This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Letters to the Editor: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My File Cabinet Download to citation manager Rights and Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Skaggs, D. L. Articles by Campbell, R. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Skaggs, D. L. Articles by Campbell, R. M., Jr. Related Collections Spine Pediatrics Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Efficacy of Intraoperative Neurologic Monitoring in Surgery Involving a Vertical Expandable Prosthetic Titanium Rib for Early-Onset Spinal Deformity

¹ Childrens Orthopaedic Center, Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, 4650 Sunset Boulevard, MS 69, Los Angeles, CA 90027
² Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115-5724
³ Department of Orthopaedics, 5G-2, Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center, 4800 Sand Point Way N.E., Seattle, WA 98105-5371
⁴ Primary Children's Medical Center, 100 North Medical Drive, Suite 4550, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84113
⁵ Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 2nd Floor, Wood Building, 34th and Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA 19104-4399

Investigation performed at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California

Disclosure: In support of their research for or preparation of this work, one or more of the authors received, in any one year, outside funding or grants in excess of $10,000 from the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD) and the Food and Drug Administration Office of Orphan Products Development Grant Program. In addition, one or more of the authors or a member of his or her immediate family received, in any one year, payments or other benefits in excess of $10,000 or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity (Synthes Spine). Also, a commercial entity (Synthes) paid or directed in any one year, or agreed to pay or direct, benefits of less than $10,000 to a research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which one or more of the authors, or a member of his or her immediate family, is affiliated or associated.

Methods: Data were collected prospectively during a multicenter study. Surgical procedures were divided into three categories: primary device implantation, device exchange, and device lengthening. Further retrospective evaluation was undertaken in cases of neurologic injury or changes detected with neuromonitoring.

Results: There were 1736 consecutive VEPTR procedures at six centers: 327 (in 299 patients) consisted of a primary device implantation, 224 were a device exchange, and 1185 were a device lengthening. Perioperative clinical neurologic injury was noted in eight (0.5%) of the 1736 cases: these injuries were identified after five (1.5%) of the 327 procedures for primary device implantation, three (1.3%) of the 224 device exchanges, and none of the 1185 device-lengthening procedures. Of the eight cases of neurologic injury, six involved the upper extremity and two involved the lower extremity. The neurologic deficit was temporary in seven patients and permanent in one patient, who had persistent neurogenic arm and hand pain. Intraoperative neuromonitoring demonstrated changes during six (0.3%) of the 1736 procedures: five (1.5%) of the 327 procedures for primary device implantation and one (0.08%) of the 1185 device-lengthening procedures. The surgery was altered in all six cases, with resolution of the monitoring changes in five cases and persistent signal changes and a neurologic deficit (upper-extremity brachial plexopathy) in one. Two patients had false-negative results of monitoring of somatosensory evoked potentials, and one had false-negative results of monitoring of somatosensory evoked potentials and motor evoked potentials during implant surgery; two had a brachial plexopathy and one had monoplegia postoperatively, with all three recovering.

Conclusions: Neurologic injury during VEPTR surgery occurs much more frequently in the upper extremities than in the lower extremities. The rates of potential neurologic injuries (neurologic injuries plus instances of changes detected by monitoring) during primary implantation of the VEPTR (2.8%) and during exchange of the VEPTR (1.3%) justify the use of intraoperative neuromonitoring of the upper and lower extremities during those procedures. As neuromonitoring did not demonstrate any changes in children without a previous VEPTR-related monitoring change and there were no neurologic injuries during more than 1000 VEPTR-lengthening procedures, intraoperative neuromonitoring may not be necessary during those procedures in children without a history of a neurologic deficit during VEPTR surgery.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Facebook    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press (TM) assists in the publication of JBJS Online.
Copyright © 2009 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. Online ISSN: 1535-1386.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery®, JBJS®, JB&JS®, and eJBJS® are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.