• William D Zelenty, Samuel Paek, Yusuke Dodo, Michele Sarin, Jennifer Shue, Ellen Soffin, Darren R Lebl, Frank P Cammisa, Federico P Girardi, Gbolabo Sokunbi, Andrew A Sama, and Alexander P Hughes.
• Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Care Institute, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY.
• Spine. 2023 Apr 1; 48 (7): 492500492-500.

Study DesignRetrospective cohort analysis.ObjectiveTo elucidate trends in the utilization of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) during anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures in NY state using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System and to determine if utilization of IONM resulted in a reduction in postoperative neurological deficits.Summary Of Background DataIONM has been available to spinal surgeons for several decades. It has become increasingly prevalent in all facets of spinal surgery including elective ACDF procedures. The utility of IONM for preventing a neurological deficit in elective spine procedures has recently been called into question.Materials And MethodsThe Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database were accessed to perform a retrospective cohort study comparing monitored versus unmonitored ACDF procedures between 2007 and 2018 as defined by the International Classification of Disease-9 and 10 Procedural Coding System (ICD-9 PCS, ICD-10 PCS) codes. Patient demographics, medical history, surgical intervention, pertinent in-hospital events, and urban versus rural medical centers (as defined by the United States Office of Management and Budget) were recorded. Propensity-score-matched comparisons were used to identify factors related to the utilization of IONM and risk factors for neurological deficits after elective ACDF.ResultsA total of 70,838 [15,092 monitored (21.3%) and 55,746 (78.7%) unmonitored] patients' data were extracted. The utilization of IONM since 2007 has increased in a linear manner from 0.9% of cases in 2007 to 36.7% by 2018. Overall, baseline characteristics of patients who were monitored during cases differed significantly from unmonitored patients in age, race/ethnicity, insurance type, presence of myelopathy or radiculopathy, and Charlson Comorbidity Index; however, only race/ethnicity was statistically significant when analyzed using propensity-score-matched. When comparing urban and rural medical centers, there is a significant lag in the adoption of the technology with no monitored cases in rural centers until 2012 with significant fluctuations in utilization compared with steadily increasing utilization among urban centers. From 2017 to 2018, reporting of neurological deficits after surgery resembled literature-established norms. Pooled analysis of these years revealed that the incidence of neurological complications occurred more frequently in monitored cases than in unmonitored (3.0% vs. 1.4%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsThe utility of IONM for elective ACDF remains uncertain; however, it continues to gain popularity for routine cases. For medical centers that lack similar resources to centers in more densely populated regions of NY state, reliable access to this technology is not a certainty. In our analysis of intraoperative neurological complications, it seems that IONM is not protective against neurological injury.Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

23 keywords...

hide…