The Use of Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in Routine Percutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulator Surgery is Not Associated With Improved Placement, Patient Safety, or Pain Severity Outcomes.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Jordan Black, Ishan Singhal, Jennifer E Murphy, Michael D Staudt
{"title":"The Use of Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in Routine Percutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulator Surgery is Not Associated With Improved Placement, Patient Safety, or Pain Severity Outcomes.","authors":"Jordan Black, Ishan Singhal, Jennifer E Murphy, Michael D Staudt","doi":"10.1227/neu.0000000000003547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The placement of spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) relies on midline placement to provide bilateral coverage. Implantation under general anesthesia using intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM) has been shown to be a valid alternative to awake placement to confirm positioning. It has been suggested that placement should be confirmed with awake testing or IOM for reasons of efficacy and safety. No study has compared operative outcomes in percutaneous SCS surgery with our without the use of IOM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-center retrospective chart review was performed, identifying 228 patients who underwent percutaneous SCS implantation between 2021 and 2023 by a single surgeon. Surgery was performed with IOM (n = 55) or without IOM (n = 173). The primary outcome measures were laterality of coverage, revision and explant rates, and incidence of intraoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included pain severity scores (Numerical Rating Scale) and operative duration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients had bilateral stimulation coverage regardless of IOM, and no revisions for laterality occurred. Revision rates for fracture of migration did not significantly vary between cohorts (IOM 3.6%, non-IOM 4.0%; P > .999). Explantation rates were also not significantly different (IOM 9.1%, non-IOM 5.2%; P = .334). Patients in both cohorts demonstrated a lower Numerical Rating Scale at last follow-up compared with baseline; however, this change did not significantly vary between cohorts (IOM 4.7 vs non-IOM 4.4; mean difference: 0.26; P = .713) nor did the proportion of responders (IOM 52.6% vs non-IOM 48.9%; P = .684). Operative duration was significantly longer in the IOM cohort (65.3 vs 48.6 minutes; mean difference: 16.5 minutes; P < .001), as was \"room-to-incision\" time (41.0 vs 33.3 minutes; mean difference 7.66 minutes; P < .001). No intraoperative complications were encountered in either cohort, including no nerve irritation or neurological injury.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Percutaneous SCS placement can safely and accurately be performed without the use of IOM. IOM does not improve placement accuracy or laterality of coverage, as long as leads are placed anatomically in the midline.</p>","PeriodicalId":19276,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003547","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: The placement of spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) relies on midline placement to provide bilateral coverage. Implantation under general anesthesia using intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM) has been shown to be a valid alternative to awake placement to confirm positioning. It has been suggested that placement should be confirmed with awake testing or IOM for reasons of efficacy and safety. No study has compared operative outcomes in percutaneous SCS surgery with our without the use of IOM.

Methods: A single-center retrospective chart review was performed, identifying 228 patients who underwent percutaneous SCS implantation between 2021 and 2023 by a single surgeon. Surgery was performed with IOM (n = 55) or without IOM (n = 173). The primary outcome measures were laterality of coverage, revision and explant rates, and incidence of intraoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included pain severity scores (Numerical Rating Scale) and operative duration.

Results: All patients had bilateral stimulation coverage regardless of IOM, and no revisions for laterality occurred. Revision rates for fracture of migration did not significantly vary between cohorts (IOM 3.6%, non-IOM 4.0%; P > .999). Explantation rates were also not significantly different (IOM 9.1%, non-IOM 5.2%; P = .334). Patients in both cohorts demonstrated a lower Numerical Rating Scale at last follow-up compared with baseline; however, this change did not significantly vary between cohorts (IOM 4.7 vs non-IOM 4.4; mean difference: 0.26; P = .713) nor did the proportion of responders (IOM 52.6% vs non-IOM 48.9%; P = .684). Operative duration was significantly longer in the IOM cohort (65.3 vs 48.6 minutes; mean difference: 16.5 minutes; P < .001), as was "room-to-incision" time (41.0 vs 33.3 minutes; mean difference 7.66 minutes; P < .001). No intraoperative complications were encountered in either cohort, including no nerve irritation or neurological injury.

Conclusion: Percutaneous SCS placement can safely and accurately be performed without the use of IOM. IOM does not improve placement accuracy or laterality of coverage, as long as leads are placed anatomically in the midline.

在常规经皮脊髓刺激器手术中使用术中神经监测与改善放置、患者安全性或疼痛严重程度结果无关。
背景和目的:脊髓刺激器(scs)的放置依赖于中线放置以提供双侧覆盖。在全身麻醉下使用术中神经监测(IOM)植入已被证明是一种有效的替代清醒放置来确认定位。出于有效性和安全性的考虑,建议通过清醒试验或IOM来确定放置位置。没有研究比较经皮SCS手术与不使用IOM的手术结果。方法:进行单中心回顾性图表回顾,确定2021年至2023年间由同一位外科医生进行经皮SCS植入的228例患者。手术采用IOM (n = 55)或不IOM (n = 173)。主要观察指标是覆盖的侧边、翻修和移植率以及术中并发症的发生率。次要结果包括疼痛严重程度评分(数值评定量表)和手术时间。结果:所有患者均有双侧刺激覆盖,与IOM无关,未发生侧侧修复。迁移骨折的修正率在队列之间没有显著差异(IOM 3.6%,非IOM 4.0%;P[0.99 .99]。外植率差异也不显著(IOM 9.1%, non-IOM 5.2%;P = .334)。与基线相比,两组患者在最后随访时均表现出较低的数值评定量表;然而,这一变化在队列之间没有显著差异(IOM 4.7 vs非IOM 4.4;平均差值:0.26;P = .713),应答者的比例(IOM 52.6% vs非IOM 48.9%;P = .684)。IOM组的手术时间明显更长(65.3分钟vs 48.6分钟;平均差:16.5分钟;P < 0.001),“房间到切口”时间(41.0 vs 33.3分钟;平均差7.66分钟;P < 0.001)。两组患者均未出现术中并发症,包括无神经刺激或神经损伤。结论:经皮SCS置入术可以在不使用IOM的情况下安全、准确地进行。只要导联按解剖位置放置在中线,IOM就不能提高放置精度或覆盖的偏侧性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurosurgery
Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
898
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurosurgery, the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, publishes research on clinical and experimental neurosurgery covering the very latest developments in science, technology, and medicine. For professionals aware of the rapid pace of developments in the field, this journal is nothing short of indispensable as the most complete window on the contemporary field of neurosurgery. Neurosurgery is the fastest-growing journal in the field, with a worldwide reputation for reliable coverage delivered with a fresh and dynamic outlook.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信