ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Comparison of subdermal needle and surface adhesive electrodes for intraoperative neuromonitoring during spine surgeries.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Confounding Factors and Their Mitigation in Measurements of Bioelectrical Impedance at the Skin Interface.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- fNIRS vs. EEG in audiological diagnostics: novel approaches to recording brain responses to auditory stimulation.Frontiers in medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to further compare subdermal needle electrodes (NE) and surface adhesive electrodes (SE) during intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) in spine surgeries.
methodsWe analyzed data from forty consecutive patients undergoing spine surgery. The data mainly included impedance, Root Mean Square (RMS), Tc-MEP and free-run EMG characteristics of NE versus SE with (left foot) and without (right foot) conductive paste (CP) during IONM.
resultsResults indicated that SE with CP exhibited significantly lower impedance than SE without CP and higher impedance than NE. The RMS of free-run EMG recorded by SE were found to be higher than the NE, but no significant differences were found between SE with CP and SE without CP. Furthermore, NE yielded higher MEP amplitudes and superior signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) than SE. The ratios of MEP amplitude and SNR recorded by SE to NE were not significantly different between the left and right foot. The success rate for MEP induction was significantly higher with NE than SE.
conclusionThis research advocates for prioritizing NE in IONM during spine surgeries due to their favorable performance characteristics.
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.