A prospective comparison of neurogenic mixed evoked potential stimulation methods: utility of epidural elicitation during posterior spinal surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study of 50 patients who underwent posterior thoracic or thoracolumbar instrumented spinal surgery from June 1998 through June 1999. OBJECTIVES: To highlight the advantages and disadvantages of neurogenic mixed evoked potential (NMEP) data obtained with three methods of stimulation: epidural, spinous process, and percutaneous. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Reports in the literature have established the efficacy of epidural, spinous process, and percutaneous stimulation of the NMEP response. The three methods have not been compared for reliability, sensitivity, and specificity. METHODS: The study group consisted of 50 patients who underwent posterior thoracic or thoracolumbar instrumented spinal surgery from June 1998 through June 1999. Somatosensory-evoked potentials were used to monitor upper and lower extremities. An attempt to obtain NMEPs was made in all patients by using percutaneous (PERC-NMEP), spinous process (SP-NMEP), and epidural (EPI-NMEP) stimulation. These data were evaluated for reliability, sensitivity, and specificity. The number of minutes monitored in the postcorrection period were calculated for each method, and stimulus intensities were noted. RESULTS: In the current study, PERC-NMEPs were obtained in 88% of the patients and were maintained in 91% of those cases, SP-NMEPs were obtained in 96% and maintained in 77%, and EPI-NMEPs were obtained in 100% and maintained in 88%. Data collection continued in the postcorrection period for 46 minutes for PERC-NMEPs, 19 minutes for SP-NMEPs, and 23 minutes for EPI-NMEPs. The study group had no true-positive or false-negative findings. CONCLUSIONS: Results showed that EPI-NMEPs provide reliable data in a greater number of patients than either SP-NMEPs or PERC-NMEPs. However, PERC-NMEP data are readily maintained during and after the critical time window after corrective spinal maneuvers. The NMEPs elicited with both percutaneous and epidural stimulation have a useful role in an intraoperative spinal cord-monitoring protocol.

Efficacy of intraoperative monitoring for pediatric patients with spinal cord pathology undergoing spinal deformity surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study of 38 pediatric patients with spinal cord pathology who underwent corrective spinal deformity surgery from January 1989 through June 1998. OBJECTIVES: To report reliability and specificity in obtaining intraoperative data in this population. These data were compared with monitoring results obtained in a group of pediatric patients with idiopathic scoliosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Reports in the literature suggest intraoperative monitoring for patients with spinal cord pathology may be of limited value. No optimal monitoring protocol has been suggested for this population. METHODS: The study group consisted of 38 pediatric patients with a diagnosis of spinal cord pathology who underwent corrective spinal deformity surgery from January 1989 through June 1998. All patients had lower extremity function. Somatosensory and neurogenic motor evoked potentials were used to monitor neurologic status during surgery. These data were compared with data obtained in 429 pediatric patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Study patients were divided into Group I, those who had had spinal cord surgery (n = 20), and Group II, those who had not (n = 18). RESULTS: Somatosensory evoked potentials were obtained in 93.2% and remained consistent with baselines in 87.2% of the study group patients. Neurogenic motor evoked potentials were obtained in 50.8% of the study subjects and remained consistent in 76.6% of those cases. The false-positive rate was 27.1% in the study group, compared with 1.4% in the group with idiopathic scoliosis. The study group had no true-positive or false-negative findings. Group I data differed from Group II data. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative monitoring should be used in patients with spinal cord pathology who undergo surgery for spinal deformity. Monitoring should not miss a neurologic deficit but demonstrates greater variability, resulting in more frequent use of an intraoperative wake-up test.

Somatosensory- and motor-evoked potential monitoring without a wake-up test during idiopathic scoliosis surgery. An accepted standard of care.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of 500 patients undergoing corrective surgery between 1987 and 1997 for spinal deformity caused by idiopathic scoliosis. OBJECTIVES: To report the sensitivity and specificity of somatosensory-evoked and neurogenic motor-evoked potentials monitoring and the requirements for an intraoperative wake-up test for all idiopathic scoliosis surgeries at a single institution. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Intraoperative monitoring is recommended for use during corrective spinal surgery. Accepted monitoring standards and requirements for an intraoperative wake-up test are still debated. METHODS: The study group consisted of 500 patients undergoing corrective surgery for idiopathic scoliosis between 1987 and 1997. All patients were monitored using somatosensory-evoked and neurogenic motor-evoked potential techniques, using a standard protocol developed at this institution. RESULTS: The false-positive rate (significant data change without postoperative neurologic deficit) was 0.014% (n = 7). The true-positive rate (degradation of data that met warning criteria, with a corresponding postoperative neurologic deficit) was 0.004% (n = 2). No false-negative results (normal data during with a postoperative neurologic deficit) were seen. The sensitivity of combined somatosensory-evoked and neurogenic motor-evoked potential data in predicting neurologic status was 98.6%, and the specificity of normal data predicting normal findings in a neurologic examination was 100%. CONCLUSION: Combined somatosensory-evoked and neurogenic motor-evoked potentials monitoring during idiopathic scoliosis surgery represents a standard of care that obviates the need for an intraoperative wake-up test when reliable data are obtained and maintained.