Validation of an Adaptive Signal Enhancer in Intraoperative Somatosensory Evoked Potentials Monitoring

The conventional approach of ensemble averaging in intraoperative somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) monitoring requires more than 500 trials to extract a reliable waveform for neurologic diagnosis. Previous studies showed that an adaptive signal enhancer (ASE) could increase the signal-to-noise ratio of input signals. This study assessed the accuracy and efficiency of the ASE in the extraction of neurologic normal human and abnormal rat SEP. Cortical and subcortical SEP were taken from 16 subjects undergoing scoliosis surgery. SEP extracted by ASE were compared with those obtained with 500-trial averaging in terms of peak latency, amplitude, and waveforms using correlation coefficients. An animal study composed of 18 rats was used to test the ASE in detecting abnormal SEP changes due to spinal cord compression. The results demonstrate the accuracy of ASE by showing very high correlations between ASE-processed SEP and ensemble averaging–processed SEP in waveforms, peak latencies, and amplitudes. The results also show the efficiency of the ASE in extracting SEP waveforms from 50 input trials, which provided waveforms of sufficiently high quality and latency/amplitude measurements equivalent to those obtained in 500 trials of conventional ensemble averaging. Because of its fast extraction ability, adaptive signal enhancement could be an appropriate alternative to conventional ensemble averaging in intraoperative spinal cord monitoring.

[1]  N V Thakor,et al.  Adaptive Filterng of Evoked Potentials , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[2]  Mark M. Stecker,et al.  The effects of automatic artifact rejection on evoked potential recordings , 2002, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[3]  J C Leong,et al.  Prevention of spinal cord injury with time-frequency analysis of evoked potentials: an experimental study , 2001, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[4]  M R Nuwer,et al.  Spinal cord monitoring with somatosensory techniques. , 1998, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[5]  O. Svensson,et al.  Tracking of changes in latency and amplitude of the evoked potential by using adaptive LMS filters and exponential averagers , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[6]  M. Nuwer,et al.  Somatosensory evoked potential spinal cord monitoring reduces neurologic deficits after scoliosis surgery: results of a large multicenter survey. , 1995, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[7]  J. P. C. de Weerd,et al.  A posteriori time-varying filtering of averaged evoked potentials , 1981, Biological Cybernetics.

[8]  P. Caminal,et al.  Adaptive filter for event-related bioelectric signals using an impulse correlated reference input: comparison with signal averaging techniques , 1992, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  F. K. Lam,et al.  Detection of brainstem auditory evoked potential by adaptive filtering , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[10]  Wei Qiu,et al.  Adaptive filtering of evoked potentials with radial-basis-function neural network prefilter , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[11]  A. Norcia,et al.  Application of adaptive filtering to steady-state evoked response , 1995, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[12]  P. Rossini,et al.  Short latency somatosensory evoked potentials to peroneal nerve stimulation: scalp topography and the effect of different frequency filters. , 1981, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[13]  Vedran Deletis,et al.  Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in pediatric neurosurgery: why, when, how? , 2002, Child's Nervous System.

[14]  M. Nuwer,et al.  Intraoperative evoked potential monitoring of the spinal cord. A restricted filter, scalp method during Harrington instrumentation for scoliosis. , 1984, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  J. D. de Weerd,et al.  A posteriori time-varying filtering of averaged evoked potentials. I. Introduction and conceptual basis. , 1981, Biological cybernetics.

[16]  Nitish V. Thakor,et al.  Coherence-weighted wiener filtering of somatosensory evoked potentials , 2001, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng..

[17]  American Electroencephalographic Society Guidelines for Intraoperative Monitoring of Sensory Evoked Potentials1 , 1987, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[18]  R. Coppola,et al.  Signal to noise ratio and response variability measurements in single trial evoked potentials. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  F H Chan,et al.  An enhanced approach to adaptive processing of the brain stem auditory evoked potential. , 1994, Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine.

[20]  O. Bertrand,et al.  Time-frequency digital filtering based on an invertible wavelet transform: an application to evoked potentials , 1994, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  J. P. C. de Weerd,et al.  A posteriori time-varying filtering of averaged evoked potentials , 1981, Biological Cybernetics.

[22]  Y Harada,et al.  Automated spinal cord monitoring for spinal surgery , 1989, Paraplegia.

[23]  P. Parker,et al.  Evoked Response Signal and System Nonlinearity , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[24]  J C Leong,et al.  Variability of somatosensory-evoked potentials in different stages of scoliosis surgery. , 1999, Spine.

[25]  S Turner,et al.  Extraction of short-latency evoked potentials using a combination of wavelets and evolutionary algorithms. , 2003, Medical engineering & physics.