Intraoperative Neuromonitoring Alarms: Relationship of the Surgeon's Decision to Intervene (or Not) and Clinical Outcomes in a Subset of Spinal Surgical Patients with a New Postoperative Neurological Deficit

Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Intradural Extramedullary Spinal Tumours

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) is widely used in spinal neurosurgery, particularly for intramedullary tumours. However, its validity in intradural extramedullary (IDEM) spinal tumours is less clearly defined, this being the focus of this study.

METHODS

We compared outcomes for patients that underwent resection of IDEM tumours with and without IONM between 2010 and 2020. Primary outcomes were postoperative American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scores. Other factors assessed were use of intraoperative ultrasound, drain placement, postoperative complications, postoperative Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score, extent of resection, length of hospital stay, discharge location and recurrence.

RESULTS

163 patients were included, 71 patients in the IONM group and 92 in the non-IONM group. No significant differences were noted in baseline demographics. For preoperative ASIA D patients, 44.0% remained ASIA D and 49.9% improved to ASIA E in the IONM group, compared to 39.7% and 30.2% respectively in the non-IONM group. For preoperative ASIA E patients, 50.3% remained ASIA E and 44.0% deteriorated to ASIA D in the IONM group, compared to 30.2% and 39.7% respectively in the non-IONM group (all other patients deteriorated further). Length of inpatient stay was significantly shorter in the IONM group (P = .043). There were no significant differences in extent of resection, postoperative complications, discharge location or tumour recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Research focusing on the use of IONM in IDEM tumour surgery remains scarce. Our study supports the use of IONM during surgical excision of IDEM tumours.

Intraoperative Testing During the Mapping of the Language Cortex

Intracranial lesions, particularly in the language-eloquent areas of the brain, can affect one's speaking ability. Despite advances in surgery, the excision of these lesions can be challenging. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) during awake craniotomies can help identify language-eloquent areas and minimize postoperative impairments. Preoperative language testing is performed to establish a baseline before intraoperative language testing. This involves subjecting patients to predetermined tasks in the operating room to evaluate their phonological, semantic, and syntactic capabilities. The current state and future directions of intraoperative language testing procedures are discussed in this paper. The most common intraoperative tasks are counting and picture naming. However, some experts recommend utilizing more nuanced tasks that involve regions affected by infrequently occurring tumor patterns. Low-frequency bipolar Penfield stimulation is optimal for language mapping. Exception cases are discussed where awake craniotomies are not feasible. When dealing with multilingual patients, the patient's age of learning and skill level can be accounted for in terms of making informed task choices and mapping techniques to avoid any damage to language areas.

Intraoperative neuromonitoring practice patterns in spinal deformity surgery: a global survey of the Scoliosis Research Society

PURPOSE

Although multimodal IONM has reached a widespread use, several unresolved issues have remained in clinical practice. The aim was to determine differences in approaches to form a basis for taking actions to improve patient safety globally.

METHODS

A survey comprising 19 questions in four sections (demographics, setup, routine practices and reaction to alerts) was distributed to the membership of the SRS.

RESULTS

Of the estimated 1300 members, 205 (~ 15%) completed the survey. Respondent demographics reflected SRS member distribution. Most of the respondents had > 10 years of experience. TcMEP and SSEP were available to > 95%. Less than 5% reported that a MD/PhD with neurophysiology background routinely examines patients preoperatively, while 19% would consult if requested. After an uneventful case, 36% reported that they would decrease sedation and check motor function if the patient was to be transferred to ICU intubated. Reactions to dropped signals that recovered or did not fully recover varied between attempting the same correction to aborting the surgery with no rods and returning another day, with or without implant removal. After a decrease of signals, 85.7% use steroids of varied doses. Of the respondents, 53.7% reported using the consensus-created checklist by Vitale et al. Approximately, 14% reported never using the wake-up test while others use it for various conditions.

CONCLUSION

The responses of 205 experienced SRS members from different regions of the world showed that surgeons had different approaches in their routine IONM practices and in the handling of alerts. This survey indicates the need for additional studies to identify best practices.

Therapeutic Impact of Traction Release After C5 Nerve Root Motor Evoked Potential (MEP) Alerts in Cervical Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of 40,919 cervical spine surgeries monitored with motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from a multi-institutional intraoperative neuromonitoring database.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the clinical impact of interventions prompted by C5 spinal nerve root MEP alerts.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

MEPs have been shown to diagnose acute C5 palsies, but additional data are needed regarding the clinical impact of interventions in response to C5 MEP alerts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Procedures with isolated C5 MEP alerts were categorized as fully resolved, partially resolved, or unresolved based on the status of signals at closure. Clinical outcomes were based on neurological assessment in the immediate postoperative period. The sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and odds ratios (ORs) of C5 MEP alerts for acute C5 palsies were calculated.

