Intraoperative neuromonitoring during glioma surgery: Bring in the expert neurophysiologists!

Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 151-153

  Ritzl, Eva K ^a,b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BLEEDING; CONFERENCE PAPER; EVOKED MUSCLE RESPONSE; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FOLLOW UP; GLIOBLASTOMA; GLIOMA; HUMAN; ISCHEMIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NEUROMONITORING; NEUROSURGERY; PATIENT MONITORING; TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BRAIN NEOPLASMS; EVOKED POTENTIALS, MOTOR; EVOKED POTENTIALS, SOMATOSENSORY; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; GLIOMA; HUMANS; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE; NEUROSURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84859716877     PISSN: 07360258     EISSN: 15371603     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNP.0b013e31824f8566     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (15)

1. Bleasel A, Comair Y, Lüders HO. Surgical ablations of the mesial frontal lobe in humans. Adv Neurol 1996;70:217-235.
2. Buxbaum LJ, Ferraro MK, Veramonti T, et al. Hemispatial neglect: subtypes, neuroanatomy, and disability. Neurology 2004;62:749-756. (Pubitemid 38298951)
3. Deletis V. Intraoperative neurophysiology and methodologies used to monitor the functional integrity of the motor system. In: Deletis V, Shils JL, eds. Neurophysiology in neurosurgery. A modern intraoperative approach. San Diego: Academic Press, 2002.
4. Dützmann S, Geßler F, Bink A, et al. Risk of ischemia in glioma surgery: comparison of first and repeat procedures [published online ahead of print January 17, 2012]. J Neurooncol 2012.
5. Kombos T, Picht T, Derdilopoulos A, Suess O. Impact of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring on surgery of high-grade gliomas. J Clin Neurophysiol 2009;26:422-425.
6. McGinley M, Hoffman RL, Russ DW, et al. Older adults exhibit more intracortical inhibition and less intracortical facilitation than young adults. Exp Gerontol 2010;45:671-678.
7. Neuloh G, Schramm J. Are there false-negative results of motor evoked potential monitoring in brain surgery? Cen Eur Neurosurg 2009;70:171-175.
8. Neuloh G, Pechstein U, Cedzich C, Schramm J. Motor evoked potential monitoring with supratentorial surgery. Neurosurgery 2004;54:1061-1070; discussion 1070-1072.
9. Neuloh G, Simon M, Schramm J. Stroke prevention during surgery for deep-seated gliomas. Neurophysiol Clin 2007;37:383-389. (Pubitemid 350236868)
10. Nuwer MR. A new multicenter survey of neurologic deficits after spinal deformity surgery: are new models of intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring less accurate? J Clin Neurophysiol 2011;28:602-604.
11. Simon MV, Shields DC, Eskandar EN. Functional cortical mapping. In: Simon MV, ed. Intraoperative clinical neurophysiology. A comprehensive guide to monitoring and mapping. New York: Demos Medical Publishing, 2010.
12. Szelenyi A, Kothbauer KF, Deletis V. Transcranial electric stimulation for intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring: stimulation parameters and electrode montages. Clin Neurophysiol 2007;118:1586-1595. (Pubitemid 46839203)
13. Yingling CD. Are there false-negative and false-positive motor-evoked potentials? J Clin Neurophysiol 2011;28:607-610.
14. Zentner J, Hufnagel A, Pechstein U, et al. Functional results after resective procedures involving the supplementary motor area. J Neurosurg 1996;85:542-549. (Pubitemid 26315183)
15. Zhou H, Miller D, Schulte DM, et al. Transsulcal approach supported by navigation-guided neurophysiological monitoring for resection of paracentral cavernomas. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2009;111:69-78.