We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Warning criteria for intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring.
Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology 2017 October
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Intraoperative changes in somatosensory (SEP) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) may indicate potential injury to the spinal cord and will require timely intervention to prevent permanent damage. This review focuses on the validity of currently recommended warning criteria for intraoperative evoked potential monitoring.
RECENT FINDINGS: Current guideline recommends a decrease in SEP amplitude by 50% and MEP amplitude by 50-100% as warning signals for injury to the ascending sensory and descending motor pathway, respectively. On the basis of cohort studies, the diagnostic accuracy of SEP and MEP to predict postoperative neurologic deficits was variable. Importantly, 0.1-4.1% of monitored patients suffered postoperative neurologic deficit despite apparently normal SEP and MEP recordings (i.e. false negative events). These data suggested that the true warning criteria may be lower than previously acknowledged. A systematic review of studies that reported changes in SEP or MEP monitoring and postoperative neurological outcome showed an association between changes in monitoring signals and postoperative neurological deficits. However, the confidence intervals were wide and it is not possible to determine a threshold value in SEP or MEP amplitude beyond which may indicate neurologic deficit.
SUMMARY: Current recommendations for warning criteria during intraoperative evoked potential monitoring are empirically derived. Until a threshold that predicts spinal cord injury can be accurately determined, it remains difficult to define the clinical utility of intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring.
RECENT FINDINGS: Current guideline recommends a decrease in SEP amplitude by 50% and MEP amplitude by 50-100% as warning signals for injury to the ascending sensory and descending motor pathway, respectively. On the basis of cohort studies, the diagnostic accuracy of SEP and MEP to predict postoperative neurologic deficits was variable. Importantly, 0.1-4.1% of monitored patients suffered postoperative neurologic deficit despite apparently normal SEP and MEP recordings (i.e. false negative events). These data suggested that the true warning criteria may be lower than previously acknowledged. A systematic review of studies that reported changes in SEP or MEP monitoring and postoperative neurological outcome showed an association between changes in monitoring signals and postoperative neurological deficits. However, the confidence intervals were wide and it is not possible to determine a threshold value in SEP or MEP amplitude beyond which may indicate neurologic deficit.
SUMMARY: Current recommendations for warning criteria during intraoperative evoked potential monitoring are empirically derived. Until a threshold that predicts spinal cord injury can be accurately determined, it remains difficult to define the clinical utility of intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app