Neurophysiological Identification and Differentiation of Motor Cranial Nerves

When the identity of a cranial nerve is unclear to a surgeon, we are frequently called upon to identify nerves through the use of intraoperative neurophysiology. If the nerve in question is a motor cranial nerve, or mixed sensory-motor cranial nerve, then we can identify it with the use of electrical nerve stimulation and concurrent recording from muscles innervated by that nerve. We call this test stimulus-triggered electromyography (T-EMG) and the responses are called compound muscle action potential (CMAPs).


Contents:

  1. Introduction
  2. Stimulus Parameters
  3. Recording Parameters
  4. Recording Locations
  5. Important Notes
  6. Differentiating Oculomotor, Trochlear and Abducens Nerves
  7. Differentiating Trigeminal and Facial Nerves
  8. Differentiating the Lower Cranial Nerves (IX-XII)
  9. Bonus Round
  10. References

Introduction:

Identification and differentiation of motor cranial nerves can be rather straight-forward, or it can just as well be complex and challenging. Intimate knowledge of cranial nerve anatomy, including anatomical variations, is essential to making the correct decision. I also believe that direct visualization of the operative field (integrating microscope feed onto your computer screen) and close/clear communication with the surgeon are extremely important.

Here I will review the motor and mixed sensorimotor cranial nerves and the techniques that you can use to help identify and differentiate them in surgery. Keep in mind that not all surgical procedures can be reviewed and variations in anatomy, physiology, conduction velocity, latency, amplitude and required stimulation parameters will inevitably exist.

It is strongly recommended that you do not perform electrical stimulation of the nervous system unless properly trained and credentialed. These techniques should only be performed under the supervision of a neurophysiologist with a professional board certification (e.g., D.ABNM, or a neurologist fellowship-trained in IONM).
Back to the Top

Stimulus Parameters:

Stimulus parameters will depend on the type of probe you are using (i.e., monopolar v. bipolar) and the type of tissue you are stimulating (e.g., bone, tumor, muscle or direct nerve). Importantly, stimulation parameters will also depend on the goal of stimulation. The following parameters assume direct stimulation of cranial nerves for the purpose of differentiating one nerve from another:

  • Intensity: ≤ 5.0 mA. Start at 0.0 mA and increase intensity by increments of ~0.1 mA until you record CMAPs from the appropriate muscles at the expected latency.
  • Pulse: cathodal, square wave.
  • Pulse Width: commonly ≤ 200 μsec, but I recommend ≤ 100 μsec.
  • Charge: 1.0 μC/cm^2/ph (assuming 5 mA and 200 μsec).
  • Frequency: 2-5 Hz.

Note: there are a number of different methods for evaluating the function of a nerve in the context of making a prognosis. These methods differ from the above and are beyond the scope of this particular post.

Back to the Top

Recording Parameters:

  • High Pass Filter: 1-10 Hz, I use 10 Hz.
  • Low Pass Filter 1500-5000 Hz, I use 3000 Hz.
  • Time Base: 20-50 msec (2-5 msec/division), I use 2-3 msec/div.

Back to the Top

Recording Locations:

In the table below, I have listed some common muscle recording sites for monitoring and mapping cranial nerves and their branches during surgery. The list of muscles is not all-inclusive, and some muscles may not make sense for all procedures and/or patients. This table is provided only as a guide.

Cranial nerves with motor components and associated muscle recording sites. Notes: C = commonly reported in the literature as the primary recording site. A = alternate recording site. N = not recommended that you record from this site. 1 = monitors the motor component of mandibular branch (V3). 2 = The vocalis muscle be used for monitoring motor portions of vagus nerve, recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN), and non-recurrent laryngeal nerve. It cannot be used to monitor the superior laryngeal nerve (SLN). 3 = The cricothyroid muscle can be used for monitoring the vagus nerve and the SLN. It cannot be used to monitor the RLN or non-recurrent laryngeal nerve.

Back to the Top

Important Notes:

Many people make the mistake of marking the latency of a CMAP at it’s onset. You can get into some trouble doing this, particularly when differentiating the lower cranial nerves. Make sure you mark the latency of a CMAP at the peak of it’s first deflection, just like other evoked potentials. When you measure the amplitude, you measure peak-to-peak.

The reliability of T-EMG is largely dependent upon the integrity of the neural elements being tested. Thus, a patient presenting with pre-operative neurological deficits confounds the monitoring. Often, a nerve that is compromised will have an altered threshold, decreased amplitude, increased latency, poor morphology, or no response at all (Singh et al., 2016).

In order to optimize interpretation of T-EMG, the patient must be sufficiently free of pharmacological blockade of the neuromuscular junction. Absence of neuromuscular blockade, or sufficient clearance/reversal for reliable monitoring, should be documented by the neurophysiologist using “train-of-four” (TOF) monitoring, which records muscle twitches in response to stimulation of a peripheral nerve. For cranial nerve monitoring, I recommend a TOF ratio (T4:T1) ≥ 0.70. Keep in mind that partial blockade affects different muscle groups to varying degrees (Gavrancic et al., 2014; Saitoh et al., 1996), and can be especially variable in a patient with pre-existing neurological dysfunction (Sloan, 2013; Sloan & Heyer, 2002).
Back to the Top

Differentiating Oculomotor (III), Trochlear (IV) and Abducens (VI) Nerves:

It is commonly necessary to differentiate CNs III, IV and VI in the middle fossa and cavernous sinus. Recording from extraocular muscles requires knowledge of ocular anatomy and associated vasculature. Careful electrode placement will ensure the integrity of the sclera. Several recording methods have been reviewed by López (2011). In a recently-published paper, my colleagues and I described our methodology for placing extra-ocular recording electrodes (Singh et al., 2016).

We use a commercially-available subdermal needle electrode which is pre-bent to approximately 90°. With the eye in the closed position, the neurophysiologist inserts the needle into the extraocular muscle of interest and carefully advances the electrode along the bony ridge of the orbit until it is fully inserted. A small piece of TransporeTM tape is used to secure each electrode as the others are placed. One electrode is placed for each of the extraocular muscle monitored, and each recording is referenced to a needle inserted into the frontalis muscle of the forehead. TegadermTM film is applied to protect the eyes during surgery.

Once the electrodes are in place, differentiating the nerves is rather straight-forward. For the most part, the CMAP latencies following stimulation of each nerve will be identical. So, you will be relying solely on the muscle from which the CMAP is recorded. Thus, when a CMAP is recorded from only the inferior rectus, the nerve in question in the oculomotor nerve (CN III). When a CMAP is recorded from only the superior oblique, the nerve in question in the trochlear nerve (CN IV). When a CMAP is recorded from only the lateral rectus, the nerve in question in the oculomotor nerve (CN VI).

Example recording from the inferior rectus (IR) and lateral rectus (LR) following electrical stimulation of the oculomotor nerve. CMAPs are recorded only from the inferior rectus muscle. REF = reference electrode placed in the frontalis muscle. From Singh et al (2016).

Example recording from the inferior rectus (IR) and lateral rectus (LR) following electrical stimulation of the oculomotor nerve. CMAPs are recorded only from the inferior rectus muscle. REF = reference electrode placed in the frontalis muscle. From Singh et al (2016).

What about the situation in which you stimulate a single nerve, and get CMAPs from multiple extra-ocular muscles, such as the inferior rectus and the superior oblique? Assuming you’ve ruled out technical factors, like current spread and current shunting, the most likely interpretation is that you are stimulating the oculomotor nerve (CN III). This is because your superior oblique electrode, which you are using to monitor CN IV, is so close to the superior rectus muscle (innervated by CN III) that you are likely to record CMAPs from this muscle, which will obviously coincide with CMAPs recorded from the inferior rectus muscle.
Back to the Top

Differentiating Trigeminal (V) and Facial (VII) Nerves:

It is typically only necessary to differential the trigeminal and facial nerves when working at the brainstem, because they have very different anatomical courses. The trigeminal nerve goes anterior through Mekel’s Cave and the mandibular division (V3) exits the skull through the foramen ovale. The facial nerve goes lateral with the vestibulocochlear nerve (VIII), enters the internal auditory meatus, winds through the middle/inner ear and exits the skull through the stylomastoid foramen.

Following electrical stimulation of cranial nerves V or VII, CMAPs are usually recorded simultaneously from muscles innervated by both nerves. Because all of these muscles are in close proximity in the face, the CMAP from one muscle will be recorded by electrodes placed in nearby muscles. This is called volume conduction (some people call it cross-talk)So, you can’t always use the location of the CMAP to identify the nerve.

Because responses come from both muscle groups, he best way to differentiate CNs V and VII is through the latency of the CMAP. When working at the brainstem, stimulation of the trigeminal nerve (CN V) will normally produce CMAPs with a latency of 4-5 msec, while stimulation of the facial nerve (CN VII) will normally produce CMAPs with a latency of 6-7 msec.

Here are a couple of examples from a retrosigmoid craniectomy for resection of acoustic schwannoma.

Stimulation of CN V. EMG responses are found on all muscles with subdermal electrodes, and the latency ranges from about 4-5 msec (time base is 2 msec/div).

Stimulation of CN V. EMG responses are found on all muscles with subdermal electrodes, and the latency ranges from about 4-5 msec (time base is 2 msec/div). All traces secondary to 0.10 mA intensity, 200 µsec p/w, 3.1 Hz stimulus applied directly to the nerve.

In addition to the short, ~5 msec CMAP latency, notice that the amplitude of the response recorded from the masseter muscle is much larger as compared to the rest of the muscles, all of which are innervated by CN VII.

Stimulation of CN VII. EMG responses are found on all muscles with subdermal electrodes, and the latency ranges from about 6-7 msec (time base is 2 msec/div).

Stimulation of CN VII. EMG responses are found on all muscles with subdermal electrodes, and the latency ranges from about 6-7 msec (time base is 2 msec/div). All traces secondary to 0.10 mA intensity, 200 µsec p/w, 3.1 Hz stimulus applied directly to the nerve.

In addition to the long, ~7 msec CMAP latency, notice that the amplitude of the responses recorded from the facial muscles are much larger as compared to the masseter muscle, which is innervated by CN V.

Keep in mind that the latency of a CMAP is a function of the nerve’s 1) health, 2) conduction velocity, and 3) length. In some situations, it may be possible to record CMAPs of similar latency/amplitude, particularly if in the context of per-operative motor deficits secondary to chronic nerve compression/injury. So, you may not always be able to rely on CMAP latency and amplitude.

If you want to make your life a lot easier, I have a tip for you: Rather than use subdermal needle electrode for recording from the mimetic (facial) and mastication (chewing) muscles, use intramuscular needle electrodes! This will purify your recordings and virtually eliminate volume conduction.

Here is an example of CN VII stimulation during a translabyrinthine craniectomy for resection of acoustic schwannoma.

Stimulation of CN VII. EMG responses are found only from CN VII-innervated muscles with intramuscular electrodes, and the latency ranges from about 6-7 msec (time base is 2 msec/div).

Stimulation of CN VII. EMG responses are found only from CN VII-innervated muscles with intramuscular electrodes, and the latency ranges from about 6-7 msec (time base is 2 msec/div). All traces secondary to 0.30 mA intensity, 200 µsec p/w, 3.1 Hz stimulus applied directly to the nerve.

It has become my preference to use intramuscular needle electrodes for any surgery in which I need to differentiate between the trigeminal and facial nerves. Give it a shot and let me know what you think. You can get these electrodes here.
Back to the Top

Differentiating the Lower Cranial Nerves (IX, X, XI and XII):

The locations where you are most likely to have to differentiate the lower cranial nerves are at the brainstem and in the jugular foramen.

When the glossopharyngeal nerve is monitored, pre-bent subdermal needle electrodes are placed in the soft palate with the aid of a curved hemostat. When the vagus nerve is monitored, a commercially-available endotracheal tube (ETT) with surface-mounted electrode contact can be used. Alternatively, some people place subdermal needle electrodes in the cricothyroid muscle. When the accessory nerve is monitored, subdermal needle electrodes are placed in the upper trapezius muscle. When the hypoglossal nerve is monitored, pre-bent subdermal needle electrodes are placed in the lateral tongue with the aid of a curved hemostat.

Differentiation of the lower cranial nerves can pose some pretty significant challenges:

The first major challenge is that the lower cranial nerves all have natural anatomical variations in the form of inter-connections (anastamoses) that makes these nerves more of a plexus (Shoja et al., 2014a,b). For this reason, even low-level stimulation of one nerve can easily coactivate a different nerve and this can result in recording CMAPs from muscles that represent seeming disparate cranial nerves.

Here’s an example in which Vagus Nerve (X) stimulation also evoked CMAPs from the tongue:

CN X stimulation evoked CMAPs from the tongue.

CN X stimulation evoked CMAPs from the tongue.

The second major challenge has to do with recording locations. The only way to monitor the glossopharyngeal nerve (CN IX) is to record from the stylopharyngeus muscle, and the only way to record from this muscle is to place electrodes in the lateral soft palate. The problem is that the electrodes aren’t actually in the stylopharyngeus muscle; rather, they are close to the muscle. The electrodes are technically in the soft palate and these muscles are innervated by the vagus nerve (CN X). So, differentiating between IX and X can be challenging.

In some cases, differentiating the lower cranial nerves is straight-forward – you stimulate a nerve, and you get a response from one muscle. In my experience, this is usually true for the accessory nerve and the hypoglossal nerve. Likewise, one can stimulate CN IX and get a CMAP only from the soft palate. Here’s an example:

Stimulation of CN IX in the jugular foramen. CMAPs are recorded only from the soft palate with a latency of approximately 6 msec.

Stimulation of CN IX in the jugular foramen. CMAPs are recorded only from the soft palate with a latency of approximately 6 msec.

It’s not always that easy, though. Sometimes you stimulate CN IX and get responses from the soft palate and the vocal folds. The best physiological explanation for this is anastamoses between the nerves. It may be best to stimulate multiple nerves and see if you can find a clear differentiation. You and the surgeon may have to put your heads together to determine what makes the most sense given the location of the surgery and the patient’s known individual anatomy.

One thing that you have to keep in mind when differentiating IX and X is the anatomy of the vagus nerve. If you are recording from the vocal folds with an endotrachial tube, then you are essentially recording from the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN), which has a long, winding pathway to the vocal muscles. On the right side, the RLN branches off of the vagus nerve, loops under the subclavian artery and ascends back toward the vocal cords. On the left side, the RLN has a longer course after branching from the vagus, looping under the aortic arch before ascending toward the vocal cords.

This is important because the excessive length of the vagus nerve translates to a much longer latency, at least as compared to the glossopharyngeal nerve. If you stimulate CN IX at the brainstem, the CMAP should have a latency of approximately 7 msec. If you stimulate CN X at the brainstem, the CMAP should have a latency of approximately 9-11 msec on the right side, and 11-13 msec on the left side. This is where it’s absolutely critical to measure the response latency by the peak of the CMAP, and not the onset.

Stimulation of the left vagus nerve in the jugular foramen. Note the latency is measured from the peak (white arrow). CMAPs recorded from the soft palate are due to activation of the vagus nerve. CMAPs recorded from the tongue are presumed to occur secondary to a X-XII anastamosis.

Stimulation of the left vagus nerve in the jugular foramen. Note the latency is measured from the peak (white arrow). CMAPs recorded from the soft palate are due to activation of the vagus nerve. CMAPs recorded from the tongue are presumed to occur secondary to a X-XII anastamosis.

I think that the difficulties associated with differentiating CNs IX and X and under-reported in the literature, and this particular topic deserves more attention. Recently, the utility of glossopharyngeal nerve monitoring has been challenged by Kartush (2015). I highly recommend reading his commentary if you can.

The challenges associated with differentiating the lower cranial nerves with the use of T-EMG are not insignificant. As with the other cranial nerves, a keen understanding of the anatomy, physiology, pathology and surgical approach, as well as having a view of the surgical field, will help you to make the best decisions. When in doubt, be sure to communicate your uncertainty. Communication is critical to identification and differentiation of cranial nerve. In some cases, you and the surgeon may find yourselves making a “best guess”, and that’s ok as long as everyone is on the same page.
Back to the Top

Bonus Round:

In the image below, CMAPs are recorded from different muscles following electrical stimulation of three different cranial nerves. Within the figure, I have labeled these CMAPs by grouping (Group 1, Group 2, Group 3). As you read below, refer to these Groups within the figure.

CMAPs recorded following electrical stimulation of three different cranial nerves (Groups 1, 2, 3). Refer to text for more information.

CMAPs recorded following electrical stimulation of three different cranial nerves (Groups 1, 2, 3). Refer to text for more information.

Group 1:

These recordings are made following electrical stimulation of one of the right side lower cranial nerve near the brainstem. As you can see, CMAPs are recorded from the soft palate, vocalis and cricothyroid muscles. The cricothyroid response appears small in amplitude, but the screen sensitivity is set to 2000 μV/div. From the pattern of muscles activated, we can deduce that the nerve in question is the vagus nerve.

It is also important to consider the CMAP latency and what that means in the context of the vagus nerve anatomy. As the right vagus nerve descends in the neck (inside the carotid sheath) it first gives off the external branch of the superior laryngeal nerve, and this innervates the cricothyroid muscle. The latency of this response is ~7.5 msec. The vagus nerve then gives off the recurrent laryngeal nerve, which passes under the subclavian artery and then ascends in the tracheoesophageal groove before entering the larynx and innervating the vocal cords (among many other muscles). The latency of this response is ~10.0 msec. So, the latencies of these CMAPs match the anatomical course of the nerve.

Group 1 recordings are clearly made in response to electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve, and this goes to show that you can use cricothyroid recordings to monitor CN X just as well as an endotrachial tube with surface electrodes. In this case, cricothyroid recordings are made using subdermal needle electrodes placed in the neck.

Group 2:

Similar to Group 1, these recordings in Group 2 are also made following electrical stimulation of one of the right side lower cranial nerve near the brainstem. CMAPs are recorded most prominently from the vocalis and trapezius muscles. The latency of the CMAP recorded from the trapezius muscle and the prominence of the response is clearly consistent with stimulation of the accessory nerve (CN XI).

What’s interesting about this grouping is that the latency of the vocalis CMAP is actually consistent with activation of vagus nerve; however, there’s no CMAP recorded from the cricothyroid muscle. Also, notice that the vocalis CMAP is inverted, small in amplitude and more protracted (wider base) as compared to the recordings from Group 1. The reversal in phase leads me to believe that the generator site has changed relative to the recording location. Also, the smaller amplitude and protracted base both lead me to believe that the CMAP is far-field. I don’t know the generator of this CMAP, but I suspect that perhaps this recording is a far-field response secondary to activation of the sternocleomastoid muscle, which is innervated by CN XI.

Group 3:

These recordings are made following electrical stimulation of one of the right side cranial nerve near the brainstem. CMAPs are recorded most prominently from the masseter, orbicularis oculi, orbicularis oris, mentalis and cricothyroid muscles – all using subdermal needle electrodes.

The CMAP latency is too long to be activation of CN V, so we are obviously stimulating CN VII. What about the cricothyroid response? The latency of this response is much longer than the one recorded in Group 1 when we were stimulating the vagus nerve. That’s because the generator for this particular CMAP is from a CN VII-innervated muscle – the platysma, which is innervated by the cervical branch of the facial nerve. The latency is accounted for by the long, winding route of the facial nerve.
Back to the Top

Ok, that’s all, folks! I hope you enjoyed this post. Feel free to leave your comments below.

References:

  1. Gavrancic B, Lolis A, Beric A. Train-of-four test in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring: differences between hand and foot train-of-four. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2014;31(6):575–9.
  2. Kartush JM. Commentary: Endotracheal Tube Electrodes to Assess Vocal Cord Motor Function During Surgery in the Cerebellopontine Angle. Neurosurgery. 2015;77(5):E838–41.
  3. López JR. Neurophysiologic Intraoperative Monitoring of the Oculomotor, Trochlear, and Abducens Nerves. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2011;28(6):543–550.
  4. Saitoh Y, Tanaka H, Toyooka H, Amaha K. Recovery of post-tetanic and train-of-four responses at the first dorsal interosseous and adductor pollicis muscles in patients receiving vecuronium. Can. J. Anaesth. = J. Can. d’anesthésie. 1996;43(4):362–7.
  5. Shoja MM, Oyesiku NM, Griessenauer CJ, Radcliff V, Loukas M, Chern JJ, Benninger B, Rozzelle CJ, Shokouhi G, Tubbs RS. Anastomoses between lower cranial and upper cervical nerves: a comprehensive review with potential significance during skull base and neck operations, part I: trigeminal, facial, and vestibulocochlear nerves. Clin Anat. 2014a Jan;27(1):118-30.
  6. Shoja MM, Oyesiku NM, Shokouhi G, Griessenauer CJ, Chern JJ, Rizk EB, Loukas M, Miller JH, Tubbs RS. A comprehensive review with potential significance during skull base and neck operations, Part II: glossopharyngeal, vagus, accessory, and hypoglossal nerves and cervical spinal nerves 1-4. Clin Anat. 2014b Jan;27(1):131-44.
  7. Singh H, Vogel RW, Lober RM, Doan AT, Matsumoto CI, Kenning TJ, & Evans JJ. (2016). Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for endoscopic endonasal approaches to the skull base: A technical guide. Scientifica Neuroscience. 2016;2016:1-20.
  8. Sloan TB. Muscle relaxant use during intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring. J. Clin. Monit. Comput. 2013;27(1):35–46.
  9. Sloan TB, Heyer EJ. Anesthesia for intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring of the spinal cord. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2002;19(5):430–43.

Back to the Top

12 thoughts on “Neurophysiological Identification and Differentiation of Motor Cranial Nerves

  • Reply diane bouchard June 9, 2016 at 21:01

    hi. very informative,

    just a question regarding T-EMG cranial nerves. in order to put a cursor on the top of wave for latency, you expect it to have an initial rise up? dont you have to put your active recording electrode in a specific place in relation to the stimulating cathode in order to be sure of the initial deflection?

    if so, how feasible is that with different cranial nerves?

    sometimes they are slightly polyphasic with a doublet and difficult to determine the real first peak.

    • Reply Richard Vogel June 12, 2016 at 20:46

      Hi Diane, When measuring latency, you’re usually marking the first deflection, which could be a peak (if up) or a trough (if down). Whether the CMAP goes up or down first is ultimately determined by which recording electrode is assigned to be active (+) and which is assigned to be a reference (-) when plugged into the amplifier. Remember that we use an operational amplifier and the active recording (+) is always inverted, while the reference recording (-) is not inverted. You can actually invert any evoked potential just by switching your +/- electrodes. Here’s an example: let’s say you have a twisted pair placed in the deltoid and they are plugged into your amplifier ports #s 1 and 2. You run an MEP test. Then take the electrodes in 1 and 2, and just switch them. The CMAP will invert. Also, it doesn’t matter where the stimulating cathode is located. With T-EMG you can get CMAPs that are polyphasic. I’d be reluctant to give a hard-and-fast rule for labeling the latency without looking at the individual recording myself. In general, the peak/trough of the first deflection is where you want to make the latency.

  • Reply sergio June 18, 2016 at 16:43

    Hi Richard, as always, very clear and deep.
    Let me ask : during , i,e, spine surgeries, apart of MEP latencies prolongatin, as an alarma sign, i consider the number of phases in poliphasic recording, If that number decreases, together with other parameters detrioration, so, it is a significant sign of signal deterioration, with suitables contitions of anaesthesic , etc.
    Are these criteria the same for cranial nerves recordings ?
    Regards
    Sergio

    • Reply Richard Vogel June 19, 2016 at 22:20

      Hi Sergio. Guidelines for MEP alerts in various surgical procedures are reviewed in the MacDonald et al paper below. Cranial Nerve EMG alerts are very different, and depend on the nerve and how/where you stimulated. I would focus more on the amplitude than the latency/morphology.

      Macdonald DB, Skinner S, Shils J, Yingling C; American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring. Intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring – a position statement by the American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring. Clin Neurophysiol. 2013 Dec;124(12):2291-316. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2013.07.025. Epub 2013 Sep 18. Review. PubMed PMID: 24055297.

  • Reply Kristina Port June 19, 2016 at 08:27

    Appreciate the mini tutorial on CN not often monitored in basic spine cases.

  • Reply hector zambrano November 23, 2016 at 22:09

    one question are you used hookwire for registration??

    • Reply hector zambrano May 17, 2017 at 21:53

      ???????’

    • Reply Richard Vogel May 18, 2017 at 09:52

      Hi Hector, sorry I didn’t respond earlier. I do not use usually hookwire electrodes.

  • Reply hector zambrano November 23, 2016 at 22:10

    could you adds a video for technique ??

    • Reply Richard Vogel May 18, 2017 at 09:54

      Which technique would you like a video of? It can be challenging to record videos and maintain patient privacy.

  • Reply Jeremy January 12, 2017 at 10:30

    Hi Richard,

    This is an exceptional post. You have a very informative site, and although I don’t agree 100% with some of your ‘political’ views, I am impressed with your concise and cogent explanations/assertions of some of the more convoluted issues faced in IOM — this piece in particular is one the best I’ve read.

    I also wanted to say that I appreciate your outside links/references as well. Although I had read it previously, it was nice to see the reference to Kartush’s commentary as it is an excellent read for anyone involved in CN monitoring.

    The only thing I would add to an otherwise (in my opinion) very thorough explanation, is the possibility of stimulator current shunting in a wet operating field vs. anastomosis.

    Regards,
    Jeremy

    • Reply Richard Vogel May 18, 2017 at 10:08

      Hi Jeremy, Thank for taking the time to write, and thanks for the kind words about my blog. I’m just now playing catch-up after a bit of a hiatus. Given that I tend to freely express my opinions online, it may be hard to believe but I’m a very open-minded person; thus, while I obviously have some opinions/politics with which you disagree, I definitely respect your opinions and I’m very thankful for the fact that we live an a country where we can freely express ourselves! I just wanted to address the one comment about current shunting vs anastomosis – a great comment. That’s generally a concern, but it in this particular situation, we were under the microscope in the jugular foramen with the nerves clearly separated and no additional fluid. So, anastomosis is the most likely explanation in this scenario. The review papers written by Shoja and colleagues (2014) provided an excellent treatment of the anatomical anomalies that exist in the context of cranial nerve anastomoses and they’re important reads for anyone who works in skull base surgery. I thought the example presented above would help to generate some discussion around this topic and shine more light upon it. Not always the case. Thanks again for reading and commenting. Rich

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: