4.5 Article

Improving successful rate of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials monitoring during spinal surgery in young children

Journal

EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL
Volume 21, Issue 5, Pages 980-984

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-011-1995-z

Keywords

Intraoperative spinal cord monitoring; Motor evoked potentials (MEP); Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP); Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA); Congenital scoliosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This prospective study was to investigate the successful rate of intraoperative motor evoked potentials (MEP) monitoring for children (< 12 years old) with congenital scoliosis. A consecutive series of 27 young children (7 girls and 20 boys; from 1 to 11 years old) between September 2007 and November 2009, were enrolled to this study. 12 patients received general anesthesia based on TIVA, induced with propofol 2-4 mg/kg and fentanyl 3-5 A mu g/kg followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (20-150 A mu g/kg/min, at mean of 71.7 A mu g/kg/min). The other 15 patients received combined inhalation and intravenous anesthesia, induced with sevoflurane and fentanyl 3-5 A mu g/kg and maintained by sevoflurane (0.5-1%). The maintenance of anaesthesia management was performed with stable physiological parameters during surgery. Intraoperative MEP monitoring was successfully performed in all patients, while SEP was successfully performed in 26 of 27 patients. There was no significant difference of successful rates between SEP and MEP monitoring (P > 0.05). As well, no difference in MEP successful rates was observed in two groups with different anesthetic techniques. No wake-up test and no post-operative neurological deficits occurred in this series of patients. Low dose anesthesia by either TIVA with propofol or sevoflurane-based mixture anesthesia protocol can help the intraoperative spinal cord monitoring to successfully elicit MEP and perform reliable monitoring for patients below 12 years of age.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available