English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

OBJECTIVES Canine experiments have shown that transoesophageal motor-evoked potential monitoring is feasible, safe and stable, with a quicker response to ischaemia and a better prognostic value than transcranial motor-evoked potentials. We aimed to elucidate whether or not these findings were clinically reproducible. METHODS A bipolar oesophageal electrode mounted on a large-diameter silicon tube and a train of 5 biphasic wave stimuli were used for transoesophageal stimulation. Results of 18 patients (median age 74.5 years, 13 males) were analysed. RESULTS There were no mortalities, spinal cord injuries or complications related with transoesophageal stimulation. Transcranial motor-evoked potential could not be monitored up to the end of surgery in 3 patients for unknown reasons, 2 of whom from the beginning. Transoesophageal motor-evoked potential became non-evocable after manipulation of a transoesophageal echo probe in 2 patients. Strenuous movement of the upper limbs during transoesophageal stimulation was observed in 3 patients. In 14 patients who successfully completed both monitoring methods up to the end of surgery (11 thoraco-abdominal and 3 descending aortic repair), the final results were judged as false positives in 6 by transcranial stimulation and in 1 by transoesophageal stimulation. The stimulation intensity was significantly lower and the upper limb amplitude was significantly higher by transoesophageal stimulation, while the lower limb amplitude was comparable. CONCLUSIONS Transoesophageal motor-evoked potential monitoring is clinically feasible and safe with a low false positive rate. A better electrode design is required to avoid its migration by transoesophageal echo manipulation. Further studies may be warranted. Clinical registration number UMIN000022320.

Clinical feasibility and safety of transoesophageal motor-evoked potential monitoring