Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nara Medical University, 840 Shijo-cho Kashihara City, Nara, 6348522, Japan.
Department of Anesthesiology, Nara Medical University, 840 Shijo-cho Kashihara City, Nara, 6348522, Japan.
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 7;9(1):3773. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-39883-y.
Constant-voltage and constant-current stimulators may be used for transcranial electrical stimulation of motor evoked potentials (TES-MEP). However, no previous report has determined whether the two monophasic stimulation methods lead to similar responses during intra-operative monitoring. We studied differences in the lateralities of compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) during intra-operative spinal cord monitoring via TES-MEP using monophasic constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations. CMAPs were bilaterally recorded from the upper and lower limb muscles in 95 patients who underwent elective spine and spinal cord surgery. We used two monophasic stimulation patterns: pattern 1, right anode and left cathode; pattern 2, right cathode and left anode. There were no statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with respect to success rates, wave amplitudes, and efficiencies, with constant-voltage stimulation, however, there were statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with constant-current stimulation. In case of our stimulation condition, there were no statistically significant differences between the right and left sides with respect to CMAPs with constant-voltage stimulation; constant-current stimulation was influenced by the type of monophasic stimulation, which necessitates the switch the polarity of the stimulation to bilaterally record CMAPs.
恒压和恒流刺激器可用于经颅电刺激运动诱发电位(TES-MEP)。然而,以前没有研究确定这两种单相刺激方法在术中监测时是否会产生相似的反应。我们研究了在使用单相恒流和恒压刺激进行术中脊髓监测时,TES-MEP 中复合肌肉动作电位(CMAP)的左右侧差异。95 例行择期脊柱和脊髓手术的患者双侧上肢和下肢肌肉记录 CMAP。我们使用了两种单相刺激模式:模式 1,右阳极和左阴极;模式 2,右阴极和左阳极。在恒压刺激时,成功率、波幅和效率方面,右侧和左侧之间没有统计学差异,但在恒流刺激时,右侧和左侧之间有统计学差异。在我们的刺激条件下,恒压刺激时右侧和左侧的 CMAP 之间没有统计学差异;恒流刺激受单相刺激类型的影响,需要切换刺激极性以双侧记录 CMAP。