Owen J H, Bridwell K H, Grubb R, Jenny A, Allen B, Padberg A M, Shimon S M
Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991 Aug;16(8 Suppl):S385-90.
The purpose of this study was to report results from 300 cases (177 children, 123 adults) administered somatosensory and neurogenic motor evoked potentials during surgery. Of these 300 cases, there were 16 cases of spinal fractures, 16 neurosurgical cases, 28 vascular cases, and 240 cases of elective posterior spinal deformity requiring instrumentation. Results indicated that somatosensory evoked potentials, especially cortical components, demonstrated greater variability than neurogenic motor evoked potentials. Variability was attributed to anesthesia and unknown factors. Neurogenic motor evoked potentials proved to be a more valid indicator of postoperative motor status than somatosensory evoked potentials. Based on their anatomic substrates and results from this study, it was recommended that somatosensory evoked potentials and neurogenic motor evoked potentials be used to monitor spinal cord function during surgery that would place that structure at risk.
