BACKGROUND: Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) is increasingly used in presurgical brain mapping. Preoperative nTMS results correlate well with direct cortical stimulation (DCS) data in the identification of the primary motor cortex. Repetitive nTMS can also be used for mapping of speech-sensitive cortical areas. OBJECTIVE: The current cohort study compares the safety and effectiveness of preoperative nTMS with DCS mapping during awake surgery for the identification of language areas in patients with left-sided cerebral lesions. METHODS: Twenty patients with tumors in or close to left-sided language eloquent regions were examined by repetitive nTMS before surgery. During awake surgery, language-eloquent cortex was identified by DCS. nTMS results were compared for accuracy and reliability with regard to DCS by projecting both results into the cortical parcellation system. RESULTS: Presurgical nTMS maps showed an overall sensitivity of 90.2%, specificity of 23.8%, positive predictive value of 35.6%, and negative predictive value of 83.9% compared with DCS. For the anatomic Broca's area, the corresponding values were a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 13.0%, positive predictive value of 56.5%, and negative predictive value of 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Good overall correlation between repetitive nTMS and DCS was observed, particularly with regard to negatively mapped regions. Noninvasive inhibition mapping with nTMS is evolving as a valuable tool for preoperative mapping of language areas. Yet its low specificity in posterior language areas in the current study necessitates further research to refine the methodology.

No abstract

The applied motor evoked potential methods seem to improve long-term motor outcome significantly. Early motor outcome is similar because of transient motor deficits in the INM group, which can be predicted at the end of surgery by the neurophysiological profile of patients.

Resection of intramedullary spinal cord tumors carries a high risk for surgical damage to the motor pathways. This surgery is therefore optimal for testing the performance of intraoperative motor evoked potential (MEP) monitoring. This report attempts to provide evidence for the accurate representation of patients' pre- and postoperative motor status by combined epidural and muscle MEP monitoring during intramedullary surgery. The authors used transcranial electrical motor cortex stimulation to elicit MEPs, which were recorded from the spinal cord (with an epidural electrode) and from limb target muscles (thenar, anterior tibial) with needle electrodes. The amplitude of the epidural MEPs and the presence or absence of muscle MEPs were the parameters for MEP interpretation. A retrospective analysis was performed on data from the resection of 100 consecutive intramedullary tumors and MEP data were compared with the pre- and postoperative motor status. Intraoperative monitoring was feasible in all patients without severe preoperative motor deficits. Preoperatively paraplegic patients had no recordable MEPs. The sensitivity of muscle MEPs to detect postoperative motor deficits was 100% and its specificity was 91%. There was no instance in which a patient with stable MEPs developed a motor deficit postoperatively. Intraoperative MEPs adequately represented the motor status of patients undergoing surgery for intramedullary tumors. Because deterioration of the motor status was transient in all cases, it can be considered that impairment of the functional integrity of the motor pathways was detected before permanent deficits occurred.

No abstract

MEP monitorability was a better predictor of functional outcome than the patient's preoperative motor status for the adult group. Significant predictors of MEP monitorability in the adult group were preoperative motor function (P < 0.01), history of no previous treatment (surgery or irradiation) (P < 0.01), and small tumor size (P < 0.05). Weak associations with monitorable MEPs existed for low-grade tumors (P = 0.09), the presence of baseline somatosensory evoked potentials (P = 0.10), and tumor pathological abnormalities (ependymoma) (P = 0.13). No associations were determined for sex (P > 0.4), associated syrinx (P > 0.3), or tumor location (P > 0.5). In the pediatric group, none of the examined factors were associated with MEP monitorability (P > 0.3). A decline of more than 50% in MEP amplitude during tumor removal should serve as a serious warning sign to the surgeon.

In compiling this review, controversies about indications, methodologies and the usefulness of some INM techniques have surfaced. These discrepancies are often due to lack of familiarity with new techniques in groups from around the globe. Accordingly, internationally accepted guidelines for INM are still far from being established. Nevertheless, the studies reviewed provide sufficient evidence to enable us to make the following recommendations. (1) INM is mandatory whenever neurological complications are expected on the basis of a known pathophysiological mechanism. INM becomes optional when its role is limited to predicting postoperative outcome or it is used for purely research purposes. (2) INM should always be performed when any of the following are involved: supratentorial lesions in the central region and language-related cortex; brain stem tumors; intramedullary spinal cord tumors; conus-cauda equina tumors; rhizotomy for relief of spasticity; spina bifida with tethered cord. (3) Monitoring of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) is now a feasible and reliable technique that can be used under general anesthesia. MEP monitoring is the most appropriate technique to assess the functional integrity of descending motor pathways in the brain, the brain stem and, especially, the spinal cord. (4) Somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) monitoring is of value in assessment of the functional integrity of sensory pathways leading from the peripheral nerve, through the dorsal column and to the sensory cortex. SEPs cannot provide reliable information on the functional integrity of the motor system (for which MEPs should be used). (5) Monitoring of brain stem auditory evoked potentials remains a standard technique during surgery in the brain stem, the cerebellopontine angle, and the posterior fossa. (6) Mapping techniques (such as the phase reversal and the direct cortical/subcortical stimulation techniques) are invaluable and strongly recommended for brain surgery in eloquent cortex or along subcortical motor pathways. (7) Mapping of the motor nuclei of the VIIth, IXth-Xth and XIIth cranial nerves on the floor of the fourth ventricle is of great value in identification of "safe entry zones" into the brain stem. Techniques for mapping cranial nerves in the cerebellopontine angle and cauda equina have also been standardized. Other techniques, although safe and feasible, still lack a strong validation in terms of prognostic value and correlation with the postoperative neurological outcome. These techniques include monitoring of the bulbocavernosus reflex, monitoring of the corticobulbar tracts, and mapping of the dorsal columns. These techniques, however, are expected to open up new perspectives in the near future.

Intraoperative monitoring of the functional integrity of the spinal cord during removal of intramedullary spinal cord lesions is an aid in intraoperative decision making and a primary tool for the prediction of neurological outcome. Motor evoked potential monitoring has become the neurophysiological monitoring technique of choice for that purpose. In the senior author’s experience with over 130 pediatric patients suffering from intramedullary spinal cord tumors, the neurophysiological data of both motor and sensory evoked potentials was utilized in an integrative fashion. Motor evoked potentials, elicited with single transcranial electrical stimuli and recorded directly from the spinal cord with an electrode in the spinal epidural space, reflect the functional integrity of the corticospinal tract. Motor evoked potentials, elicited with a short train of transcranial electrical stimuli and recorded from limb muscles, reflect the functional integrity of the motor system from the cerebral cortex/white matter to beyond the neuromuscular junction. Both epidural and muscle motor evoked potentials correlated closely with postoperative neurological function. Both techniques provide fast, practical and reliable information on the functional integrity of the motor tracts of the spinal cord. No complications attributable to stimulation or recording occurred. Over time both the technique’s reliable power of predicting clinical outcome and its practical versatility have altered the surgical approach in that gross total resections are more readily attempted as long as motor evoked potential data indicate the intact functional integrity of the corticospinal tract. This monitoring technique unquestionably had a favorable impact on neurological outcome.