Literature DB >> 31227966

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

Sebastian Siller1, Constance Raith2, Stefan Zausinger2, Joerg-Christian Tonn2, Andrea Szelenyi2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring is widely used in spine surgery (sIONM). But guidelines are lacking and its use is mainly driven by individual surgeons' preferences and medicolegal advisements. To gain an overview over the current status of sIONM implementation, we conducted a transnational survey in the German-speaking countries.
METHODS: We developed a Web interface-based survey assessing prevalence, indication, technical implementation, and general satisfaction regarding sIONM in German, Austrian, and Swiss spine centers. The electronic survey was performed between November 2017 and April 2018, including both neurosurgical and orthopedic spine centers.
RESULTS: A total of 463 German, 60 Austrian, and 52 Swiss spine centers were contacted with participation rates of 64.1% (Germany), 68.3% (Austria), and 55.8% (Switzerland). Some 75.9% participating neurosurgical spine centers and only 14.7% of the orthopedic spine centers applied sIONM. Motor- and somatosensory-evoked potentials (93.7% and 94.3%, respectively) were the most widely available modalities, followed by direct wave (D wave; 66.5%). Whereas sIONM utilization was low in spine surgeries for degenerative, traumatic, and extradural tumor diseases, it was high for scoliosis and intradural tumor surgeries. Overall, the general satisfaction within the institutional setting regarding technical skills, staff, performance, and reliability of sIONM was rated as "high" by more than three-quarters of the centers. However, shortage of skilled staff was claimed to be a negative factor by 41.1% of the centers and reimbursement was considered to be insufficient by 83.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: sIONM availability was high in neurosurgical but low in orthopedic spine centers. Main modalities were motor/somatosensory-evoked potentials and main indications were scoliosis and intradural spinal tumor surgeries. A more frequent sIONM use, however, was mainly limited by the shortage of skilled staff and restricted reimbursement.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Epidemiology; IONM; Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring; Prevalence; Spine surgery; Survey

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31227966     DOI: 10.1007/s00701-019-03974-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)        ISSN: 0001-6268            Impact factor:   2.216


  40 in total

1.  Role of intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring in lumbosacral spine fusion and instrumentation: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Saeid Alemo; Amirali Sayadipour
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2009-08-07       Impact factor: 2.104

2.  Evaluation of intraoperative somatosensory-evoked potential monitoring during 100 cervical operations.

Authors:  N E Epstein; J Danto; D Nardi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 3.  Intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring: focus on cervical myelopathy and related issues.

Authors:  Vincent J Devlin; Paul A Anderson; Daniel M Schwartz; Robin Vaughan
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2006 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.166

4.  Does intraoperative electromyographic monitoring in lumbar microdiscectomy correlate with postoperative pain?

Authors:  Vassilios G Dimopoulos; Carlos H Feltes; Kostas N Fountas; Ioannis Z Kapsalakis; Robert L Vogel; Bridget Fuhrmann; Arthur A Grigorian; Kim W Johnston; Hugh F Smisson; Joe S Robinson
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 0.954

5.  Neurophysiologic monitoring of spinal nerve root function during instrumented posterior lumbar spine surgery.

Authors:  Bikash Bose; Lawrence R Wierzbowski; Anthony K Sestokas
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Neurophysiological monitoring of spinal cord function during instrumented anterior cervical fusion.

Authors:  Bikash Bose; Anthony K Sestokas; Daniel M Schwartz
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  Continuous neural monitoring in lumbar spine surgery: experience with 101 patients.

Authors:  K M Akay; S Onder
Journal:  Minim Invasive Neurosurg       Date:  2002-06

8.  Intraoperative neurophysiologic spinal cord monitoring in thoracolumbar burst fractures.

Authors:  Alfredo T Castellon; Robert Meves; Osmar Avanzi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Neurologic injury after insertion of laminar hooks during Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation.

Authors:  H D Been; C J Kalkman; H S Traast; B W Ongerboer de Visser
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of the spinal cord during spinal cord and spine surgery: a review focus on the corticospinal tracts.

Authors:  Vedran Deletis; Francesco Sala
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-11-28       Impact factor: 3.708

View more
  2 in total

1.  Surgical Treatment of Intra- and Juxtamedullary Spinal Cord Tumors: A Population Based Observational Cohort Study.

Authors:  Oscar Persson; Alexander Fletcher-Sandersjöö; Gustav Burström; Erik Edström; Adrian Elmi-Terander
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 4.003

2.  Barriers of neurophysiology monitoring in spine surgery: Latin America experience.

Authors:  Alfredo Guiroy; Marcelo Valacco; Martin Gagliardi; Juan Pablo Cabrera; Juan Emmerich; Gaston Camino Willhuber; Asdrubal Falavigna
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2020-05-30
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.