Chapter title |
Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Spine Surgery: A Significant Tool for Neuronal Protection and Functional Restoration
|
---|---|
Chapter number | 38 |
Book title |
Trends in Reconstructive Neurosurgery
|
Published in |
Acta neurochirurgica Supplement, January 2017
|
DOI | 10.1007/978-3-319-39546-3_38 |
Pubmed ID | |
Book ISBNs |
978-3-31-939545-6, 978-3-31-939546-3
|
Authors |
Antonino Scibilia, Giovanni Raffa, Vincenzo Rizzo, Angelo Quartarone, Massimiliano Visocchi, Antonino Germanò, Francesco Tomasello |
Abstract |
Although there is recent evidence for the role of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) in spine surgery, there are no uniform opinions on the optimal combination of the different tools. At our institution, multimodal IONM (mIONM) approach in spine surgery involves the evaluation of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) with electrical transcranial stimulation, including the use of a multipulse technique with multiple myomeric registration of responses from limbs, and a single-pulse technique with D-wave registration through epi- and intradural recording, and free running and evoked electromyography (frEMG and eEMG) with bilateral recording from segmental target muscles. We analyzed the impact of the mIONM on the preservation of neuronal structures and on functional restoration in a prospective series of patients who underwent spine surgery. We observed an improvement of neurological status in 50 % of the patients. The D-wave registration was the most useful intraoperative tool, especially when MEP and SEP responses were absent or poorly recordable. Our preliminary data confirm that mIONM plays a fundamental role in the identification and functional preservation of the spinal cord and nerve roots. It is highly sensitive and specific for detecting and avoiding neurological injury during spine surgery and represents a helpful tool for achieving optimal postoperative functional outcome. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Italy | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Other | 5 | 17% |
Researcher | 5 | 17% |
Professor | 4 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
Other | 7 | 23% |
Unknown | 3 | 10% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 40% |
Neuroscience | 5 | 17% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
Other | 3 | 10% |
Unknown | 7 | 23% |