Efficacy of Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring During Intra- and Extramedullary Spinal Cord Tumor Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study of the Monitoring Committee of the Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research

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.

Role of Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring During Traumatic Spinal Injury Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study of the Monitoring Committee of the Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective multicenter observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the role of transcranial motor evoked potential (TcMEP) monitoring during traumatic spinal injury surgery, the timing of TcMEP alerts, and intervention strategies to avoid intraoperative neurological complications.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Intraoperative neuromonitoring, including TcMEP monitoring, is commonly used in high-risk spinal surgery to predict intraoperative spinal cord injury; however, little information is available on its use in traumatic spinal injury surgery.

METHODS

The TcMEP monitoring data of 350 consecutive patients who underwent traumatic spinal injury surgery (mean age, 69.3 y) between 2017 and 2021 were prospectively reviewed. In this study, a TcMEP amplitude reduction ≥70% was established as a TcMEP alert. A rescue case was defined as a case with the recovery of TcMEP amplitudes after certain procedures and without postoperative neurological complications.

RESULTS

Among the 350 patients who underwent traumatic spinal injury surgery (TcMEP derivation rate 94%), TcMEP monitoring revealed seven true-positive (TP) (2.0%), three rescues (0.9%; rescue rate 30%), 31 false-positive, one false-negative, and 287 true-negative cases, resulting in 88% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 18% positive predictive value, and 99% negative predictive value. The TP rate in patients with preoperative motor deficits was 2.9%, which was higher than that in patients without preoperative motor deficits (1.1%). The most common timing of TcMEP alerts was during decompression (40%). During decompression, suspension of surgery with intravenous steroid injection was ineffective (rescue rate, 0%), and additional decompression was effective.

CONCLUSION

Given the low prevalence of neurological complications (2.3%) and the low positive predictive value (18.4%), single usage of TcMEP monitoring during traumatic spinal injury surgery is not recommended. Further efforts should be made to reduce FP alert rates through better interpretation of multimodal Intraoperative neuromonitorings and the incorporation of anesthesiology to improve the positive predictive value.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Impact of Preoperative Motor Status for the Positive Predictive Value of Transcranial Motor-Evoked Potentials Alerts in Thoracic Spine Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Study by the Monitoring Committee of the Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the validity of transcranial motor-evoked potentials (Tc-MEP) in thoracic spine surgery and evaluate the impact of specific factors associated with positive predictive value (PPV).

METHODS

One thousand hundred and fifty-six cases of thoracic spine surgeries were examined by comparing patient backgrounds, disease type, preoperative motor status, and Tc-MEP alert timing. Tc-MEP alerts were defined as an amplitude decrease of more than 70% from the baseline waveform. Factors were compared according to preoperative motor status and the result of Tc-MEP alerts. Factors that showed significant differences were identified by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall sensitivity was 91.9% and specificity was 88.4%. The PPV was significantly higher in the preoperative motor deficits group than in the preoperative no-motor deficits group for both high-risk (60.3% vs 38.3%) and non-high-risk surgery groups (35.1% vs 12.8%). In multivariate logistic analysis, the significant factors associated with true positive were surgical maneuvers related to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (odds ratio = 11.88; 95% CI: 3.17-44.55), resection of intradural intramedullary spinal cord tumor (odds ratio = 8.83; 95% CI: 2.89-27), preoperative motor deficit (odds ratio = 3.46; 95% CI: 1.64-7.3) and resection of intradural extramedullary spinal cord tumor (odds ratio = 3.0; 95% CI: 1.16-7.8). The significant factor associated with false positive was non-attributable alerts (odds ratio = .28; 95% CI: .09-.85).

CONCLUSION

Surgeons are strongly encouraged to use Tc-MEP in patients with preoperative motor deficits, regardless of whether they are undergoing high-risk spine surgery or not. Knowledge of PPV characteristics will greatly assist in effective Tc-MEP enforcement and minimize neurological complications with appropriate interventions.

Feasibility of multimodal intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for extramedullary spinal cord tumor surgery in elderly patients

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Extramedullary spinal cord tumors (EMSCTs) are mostly benign tumors which are increasingly diagnosed and operatively treated in the elderly. While there are hints that multimodal intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) could be influenced by age and age-related comorbidities, no study has ever systematically evaluated its feasibility and value for EMSCT surgery in elderly patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated all patients with microsurgical EMSCT resection under continuous multimodal IONM with SSEPs, MEPs and electromyography between 2016 and 2020. Epidemiological, clinical, imaging and operative/IONM records as well as detailed individual outcomes were analyzed and compared for the cohort < / ≥ 65 years.

RESULTS

Mean age was 45 years in cohort < 65 years (n = 109) and 76 years in cohort ≥ 65 years (n = 64), while baseline/operative characteristics did not significantly differ. Mean baseline SSEPs' latencies (left-right average) were significantly higher in the cohort ≥ 65 years for both median (20.9 ms vs. 22.1 ms; p < 0.01) and tibial nerve (42.9 ms vs. 46.1 ms; p < 0.01) without significant differences for SSEPs' amplitudes. Stimulation intensity to elicit intraoperative MEPs was significantly higher in the cohort ≥ 65 years (surrogate-marker: left-right-averaged quotient ID1-muscle/abductor-hallucis-muscle; 1.6 vs. 2.1; p < 0.001). Intraoperatively, SSEP and MEP monitoring were feasible in 99%/100% and 99%/98% for the cohort < / ≥ 65 years without significant differences in rates for significant IONM changes during surgery or postoperatively new sensorimotor deficits. Sensitivity of IONM was 29%/43%, specificity 99%/98%, positive and negative predictive values 67%/75% and 95%/93% for the cohort < / ≥ 65 years. Overall, age was no risk factor for IONM feasibility or rate of significant IONM changes.

DISCUSSION

Multimodal IONM is feasible/reliable for EMSCT surgery in elderly patients. An age-related prolongation of SSEPs' latencies and demand for higher stimulation intensities for MEPs' elicitation has to be considered.

Intradural extramedullary tumor location in the axial view affects the alert timing of intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring

OBJECTIVE

Intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring (IONM) reportedly helps prevent postoperative neurological complications following high-risk spinal cord surgeries. There are negative and positive reports about using IONM for intradural extramedullary (IDEM) tumors. We investigated factors affecting alerts of IONM in IDEM tumor surgery.

METHODS

We analyzed 39 patients with IDEM tumors who underwent surgery using IONM at our hospital between January 2014 and March 2021. Neurological symptoms were evaluated pre- and postoperatively using the manual muscle test (MMT). All patients were evaluated to ascertain the tumor level and location in the axial view, the operative time, intraoperative bleeding volume, and histological type. Additionally, the intraoperative procedure associated with significant IONM changes in transcranial electrical stimulation muscle-evoked potential was investigated.

RESULTS

There were 11 false-positive and 16 true-negative cases. There was one true-positive case and one false-negative case; the monitoring accuracy achieved a sensitivity of 50%, a specificity of 59%, a positive predictive value of 8%, and a negative predictive value of 94%. In the 22 alert cases, if the tumor was located anterolateral in the axial view, alerts were triggered with a significant difference (p = 0.02) during tumor resection. Alerts were generated for fifteen patients during tumor resection; nine (60%) showed waveform improvement by intervention and were classified as rescue cases.

CONCLUSION

Alert is probably triggered during tumor resection for anterolaterally located tumors. Alerts during tumor resection procedures were more likely to be rescued than other procedures in IDEM tumor surgery.

The Utility of Transcranial Stimulated Motor-Evoked Potential Alerts in Cervical Spine Surgery Varies Based on Preoperative Motor Status

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective multicenter observational study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to investigate the validity of transcranial motor-evoked potentials (Tc-MEP) in cervical spine surgery and identify factors associated with positive predictive value when Tc-MEP alerts are occurred.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The sensitivity and specificity of Tc-MEP for detecting motor paralysis are high; however, false-positives sometimes occur.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors examined Tc-MEP in 2476 cases of cervical spine surgeries and compared patient backgrounds, type of spinal disorders, preoperative motor status, surgical factors, and the types of Tc-MEP alerts. Tc-MEP alerts were defined as an amplitude reduction of more than 70% from the control waveform. Tc-MEP results were classified into two groups: false-positive and true-positive, and items that showed significant differences were extracted by univariate analysis and detected by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall sensitivity was 66% (segmental paralysis: 33% and lower limb paralysis: 95.8%) and specificity was 91.5%. Tc-MEP outcomes were 33 true-positives and 233 false-positives. Positive predictive value of general spine surgery was significantly higher in cases with a severe motor status than in a nonsevere motor status (19.5% vs . 6.7%, P =0.02), but not different in high-risk spine surgery (20.8% vs . 19.4%). However, rescue rates did not significantly differ regardless of motor status (48% vs . 50%). In a multivariate logistic analysis, a preoperative severe motor status [ P =0.041, odds ratio (OR): 2.46, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.03-5.86] and Tc-MEP alerts during intradural tumor resection ( P <0.001, OR: 7.44, 95% CI: 2.64-20.96) associated with true-positives, while Tc-MEP alerts that could not be identified with surgical maneuvers ( P =0.011, OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.073-0.71) were associated with false-positives.

CONCLUSION

The utility of Tc-MEP in patients with a preoperative severe motor status was enhanced, even in those without high-risk spine surgery. Regardless of the motor status, appropriate interventions following Tc-MEP alerts may prevent postoperative paralysis.