Significance of cathodal stimulation for motor evoked potential monitoring

Objective: Intraoperative motor evoked potential (MEP) monitoring is essential to reduce the risk of neurosurgical procedures damaging the motor system. The standard technique of recording MEP uses high-frequency anodal monopolar stimulation of the primary motor cortex. The present study investigated the possibility that cathodal stimulation allows MEP recording at lower intensities than does anodal stimulation in certain patients. Methods: Motor threshold (MT) was measured and compared for anodal and cathodal stimulation in 65 patients in Kitasato University Hospital. The patients were divided into 3 groups based on the polarity of the lower MT: anodal less than cathodal stimulation (Group A), cathodal less than anodal stimulation (Group B), and anodal similar to cathodal stimulation (Group C). Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings of hyperintensity extending to the precentral knob accompanied by brain tumor were evaluated to correlate with the polarity of lower MT. Results: There were 32 patients classified as Group A, 23 patients as Group B, and 10 patients as Group C. MR imaging showed positive findings in 3 of 32 patients in Group A, 15 of 23 patients in Group B, and 1 of 10 patients in Group C. Conclusions: Cathodal stimulation allows MEP recording at lower intensities than does anodal stimulation in a significant number of patients. MR imaging findings of hyperintensity extending to the precentral knob may be indicative of appropriate cases for cathodal stimulation.

[1]  D. Shukla,et al.  Functional cortical reorganization in cases of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and changes associated with surgery. , 2016, Neurosurgical focus.

[2]  J. Hamada,et al.  Functional reorganization in the patient with progressing glioma of the pure primary motor cortex: a case report with special reference to the topographic central sulcus defined by somatosensory-evoked potential. , 2014, World neurosurgery.

[3]  J. Rothwell,et al.  The role of interneuron networks in driving human motor cortical plasticity. , 2013, Cerebral cortex.

[4]  Theodoros Kombos,et al.  Neurophysiological basis of direct cortical stimulation and applied neuroanatomy of the motor cortex: a review. , 2009, Neurosurgical focus.

[5]  M. Matsumoto,et al.  HIGH‐FREQUENCY MONOPOLAR ELECTRICAL STIMULATION OF THE RAT CEREBRAL CORTEX , 2007, Neurosurgery.

[6]  R J Seitz,et al.  Large-scale plasticity of the human motor cortex. , 1995, Neuroreport.

[7]  Makoto Taniguchi,et al.  Modification of cortical stimulation for motor evoked potentials under general anesthesia: technical description. , 1993, Neurosurgery.

[8]  B. Day,et al.  Stimulation of the human motor cortex through the scalp , 1991, Experimental physiology.

[9]  V E Amassian,et al.  A comparison of corticospinal activation by magnetic coil and electrical stimulation of monkey motor cortex. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[10]  T. Yamamoto,et al.  Corticospinal direct response in humans: identification of the motor cortex during intracranial surgery under general anaesthesia. , 1988, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[11]  J. B. Ranck,et al.  Which elements are excited in electrical stimulation of mammalian central nervous system: A review , 1975, Brain Research.

[12]  A. Gorman,et al.  Differential patterns of activation of the pyramidal system elicited by surface anodal and cathodal cortical stimulation. , 1966, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  C. G. Phillips,et al.  Selective excitation of corticofugal neurones by surface‐anodal stimulation of the baboon's motor cortex , 1962, The Journal of physiology.

[14]  V. Amassian,et al.  Single and multiple-unit analysis of cortical stage of pyramidal tract activation. , 1954, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  M. Fujiki,et al.  Intraoperative corticomuscular motor evoked potentials for evaluation of motor function: a comparison with corticospinal D and I waves. , 2006, Journal of neurosurgery.

[16]  P. Rossini,et al.  Magnetic stimulation: motor evoked potentials. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. , 1999, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. Supplement.

[17]  R. J. Seitz,et al.  Precentral glioma location determines the displacement of cortical hand representation. , 1998, Neurosurgery.

[18]  H. Alkadhi,et al.  Localization of the motor hand area to a knob on the precentral gyrus. A new landmark. , 1997, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[19]  V. Amassian,et al.  Physiological basis of motor effects of a transient stimulus to cerebral cortex. , 1987, Neurosurgery.

[20]  D B McCreery,et al.  Considerations for safety in the use of extracranial stimulation for motor evoked potentials. , 1987, Neurosurgery.