A multicentre survey of spinal cord monitoring outcome

Nuwer, Marc R.; Carlson, Linda G.

doi:10.1007/978-94-011-1416-5_7

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 The various spinal cord monitoring techniques are comparable in their monitoring capability. 16 However, the optimum recording site in terms of non-invasiveness, versatility, time requirements duration, lateral discrimination, and ease of electrode placement is by cortically recorded somatosensory evoked potentials.…”

Section: Somatosensory Evoked Potentials (Seps)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intra-operative spinal cord monitoring in orthopaedics

Macri¹,

Monte²,

Greggi³

et al. 2000

Spinal Cord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The surgical correction of spinal deformities carries a small but signi®cant risk of injury to the spinal cord. To detect the onset and possibly reverse the e ects of surgical complication, a variety of neurophysiological monitoring procedures can be employed. The purpose of this review is to provide information regarding the various methodologies available for monitoring spinal cord and nerve root function during orthopaedic procedures. Intra-operative monitoring of cortically recorded somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) by peripheral nerve stimulation is of value during orthopaedic surgery and is the state-of-the-art in terms of non-invasiveness, versatility, time requirement, lateral discrimination, and ease of electrode placement. Monitoring of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) is useful particularly in combination with SEPs but is still considered investigational. Root function monitoring has limited application and requires more clinical research. Spinal Cord (2000) 38, 133 ± 139

show abstract

Section: Somatosensory Evoked Potentials (Seps)mentioning

confidence: 99%