Cargando…

Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study

A prospective multicenter cohort study. To clarify the differences in the accuracy of transcranial motor-evoked potentials (TcE-MEPs) and procedures associated with the alarms between cervical anterior spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Neurological complications after TcE-MEP al...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wada, Kanichiro, Imagama, Shiro, Matsuyama, Yukihiro, Yoshida, Go, Ando, Kei, Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi, Machino, Masaaki, Kawabata, Shigenori, Iwasaki, Hiroshi, Funaba, Masahiro, Kanchiku, Tsukasa, Yamada, Kei, Fujiwara, Yasushi, Shigematsu, Hideki, Taniguchi, Shinichirou, Ando, Muneharu, Takahashi, Masahito, Ushirozako, Hiroki, Tadokoro, Nobuaki, Morito, Shinji, Yamamoto, Naoya, Yasuda, Akimasa, Hashimoto, Jun, Takatani, Tunenori, Tani, Toshikazu, Kumagai, Gentaro, Asari, Toru, Nitobe, Yoshiro, Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9750642/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36626536
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031846
_version_ 1784850301216358400
author Wada, Kanichiro
Imagama, Shiro
Matsuyama, Yukihiro
Yoshida, Go
Ando, Kei
Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi
Machino, Masaaki
Kawabata, Shigenori
Iwasaki, Hiroshi
Funaba, Masahiro
Kanchiku, Tsukasa
Yamada, Kei
Fujiwara, Yasushi
Shigematsu, Hideki
Taniguchi, Shinichirou
Ando, Muneharu
Takahashi, Masahito
Ushirozako, Hiroki
Tadokoro, Nobuaki
Morito, Shinji
Yamamoto, Naoya
Yasuda, Akimasa
Hashimoto, Jun
Takatani, Tunenori
Tani, Toshikazu
Kumagai, Gentaro
Asari, Toru
Nitobe, Yoshiro
Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
author_facet Wada, Kanichiro
Imagama, Shiro
Matsuyama, Yukihiro
Yoshida, Go
Ando, Kei
Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi
Machino, Masaaki
Kawabata, Shigenori
Iwasaki, Hiroshi
Funaba, Masahiro
Kanchiku, Tsukasa
Yamada, Kei
Fujiwara, Yasushi
Shigematsu, Hideki
Taniguchi, Shinichirou
Ando, Muneharu
Takahashi, Masahito
Ushirozako, Hiroki
Tadokoro, Nobuaki
Morito, Shinji
Yamamoto, Naoya
Yasuda, Akimasa
Hashimoto, Jun
Takatani, Tunenori
Tani, Toshikazu
Kumagai, Gentaro
Asari, Toru
Nitobe, Yoshiro
Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
author_sort Wada, Kanichiro
collection PubMed
description A prospective multicenter cohort study. To clarify the differences in the accuracy of transcranial motor-evoked potentials (TcE-MEPs) and procedures associated with the alarms between cervical anterior spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Neurological complications after TcE-MEP alarms have been prevented by appropriate interventions for cervical degenerative disorders. The differences in the accuracy of TcE-MEPs and the timing of alarms between cervical ASF and PSF noted in the existing literature remain unclear. Patients (n = 415) who underwent cervical ASF (n = 171) or PSF (n = 244) at multiple institutions for cervical spondylotic myelopathy, ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, spinal injury, and others were analyzed. Neurological complications, TcE-MEP alarms defined as a decreased amplitude of ≤70% compared to the control waveform, interventions after alarms, and TcE-MEP results were compared between the 2 surgeries. The incidence of neurological complications was 1.2% in the ASF group and 2.0% in the PSF group, with no significant intergroup differences (P-value was .493). Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and rate of rescue were 50.0%, 95.2%, 99.4%, and 1.8%, respectively, in the ASF group, and 80.0%, 90.9%, 99.5%, and 2.9%, respectively, in the PSF group. The accuracy of TcE-MEPs was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P-value was .427 in sensitivity, .109 in specificity, and .674 in negative predictive value). The procedures associated with the alarms were decompression in 3 cases and distraction in 1 patient in the ASF group. The PSF group showed Tc-MEPs decreased during decompression, mounting rods, turning positions, and others. Most alarms went off during decompression in ASF, whereas various stages of the surgical procedures were associated with the alarms in PSF. There were no significant differences in the accuracy of TcE-MEPs between the 2 surgeries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9750642
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97506422022-12-28 Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study Wada, Kanichiro Imagama, Shiro Matsuyama, Yukihiro Yoshida, Go Ando, Kei Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi Machino, Masaaki Kawabata, Shigenori Iwasaki, Hiroshi Funaba, Masahiro Kanchiku, Tsukasa Yamada, Kei Fujiwara, Yasushi Shigematsu, Hideki Taniguchi, Shinichirou Ando, Muneharu Takahashi, Masahito Ushirozako, Hiroki Tadokoro, Nobuaki Morito, Shinji Yamamoto, Naoya Yasuda, Akimasa Hashimoto, Jun Takatani, Tunenori Tani, Toshikazu Kumagai, Gentaro Asari, Toru Nitobe, Yoshiro Ishibashi, Yasuyuki Medicine (Baltimore) 7100 A prospective multicenter cohort study. To clarify the differences in the accuracy of transcranial motor-evoked potentials (TcE-MEPs) and procedures associated with the alarms between cervical anterior spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Neurological complications after TcE-MEP alarms have been prevented by appropriate interventions for cervical degenerative disorders. The differences in the accuracy of TcE-MEPs and the timing of alarms between cervical ASF and PSF noted in the existing literature remain unclear. Patients (n = 415) who underwent cervical ASF (n = 171) or PSF (n = 244) at multiple institutions for cervical spondylotic myelopathy, ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, spinal injury, and others were analyzed. Neurological complications, TcE-MEP alarms defined as a decreased amplitude of ≤70% compared to the control waveform, interventions after alarms, and TcE-MEP results were compared between the 2 surgeries. The incidence of neurological complications was 1.2% in the ASF group and 2.0% in the PSF group, with no significant intergroup differences (P-value was .493). Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and rate of rescue were 50.0%, 95.2%, 99.4%, and 1.8%, respectively, in the ASF group, and 80.0%, 90.9%, 99.5%, and 2.9%, respectively, in the PSF group. The accuracy of TcE-MEPs was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P-value was .427 in sensitivity, .109 in specificity, and .674 in negative predictive value). The procedures associated with the alarms were decompression in 3 cases and distraction in 1 patient in the ASF group. The PSF group showed Tc-MEPs decreased during decompression, mounting rods, turning positions, and others. Most alarms went off during decompression in ASF, whereas various stages of the surgical procedures were associated with the alarms in PSF. There were no significant differences in the accuracy of TcE-MEPs between the 2 surgeries. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9750642/ /pubmed/36626536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031846 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle 7100
Wada, Kanichiro
Imagama, Shiro
Matsuyama, Yukihiro
Yoshida, Go
Ando, Kei
Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi
Machino, Masaaki
Kawabata, Shigenori
Iwasaki, Hiroshi
Funaba, Masahiro
Kanchiku, Tsukasa
Yamada, Kei
Fujiwara, Yasushi
Shigematsu, Hideki
Taniguchi, Shinichirou
Ando, Muneharu
Takahashi, Masahito
Ushirozako, Hiroki
Tadokoro, Nobuaki
Morito, Shinji
Yamamoto, Naoya
Yasuda, Akimasa
Hashimoto, Jun
Takatani, Tunenori
Tani, Toshikazu
Kumagai, Gentaro
Asari, Toru
Nitobe, Yoshiro
Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study
title Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study
title_full Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study
title_fullStr Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study
title_short Comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: A prospective multi-institutional cohort study
title_sort comparison of intraoperative neuromonitoring accuracies and procedures associated with alarms in anterior versus posterior fusion for cervical spinal disorders: a prospective multi-institutional cohort study
topic 7100
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9750642/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36626536
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031846
work_keys_str_mv AT wadakanichiro comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT imagamashiro comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT matsuyamayukihiro comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT yoshidago comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT andokei comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT kobayashikazuyoshi comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT machinomasaaki comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT kawabatashigenori comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT iwasakihiroshi comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT funabamasahiro comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT kanchikutsukasa comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT yamadakei comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT fujiwarayasushi comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT shigematsuhideki comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT taniguchishinichirou comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT andomuneharu comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT takahashimasahito comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT ushirozakohiroki comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT tadokoronobuaki comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT moritoshinji comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT yamamotonaoya comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT yasudaakimasa comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT hashimotojun comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT takatanitunenori comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT tanitoshikazu comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT kumagaigentaro comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT asaritoru comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT nitobeyoshiro comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy
AT ishibashiyasuyuki comparisonofintraoperativeneuromonitoringaccuraciesandproceduresassociatedwithalarmsinanteriorversusposteriorfusionforcervicalspinaldisordersaprospectivemultiinstitutionalcohortstudy