Literature DB >> 20407350

The evidence for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: does it make a difference?

Michael G Fehlings1, Darrel S Brodke, Daniel C Norvell, Joseph R Dettori.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article was to undertake a systematic review of the literature to determine whether IOM is able to sensitively and specifically detect intraoperative neurologic injury during spine surgery and to assess whether IOM results in improved outcomes for patients during these procedures. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Although relatively uncommon, perioperative neurologic injury, in particular spinal cord injury, is one of the most feared complications of spinal surgery. Intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM) has been proposed as a method which could reduce perioperative neurologic complications after spine surgery.
METHODS: A systematic review of the English language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1990 and March 2009. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Collaborative Library databases were searched, as were the reference lists of published articles examining the use of IOM in spine surgery. Two independent reviewers assessed the level of evidence quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, and disagreements were resolved by consensus.
RESULTS: A total of 103 articles were initially screened and 32 ultimately met the predetermined inclusion criteria. We determined that there is a high level of evidence that multimodal IOM is sensitive and specific for detecting intraoperative neurologic injury during spine surgery. There is a low level of evidence that IOM reduces the rate of new or worsened perioperative neurologic deficits. There is very low evidence that an intraoperative response to a neuromonitoring alert reduces the rate of perioperative neurologic deterioration.
CONCLUSION: Based on strong evidence that multimodality intraoperative neuromonitoring (MIOM) is sensitive and specific for detecting intraoperative neurologic injury during spine surgery, it is recommended that the use of MIOM be considered in spine surgery where the spinal cord or nerve roots are deemed to be at risk, including procedures involving deformity correction and procedures that require the placement of instrumentation. There is a need to develop evidence-based protocols to deal with intraoperative changes in MIOM and to validate these prospectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20407350     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d8338e

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  54 in total

1.  Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for minimally invasive 1- and 2-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: does it improve patient outcome?

Authors:  Juanita Garces; J Franklin Berry; Edison P Valle-Giler; Wale A R Sulaiman
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

2.  Indication and technical implementation of the intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spine surgeries-a transnational survey in the German-speaking countries.

Authors:  Sebastian Siller; Constance Raith; Stefan Zausinger; Joerg-Christian Tonn; Andrea Szelenyi
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 2.216

3.  Changes to CMS reimbursement rules for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: implications for telemedicine.

Authors:  John P Ney
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 3.536

4.  The impact and value of uni- and multimodal intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) on neurological complications during spine surgery: a prospective study of 2728 patients.

Authors:  Martin Sutter; Andreas Eggspuehler; Dezsoe Jeszenszky; Frank Kleinstueck; Tamàs F Fekete; Daniel Haschtmann; François Porchet; Jiri Dvorak
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  An evaluation of multimodal spinal cord monitoring in scoliosis surgery: a single centre experience of 354 operations.

Authors:  S Bhagat; A Durst; H Grover; J Blake; L Lutchman; A S Rai; R Crawford
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-01-25       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Characteristics of multi-channel Br(E)-MsEP waveforms for the lower extremity muscles in thoracic spine surgery: comparison based on preoperative motor status.

Authors:  Kazuyoshi Kobayashi; Kei Ando; Mikito Tsushima; Masaaki Machino; Kyotaro Ota; Masayoshi Morozumi; Satoshi Tanaka; Shunsuke Kanbara; Naoki Ishiguro; Shiro Imagama
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  A CT-based study investigating the relationship between pedicle screw placement and stimulation threshold of compound muscle action potentials measured by intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.

Authors:  Gerit Kulik; Etienne Pralong; John McManus; Damien Debatisse; Constantin Schizas
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-05-19       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Multimodal Intraoperative Spinal Cord Monitoring during Spinal Deformity Surgery: Efficacy, Diagnostic Characteristics, and Algorithm Development.

Authors:  Athanasios I Tsirikos; Andrew D Duckworth; Lindsay E Henderson; Ciara Michaelson
Journal:  Med Princ Pract       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 1.927

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.  Intra-operative MEP monitoring can work well in the patients with neural axis abnormality.

Authors:  Shujie Wang; Qianyu Zhuang; Jianguo Zhang; Ye Tian; Hong Zhao; Yipeng Wang; Yu Zhao; Shugang Li; Xisheng Weng; Guixing Qiu; Jianxiong Shen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.