Montenegro Thiago Scharth, Hoelscher Christian, Hines Kevin, Thalheimer Sara, Matias Caio, Wilent Bryan, Harrop James, Heller Joshua E
Department of Neurosurgery, 6559Thomas Jefferson University and Jefferson Hospital for Neuroscience, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Clinical Neurophysiology, 17389SpecialtyCare, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Global Spine J. 2022 Sep;12(7):1400-1406. doi: 10.1177/2192568220981977. Epub 2021 Jan 12.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort. OBJECTIVE: A review of efficiency and safety of fluoroscopy and stereotactic navigation system for minimally invasive (MIS) Sacroiliac (SI) fusion through a lateral technique. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of an observational cohort of 96 patients greater than 18 years old, that underwent MIS SI fusion guided by fluoroscopy or navigation between January 2013 and April 2020 with a minimum of 3 months follow-up. Intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) with a variable combination of electromyography (EMG), somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) was also utilized. RESULTS: The overall complication rate in the study was 9.4%, and there was no difference between the fluoroscopy (10.1%), and navigation groups (8%). Neurological complication rate was 2.1%, without a significant difference between both intraoperative guidance modality groups (p = 0.227). There was a significant difference between the modalities of IONM used and the occurrence of neurological injury (p = 0.01).The 2 patients who had a neurological complication postoperatively were monitored only with EMG and SSEP, but none of the patients (n = 76) in which MEPs were utilized had neurologic complication. The mean pain improvement 3 months after surgery was greater in the navigation group (2.44 ± 2.72), but was not statistically different than the improvement in the fluoroscopy group (1.90 ± 2.07) (p = 0.301). CONCLUSIONS: No difference in the safety of the procedure was found between the fluoroscopy and the stereotactic navigation techniques. The contribution of the IONM to the safety of SI fusions could not be determined, but the data indicates that MEPs provide the highest level of sensitivity.
研究设计:回顾性观察队列研究。 目的:回顾透视和立体定向导航系统用于经外侧技术的微创骶髂关节融合术的效率和安全性。 方法:对96例年龄大于18岁的观察队列患者进行回顾性分析,这些患者在2013年1月至2020年4月期间接受了透视或导航引导下的微创骶髂关节融合术,且随访至少3个月。术中还采用了肌电图(EMG)、体感诱发电位(SSEP)和运动诱发电位(MEP)的不同组合进行神经监测(IONM)。 结果:该研究中的总体并发症发生率为9.4%,透视组(10.1%)和导航组(8%)之间无差异。神经并发症发生率为2.1%,两种术中引导方式组之间无显著差异(p = 0.227)。所使用的IONM方式与神经损伤的发生之间存在显著差异(p = 0.01)。术后发生神经并发症的2例患者仅接受了EMG和SSEP监测,但使用MEP的患者(n = 76)均未发生神经并发症。导航组术后3个月的平均疼痛改善程度更大(2.44±2.72),但与透视组的改善程度(1.90±2.07)无统计学差异(p = 0.301)。 结论:透视和立体定向导航技术在该手术安全性方面未发现差异。IONM对骶髂关节融合术安全性的贡献尚无法确定,但数据表明MEP具有最高的敏感性。
Neurospine. 2021-9
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018-2-15