ReviewJournal of anesthesia2024
Updated review on the use of neuromuscular blockade during intraoperative motor-evoked potential monitoring in the modern anesthesia era.
Review in Journal of anesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuromuscular blocking agent use in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a safety assessment.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Mivacurium Infusion ED50/ED95 for Maintaining Motor Evoked Potentials During Adolescent Scoliosis Surgery Under TIVA: A Modified Dixon Up-and-Down Sequential Dose-Finding Study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Effect of rocuronium-sugammadex versus cisatracurium on motor evoked potentials (RECAP-MEP)-A randomized controlled trial.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potentials (Tc-MEP) monitoring is a common practice in neurosurgery to prevent postoperative neurological damage. However, the use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) during Tc-MEP monitoring is a subject of controversy. In addition, the effectiveness of sugammadex, a selective reversal agent, in the context of Tc-MEP monitoring requires further investigation. This review aimed to clarify the considerations involved in achieving optimal Tc-MEP monitoring while ensuring patient safety. Preoperative patient selection, comorbidity assessment, motor power evaluation, and the nature of the planned surgery are critical factors. Accurate paralysis assessment, continuous NMBA infusion, and post-tetanic stimulation techniques are essential for achieving optimal partial NMB. The decision to administer an NMB during Tc-MEP monitoring necessitates a careful evaluation of the balance between accuracy and potential complications. This review emphasizes the challenges associated with NMB administration during Tc-MEP monitoring and highlights the need for personalized patient assessment.
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.