Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
Published in: Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 6/2021

01-12-2021 | Motor Evoked Potential | Original Research

Non-linear regression analysis for estimating the intraoperative motor evoked potential recovery time after bolus neuromuscular blockade

Authors: Tetsuro Tatsuoka, Tasuku Fujii, Takeshi Furuhashi, Kimitoshi Nishiwaki

Published in: Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing | Issue 6/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

The recovery time of the motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude following a neuromuscular blockade (NMB) during surgery is useful for interpreting low-amplitude waveforms or selecting the baseline waveform. In this study, the MEP data of 195 orthopedic cases who received a bolus dose of rocuronium at the beginning of surgery, between June 2009 and January 2016 were used. A non-linear regression analysis was applied to MEP amplitude data of multiple patients. The time taken for 90% of the maximum-amplitude recovery was estimated from the identified time series model. The 90% amplitude recovery time was 88.6 min in the pharmacological model and 89.4 min in the logistic model. These results were included in the 95% confidence interval of the previous studies. Although MEP amplitude is relatively unstable because of anesthesia, the averaged time series model of MEP amplitude can be estimated by using a large number of data.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Kobayashi S, Matsuyama Y, Kawabata S, Ando M, Kanchiku T, Takahashi M, Ito Z, Fujiwara Y, Tadokoro N, Wada K, Yamada K, Yamamoto N, Tani T. A multicenter study from intraoperative spinal cord monitoring Working Group of Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research. Jpn J Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;44(3):116–9.
2.
Sutter M, Deletis V, Dvorak J, Eggspuehler A, Grob D, MacDonald D, Mueller A, Sala F, Tamaki T. Current opinions and recommendations on multimodal intraoperative monitoring during spine surgeries. Eur Spine J. 2007;16(2):232–7.CrossRef
3.
Tsutsui S, Yamada H. Basic principles and recent trends of transcranial motor evoked potentials in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring. Neurol medico-chir. 2016;56(8):451–6.CrossRef
4.
Tsutsumi C, Okuma A, Sumita K, Sakakibara SKK, Yoshiko K, Matsumoto H, Matsushita T, Muramoto A, lto Z, lmagama S, Nishimura Y, Hara M. Evaluation of the timing suitable for a baseline waveform record in intraoperative spinal cord monitoring with Br(E)-MsEP. J Funct Diagn Spinal Cord. 2014;35(1):103–7.
5.
Batistaki C, Papadopoulos K, Kalimeris K, Soultanis K, Alevizou A, Pantazi M, Kostopanagiotou G. Sugammadex to reverse rocuronium and facilitate intraoperative motor evoked potentials monitoring during spinal surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2012;40(6):1073–5.PubMed
6.
Miyazaki Y, Sunaga H, Kida K, Hobo S, Inoue N, Muto M, Uezono S. Incidence of anaphylaxis associated with sugammadex. Anesth Analg. 2018;126(5):1505–8.CrossRef
7.
Trifa M, Krishna S, D’Mello A, Hakim M, Tobias JD. Sugammadex to reverse neuromuscular blockade and provide optimal conditions for motor-evoked potential monitoring. Saudi J Anaesth. 2017;11(2):219.CrossRef
8.
Woloszczuk-Gebicka B, Wyska E, Grabowski T. Sevoflurane increases fade of neuromuscular response to TOF stimulation following rocuronium administration in children. A PK/PD analysis. Pediatr Anesth. 2007;17(7):637–46.CrossRef
9.
Kleijn HJ, Zollinger DP, van den Heuvel MW, Kerbusch T. Population pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic analysis for sugammadex-mediated reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;72(3):415–33.CrossRef
10.
Duvaldestin P, Kuizenga K, Saldien V, Claudius C, Servin F, Klein J, Debaene B, Heeringa M. A randomized, dose–response study of sugammadex given for the reversal of deep rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade under sevoflurane anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2010;110(1):74–82.CrossRef
11.
Westin GG, Bassi BD, Lisanby SH, Luber B, NYSP Institute, NY U. Determination of motor threshold using visual observation overestimates transcranial magnetic stimulation dosage: safety implications. Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(1):142–7.
12.
MacDonald DB. Motor evoked potential warning criteria. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;34(1):1–3.CrossRef
