MEPs. When T1 and %T1 were less than and equal to 1 mV and 10%, respectively, the movement score was 1 or 2 in all patients, indicating that microscopic surgery was possible without the interruption of surgical procedures. When T1 was around 1 mV (0.8–1.2 mV), the success rates of recording of c-MEPs and p-MEPs were 73% (11 of 15) and 100% (15 of 15), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Under propofol/fentanyl anesthesia, p-MEP could be recorded at a T1 of 1 mV, in which patient movement in response to transcranial stimulation did not interfere with surgery. This technique may be used in patients without preoperative motor deficits, in which patient movement during surgical procedures is not preferable.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
H. Hayashi, M. Kawaguchi, Y. Yamamoto, S. Inoue, M. Koizumi, Y. Ueda, Y. Takakura, and H. Furuya
The Application of Tetanic Stimulation of the Unilateral Tibial Nerve Before Transcranial Stimulation Can Augment the Amplitudes of Myogenic Motor-Evoked Potentials from the Muscles in the Bilateral Upper and Lower Limbs
Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2008; 107(1): 215 - 220.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2008 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2008 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.