A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Optimal method for reliable lateral spread response monitoring during microvascular decompression surgery for hemifacial spasm. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

In this study, we propose an optimal method for monitoring the key electrophysiological sign, the Lateral Spread Response (LSR), during microvascular decompression (MVD) surgery for hemifacial spasm (HFS). Current monitoring methods and interpretations of LSR remain unclear, leading to potential misinterpretations and undesirable outcomes." We prospectively collected data from patients undergoing MVD for HFS, including basic demographics, clinical characteristics, and surgical outcomes. Stimulation intensity was escalated by 1 mA increments to identify the optimal range for effective LSR. We designated the threshold at which we can observe LSR as THR1 and THR2 for when LSR disappears, with high-intensity stimulation (30 mA) designated as THR30. Subsequently, we compared abnormal muscle responses (AMR) between the optimal range (between THR1 and THR2) and THR30. Additionally, we conducted an analysis to identify and assess factors associated with artifacts and their potential impact on clinical outcomes. As stimulation intensity increases, the onset latency to detect AMR was shortened. The first finding of the study was high intensity stimulation caused artifact that mimic the wave of LSR. Those artifacts were observed even after decompression thus interfere interpretation of disappearance of LSR. Analyzing the factors related to the artifact, we found the AMR detected at onset latency below 9.6 ms would be the lateral spreading artifact (LSA) rather than true LSR. To avoid false positive LSR from LSA, we should stepwise increase stimulation intensity and not to surpass the intensity that cause LSR onset latency below 10 ms.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10709590PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49008-1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

stimulation intensity
12
onset latency
12
lsr
10
optimal method
8
lateral spread
8
spread response
8
microvascular decompression
8
surgery hemifacial
8
hemifacial spasm
8
outcomes stimulation
8

Similar Publications