4.3 Article

Significance of multimodal intraoperative monitoring for the posterior cervical spine surgery

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
卷 143, 期 -, 页码 9-14

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.02.007

关键词

Multi-modal intraoperative monitoring; Posterior cervical spine surgery; High cervical operation; Low cervical operation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of multimodal neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in a cohort of patients who underwent posterior cervical surgery. Material and methods: A total 182 patients were included in this study. Multi-modal intraoperative monitoring (MIOM, somatosensory-evoked potentials: SSEP/transcranial motor-evoked potentials: TCe-MEP/spontaneous-electromyography: S-EMG) was performed in a consecutive series of 129 patients and the other 53 patients (control group) did not. We classified all patients into a high-cervical (H-C) operation group or a low-cervical (L-C) operation group, based on the level of the surgery and analyzed respectively. Results: One hundred-eleven cases (86%) showed true negative results. Fourteen patients (9 cases- H-C operation, 5 cases- L-C operation) met the criteria of neurophysiologic changes during operation. Of these, 10 cases were restored to normal during operation spontaneously (7cases) or with surgical manipulation (all 3 cases were related to H-C operation). All unrestored neurophysiologic cases (n = 4) showed new post-operative neurological deficits. Four patients showed neurological deficits without any changes in MIOM (false negative, 3 cases-delayed onset C5 palsy, 1 case-C8 palsy). Conclusions: Proper application of MIOM may be useful to detect intraoperative neurological injury during the posterior cervical operations and improve surgical outcomes especially in subgroup of H-C operation. However, the efficacy of MIOM may be restricted to detect and prevent the delayed onset C5 palsy. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据