Intraoperative electromyographic monitoring to optimize safe lumbar pedicle screw placement - a retrospective analysis

Perspective: Can intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) limit errors associated with lumbar pedicle screw fusions/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF)?

Background

We evaluated whether intraoperative neural monitoring (IONM), including somatosensory evoked potential monitoring (SEP), motor evoked potential monitoring (MEP), and electrophysiological monitoring (EMG), could reduce operative errors attributed to lumbar instrumented fusions, including minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)/open TLIF.

Methods

Operative errors included retraction/stretch or cauda equina neural/cauda equina injuries that typically occurred during misplacement of interbody devices (IBD) and/or malpositioning of pedicle screws (PS).

Results

IONM decreased the incidence of intraoperative errors occurring during instrumented lumbar fusions (MI-TLIF/TLIF). In one series, significant loss of intraoperative SEP in 5 (4.3%) of 115 patients occurred after placing IBD; immediate removal of all IBD left just 2 patients with new neural deficits. In other series, firing of trigger EMG's (t-EMG) detected intraoperative PS malpositioning, prompted the immediate redirection of these screws, and reduced the need for reoperations. One t-EMG study required a reoperation in just 1 of 296 patients, while 6 reoperations were warranted out of 222 unmonitored patients. In another series, t-EMG reduced the pedicle screw breech rate to 7.78% (1723 PS) from a higher 11.25% for 1680 PS placed without t-EMG. A further study confirmed that MEP's picked up new motor deficits in 5 of 275 TLIF.

Conclusion

SEP/MEP/EMG intraoperative monitoring appears to reduce the risk of surgical errors when placing interbody devices and PS during the performance of lumbar instrumented fusions (MI-TLIF/TLIF).However, IONM is only effective if spine surgeons use it, and immediately address significant intraoperative changes.

Intraoperative triggered electromyographic monitoring of pedicle screw efficiently reduces the lumbar pedicle breach and re-operative rate-a retrospective analysis based on postoperative computed tomography scan

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether intraoperative triggered electromyographic (T-EMG) monitoring could effectively reduce the breach rate of pedicle screws and the revision rate.

METHODS

Patients with posterior pedicle screw fixation from L1-S1 were enrolled between June 2015 and May 2021. The patients in whom T-EMG was utilized were placed in the T-EMG group, and the remaining patients were considered in the non-T-EMG group. Three spine surgeons evaluated the images. The two groups were divided into subgroups based on screw position (lateral/superior and medial/inferior) and breach degree (minor and major). Patient demographics, screw positions, and revision procedures were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 713 patients (3403 screws) who underwent postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans were included. Intraobserver and interobserver reliabilities were perfect. The T-EMG and non-T-EMG groups had 374(1723 screws) and 339 (1680 screws) cases, respectively. T-EMG monitoring efficiently reduced the overall screw breach (T-EMG 7.78% vs. non-T-EMG 11.25%, p = 0.001). in the subgroup analysis, the medial/inferior breach rate was higher in the T-EMG group than in the non-T-EMG group (T-EMG 6.27% vs. non-T-EMG 8.93%, p = 0.002); however, no difference was observed between the lateral and superior breaches (p = 0.064). A significant difference was observed between the minor (T-EMG 6.21% vs. non-T-EMG 8.33%, p = 0.001) and major (T-EMG 0.06% vs. non-T-EMG 0.6%, p = 0.001) medial or inferior screw breach rates. Six screws (all in the non-T-EMG group) underwent revision, with a significant difference between the groups (T-EMG 0.0% vs. non-T-EMG 3.17%, p = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

T-EMG is a valuable tool in improving the accuracy of screw placement and reducing the screw revision rate. The screw-nerve root distance is vital in causing symptomatic screw breach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is retrospective registered in China National Medical Research Registration and Archival information system in Nov 17th 2022.

