The role of the neurophysiological intraoperative monitoring to prevention of postoperative neurological complication in the surgical treatment of scoliosis

Bearing in mind that the technique of surgical treatment of scoliosis and skills are high enough, iatrogenic spinal cord injury is still one of the most feared complication of scoliosis surgery. It is well known that the function of the spinal cord may be estimated by combining somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) and motor evoked potentials (MEP). We have retrospectively evaluated the results of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IOM) in a large population of patients underwent surgical treatment of spinal deformity. Intraoperative neuromonitoring SSEP and transcranial electrostimulation (TES) – MEP in conjunction with the assessment of the correct position of the screws was performed in 142 consecutive cases, i. e. all patients who had undergone surgical treatment of idiopathic (127 pts), congenital (10 pts) or neurogenic (5 pts) scoliosis. A neurophysiological “alarm” was defined as a decrease in amplitude (uni- or bilateral) of at least 50 % for SEPs and of 70 % for TES-MEP compared with baseline. Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in 138 cases was achieved by infusion of propofol (8–16 mg / kg / h) and in 4 cases by halogenate anesthesia – sevoflurane (0.4–1.8 MAC). Seven patients (4.9 %) were reported intraoperative neurophysiological parameters significant changes that require action by the surgeons and anesthetists, with deterioration of ostoperative neurologic status in one case. Of these three cases, the amplitude drop SSEPs and TESMEPs-was due, to the pharmacological aspects of anesthetic management, in the other four cases – with surgical procedures (response halo-traction – 1 case, mechanical damage of sheath of the spinal cord by pliers Kerrison – 1case, overcorrection – 2 cases). In five cases (3.5 %) required reposting of pedicle screws (1–2 levels). Only one patient (0.7 %) had a persistent postoperative neurological disorder (neuropathic pain), respectively from a level of re-reposition of pedicle screws.

1. Diab M., Smith A.R., Kuklo T.R. et al. The Spinal Deformity Study Group. Neural complications in the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2007;32:2759–63.

2. Qiu Y., Wang S., Wang B. et al. Incidence, risk factors of neurological deficits of surgical correction for scoliosis. Analysis of 1373 cases at one Chinese institution. Spine. 2008;33:519–26.

3. Vauzelle C., Stagnara P., Jouvinroux P. Functional monitoring of spinal cord activity during spinal surgery. Clin Orthop 1973;93:173–8.

4. Mostegl A., Bauer R., Eichenbauer M. Intraoperative somatosensory potential monitoring: a clinical analysis of 127 surgical procedures. Spine 1988;13(4): 396–400.

5. Tamaki T., Noguchi T., Takano H. et al. Spinal cord monitoring as a clinical utilization of the spinal evoked potential. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1984;184:58–64.

6. Padberg A.M., Wilson-Holden T.J., Lenke L.G., Bridwell K.H. Somatosensory and motor evoked potential monitoring without a wakeup test during idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Spine 1992;23:1392–1400.

7. Nuwer M.R., Dawson E.G., Carlson L.G. et al. Somatosensory evoked potential spinal cord monitoring reduces neurologic deficits after scoliosis surgery: results of a large multicenter survey. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1995;96:6–11.

8. Position statement: Somatosensory evoked potential monitoring of neurologic spinal cord function during spinal surgery. Scoliosis Research Society. 1992.

9. Luk K.D.K., Hu Y., Wong Y.W., Cheung K.M.C. Evaluation of various evoked potenial techniques for spinal cord monitoring during scoliosis surgery. Spine 2001;26(16):1772–7.

10. Sutter M., Deletis V., Dvorak J. et al. Current opinions and recommendations on multimodal intraoperative monitoring during spine surgeries. Eur Spine J 2007;16(2):232–7.

11. Pajewski T.N., Arlet V., Phillips L.H. Current approach on spinal cord monitoring: the point of view of the neurologist, the anesthesiologist and the spine surgeon. Eur Spine J 2007;16(2):115–29.

12. Schwartz D.M., Sestokas A.K. A systemsbased algorithmic approach to intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spinal surgery. Semin Spine Surg 2002;14:136–45.