RESULTS

The odds of an acute C5 palsy greatly increased if there was a C5 MEP alert [OR=340.9; 95% confidence (CI): 173.0, 671.6; P<0.0001], and increased further if the alert persisted through closure (OR=820.8; 95% CI: 398.1, 1692.0; P<0.0001). Relative to procedures with unresolved C5 MEP alerts, the risk of an acute C5 palsy significantly decreased if a C5 MEP alert was fully resolved by closure (OR=0.07; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.25; P<0.0001). For alerts resolved during positioning or exposure, 90.9% were resolved with the release of positional traction, and for resolved alerts that occurred after exposure, 36.3% involved just traction release, 14.1% involved both traction release and surgical action, and 30.3% involved just surgical action. The sensitivity of C5 MEP alerts for acute C5 palsies was anesthetic dependent: 89.7% (26/29) in the total intravenous regimen cohort but just 50.0% (10/20) in the inhalational anesthesia cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The timely release of positional traction is an effective intervention for resolving C5 MEP alerts and reducing the odds of an acute postoperative C5 palsy. Surgical maneuvers, such as the release of distraction or graft adjustment, should be attempted in conjunction with traction release depending on the surgical context of the alert.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Consensus document for multimodal intraoperatory neurophisiological monitoring in neurosurgical procedures. Basic fundamentals

The present work aims to establish a guide to action, agreed by anaesthesiologists and neurophysiologists alike, to perform effective intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for procedures presenting a risk of functional neurological injury, and neurosurgical procedures. The first section discusses the main techniques currently used for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. The second exposes the anaesthetic and non-anaesthetic factors that are likely to affect the electrical records of the nervous system structures. This section is followed by an analysis detailing the adverse effects associated with the most common techniques and their use. Finally, the last section describes a series of guidelines to be followed upon the various intraoperative clinical events.

Barriers of neurophysiology monitoring in spine surgery: Latin America experience

Background:

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IOM) has become valuable in spine surgery. Unfortunately, it is not always available in many spine centers, especially in developing countries. Our aim was to evaluate the accessibility and barriers to IOM in spine surgery in Latin America.

Methods:

We designed a questionnaire to evaluate the characteristics of surgeons and their opinions on the usefulness of IOM for different spine operations. The survey was sent to 9616 members and registered users of AO Spine Latin America (AOSLA) from August 1, 2019, to August 21, 2019. Major variables studied included nationality, years of experience, specialty (orthopedics or neurosurgery), level of complexity of the hospital, number of spine surgeries performed per year by the spine surgeon, the types of spinal pathologies commonly managed, and how important IOM was to the individual surgeon. General questions to evaluate use included accessibility, limitations of IOM usage, management of IOM changes, and the legal value of IOM. The results were analyzed and compared between neurosurgeon and orthopedics, level of surgeon experience, and country of origin.

Results:

Questionnaires were answered by 200 members of AOSLA from 16 different countries. The most common responses were obtained from orthopedic surgeons (62%), those with more than 10 years of practice (54%); majority of surgeons performed more than 50 spine surgeries per year (69%) and treated mainly spine degenerative diseases (76%). Most surgeons think that IOM has a real importance during surgeries (92%) and not just a legal value. Although surgeons mostly considered IOM essential to scoliosis surgery in adolescents (70%), thoracolumbar kyphosis correction (68%), and intramedullary tumors (68%), access to IOM was limited to 57% for economic reasons. Of interest, in 64% of cases, where IOM was available and significant change occurred, the actual operative procedures were significantly altered.

Conclusion:

Despite the fact that 68% of spine surgeons believe IOM to be indispensable for complex spine surgery, cost remains the main barrier to its use/availability in Latin America.

Postsurgical Neuropathy: A Descriptive Review

Postsurgical neuropathies represent an infrequent but potentially devastating complication of surgery that may result in significant morbidity with medicolegal implications. Elucidation of this phenomenon has evolved over the past few decades, with emerging evidence for not only iatrogenic factors contributing to this process but also inflammatory causes. This distinction can be important; for instance, cases in which inflammatory etiologies are suspected may benefit from further investigations including nerve biopsy and may benefit from treatment in the form of immunotherapy. In contrast, postsurgical neuropathies due to perioperative causes including anesthesia, traction, compression, and transection will not benefit in the same manner. This article summarizes early and current literature surrounding the frequency of new neurologic deficits after various surgical types, potential causes including anatomical and inflammatory considerations, and roles for treatment. To capture the scope of the issue, a literature review was conducted for human studies in English via MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1, 1988 to March 31, 2018. Search terms included anesthesia and/or surgical procedures, operative, peripheral nervous system diseases, trauma, mononeuropathy, polyneuropathy, peripheral nervous system, nerve compression, neuropathy, plexopathy, postoperative, postsurgical, perioperative, complication. We excluded case series with less than 10 patients and review papers. We then narrowed the studies to those presented highlighting key concepts in postsurgical neuropathy.

Neurophysiological monitoring during neurosurgery: anesthetic considerations based on outcome evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the recent outcome studies that investigated intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) during spine, neurovascular and brain tumor surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several recent studies have focused on identifying which types of neurosurgical procedures might benefit most from IONM use. Despite conflicting literature regarding its efficacy in improving neurological outcomes, many experts have advocated for the use of IONM in neurosurgery. Several themes have emerged from the recent literature: the entire perioperative team must always work together to ensure adequate communication and intervention; systems and checklists, in which each member of the perioperative team has a clearly defined role, can be useful in the event of a sudden intraoperative changes in electrophysiological signals; regardless of the IONM modality used, any sudden change in electrophysiological signal should prompt an immediate and appropriate intervention; a multimodal IONM approach is often, but not always, advantageous over a single IONM approach.

SUMMARY

For neurosurgical procedures that can be complicated by neural injury, the use of IONM should be considered according to specific patient and surgical factors. Future studies should focus on improving IONM technology and optimizing sensitivity and specificity for detecting any impending neural damage.