Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, 4650 Sunset Boulevard 69, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Aug 15;34(18):1952-5. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181afe869.
Retrospective case series from a multicenter database.
To evaluate the risk of neurologic injury during growing rod surgeries and to determine whether intraoperative neuromonitoring is necessary for all growing rod procedures.
Although the use of growing rod constructs for early-onset spinal deformity has become a commonly accepted treatment, the incidence of neurologic events during growing rod surgeries remains unknown.
We reviewed data from a multicenter database on 782 growing rod surgeries performed in 252 patients. VEPTR devices and any constructs with rib attachments were excluded. A questionnaire was sent to all surgeons contributing cases requesting detailed information about all neurologic events associated with any growing rod surgery.
There were 782 growing rod surgeries performed on 252 patients including 252 primary growing rod implantations, 168 implant exchanges, and 362 lengthenings. Five hundred sixty-nine of 782 (73%) cases were performed with neuromonitoring. Only one clinical injury occurred in the series, resulting in an injury rate of 0.1% (1/782). This deficit occurred during an implant exchange while attempting pedicle screw placement, and resolved within 3 months. There were 2 cases with neuromonitoring changes during primary implant surgeries (0.9%, 2/231), 1 change during implant exchanges (0.9%, 1/116), and 1 neuromonitoring change during lengthenings (0.5%, 1/222). The single monitoring change that occurred during a lengthening was in a child with an intracanal tumor who also had a monitoring change during the primary surgery. There are anecdotal cases (outside this study group series) of neuromonitoring changes during simple lengthenings in children with uneventful primary implantations.
Based on our study, the largest reported series of growing rod surgeries, the rate of neuromonitoring changes during primary growing rod implantation (0.9%) and exchange (0.9%) justifies the use of intraoperative neuromonitoring during these surgeries. As there were no neurologic events in 361 lengthenings in patients with no previous neurologic events, the question may be raised as to whether intraoperative neuromonitoring is necessary for simple lengthenings in these patients. However, caution should be maintained when interpreting our results as anecdotal cases of neurologic changes from simple lengthenings do exist outside of this series.
多中心数据库的回顾性病例系列。
评估生长棒手术过程中发生神经损伤的风险,并确定术中神经监测是否对所有生长棒手术都必要。
尽管使用生长棒器械治疗早发性脊柱畸形已成为一种被广泛接受的治疗方法,但生长棒手术过程中发生神经事件的发生率尚不清楚。
我们回顾了来自 252 名患者的 782 例生长棒手术的多中心数据库数据。排除 VEPTR 器械和任何带有肋骨附件的器械。向所有参与病例的外科医生发送了一份问卷,要求提供与任何生长棒手术相关的所有神经事件的详细信息。
在 252 名患者中进行了 782 例生长棒手术,其中包括 252 例原发性生长棒植入术、168 例植入物更换术和 362 例延长术。782 例中有 569 例(73%)进行了神经监测。该系列中仅发生了 1 例临床损伤,发生率为 0.1%(1/782)。该缺损发生在植入物更换过程中尝试椎弓根螺钉放置时,在 3 个月内得到解决。在原发性植入手术中有 2 例出现神经监测变化(0.9%,2/231),1 例在植入物更换时(0.9%,1/116),1 例在延长术时有神经监测变化(0.5%,1/222)。在延长术中发生的唯一监测变化发生在一名患有椎管内肿瘤的儿童身上,该儿童在原发性手术中也发生了监测变化。在原发性植入术无意外的情况下,有简单延长术时发生神经监测变化的偶发病例(不在本研究组系列内)。
根据我们的研究,这是最大的生长棒手术报告系列,原发性生长棒植入术(0.9%)和交换术(0.9%)期间的神经监测变化发生率证明了在这些手术中使用术中神经监测是合理的。由于在 361 例无先前神经事件的患者中进行的单纯延长术没有神经事件,因此可能会提出这样一个问题,即对于这些患者,单纯延长术是否需要术中神经监测。然而,在解释我们的结果时应保持谨慎,因为在本系列之外确实存在单纯延长术导致神经变化的偶发病例。