Literature DB >> 18312072

Predictive value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during cervical spine surgery: a prospective analysis of 1055 consecutive patients.

Michael O Kelleher1, Gamaliel Tan, Roger Sarjeant, Michael G Fehlings.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Despite the growing use of multimodal intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in cervical spinal surgery, limited data exist regarding the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of such a technique in detecting new neurological deficits in this setting. The authors sought to define the incidence of significant intraoperative electrophysiological changes and new postoperative neurological deficits in a cohort of patients undergoing cervical surgery.
METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective analysis of a consecutive series of patients who had undergone cervical surgery during a 5-year period at a university-based neurosurgical unit, in which multimodal IOM was recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs) were determined using standard Bayesian techniques. The study population included 1055 patients (614 male and 441 female) with a mean age of 55 years.
RESULTS: The IOM modalities performed included somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) recording in 1055 patients, motor evoked potential (MEP) recording in 26, and electromyography (EMG) in 427. Twenty-six patients (2.5%) had significant SSEP changes. Electromyographic activity was transient in 212 patients (49.6%), and 115 patients (26.9%) had sustained burst or train activity. New postoperative neurological deficits occurred in 34 patients (3.2%): 6 had combined sensory and motor deficits, 7 had new sensory deficits, 9 had increased motor weakness, and 12 had new root deficits. Of these 34 patients, 12 had spinal tumors, of which 7 were intramedullary. Overall, of the 34 new postoperative deficits, 21 completely resolved, 9 partially resolved, and 4 had no improvement. The deficits that completely resolved did so on average 3.3 months after surgery. Patients with deficits that did not fully resolve (partial or no improvement) were followed up for an average of 1.8 years after surgery. Somatosensory evoked potentials had a sensitivity of 52%, a specificity of 100%, a PPV of 100%, and an NPV of 97%. Motor evoked potential sensitivity was 100%, specificity 96%, PPV 96%, and NPV 100%. Electromyography had a sensitivity of 46%, specificity of 73%, PPV of 3%, and an NPV of 97%.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined neurophysiological IOM with EMG and SSEP recording and the selective use of MEPs is helpful for predicting and possibly preventing neurological injury during cervical spine surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18312072     DOI: 10.3171/SPI/2008/8/3/215

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  32 in total

1.  Elevated preoperative blood pressure predicts the intraoperative loss of SSEP neuromonitoring signals during spinal surgery.

Authors:  Akash Kumar; Yuangen Chen; Hung-Mo Lin; Stacie Deiner
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during complex spinal deformity cases in pediatric patients: methodology, utility, prognostication, and outcome.

Authors:  James Drake; Reinhard Zeller; Abhaya V Kulkarni; Samuel Strantzas; Laura Holmes
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2010-03-07       Impact factor: 1.475

3.  Utility of intraoperative monitoring with motor-evoked potential during the surgical enucleation of peripheral nerve schwannoma.

Authors:  Hiromi Sasaki; Satoshi Nagano; Masahiro Yokouchi; Takao Setoguchi; Hirofumi Shimada; Takuya Yamamoto; Yasuhiro Ishidou; Setsuro Komiya
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 2.967

4.  Delayed postoperative C5 root palsy and the use of neurophysiologic monitoring.

Authors:  Steven Spitz; Daniel Felbaum; Nima Aghdam; Faheem Sandhu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Monitoring rate and predictability of intraoperative monitoring in patients with intradural extramedullary and epidural metastatic spinal tumors.

Authors:  H Kang; H S Gwak; S H Shin; M K Woo; I H Jeong; H Yoo; J W Kwon; S H Lee
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 2.772

6.  Protection of the remaining spinal cord function with intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during paraparetic scoliosis surgery: a case report.

Authors:  Zhengyong Chen; Joel Lerman
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2011-12-22       Impact factor: 2.502

7.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the semi-quantitative, pre-operative assessment of patients undergoing spinal deformity surgery.

Authors:  Michael A Glasby; Athanasios I Tsirikos; Lindsay Henderson; Gillian Horsburgh; Brian Jordan; Ciara Michaelson; Christopher I Adams; Enrique Garrido
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Clinical analysis of 21 cases of spinal cord ependymoma : positive clinical results of gross total resection.

Authors:  Tuncay Kaner; Mehdi Sasani; Tunc Oktenoglu; Bilgehan Solmaz; Ali Cetin Sarloglu; Ali Fahir Ozer
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2010-02-28

9.  Changes in transcranial motor evoked potentials during hemorrhage are associated with increased serum propofol concentrations.

Authors:  Jeremy A Lieberman; John Feiner; Mark Rollins; Russ Lyon; Paul Jasiukaitis
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 2.502

10.  Neurophysiologic monitoring can predict iatrogenic injury during acetabular and pelvic fracture fixation.

Authors:  Manny Porat; Fabio Orozco; Nitin Goyal; Zachary Post; Alvin Ong
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2013-08-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.