Intra‐Operative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Patients with Intraspinal Abnormalities Undergoing Posterior Spinal Fusion

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) data of patients with intraspinal abnormalities undergoing posterior spinal fusion and to determine how intraspinal abnormalities influence IONM results. METHODS: Patients with severe kyphoscoliosis and intraspinal abnormalities who underwent posterior spinal correction and fusion between September 2015 and January 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Candidate intraspinal abnormalities included Chiari malformation, syringomyelia, split cord malformation, and tethered cord syndrome. Total intravenous anesthesia was administered, and no muscle relaxant or inhalation anesthesia was used for maintenance. IONM data, including somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) and motor evoked potentials (MEP), were recorded. The P37 and N50 latencies and amplitude were recorded for SSEP, whereas only the amplitude was recorded for MEP. The possible high‐risk factors for abnormal IONM results were analyzed. RESULTS: The current study included 87 patients (40 men, 47 women) with an average age of 20.2 ± 10.4 years. The etiologies were neuromuscular in 45 patients, idiopathic in four, and congenital in 38. A total of 136 intraspinal abnormalities were detected, including Chiari malformation in 33 patients, syringomyelia in 55, split‐cord malformation in 25, and tethered cord syndrome in 23. Forty patients had one intraspinal abnormality, whereas 47 patients had two or three intraspinal abnormalities. The monitorabilities were 87.4% and 97.7% for the SSEP and MEP, respectively. SSEP alerts were reported in five patients and MEP alerts in four patients, and new neurological deficits were observed in three patients postoperatively. The sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 97.3% for SSEP, and 100% and 98.8% for MEP, respectively. A significant difference in MEP amplitude between the concave and convex sides was observed, while significantly higher SSEP latency was observed on the concave side in patients with preoperative neurological deficits. There were 52 (59.8%) patients with abnormal IONM data. Preoperative neurological deficits (χ(2) = 7.715, p = 0.005) and more than one intraspinal abnormality (χ(2) = 9.186, p = 0.004) indicated a higher risk of abnormal IONM data. CONCLUSIONS: IONM can be effectively used in patients with intraspinal abnormalities who undergo posterior spinal fusion. Patients with preoperative neurological deficits and more than one intraspinal abnormality have a higher risk of abnormal IONM monitoring.