The evidence for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: does it make a difference?

Michael G Fehlings1, Darrel S Brodke, Daniel C Norvell

  • 1Neural Repair and Regeneration, University of Toronto Spine Program, University of Toronto Neuroscience Program, Toronto, ON, Canada. Michael.fehlings@uhn.on.ca

Spine
|April 22, 2010
PubMed

Insights

Multimodal intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM) effectively detects neurologic injury during spine surgery. While evidence is limited, IOM is recommended for high-risk procedures to monitor spinal cord and nerve root safety.

Area of Science:

  • Neurosurgery
  • Spinal Surgery
  • Neuromonitoring

Background:

  • Spinal cord injury is a feared complication of spine surgery.
  • Intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM) is proposed to mitigate these risks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review literature on IOM's sensitivity and specificity in detecting intraoperative neurologic injury during spine surgery.
  • To assess if IOM improves patient outcomes in these procedures.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review of English language literature (1990-March 2009).
  • Searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Collaborative Library, and reference lists.
  • Two independent reviewers assessed evidence quality using GRADE criteria.

Main Results:

  • High-level evidence confirms multimodal IOM is sensitive and specific for detecting intraoperative neurologic injury.
  • Low-level evidence suggests IOM does not significantly reduce new/worsened neurologic deficits.
  • Very low evidence supports intraoperative responses to IOM alerts improving outcomes.

Conclusions:

  • Multimodality IOM (MIOM) is recommended for spine surgeries with risk to the spinal cord or nerve roots.
  • Consider MIOM for deformity correction and instrumentation procedures.
  • Develop evidence-based protocols for intraoperative MIOM changes and prospective validation.
Abstract