Utility of neuromonitoring during lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy for adult spinal deformity.
Adolescent
Adult
Evoked Potentials, Motor
/ physiology
Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory
/ physiology
Female
Humans
Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring
/ methods
Lumbosacral Region
/ physiopathology
Male
Middle Aged
Neurosurgical Procedures
/ adverse effects
Osteotomy
/ adverse effects
Postoperative Complications
Retrospective Studies
Spinal Diseases
/ surgery
Spinal Fusion
/ methods
Young Adult
ASD = adult spinal deformity
IONM = intraoperative neuromonitoring
MEP = motor evoked potential
NPV = negative predictive value
PPV = positive predictive value
PSO = pedicle subtraction osteotomy
SSEP = somatosensory evoked potential
UIV = uppermost instrumented vertebra
complications
lumbar
neuromonitoring
osteotomy
spinal deformity
surgical technique
three-column
Journal
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
ISSN: 1547-5646
Titre abrégé: J Neurosurg Spine
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101223545
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 May 2019
31 May 2019
Historique:
received:
28
11
2018
accepted:
08
03
2019
pubmed:
1
6
2019
medline:
25
3
2020
entrez:
1
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The benefits and utility of routine neuromonitoring with motor and somatosensory evoked potentials during lumbar spine surgery remain unclear. This study assesses measures of performance and utility of transcranial motor evoked potentials (MEPs) during lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO). This is a retrospective study of a single-surgeon cohort of consecutive adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients who underwent lumbar PSO from 2006 to 2016. A blinded neurophysiologist reviewed individual cases for MEP changes. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine whether changes correlated with neurological deficits. Measures of performance were calculated. A total of 242 lumbar PSO cases were included. MEP changes occurred in 38 (15.7%) cases; the changes were transient in 21 cases (55.3%) and permanent in 17 (44.7%). Of the patients with permanent changes, 9 (52.9%) had no recovery and 8 (47.1%) had partial recovery of MEP signals. Changes occurred at a mean time of 8.8 minutes following PSO closure (range: during closure to 55 minutes after closure). The mean percentage of MEP signal loss was 72.9%. The overall complication rate was 25.2%, and the incidence of new neurological deficits was 4.1%. On multivariate analysis, MEP signal loss of at least 50% was not associated with complication (p = 0.495) or able to predict postoperative neurological deficits (p = 0.429). Of the 38 cases in which MEP changes were observed, the observation represented a true-positive finding in only 3 cases. Postoperative neurological deficits without MEP changes occurred in 7 cases. Calculated measures of performance were as follows: sensitivity 30.0%, specificity 84.9%, positive predictive value 7.9%, and negative predictive value 96.6%. Regarding the specific characteristics of the MEP changes, only a signal loss of 80% or greater was significantly associated with a higher rate of neurological deficit (23.0% vs 0.0% for loss of less than 80%, p = 0.021); changes of less than 80% were not associated with postoperative deficits. Neuromonitoring has a low positive predictive value and low sensitivity for detecting new neurological deficits. Even when neuromonitoring is unchanged, patients can still have new neurological deficits. The utility of transcranial MEP monitoring for lumbar PSO remains unclear but there may be advantages to its use.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31151094
doi: 10.3171/2019.3.SPINE181409
pii: 2019.3.SPINE181409
doi:
pii:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM