The utility of somatosensory evoked potential monitoring during cervical spine surgery: How often does it prompt intervention and affect outcome?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of the results of somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) performed in cervical spine surgery. PURPOSE: To evaluate the utility of spinal cord monitoring during cervical spine surgery in a single surgeon\u27s practice, based on how often it prompted an intraoperative intervention. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Intraoperative monitoring during cervical spine surgery is not a universally accepted standard of care. This is due in part to the paucity of literature regarding the impact of monitoring on patient management or outcome. METHODS: SSEP for tibial, median, and ulnar nerves were monitored in 809 consecutive cervical spine operations performed by a single surgeon. The average patient age was 52 years (range, 2 to 88 years), with 472 males and 339 females. Cases were screened for significant degradation or loss of SSEP data. Specific attention was paid to 1) what interventions were performed in response to the SSEP degradation with subsequent improvement, and 2) whether SSEP changes corresponded with postoperative neurological deficits. RESULTS: Seventeen of 809 patients (2.1%) had SSEP degradation that met warning criteria and therefore prompted intervention. Release of shoulder tape (8) or traction (4) most often resulted in SSEP improvement. Failure of SSEP data to return to within acceptable limits of baseline was associated with neurological deficit (p=0.04). Two patients awoke with new postoperative neurological deficits, which resolved in 6 hours and 2 months respectively. Patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) were at seven-fold greater risk of intraoperative SSEP degradation. CONCLUSIONS: SSEP monitoring in this surgical population proved sensitive to perioperative factors which may increase the risk of postoperative neurologic deficit, and probably prevented neurological deficits in 15 of 809 patients (1.9%). Improvement in data following intervention appears to correlate well with unchanged neurologic status. Experience with intraoperative monitoring in this patient series has led to incorporation of these techniques as a standard of care in cervical spine surgeries performed by this surgeon