TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing Motor-Evoked Potential Characteristics of NEedle versus suRFACE Recording Electrodes during Spinal Cord Monitoring
T2 - The NERFACE Study Part I
AU - Gadella, Maria C.
AU - Dulfer, Sebastiaan E.
AU - Absalom, Anthony R.
AU - Lange, Fiete
AU - Scholtens-Henzen, Carola H.M.
AU - Groen, Rob J.M.
AU - Wapstra, Frits H.
AU - Faber, Christopher
AU - Tamási, Katalin
AU - Sahinovic, Marko M.
AU - Drost, Gea
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 by the authors.
PY - 2023/2/10
Y1 - 2023/2/10
N2 - Muscle-recorded transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potentials (mTc-MEPs) are used to assess the spinal cord integrity. They are commonly recorded with subcutaneous needle or surface electrodes, but the different characteristics of mTc-MEP signals recorded with the two types of electrodes have not been formally compared yet. In this study, mTc-MEPs were simultaneously recorded from the tibialis anterior (TA) muscles using surface and subcutaneous needle electrodes in 242 consecutive patients. Elicitability, motor thresholds, amplitude, area under the curve (AUC), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and the variability between mTc-MEP amplitudes were compared. Whereas amplitude and AUC were significantly higher in subcutaneous needle recordings (p < 0.01), motor thresholds and elicitability were similar for surface and subcutaneous needle recordings. Moreover, the SNRs were >2 in more than 99.5% of the surface and subcutaneous needle recordings, and the variability between consecutive amplitudes was not significantly different between the two recording electrode types (p = 0.34). Surface electrodes appear to be a good alternative to needle electrodes for spinal cord monitoring. They are non-invasive, can record signals at similar threshold intensities, have adequately high SNRs, and record signals with equivalent variability. Whether surface electrodes are non-inferior to subcutaneous needle electrodes in detecting motor warnings is investigated in part II of the NERFACE study.
AB - Muscle-recorded transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potentials (mTc-MEPs) are used to assess the spinal cord integrity. They are commonly recorded with subcutaneous needle or surface electrodes, but the different characteristics of mTc-MEP signals recorded with the two types of electrodes have not been formally compared yet. In this study, mTc-MEPs were simultaneously recorded from the tibialis anterior (TA) muscles using surface and subcutaneous needle electrodes in 242 consecutive patients. Elicitability, motor thresholds, amplitude, area under the curve (AUC), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and the variability between mTc-MEP amplitudes were compared. Whereas amplitude and AUC were significantly higher in subcutaneous needle recordings (p < 0.01), motor thresholds and elicitability were similar for surface and subcutaneous needle recordings. Moreover, the SNRs were >2 in more than 99.5% of the surface and subcutaneous needle recordings, and the variability between consecutive amplitudes was not significantly different between the two recording electrode types (p = 0.34). Surface electrodes appear to be a good alternative to needle electrodes for spinal cord monitoring. They are non-invasive, can record signals at similar threshold intensities, have adequately high SNRs, and record signals with equivalent variability. Whether surface electrodes are non-inferior to subcutaneous needle electrodes in detecting motor warnings is investigated in part II of the NERFACE study.
KW - intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring
KW - muscle recorded transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potentials
KW - signal-to-noise ratio
KW - subcutaneous needle recording electrode
KW - surface recording electrode
KW - volume conduction
U2 - 10.3390/jcm12041404
DO - 10.3390/jcm12041404
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85148951581
SN - 2077-0383
VL - 12
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
JF - Journal of Clinical Medicine
IS - 4
M1 - 1404
ER -