Diagnostic Accuracy of Thresholds Less Than or Equal to 8 mA in Pedicle Screw Testing During Lumbar Spine Procedures to Predict New Postoperative Lower Extremity Neurological Deficits

Accuracy of Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in the Diagnosis of Intraoperative Neurological Decline in the Setting of Spinal Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

In an effort to prevent intraoperative neurological injury during spine surgery, the use of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) has increased significantly in recent years. Using IONM, spinal cord function can be evaluated intraoperatively by recording signals from specific nerve roots, motor tracts, and sensory tracts. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies to evaluate the efficacy of IONM among patients undergoing spine surgery for any indication.

METHODS

The current systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) and was registered on PROSPERO. A comprehensive search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS for all studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of neuromonitoring, including somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP), motor evoked potential (MEP) and electromyography (EMG), either on their own or in combination (multimodal). Studies were included if they reported raw numbers for True Positives (TP), False Negatives (FN), False Positives (FP) and True Negative (TN) either in a 2 × 2 contingency table or in text, and if they used postoperative neurologic exam as a reference standard. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated to evaluate the overall efficacy of each modality type using a bivariate model adapted by Reitsma et al, for all spine surgeries and for individual disease groups and regions of spine. The risk of bias (ROB) of included studies was assessed using the quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2).

RESULTS

A total of 163 studies were included; 52 of these studies with 16,310 patients reported data for SSEP, 68 studies with 71,144 patients reported data for MEP, 16 studies with 7888 patients reported data for EMG and 69 studies with 17,968 patients reported data for multimodal monitoring. The overall sensitivity, specificity, DOR and AUC for SSEP were 71.4% (95% CI 54.8-83.7), 97.1% (95% CI 95.3-98.3), 41.9 (95% CI 24.1-73.1) and .899, respectively; for MEP, these were 90.2% (95% CI 86.2-93.1), 96% (95% CI 94.3-97.2), 103.25 (95% CI 69.98-152.34) and .927; for EMG, these were 48.3% (95% CI 31.4-65.6), 92.9% (95% CI 84.4-96.9), 11.2 (95% CI 4.84-25.97) and .773; for multimodal, these were found to be 83.5% (95% CI 81-85.7), 93.8% (95% CI 90.6-95.9), 60 (95% CI 35.6-101.3) and .895, respectively. Using the QUADAS-2 ROB analysis, of the 52 studies reporting on SSEP, 13 (25%) were high-risk, 10 (19.2%) had some concerns and 29 (55.8%) were low-risk; for MEP, 8 (11.7%) were high-risk, 21 had some concerns and 39 (57.3%) were low-risk; for EMG, 4 (25%) were high-risk, 3 (18.75%) had some concerns and 9 (56.25%) were low-risk; for multimodal, 14 (20.3%) were high-risk, 13 (18.8%) had some concerns and 42 (60.7%) were low-risk.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that all neuromonitoring modalities have diagnostic utility in successfully detecting impending or incident intraoperative neurologic injuries among patients undergoing spine surgery for any condition, although it is clear that the accuracy of each modality differs.PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42023384158.

Optimal "Low" Pedicle Screw Stimulation Threshold to Predict New Postoperative Lower-Extremity Neurologic Deficits During Lumbar Spinal Fusions

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have shown that pedicle screw stimulation thresholds ≤6-8 mA yield a high diagnostic accuracy of detecting misplaced screws. Our objective was to determine the optimal "low" stimulation threshold to predict new postoperative neurologic deficits and identify additional risk factors associated with deficits.

METHODS

We included patients with complete pedicle screw stimulation testing who underwent posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgeries from 2010-2012. We calculated the diagnostic accuracy of pedicle screw responses of ≤4 mA, ≤6 mA, ≤8 mA, ≤10 mA, ≤12 mA, and ≤20 mA to predict new postoperative lower-extremity (LE) neurologic deficits. We used multivariate modeling to determine the best logistic regression model to predict LE deficits and identify additional risk factors. Statistics software packages used were Python3.8.5, NumPy 1.19.1, Pandas 1.1.1, and SPSS26.

RESULTS

We studied 1179 patients who underwent 8584 pedicle screw stimulations with somatosensory evoked potential and free-run electromyographic monitoring for posterior lumbar spinal fusion. Twenty-five (2.1%) patients had new LE neurologic deficits. A stimulation threshold of ≤8 mA had a sensitivity/specificity of 32%/90% and a diagnostic odds ratio/area under the curve of 4.34 [95% confidence interval: 1.83, 10.27]/0.61 [0.49, 0.74] in predicting postoperative deficit. Multivariate analysis showed that patients who had pedicle screws with stimulation thresholds ≤8 mA are 3.15 [1.26, 7.83]× more likely to have postoperative LE deficits while patients who have undergone a revision lumbar spinal fusion surgery are 3.64 [1.38, 9.61]× more likely.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that low thresholds are indicative of not only screw proximity to the nerve but also an increased likelihood of postoperative neurologic deficit. Thresholds ≤8 mA prove to be the optimal "low" threshold to help guide a correctly positioned pedicle screw placement and detect postoperative deficits.