Daube, Jasper R.

While anal sphincter neurogenic injury documented by needle electromyography (EMG) has been implicated to cause fecal incontinence (FI), most studies have been uncontrolled. Normal values and the effects of age on anal sphincter motor unit potentials (MUP) are ill defined. The functional significance of anal sphincter neurogenic injury in FI is unclear. Anal pressures and EMG were assessed in 20 asymptomatic nulliparous women (age, 38 ± 5 yr; mean ± SE) and 20 women with FI (54 ± 3 yr). A computerized program quantified MUP duration and phases. These parameters and MUP recruitment were also semiquantitatively assessed by experienced electromyographers in real time. Increasing age was associated with longer and more polyphasic MUP in nulliparous women by quantitative analysis. A higher proportion of FI patients had prolonged (1 control, 7 patients, P = 0.04) and polyphasic MUP (2 controls, 9 patients, P = 0.03) at rest but not during squeeze. Semiquantitative analyses identified neurogenic or muscle injury in the anal sphincter (11 patients) and other lumbosacral muscles (4 patients). There was substantial agreement between quantitative and semiquantitative analyses (κ statistic 0.63 ± 95% CI: 0.32–0.96). Anal resting and squeeze pressures were lower ( P ≤ 0.01) in FI than controls. Anal sphincter neurogenic or muscle injury assessed by needle EMG was associated ( P = 0.01) with weaker squeeze pressures (83 ± 10 mmHg vs. 154 ± 30 mmHg) and explained 19% ( P = 0.01) of the variation in squeeze pressure. Anal sphincter MUP are longer and more polyphasic in older than younger nulliparous women. Women with FI have more severe neurogenic or muscle anal sphincter injury, which is associated with lower squeeze pressures.

Background Paraplegia is a devastating complication for patients undergoing repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. A monitor to detect spinal cord ischemia is necessary if anesthesiologists are to intervene to protect the spinal cord during aortic aneurysm clamping. Methods The medical records of 60 patients who underwent thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair with regional lumbar epidural cooling with evoked potential monitoring were reviewed. The authors analyzed latency and amplitude of motor evoked potentials, somatosensory evoked potentials, and H reflexes before cooling and clamping, after cooling and before clamping, during clamping, and after release of aortic cross clamp. Results Twenty minutes after the aortic cross clamp was placed, motor evoked potentials had 88% sensitivity and 65% specificity in predicting spinal cord ischemia. The negative predictive value of motor evoked potentials at 20 min after aortic cross clamping was 96%. Conclusions Rapid loss of motor evoked potentials or H reflexes after application of the aortic cross clamp identifies a subgroup of patients who are at high risk of developing spinal cord ischemia and in whom aggressive anesthetic and surgical interventions may be justified.

In this era of budgetary constraints, the biggest threat to continuing biomedical research is often seen as governmental funding cutbacks. However, a much larger threat looms—the antiscientific programs of the various so-called animal rights groups. Unless clinicians and scientists mount a concerted defense of scientific investigation, the repressive antiscience movement will win out and thrust us into a Dark Ages scenario, with only a few gallant enough to maintain scientific thought until another Enlightenment. During World War II, the German clergyman Martin Niemoeller lamented the general apathy that allowed a small group of dedicated ideologues (the Nazi hierarchy) to terrorize the Germans: "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up." Not dissimilarly, the apathy of clinicians and biomedical scientists has permitted the radical animal rights movement to terrorize researchers and undermine our research freedom. In a call to action, the American Academy of Neurology has developed a statement (in association with the Foundation for Biomedical Research and other groups) on the threat to neurology research. This information was originally published in Neurology (1995;45: 609-610). In order to increase the dissemination of this important warning to clinicians and scientists everywhere, the Journal of Child Neurology in cooperation with the American Academy of Neurology is reprinting that material in this issue.