ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2022
Localization of macroscopically undetectable intramedullary hematoma by intraoperative epidural motor evoked potential.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Intramedullary hematoma is an uncommon, serious neurological disease, representing a diagnostic challenge. The preferred treatment is surgical. In most of the cases the lesion can be identified macroscopically. Otherwise, finding the optimal place to perform myelotomy is demanding. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring plays an important role in preventing surgical complications, but its versatility for localization has not been studied so far. Case report: The present case report describes a 17-year-old patient with flaccid right inferior monoparesis (later paraparesis), ipsilateral loss of proprioception and vibration sense, contralateral analgesia below the T10 dermatome level and urinary retention (Brown-Séquard syndrome). The MRI revealed an intramedullary hematoma at the level of T8-T9 vertebral bodies. Digital subtraction angiography did not identify any vascular malformation. Urgent surgical intervention was performed. In order to prevent any complication somatosensory-evoked potential (SSEP), transcranial and epidural motor-evoked potential (tcMEP, eMEP) recordings were planned. SSEP in response to right tibial nerve stimulation and tcMEP were absent bilaterally. From electrophysiological point of view, the eMEP revealed a total conduction block of the corticospinal tract. In the absence of typical macroscopic signs (discoloration, swelling, abnormal vascularization etc.), the small intramedullary hematoma could not be identified. Therefore, it was decided to adopt eMEP technique for mapping and localizing the conduction block intraoperatively by changing the distance between the two electrodes used for recording. The hematoma was precisely localized and successfully evacuated. Postoperatively, a slow but continuous improvement was noted. Conclusion: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring has been suggested to play crucial role in spinal cord surgery. To our knowledge, this is the first case report using eMEP recording for guiding and localizing of an intramedullary hematoma. Beside the clear limitations of our study, it could result in a novel application of the aforementioned monitoring technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.