From the Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary.
Department of Anesthesiology, NorthShore University Health System, University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Anesth Analg. 2020 Apr;130(4):941-948. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004326.
There is a need for easy to use, reliable neuromuscular monitors (NMMs). This multicenter, prospective, unblinded study compared the discomfort associated with neurostimulation in unmedicated healthy volunteers when using the new electromyography (EMG)-based TetraGraph and acceleromyography (AMG)-based TOF-Watch NMMs. The secondary aim was to compare the repeatability of the train-of-four (TOF) ratios (TOFRs) obtained with the 2 devices.
The TOF measurements of 135 volunteers from 3 university hospitals were analyzed (age: 38.3 ± 12 years [mean ± standard deviation [SD]]; male/female ratio = 63:72). The left or right ulnar nerve was stimulated at the wrist in TOF mode with 20, 30, 40, and 50 mA stimulating current intensities with both devices in random order. The TOF-Watch used standard electrocardiography (ECG) electrodes (Red Dot; 3M Health Care) for nerve stimulation. The stimulating surface area of 1 ECG electrode is 113 mm. The piezoelectric probe was attached to the thumb, and a hand adapter was used to ensure consistency of AMG measurements. The TetraGraph uses proprietary surface strip electrodes for nerve stimulation and muscle action potential recording, whose stimulating surface area is roughly twice as big as that of standard ECG electrodes (228.5 mm). The volunteers were asked to rate the discomfort associated with neurostimulation on a 0-10 verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) score anchored with 0 (no pain) and 10 (worst pain ever experienced). A linear mixed-effects model was used to evaluate the difference in VNRS scores between devices. P <.05 was accepted as the level of significance.
In the linear mixed-effects model, there were no differences in VNRS scores between devices at any of the stimulating current intensities, P = .38. The median (range) VNRS scores obtained with TOF-Watch and TetraGraph devices were 2 (0-7) vs 2 (0-8) at 20 mA, 3 (1-9) vs 3 (1-9) at 30 mA, 5 (1-10) vs 5 (1-10) at 40 mA, and 5 (1-10) vs 6 (1-10) at 50 mA stimulating current intensities. The mean of the 1469 TOFRs obtained with TetraGraph was 100.43% ± 7.74% (standard error = 0.2%). Due to technical difficulties, the repeatability of the TOFRs could not be determined.
Despite the different size and design of the stimulating electrodes, the 2 NMMs caused the same level of discomfort in unmedicated healthy volunteers.
需要易于使用且可靠的神经肌肉监测仪(NMM)。这项多中心、前瞻性、非盲研究比较了在未用药的健康志愿者中使用新型基于肌电图(EMG)的 TetraGraph 和基于加速肌描记法(AMG)的 TOF-Watch NMM 进行神经刺激时与不适感相关的问题。次要目的是比较两种设备获得的四个成串刺激(TOF)比值(TOFR)的可重复性。
分析了来自 3 家大学医院的 135 名志愿者的 TOF 测量结果(年龄:38.3 ± 12 岁[均值 ± 标准差(SD)];男女比例=63:72)。使用两种设备以随机顺序在腕部以 20、30、40 和 50 mA 刺激电流强度在 TOF 模式下刺激左或右尺神经。TOF-Watch 使用标准心电图(ECG)电极(Red Dot;3M Health Care)进行神经刺激。一个 ECG 电极的刺激表面积为 113mm²。将压电探头贴在拇指上,并使用手部适配器确保 AMG 测量的一致性。TetraGraph 使用专有的表面条状电极进行神经刺激和肌肉动作电位记录,其刺激表面积大约是标准 ECG 电极的两倍(228.5mm²)。志愿者被要求使用 0-10 的数字评分量表(VNRS)对神经刺激引起的不适程度进行评分,0 表示无疼痛,10 表示经历过的最严重疼痛。使用线性混合效应模型评估两种设备之间 VNRS 评分的差异。P<.05 被认为是显著性水平。
在线性混合效应模型中,在任何刺激电流强度下,两种设备的 VNRS 评分均无差异,P=0.38。使用 TOF-Watch 和 TetraGraph 设备获得的中位数(范围)VNRS 评分分别为 2(0-7)比 2(0-8)在 20 mA 时,3(1-9)比 3(1-9)在 30 mA 时,5(1-10)比 5(1-10)在 40 mA 时,和 5(1-10)比 6(1-10)在 50 mA 刺激电流强度时。使用 TetraGraph 获得的 1469 个 TOFR 的平均值为 100.43%±7.74%(标准误差=0.2%)。由于技术困难,无法确定 TOFR 的可重复性。
尽管刺激电极的大小和设计不同,但两种 NMM 在未用药的健康志愿者中引起的不适感水平相同。