2017
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-16453-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantitative analysis of motor evoked potentials in the neonatal lamb

Abstract: Evoking motor potentials are an objective assessment method for neuromotor function, yet this was to our knowledge never done in neonatal lambs. There is neither a method for standardized quantification of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). We first aimed to evaluate the feasibility of MEP recording in neonatal lambs and test its validity. Second we aimed to develop an algorithm for its quantification and test its reliability since manual input is required. We recorded myogenic MEPs after transcranial motor corte… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All lambs were delivered by cesarean section through flank incision around term (145 days of gestation) under spinal anesthesia as described earlier 38 . On day two of life, general anesthesia was induced using intravenous propofol.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All lambs were delivered by cesarean section through flank incision around term (145 days of gestation) under spinal anesthesia as described earlier 38 . On day two of life, general anesthesia was induced using intravenous propofol.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our MEP protocol has been described previously 38 . Briefly, MEPs were recorded between two needle electrodes inserted in the distal forelimb and hindlimb muscles following a contralateral motor cortex transcranial stimulation using skull screw electrodes (Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different methods can be applied to quantify the amplitude of a motor EP, based on either peak sizes or signal integration (area) measurements. Different metrics are widely accepted (Lavoie et al, 1995; Cacchio et al, 2009; Joyeux et al, 2017). We compared the results of the LMEP amplitude evaluation using a P2P metric, a single peak amplitude (N1 prominence) and the integral AUC measurements.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For each measure, we calculated the mean values per train of stimulation based on the grand average (average over the maximum number of epochs available in a train). We first measured the mutual agreement of the three different amplitude measurements, as an indication of their inter-exchangeability and of the overall reliability of EP measures (Joyeux et al, 2017). We calculated the ICC(3,k) for inter-rater reliability, in which each method is considered as a different rater, and their consistency across trials is tested (McGraw and Wong, 1996; Koo and Li, 2016; Joyeux et al, 2017).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As new clinical techniques are introduced, it would seem logic to preclinically validate them against this experimental standard in the SB fetal lamb model. Such experiments should use standardized methods for both timing of the experiments, ie, induction and closure of the lesion, and objectively evaluating the effects of surgical closure …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%