Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spine surgery with total intravenous anesthesia or balanced anesthesia with 3% desflurane

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[Tod Sloan, J. Toleikis, Sandra Toleikis, Antoun Koht]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2015
Enthalten in:
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, 29/1(2015-02-01), 77-85
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 605509743
LEADER caa a22 4500
001 605509743
003 CHVBK
005 20210128100642.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 210128e20150201xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.1007/s10877-014-9571-9  |2 doi 
035 |a (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10877-014-9571-9 
245 0 0 |a Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spine surgery with total intravenous anesthesia or balanced anesthesia with 3% desflurane  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [Tod Sloan, J. Toleikis, Sandra Toleikis, Antoun Koht] 
520 3 |a Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and opioids is frequently utilized for spinal surgery when somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) and transcranial motor evoked potentials (tcMEPs) are monitored. Many anesthesiologists would prefer to utilize low dose halogenated anesthetics (e.g. 1/2 MAC). We examined our recent experience using 3% desflurane or TIVA during spine surgery to determine the impact on propofol usage and on the evoked potential responses. After institutional review board approval we conducted a retrospective review of a 6month period for adult spine patients who were monitored with SSEPs and tcMEPs. Cases were included for the study if anesthesia was conducted with propofol-opioid TIVA or 3% desflurane supplemented with propofol or opioid infusions as needed. We evaluated the propofol infusion rate, cortical amplitudes of the SSEPs (median nerve, posterior tibial nerve), amplitudes and stimulation voltage for eliciting the tcMEPs (adductor pollicis brevis, tibialis anterior) and the amplitude variability of the SSEP and tcMEP responses as assessed by the average percentage trial to trial change. Of the 156 spine cases included in the study, 95 had TIVA with propofol-opioid (TIVA) and 61 had 3% expired desflurane (INHAL). Three INHAL cases were excluded because the desflurane was eliminated because of inadequate responses and 26 cases (16 TIVA and 10 INHAL) were excluded due to significant changes during monitoring. Propofol infusion rates in the INHAL group were reduced from the TIVA group (average 115-45μg/kg/min) (p<0.00001) with 21 cases where propofol was not used. No statistically significant differences in cortical SSEP or tcMEP amplitudes, tcMEP stimulation voltages nor in the average trial to trial amplitude variability were seen. The data from these cases indicates that 1/2 MAC (3%) desflurane can be used in conjunction with SSEP and tcMEP monitoring for some adult patients undergoing spine surgery. Further studies are needed to confirm the relative benefits versus negative effects of the use of desflurane and other halogenated agents for anesthesia during procedures on neurophysiological monitoring involving tcMEPs. Further studies are also needed to characterize which patients may or may not be candidates for supplementation such as those with neural dysfunction or who are opioid tolerant from chronic use. 
540 |a Springer Science+Business Media New York, 2014 
690 7 |a Propofol  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Desflurane  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Total intravenous anesthesia  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Somatosensory evoked potentials  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Motor evoked potentials  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Spinal surgery  |2 nationallicence 
700 1 |a Sloan  |D Tod  |u Department of Anesthesiology, Anschutz Office West (AO1), MS 8202, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, 12631 E 17th Avenue, 80045, Aurora, CO, USA  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Toleikis  |D J.  |u Department of Anesthesiology, Rush Medical College, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Toleikis  |D Sandra  |u Department of Anesthesiology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Koht  |D Antoun  |u Departments of Anesthesiology, Neurosurgery, and Neurology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA  |4 aut 
773 0 |t Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing  |d Springer Netherlands  |g 29/1(2015-02-01), 77-85  |x 1387-1307  |q 29:1<77  |1 2015  |2 29  |o 10877 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-014-9571-9  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
900 7 |a Metadata rights reserved  |b Springer special CC-BY-NC licence  |2 nationallicence 
908 |D 1  |a research-article  |2 jats 
949 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |F NATIONALLICENCE  |b NL-springer 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 856  |E 40  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-014-9571-9  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Sloan  |D Tod  |u Department of Anesthesiology, Anschutz Office West (AO1), MS 8202, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, 12631 E 17th Avenue, 80045, Aurora, CO, USA  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Toleikis  |D J.  |u Department of Anesthesiology, Rush Medical College, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Toleikis  |D Sandra  |u Department of Anesthesiology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Koht  |D Antoun  |u Departments of Anesthesiology, Neurosurgery, and Neurology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 773  |E 0-  |t Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing  |d Springer Netherlands  |g 29/1(2015-02-01), 77-85  |x 1387-1307  |q 29:1<77  |1 2015  |2 29  |o 10877