13.
Hodrea R, Nascu I, De Keyser R, Ionescu CM. EPSAC predictive control applied to muscle relaxant administration. In: 8th symposium on biological and medical systems (IFAC-212). Ghent University, Department of Electrical Energy, Systems and Automation; 2012.
14.
Vermeyen K, Hoffmann V, Saldien V. Target controlled infusion of rocuronium: analysis of effect data to select a pharmacokinetic model. Br J Anaesth. 2003;90(2):183–8.CrossRef
15.
Yajima C, Tsudaka S, Nagata O, Tagami M, Hanaoka K. Simulations of recovery times following nondepolarizing neuromuscular blockade produced by steady-state infusions. J Jpn Soc Clin Anesth. 1999;19(10):601–8.CrossRef
16.
Seefeldt SS, Jensen JE, Fuerst EP. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose–response relationships. Weed Technol. 1995;9(2):218–27.CrossRef
17.
Akaike H. A new look at the statistical model identification. In: Selected Papers of Hirotugu Akaike. New York: Springer; 1974. p. 215–222.
18.
Wierda JMK, Kleef UW, Lambalk LM, Kloppenburg WD, Agoston S. The pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of Org 9426, a new non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agent, in patients anaesthetized with nitrous oxide, halothane and fentanyl. Can J Anaesth. 1991;38(4):430.CrossRef
19.
Pühringer F, Gordon M, Demeyer I, Sparr H, Ingimarsson J, Klarin B, Van Duijnhoven W, Heeringa M. Sugammadex rapidly reverses moderate rocuronium- or vecuronium-induced neuromuscular block during sevoflurane anaesthesia: a dose–response relationship. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105(5):610–9.CrossRef
20.
Lowry DW, Mirakhur RK, McCarthy GJ, Carroll MT, McCourt KC. Neuromuscular effects of rocuronium during sevoflurane, isoflurane, and intravenous anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 1998;87(4):936–40.CrossRef
21.
Maidatsi P, Zaralidou AT, Gorgias N, Amaniti E, Karakoulas K, Giala M. Rocuronium duration of action under sevoflurane, desflurane or propofol anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2004;21(10):781–6.CrossRef
22.
MacDonald DB. Intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring: overview and update. J Clin Monit Comput. 2006;20(5):347–77.CrossRef
23.
Macdonald D, Skinner S, Shils J, Yingling C. Intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring—a position statement by the American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring. Clin Neurophysiol. 2013;124(12):2291–316.CrossRef
24.
Naguib M, Kopman AF, Lien CA, Hunter JM, Lopez A, Brull SJ. A survey of current management of neuromuscular block in the United States and Europe. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(1):110–9.CrossRef
25.
Phillips S, Slewarl P, Bilgin A. A survey of the management of neuromuscular blockade monitoring in Australia and New Zealand. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2013;41(3):374–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Non-linear regression analysis for estimating the intraoperative motor evoked potential recovery time after bolus neuromuscular blockade
Authors
Tetsuro Tatsuoka
Tasuku Fujii
Takeshi Furuhashi
Kimitoshi Nishiwaki
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing / Issue 6/2021
Print ISSN: 1387-1307
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2614
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00600-0

Other articles of this Issue 6/2021

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 6/2021 Go to the issue

Original Research

Train-of-four monitoring with the twitchview monitor electctromyograph compared to the GE NMT electromyograph and manual palpation

Original Research

Prognostic value and time course evolution left ventricular global longitudinal strain in septic shock: an exploratory prospective study

Original Research

Normative values for SedLine-based processed electroencephalography parameters in awake volunteers: a prospective observational study

Letter to the Editor

Unusual cause of hypoxia due to incomplete removal of the closed suction catheter system during COVID-19 ventilation

Original Research

A mathematical model for predicting intracranial pressure based on noninvasively acquired PC-MRI parameters in communicating hydrocephalus

Original Research

Artifact reduction by using alternating polarity stimulus pairs in intraoperative peripheral nerve action potential recording