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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |