STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of spinal cord monitoring (SCM) results of patients with neural axis abnormalities (NAA) as compared with a control group of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. OBJECTIVE: To analyze SCM on a group of patients who had a NAA undergoing spinal deformity surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: To our knowledge, only 1 report in the literature has analyzed the accuracy and reliability of SCM in patients with NAA. METHODS: Over a 10-year period, 41 patients with NAA had SCM while undergoing surgery for spinal deformity. These patients were retrospectively compared with a group of 136 AIS patients. RESULTS: The average ages were similar (14.4 vs. 14.6 years), but there were more males (48.8% vs. 19.1%) and greater preoperative curve magnitude in the NAA group (65.9 degrees vs. 59.8 degrees ) (P < 0.05). Good baseline values were achieved less often in the NAA group for somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) (85.4% vs. 98.5%) and motor-evoked potentials (MEP) (82.6% vs. 100%) (P < 0.05). Significant deviations from baseline values were seen more often in the NAA group for SSEP (8.6% vs. 1.5%) and MEP (5.3% vs. 2.5%). There were no false negatives in either group. CONCLUSIONS: SCM in patients who have NAA can be more difficult to obtain than in AIS but results in few false positives and does not miss neurologic injury.
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of spinal cord monitoring (SCM) results of patients with neural axis abnormalities (NAA) as compared with a control group of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. OBJECTIVE: To analyze SCM on a group of patients who had a NAA undergoing spinal deformity surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: To our knowledge, only 1 report in the literature has analyzed the accuracy and reliability of SCM in patients with NAA. METHODS: Over a 10-year period, 41 patients with NAA had SCM while undergoing surgery for spinal deformity. These patients were retrospectively compared with a group of 136 AISpatients. RESULTS: The average ages were similar (14.4 vs. 14.6 years), but there were more males (48.8% vs. 19.1%) and greater preoperative curve magnitude in the NAA group (65.9 degrees vs. 59.8 degrees ) (P < 0.05). Good baseline values were achieved less often in the NAA group for somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) (85.4% vs. 98.5%) and motor-evoked potentials (MEP) (82.6% vs. 100%) (P < 0.05). Significant deviations from baseline values were seen more often in the NAA group for SSEP (8.6% vs. 1.5%) and MEP (5.3% vs. 2.5%). There were no false negatives in either group. CONCLUSIONS: SCM in patients who have NAA can be more difficult to obtain than in AIS but results in few false positives and does not miss neurologic injury.