Adverse Events Related to Transcranial Electric Stimulation for Motor-evoked Potential Monitoring in High-risk Spinal Surgery.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN:

Prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to study the incidence of nonneurologic adverse events related to transcranial electric stimulation (TES) for intraoperative spinal cord monitoring (IOM) with motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) (Tc(E)- MEPs) and determine the need for safety precautions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:

Tc(E)-MEPs monitoring requires high-voltage multipulse TES that causes widespread muscle contraction and movement. Improved awareness of TES-induced movement-related adverse events is needed.

METHODS:

We analyzed data from 2643 patients who underwent high-risk spinal surgery with intraoperative Tc(E)-MEPs at 11 spinal centers from 2010 to 2016. Information about neurologic and non-neurologic postoperative complications was collected, including type of surgical procedure, operative time, estimated blood loss, and treatment for postoperative adverse events.

RESULTS:

A 70% drop in Tc(E)-MEPs amplitude, which was the alarm criterion to interrupt surgery, predicted postoperative motor deficits with 93.5% sensitivity, 91.0% specificity, a false-positive rate of 8.2%, and a false-negative rate of 0.3%. Non-neurologic adverse events developed in 17 (0.64%) patients and were most commonly because of bite injuries (0.57%), including 11 cases of tongue laceration, two cases of lip laceration, and two cases of tooth breakage. Four (0.15%) tongue lacerations required surgical repair with sutures and two tooth breakages required dental treatment. One patient had hair loss corresponding to the TES site. One patient, who underwent additional IOM with transpharyngeal stimulation, had severe nasal hemorrhage following electrode placement by nasal route, which resolved spontaneously. Non-neurologic adverse events did not significantly affect the accuracy of IOM assessment. Neither operative times nor blood loss significantly influenced the occurrence of adverse events.

CONCLUSION:

During TES-IOM, both the surgeon and monitoring team must consider the possibility-although rare-of non-neurologic adverse events, particularly bite injuries. Such complications can be minimized by using a soft bite-block and frequently evaluating the intraoral integrity of the anesthetized patient.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

4.

• Authors: Go Yoshida, Shiro Imagama, Shigenori Kawabata, Kei Yamada, Tsukasa Kanchiku, Yasushi Fujiwara, Nobuaki Tadokoro, Masahito Takahashi, Kanichiro Wada, Naoya Yamamoto, Hiroki Ushirozako, Kazuyoshi Kobayashi, Akimasa Yasuda, Muneharu Ando, Toshikazu Tani, Yukihiro Matsuyama
• Journal: Spine (Spine (Phila Pa 1976)) Vol. 44 Issue 20 Pg. 1435-1440 (Oct 15 2019) ISSN: 1528-1159 [Electronic] United States
• PMID: 31589200 (Publication Type: Journal Article, Multicenter Study)

Topics

• Evoked Potentials, Motor (physiology)
• Humans
• Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (adverse effects)
• Neurosurgical Procedures (methods)
• Postoperative Complications
• Prospective Studies
• Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (adverse effects)