Robotic-assisted spine surgery allows for increased pedicle screw sizes while still improving safety as indicated by elevated triggered electromyographic thresholds

The present study used triggered electromyographic (EMG) testing as a tool to determine the safety of pedicle screw placement. In this Institutional Review Board exempt review, data from 151 consecutive patients (100 robotic; 51 non-robotic) who had undergone instrumented spinal fusion surgery of the thoracic, lumbar, or sacral regions were analyzed. The sizes of implanted pedicle screws and EMG threshold data were compared between screws that were placed immediately before and after adoption of the robotic technique. The robotic group had significantly larger screws inserted that were wider (7 ± 0.7 vs 6.5 ± 0.3 mm; p < 0.001) and longer (47.8 ± 6.4 vs 45.7 ± 4.3 mm; p < 0.001). The robotic group also had significantly higher stimulation thresholds (34.0 ± 11.9 vs 30.2 ± 9.8 mA; p = 0.002) of the inserted screws. The robotic group stayed in the hospital postoperatively for fewer days (2.3 ± 1.2 vs 2.9 ± 2 days; p = 0.04), but had longer surgery times (174 ± 37.8 vs 146 ± 41.5 min; p < 0.001). This study demonstrated that the use of navigated, robot-assisted surgery allowed for placement of larger pedicle screws without compromising safety, as determined by pedicle screw stimulation thresholds. Future studies should investigate whether these effects become even stronger in a later cohort after surgeons have more experience with the robotic technique. It should also be evaluated whether the larger screw sizes allowed by the robotic technology actually translate into improved long-term clinical outcomes.

Threshold-based Monitoring of Compound Muscle Action Potentials for Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement in the Lumbosacral Spine: Can We Rely on Stimulation of the Uninsulated Screw to Provide a Valid Safety Warning?

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To test if threshold-based monitoring of compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) by stimulating the screw loaded to uninsulated extender sleeve provides a valid safety warning for percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placements in the lumbosacral spine.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Utility of the CMAP monitoring to PPS procedures remains controversial.

METHODS

A series of 202 patients underwent a total of 1664 lumbosacral PPS placements under CMAP monitoring without fluoroscopic guidance. The monitoring consisted of stimulating the PPS assembled to uninsulated extender sleeve and recording CMAPs from the vastus medialis, biceps femoris, tibialis anterior, and medial gastrocnemius. Automated steps of a threshold hunting algorithm using 0.2-ms duration pulses of increasing intensities delivered at 2/s allowed quick determination of a minimum stimulation current to evoke >100-μV amplitude CMAPs.

RESULTS

At L2 through S1 spines, postoperative CT scans identified 51 medial or inferior pedicle wall breaches of 1536 screws (3.3%) without neurologic complications. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined the critical cutoff threshold value of 27 mA (74% sensitivity and 95% specificity) for predicting 35 breaches of 627 screws (5.6%) at L2 and L3, and of 17 mA (100% sensitivity and 98% specificity) for 16 of 909 (1.8%) at L4 through S1. While advancing the screw, three breaches (5.9%) showed a particularly low threshold of ≤6-mA, allowing the surgeon to immediately redirect the screw and retest the new trajectory as safe.

CONCLUSION

Screw stimulation with threshold hunting algorithm has a distinct advantage over the time-consuming insulated pilot hole stimulation, allowing an uninterrupted flow of the surgery. The present findings have documented practical usefulness and reliability of CMAP monitoring using direct stimulation of the PPS assembled to uninsulated extender sleeve.

A systematic review with meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of pedicle screw electrical stimulation

PURPOSE

To provide a systematic review with meta-analysis providing evidence of the current diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of pedicle screw electrical stimulation.

METHODS

A systematic database search on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science was performed according to the PRISMA-DTA guidelines, and eligibility criteria applied to reduce the results to: (1) only journal articles reporting electrical stimulation of the pedicle screw head, (2) screw position confirmation by imaging techniques, and (3) enough information allowing the calculation of a 2 × 2 contingency table. Sample characteristics, image confirmation method, electrical current threshold and stimulation results were retrieved and analyzed using according to appropriate DTA analysis methods, and allowing the calculation of specificity, sensitivity for pedicle screws insertion at the lumbar and thoracic levels.

RESULTS

Lumbar screw stimulation presents a higher sensitivity (0.586 [0.336, 0.798] and specificity (0.984 [0.958, 0.994]) than thoracic screws (sensitivity: 0.270 [0.096; 0.562]; specificity: 0.958 [0.931, 0.975]). The same is observed in terms of the diagnostic odds ratio for lumbar (88.32 [32.136, 242.962]) and thoracic (8.460 [2.139, 33.469]) levels. When performing a sub-group analysis, it is possible to divide the lumbar stimulation threshold as 8 and 10-12 mA, and the thoracic threshold as 6 and 9-12 mA. A threshold of 8 mA at the lumbar level provides higher sensitivity and specificity. Increasing the threshold results in higher specificity but not sensitivity. In fact, at the range of 10-12 mA, the diagnostic validity is too low to confer this technique any robust diagnostic validity. Similarly, at the thoracic level, lower threshold currents are associated with increased sensitivity, but their diagnostic validity is very low.

CONCLUSION

Electrical stimulation of the pedicle screw can be used as an adequate diagnostic capability at the lumbar level with a threshold of 8 mA. However, thoracic stimulation is currently not reliable, with very low sensitivity and diagnostic validity at 6 mA or higher.

Intraoperative Neuromonitoring and Lumbar Spinal Instrumentation: Indications and Utility

Multimodal intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring (IONM) can be utilized as an adjunct to lumbar spinal instrumentation in order to aid with avoidance of neurologic complications. The most commonly utilized modalities include somatosensory-evoked potentials, motor-evoked potentials, and electromyography. Somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEPs) allow for continuous assessment of the dorsal columns of the spinal cord and are therefore most useful during procedures with a posterior approach to the cervical and thoracic spine. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and electromyography (EMG) can be applied intermittently to assess motor nerve function. The utility of each individual modality can be largely dependent on the surgical approach. Approaches to lumbar spinal instrumentation can be generally categorized as anterior, lateral, and posterior. For lateral approaches, electromyography can be helpful in identifying neural structures crossing the surgical field to prevent injury. In posterior and anterior approaches, somatosensory-evoked potentials and motor-evoked potentials can be used to assess nerve injury during and after maneuvers for decompression and instrumentation. Additionally, during the placement of pedicle screws, direct stimulation with triggered electromyography can be used to detect the pedicle cortex's breach. The efficacy of intraoperative neuromonitoring is dependent on prompt and accurate recognition of changes in signals. This is then followed by accurate recognition of the cause for these changes and appropriate responses by the surgeon, anesthesiologist, and monitoring personnel to correct the change.

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.

Neuromonitoring in Cervical Spine Surgery: When Is a Signal Drop Clinically Significant?

Study Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Purpose

To identify the clinical significance of different patterns of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) signal alerts.

Overview of Literature

IONM is a long-established valuable adjunct to complex spine surgeries. IONM for cervical spine surgery is in the form of somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) and motor evoked potential (MEP). The efficacy of both modalities (individually or in combination) to detect clinically significant neurological compromise is constantly being debated and requires conclusive suggestions.

Methods

Clinical and neuromonitoring data of 207 consecutive adult patients who underwent cervical spine surgeries at multiple surgical centers using bimodal IONM were analyzed. Signal changes were divided into three groups. Group 0 had transient signal changes in either MEPs or SSEPs, group 1 had sustained unimodal changes, and group 2 had sustained changes in both MEPs and SSEPs. The incidences of true neurological deficits in each group were recorded.

Results

A total of 25% (52/207) had IONM signal alerts. Out of these signal drops, 96% (50/52) were considered to be false positives. Groups 0 and 1 had no incidence of neurological deficits, while group 2 had a 29% (2/7) rate of true neurological deficits. The sensitivities of both MEP and SSEP were 100%. SSEP had a specificity of 96.6%, while MEP had a lower specificity at 76.6%. C5 palsy rate was 6%, and there was no correlation with IONM signal alerts (p=0.73).

Conclusions

This study shows that we can better predict its clinical significance by dividing IONM signal drops into three groups. A sustained, bimodal (MEP and SSEP) signal drop had the highest risk of true neurological deficits and warrants a high level of caution. There were no clear risk factors for false-positive alerts but there was a trend toward patients with cervical myelopathy.

Transabdominal Motor Action Potential Monitoring of Pedicle Screw Placement During Minimally Invasive Spinal Procedures: A Case Study

Precise pedicle screw placement is a critical skill during minimally invasive spinal surgeries but can pose various challenges. Techniques such as electromyography (EMG) have been traditionally utilized for this purpose but have several shortcomings. Transabdominal motor action potential (TaMAP) has been examined as a possible effective neuromonitoring alternative and is hypothesized to provide important data on symptomatic malpositioned pedicle screws. The current study seeks to determine whether TaMAP may be an advantageous technique in the neuromonitoring of percutaneous pedicle screw placement during minimally invasive spinal procedures. The methodology involved recording TaMAP signals at the outset and the conclusion of spinal surgical procedures in human participants, for which comparisons were made of pre- and post-operative data. Results revealed that TaMAP signals remained stable during accurate pedicle screw placement and degraded during a case of inaccurate placement, for which initial misplaced hardware altered the depolarization threshold and resulted in substantial signal alteration. These results suggest that TaMAP, which is stable, repeatable, and reflects real-time information, can potentially be used as a reliable and more precise indication of accuracy in pedicle screw placement during spinal surgeries. This is the first TaMAP study conducted in human participants.

Incidence of pedicle breach following open and minimally invasive spinal instrumentation: A postoperative CT analysis of 513 pedicle screws applied under fluoroscopic guidance

Background

Even though pedicle screw application is a common procedure, and in-spite of spine surgeons being proficient with the technique, mal-positioning of pedicle screws can still occur. We intend to determine by postoperative CT analysis, the incidence of pedicle screw breach in the thoracolumbar spine despite satisfactory intraoperative placement confirmed by fluoroscopy.

Materials and methods

Consecutive patients diagnosed with thoracolumbar fractures who underwent open or minimally invasive posterior stabilization under fluoroscopic guidance were retrospectively reviewed. Postoperative CT scans of patients were analysed to determine the incidence of pedicle breach despite satisfactory intraoperative placement, and also to determine the factors that can predict a breach during intraoperative assessment.

Results

A total of 61 patients with 513 thoracolumbar pedicle screws were available for analysis. Based on our postoperative CT assessment, 28 screws (5.5%; 18 thoracic screws; 10 lumbar screws) had breached the pedicle. There were 14 minor (<3 mm) and 14 major (≥3 mm) breaches. The minimally invasive technique had a significantly lower breach rate compared to open surgery (1.9% vs. 7.9%). By retrospectively analysing the intra-operative fluoroscopic images, we determined certain parameters that could predict a breach during surgery.

Conclusion

Pedicle breaches can still be present despite satisfactory placement of screws visualized intra-operatively. A medial breach is most likely when the length of the pedicle screw spans only up to 50% of the vertebral body as seen on the lateral view but the pedicle screw tip has already transgressed the midline as seen on an AP view. A lateral breach is likely when the tip of the pedicle screw is overlapped by the screw head or is only minimally visualized on an AP view.

Role of Visuohaptic Surgical Training Simulator in Resident Education of Orthopedic Surgery

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the validity of a virtual surgical training system on lumbar pedicle screw placement for residents.

METHODS

Ten inexperienced residents were randomly assigned to the simulation training (ST) group (n = 5) and control group (n = 5). The ST group performed the lumbar pedicle screw placement on the virtual surgical training system, and the control group was given an introductory teaching session before the cadaver test. A total of 8 adult fresh cadavers including 5 males and 3 females were collected and randomly allocated to the 2 groups. Each group performed the bilateral L1-L5 pedicle screw instrumentation in the cadaver specimens, respectively. Accuracy was assessed by computed tomography after instrumentation. The screw penetration rates, acceptable rates, and average screw penetration distance of the 2 groups were compared using statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The screw penetration rate of the ST group (12.5%) was significantly lower than the control group (37.5%, P < 0.05). The screw acceptable rates in ST and control groups were 100% and 85%, respectively, with statistical differences between each other (P < 0.05). There was also a statistically significant difference of the average screw penetration distance between the ST (1.37 ± 0.62 mm) group and control group (2.42 ± 0.51 mm, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The virtual surgery simulation with greater accuracy is superior to the traditional teaching methods in surgical training of pedicle screw placement and can be used as a promising alternative for training of neurosurgical procedures.