Vertebral artery injury during foraminal decompression in "low-risk" cervical spine surgery: incidence and management.

OBJECTIVES: Vertebral artery injury (VAI) during foraminal decompression in cervical spine surgery in the absence of repositioning or screw stabilization is rare. Without immediate recognition and treatment, it may have disastrous consequences. We aimed to describe the incidence and management of iatrogenic VAI in low-risk cervical spine surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of all patients who underwent surgical procedures of the cervical spine between January 2007 and May 2012 were retrospectively consecutively evaluated. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion or arthroplasty as well as dorsal foraminal decompression through the Frykholm approach in degenerative diseases were defined as low-risk surgeries (n = 992). RESULTS: VAI occurred in 0.3 % (n = 3) of 992 procedures: in one case during a dorsal foraminal decompression, and in two cases during the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) of two or four levels, respectively. In the first case, the VAI was intraoperatively misdiagnosed. Despite an initially uneventful course, the patient suffered hemorrhage from a pseudoaneurysm of the injured VA 1 month after surgery. The aneurysm was successfully occluded by endovascular coiling. In both ACDF cases, angiography and endovascular stenting of the lacerated segment proceeded immediately after the surgery. All three patients suffered no permanent deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: In a high-volume surgical center, the incidence of VAI during low-risk cervical spine surgery is extremely low, comprising 0.3 % of all cases. The major risks are delayed sequels of the vessel wall laceration. In cases of VAI, immediate angiographic diagnostics and generous indications for endovascular treatment are obligatory.

Learning curve of 3D fluoroscopy image-guided pedicle screw placement in the thoracolumbar spine.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: During the past decade, a disproportionate increase of spinal fusion procedures has been observed. Along with this trend, image-guided spine surgery has been experiencing a renaissance in the recent years. A wide range of different navigation systems are available on the market today. However, only few published studies assess the learning curves concerning these new spinal navigation techniques. So far, a study on the learning curve for intraoperative three-dimensional fluoroscopy (3DFL)-navigated pedicle screw (PS) placement is still lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to analyze the learning curve for 3DFL-navigated thoracolumbar PS placement. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: The study design included a prospective case series. PATIENT SAMPLE: A cohort of 145 patients were recruited from January 2011 to June 2012. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures were duration of intraoperative 3D scans, PS placement, PS accuracy on postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans, and PS-related revisions and complications. METHODS: From the introduction of spinal navigation to our department in January 2011 until June 2012, the learning curve for the duration of intraoperative 3D scan acquisition (navigation or control scan) and placement time per screw, intraoperative screw revisions, screw-related complications, revision surgeries, and PS accuracy on postoperative CT scans were assessed in 145 patients undergoing dorsal navigated instrumentation for 928 PS (736 lumbosacral and 192 thoracic). The observed time span was divided into four intervals. Results of the second, third, and last periods were compared with the first (reference) period, respectively. RESULTS: The mean navigation 3D scan time decreased (first and fourth periods) from 15.4±7.8 (range, 4-40) to 8.4±3.3 (3-15) minutes (p<.001). The mean control 3D scan time (after PS placement) decreased from 11.2±4.8 (5-25) to 6.6±3.0 (3-15) minutes (p<.001). The mean PS insertion time decreased from 5.3±2.5 (1-15) to 3.2±2.3 (1-17) minutes (p<.001). The mean proportion of correctly positioned PS (all 928) according to the Gertzbein and Robbins classification grades A and B increased initially from 83.1% (first period) to 95.1% (second period, p=.001), 96.4% (third period, p=.002), and 92.4% (fourth period, p=.049). No learning effect was found with respect to intraoperative screw revisions. There was one revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: We could demonstrate significant learning effects for 3DFL-navigated PS placement with regard to intraoperative 3D scan acquisition, PS placement time, and PS accuracy.

Inter- and intraobserver variability in motor mapping of the hotspot for the abductor policis brevis muscle.

BACKGROUND: For accuracy in navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS), determination of the hotspot location of small hand muscles is crucial because it is the basis for the resting motor threshold (RMT) and, therefore, its spatial resolution. We investigated intra- and interobserver differences of hotspot mapping to provide evidence for the reproducibility of this method.Ten subjects underwent nTMS motor mapping of the hotspot for the abductor pollicis brevis muscle (APB) three times. The first two sessions were performed by the same examiner; the third mapping was performed by a different examiner. Distances between the first and second mappings (intraobserver variability) and between the second and third mappings (interobserver variability) were measured. RESULTS: Intraobserver variability had a mean of 8.1 ± 3.3 mm (limits of agreement (LOA) 1.7 to 14.6 mm), whereas mean interobserver variability was 10.3 ± 3.3 mm (LOA 3.8 to 16.7 mm). Concerning RMT, CCC was 0.725 (95% CI: 0.276; 0.914). The mean variability in the same cortical depth was measured as 5.7 ± 3.3 mm (LOA -0.7 to 12.2 mm) for intraobserver and 9.2 ± 3.3 mm (LOA 2.7 to 15.8 mm) for interobserver examinations. When evaluating the RMT, CCC was 0.709 (95% CI: 0.244; 0.909). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, intraobserver variability showed higher reliability than interobserver variability. Our findings show that we can achieve good reliability in hotspot determination, ranging within the calculated precision of the system.

Reliability of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring using motor evoked potentials during resection of metastases in motor-eloquent brain regions: clinical article.

OBJECT: Resection of gliomas in or adjacent to the motor system is widely performed using intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM). For resection of cerebral metastases in motor-eloquent regions, however, data are sparse and IOM in such cases is not yet widely described. Since recent studies have shown that cerebral metastases infiltrate surrounding brain tissue, this study was undertaken to assess the value and influence of IOM during resection of supratentorial metastases in motor-eloquent regions. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2011, the authors resected 206 consecutive supratentorial metastases, including 56 in eloquent motor areas with monitoring of monopolar direct cortically stimulated motor evoked potentials (MEPs). The authors evaluated the relationship between the monitoring data and the course of surgery, clinical data, and postoperative imaging. RESULTS: Motor evoked potential monitoring was successful in 53 cases (93%). Reduction of MEP amplitude correlated better with postoperative outcomes when the threshold for significant amplitude reduction was set at 80% (only > 80% reduction was considered significant decline) than when it was set at 50% (> 50% amplitude reduction was considered significant decline). Evidence of residual tumor was seen on MR images in 28% of the cases with significant MEP reduction. No residual tumor was seen in any case of stable MEP monitoring. Moreover, preoperative motor deficit, recursive partitioning analysis Class 3, and preoperative radiotherapy were independent risk factors for a new surgery-related motor weakness (occurring in 64% of patients with and 11% of patients without radiotherapy, p > 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous MEP monitoring provides reliable monitoring of the motor system and also influences the course of operation in resection of cerebral metastases. However, in establishing warning criteria, only an amplitude decline > 80% of the baseline should be considered significant.