Steven Spitz1, Daniel Felbaum2, Nima Aghdam1, Faheem Sandhu3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, 3700 Reservoir Road NW, 7 PHC, Washington, DC, 20007, USA. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, 3700 Reservoir Road NW, 7 PHC, Washington, DC, 20007, USA. rocky.felbaum@gmail.com. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Medstar Georgetown University Hospital, 3700 Reservoir Road NW, 7 PHC, Washington, DC, 20007, USA. fasandhu@aol.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although advances have been made in surgical technique and intraoperative monitoring, the rate of postoperative C5 palsy remains the same. We attempt to define characteristics which may predict risk of developing postoperative C5 palsy. METHODS: Retrospective chart review identified 644 patients undergoing cervical procedures. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion was performed in 456, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in 78, posterior laminectomy and fusion (PLF) in 106, and posterior open-door laminoplasty in 4 patients. All patients had neurophysiologic monitoring [somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP), spontaneous electromyogram (EMG), and/or motor-evoked potential (MEP)]. RESULTS: Postoperative C5 root palsy occurred in 5 (2 with ACCF and 3 with PLF) cases (1.4%). In all cases, there were no changes in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring. C5 palsy did not occur before postoperative day 2. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing cervical decompression remain at risk for C5 root palsy despite use of monitoring. Given that all patients experienced delayed onset of C5 palsy, MEP, SSEP, and EMG may not be sensitive enough to assess the risk of developing C5 palsy.
INTRODUCTION: Although advances have been made in surgical technique and intraoperative monitoring, the rate of postoperative C5 palsy remains the same. We attempt to define characteristics which may predict risk of developing postoperative C5 palsy. METHODS: Retrospective chart review identified 644 patients undergoing cervical procedures. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion was performed in 456, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) in 78, posterior laminectomy and fusion (PLF) in 106, and posterior open-door laminoplasty in 4 patients. All patients had neurophysiologic monitoring [somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP), spontaneous electromyogram (EMG), and/or motor-evoked potential (MEP)]. RESULTS:Postoperative C5 root palsy occurred in 5 (2 with ACCF and 3 with PLF) cases (1.4%). In all cases, there were no changes in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring. C5 palsy did not occur before postoperative day 2. CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing cervical decompression remain at risk for C5 root palsy despite use of monitoring. Given that all patients experienced delayed onset of C5 palsy, MEP, SSEP, and EMG may not be sensitive enough to assess the risk of developing C5 palsy.
Authors: Aria Nouri; Lindsay Tetreault; Juan J Zamorano; Kristian Dalzell; Aileen M Davis; David Mikulis; Albert Yee; Michael G Fehlings Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2015-02-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Dapeng Fan; Daniel M Schwartz; Alexander R Vaccaro; Alan S Hilibrand; Todd J Albert Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2002-11-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Vidya M Bhalodia; Daniel M Schwartz; Anthony K Sestokas; Gary Bloomgarden; Thomas Arkins; Patrick Tomak; Judith Gorelick; Shirvinda Wijesekera; John Beiner; Isaac Goodrich Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2013-07-26
Authors: Brandon D Lawrence; W Bradley Jacobs; Daniel C Norvell; Jeffrey T Hermsmeyer; Jens R Chapman; Darrel S Brodke Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 3.468