Biomedical subjects

R Bosnjak

Publications and source records attributed to R Bosnjak.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Subperiosteal elevation of the ulnar nerve during internal fixation for fractures of the distal humerus assessed by intra-operative neurophysiological monitoring.

Ulnar nerve function, during and after open reduction and internal fixation of fractures of the distal humerus with subperiosteal elevation of the nerve, was assessed by intra-operative neurophysiological monitoring. Intermittent recording of the compound muscle action potentials was taken from the hypothenar muscles in 18 neurologically asymptomatic patients. The mean amplitude of the compound muscle action potential after surgery was 98.1% (sd 17.6; -37% to +25%). The amplitude improved in six patients following surgery. Despite unremarkable recordings one patient had progressive paresis. Motor impairment is unlikely if the compound muscle action potential is continuously preserved and not reduced by more than 40% at the end of surgery. Temporary decreases in amplitude by up to 70% were tolerated without clinical consequences. However, repeated clinical examination is obligatory to recognise and treat early post-operative palsy.

Action Potentials↗

PubMed2002

Circulatory effects of internal jugular vein compression: a computer simulation study.

The effects of compression of the internal jugular veins and the inferior vena cava are simulated using an equivalent electronic circuit, which included simulation of cardiocirculatory phenomena and special features of the cerebral circulation. Compression of the inferior vena cava resulted in a profound decrease in cardiac output (from 4.5 to 1.51min(-1)) and arterial pressure (from 140/85 to 50/35 mmHg). Compression of the internal jugular veins resulted in a negligible decrease in cardiac output and arterial pressure, with a cerebral blood flow that was slightly decreased. Cerebral capillary and internal jugular pressures were considerably increased, leading to obstruction of cerebral veins and increased pressure (from 9 to 22 mmHg) and volume (from 120 to 145 ml) of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Increased cerebral capsule compliance resulted in decreased CSF pressure (from 9 to 8.5 mmHg), but CSF volume increased (from 120 to 190 ml). A small increase in brain volume (from 1,000 ml to 1,060 ml, 6% volume increase) was compensated for by an equal decrease in the volume of CSF. When brain volume was above 1,080 ml, the absorption of CSF was reduced, and its pressure increased.

Cerebrovascular Circulation↗

PubMed2000

Electrical thresholds for biomechanical response in the ankle to direct stimulation of spinal roots L4, L5, and S1. Implications for intraoperative pedicle screw testing.

STUDY DESIGN: A comparison of electrical thresholds for biomechanical response in the ankle and for evoked electromyographic signals from specific leg muscles during intraoperative extradural direct stimulation of roots L4, L5, and S1. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a biomechanical response in the ankle to direct root stimulation occurs before evoked electromyographic signals and to determine differences in electrical excitability of the roots circumferentially. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Stimulus intensities of 1.2-5.7 mA are reported to evoke electromyographic response in corresponding muscles to direct stimulation of normal roots. Stimulus intensities of 6-8 mA were suggested to detect bony pedicular compromise by stimulation of a hole or a screw during pedicle instrumentation. Electrical thresholds of three-dimensional torque response in the ankle to direct root stimulation have not yet been evaluated and compared with thresholds of evoked electromyogram. METHODS: Direct monopolar stimulation of the surgically exposed roots L4, L5, and S1 was performed from different sites around the root by a cuff multielectrode. Biomechanical response was measured as an isometric torque in the ankle at each of three orthogonal axes. Compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) from root-specific muscles were detected by a pair of surface or wire electrodes. RESULTS: Mean threshold for biomechanical response in the ankle to stimulation of roots L4, L5, and S1 was 0.72 +/- 0.39 mA and for CMAP response was 1.09 mA +/- 0.36 (N = 13). Thresholds for biomechanical responses were significantly lower than for CMAP responses (P = 0.0004; paired t test). Nerve roots were electrically most excitable on their ventral aspects. CONCLUSION: The biomechanical response in the joint to root stimulation can be used to test all root-related muscles crossing that joint at their individual innervation pattern and their residual innervation and to detect electrical excitation of the root at electric thresholds lower than those for detecting CMAP from single standard root-specific muscle. However, this method does not provide sufficient root specificity. It will be valuable in conjunction with multimodality neurophysiologic monitoring of the roots for earlier and more reliable detection of pedicle bone breakthrough or integrity. Further clinical investigations are suggested.

Ankle↗

PubMed2000

Motor response of the leg muscles produced by position-selective stimulation of spinal nerve roots.

OBJECTIVE: To define and measure motor responses of the leg muscles in the ankle associated with position-selective and tetanic stimulation of spinal nerve roots L3-S1. METHODS: Sixteen lumbosacral spinal nerve roots in 14 subjects were stimulated intraoperatively after surgical exposure and decompression for a herniated disc. Each contact of a spiral cuff multielectrode was wrapped around the root and used to excite a spatially defined population of axons beneath the electrode. The motor response from each stimulated position was evaluated in terms of three-dimensional vector torque in the ankle. RESULTS: Each position at which the stimulating electrode was placed around the root exhibited the same vector torque qualitatively, but at different thresholds. The root was most excitable ventrally. The S1 roots responded with a uniform three-dimensional torque pattern: plantar flexion plus lateral leg and foot rotation plus inversion. All L5 roots responded by plantar flexion. Dorsiflexion torque was possible only with stimulation of the L3 and L4 roots. Eversion was not possible with stimulation of the S1 roots or with most of the L5 roots. CONCLUSION: Position-selective stimulation of the extrathecal spinal nerve roots influences the threshold of the biomechanical response, the torque recruitment dynamics, and the magnitude of three-dimensional vector torque. Selective activation of some leg muscles or agonist muscle groups with stimulation of a single nerve root could not be achieved owing to the low spatial selectivity of the stimulation design and/or the low muscle specificity of motor fascicles in the root. Direct extrathecal stimulation of spinal nerve roots has some hypothetical advantages over stimulation of other sites along the peripheral nerves, owing to their unique anatomy, and may contribute to functional electrical stimulation of the lower extremities. Further investigation with a more selective multielectrode configuration and the use of multiple root stimulation is suggested.

Adult↗

PubMed1999

Biomechanical response in the ankle to stimulation of lumbosacral nerve roots with spiral cuff multielectrode--preliminary study.

Biomechanical response in the ankle to tetanic stimulation of the lumbosacral root was investigated to assess the potential for lower limb functional neurostimulation. Myotomal response in the leg was measured as the three-dimensional isometric torque in the ankle after extradural tetanic stimulation of the L3-S1 roots exposed surgically for herniated disc removal in five patients. The cuff multielectrode was employed to investigate functional topography of the roots by monopolar, bipolar, and tripolar electrode configurations. Four response patterns in the direction of three-dimensional torque vectors were observed. The L-5 and S-1 roots had the same response pattern, but S-1 roots produced stronger torques. Dorsiflexion torque was not obtained by stimulation of L-5 roots despite coactivation of the tibial anterior and peroneal muscles. Dorsiflexion torques were produced only by stimulating the L-4 roots. More selective bipolar and tripolar stimulations recruited force at higher thresholds and less gain. Additionally, some muscles were not activated by tripolar stimulation of the same root. In one L-4 root, the torque at lower electrical threshold was replaced by inverse torque at higher threshold, providing indirect evidence that different muscles may have motoneuron populations that differ in diameter or location within the root. Although dorsiflexion and plantarflexion torques are functional per se, they are accompanied by foot inversion and leg rotation torques (as well as proximal muscle contractions). Further experimental investigations on direct extradural stimulation of lumbosacral roots, either single or in combination, are recommended to explore the potential of lumbosacral nerve root stimulation for restoration of leg function.

Ankle↗