Advertisement

Technical Parameters, Artifacts, and Quality Assessment of Intraoperative Evoked Potentials

  • M. R. Nuwer

Summary

Monitoring personnel should consider techniques to be flexible. A variety of options are available for specific evoked potential (EP) techniques. Somewhat different techniques should be applied whenever monitoring situations require such variation in technique. Informed users should understand the various ways in which such flexibility of technique can be helpful.

Stimulus site, type, rate, recording site, filter, and other technical parameters can be altered to best suit a particular patient’s circumstances. Averaging can also be performed in several ways. During the baseline portion of an operation, the monitoring team should choose the technique that best suits the particular patient and procedure.

Artifacts and other technical problems are common in the operating room. The monitoring personnel should understand their own equipment and the artifacts present in the operating room so that they can identify the technical problems and minimize them. The monitoring team can assess the adequacy of their own recordings by applying some general quality-assurance standards, assessing reproducibility, and noisiness of the recordings. The overall technical goal of monitoring should be the rapid production of high-quality EP signals, while minimizing baseline variability in latency and amplitude of the major EP peaks. Knowledgeable users should be able to achieve this technical goal in most cases.

Keywords

Technical Parameter Notch Filter Evoke Potential Brainstem Auditory Evoke Poten Spinal Cord Monitoring 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Harper CM, Daube, J (1989) Surgical monitoring with evoked potentials: The Mayo Clinic experience. In Desmedt JE (ed) Neuromonitoring in Surgery. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 275–301Google Scholar
  2. Jones SJ, Edgar MA, Ransford AO (1982) Sensory nerve conduction in the human spinal cord: Epidural recordings made during scoliosis surgery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 45: 446–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Levine AL (1988) Surgical monitoring applications of the brainstem auditory evoked response and electrocochleography. In Owen JH, Donohoe CD (eds) Clinical Atlas of Auditory Evoked Potentials. Grune & Stratton, Orlando, Florida, pp 103–116Google Scholar
  4. Lueders H, Gurd A, Hahn J, Andrish J, Weiker G, Klem G (1982) A new technique for intraoperative monitoring of spinal cord function: Multichannel recording of spinal cord and subcortical evoked potentials. Spine 7: 110–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Molaie M (1986) False negative intraoperative somatosensory evoked potentials with simultaneous bilateral stimulation. Clin Electroenceph 17: 6–9Google Scholar
  6. Nuwer MR (1986) Evoked Potential Monitoring in the Operating Room. Raven Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Nuwer MR, Dawson E (1984a) Intraoperative evoked potential monitoring of the spinal cord: Enhanced stability of cortical recordings. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 59: 318–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Nuwer MR, Dawson E (1984b) Intraoperative evoked potential monitoring of the spinal cord: A restricted filter, scalp method during Harrington instrumentation for scoliosis. Clin Orthop 183: 42–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Sgro J A, Emerson RG, Pedley TA (1985) Real-time reconstruction of evoked potentials using a new two-dimensional filter method. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 62: 372–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tamaki T, Tsuji H, Inoue S, Kobayashi H (1981) The prevention of iatrogenic spinal cord injury utilizing the evoked spinal cord potential. Int Orthop 4: 313–317PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. R. Nuwer
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyUniversity of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Reed Neurological Research CenterLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations