Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery

Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery - Comparison between constant current and constant voltage stimulations

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

JPRN

Registry ID

JPRN-UMIN000032651

Enrollment

Registered

2018-05-21

Start date

2014-07-07

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

spine surgery cases

Interventions

During spine surgery, transcranial electrical stimulation-compound muscle active potential with constant current stimulations transcranial electrical stimulation-compound muscle active potential with

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: the patients which underwent spine surgery with intraspinal cord monitoring and agreed with our clinical trial

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: the patients which underwent spine surgery without intraspinal cord monitoring and disagreed with our clinical trial

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
We used two monophasic stimulation patterns. In pattern 1, we placed the anode and cathode on the right and left sides, respectively, and in pattern 2, we did the opposite . For each patient, we used both constant-voltage and constant-current stimulators with both stimulation patterns, for four conditions in total. We recorded baseline CMAPs in the first trial after the effects of rocuronium had disappeared. We applied the four conditions in random order. The interval between CMAP recordings was at least 2 min to avoid residual effects from the previous stimulation. TES-MEP recordings were considered successful when the recorded amplitudes of CMAPs were greater than 50 microV. We also calculated the delivered charge. The delivered charge was fixed for the constant-current cases at 200 micro C (=200 (mA) * 0.2 (msec) * 5 (pulse stimulation train)). Meanwhile, we calculated the delivered charge for the constant-voltage cases: the delivered charge (microC)= ## (mA) * 0.05 (msec) *5 (pulse stimulation train). Because it was difficult to standardize the degree of stimulation between constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations, we calculated the efficiency, the value of which was wave amplitude for each muscle divided by the delivered charge, to standardize the obtained data from constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations.	—

Measure

Time frame

We used two monophasic stimulation patterns. In pattern 1, we placed the anode and cathode on the right and left sides, respectively, and in pattern 2, we did the opposite . For each patient, we used both constant-voltage and constant-current stimulators with both stimulation patterns, for four conditions in total. We recorded baseline CMAPs in the first trial after the effects of rocuronium had disappeared. We applied the four conditions in random order. The interval between CMAP recordings was at least 2 min to avoid residual effects from the previous stimulation. TES-MEP recordings were considered successful when the recorded amplitudes of CMAPs were greater than 50 microV. We also calculated the delivered charge. The delivered charge was fixed for the constant-current cases at 200 micro C (=200 (mA) * 0.2 (msec) * 5 (pulse stimulation train)). Meanwhile, we calculated the delivered charge for the constant-voltage cases: the delivered charge (microC)= ## (mA) * 0.05 (msec) *5 (pulse stimulation train). Because it was difficult to standardize the degree of stimulation between constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations, we calculated the efficiency, the value of which was wave amplitude for each muscle divided by the delivered charge, to standardize the obtained data from constant-current and constant-voltage stimulations.

—

Countries

Japan

Contacts

Public ContactHideki Shigematsu

Nara Medical University Orthopaedic surgery

shideki714@gmail.com0744223051

Outcome results

None listed

Source: JPRN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jul 3, 2026