Intraoperative dermatomal evoked potential monitoring fails to predict outcome from lumbar decompression surgery

• Published in: Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Pa. 1976), 1997-09, Vol.22 (17), p.1970-1975
• Main Authors: TSAI, R. Y.-C, YANG, R.-S, NUWER, M. R, KANIM, L. E. A, DELAMARTER, R. B, DAWSON, E. G
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Biological and medical sciences; Cranial nerves. Spinal roots. Peripheral nerves. Autonomic nervous system. Gustation. Olfaction; Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory; Female; Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - complications; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - surgery; Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery; Male; Medical sciences; Monitoring, Intraoperative - methods; Nerve Compression Syndromes - diagnosis; Nerve Compression Syndromes - surgery; Nervous system (semeiology, syndromes); Neurology; Predictive Value of Tests; Prospective Studies; Spinal Nerve Roots - physiopathology; Spinal Nerve Roots - surgery; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 0362-2436; 1528-1159
• DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199709010-00005

Thirty-three patients with single-level, unilateral lumbosacral radiculopathy underwent micro-decompression and intraoperative dermatomal evoked potential monitoring. Side-to-side latency asymmetry was calculated. A criteria for "abnormal" was defined. Intraoperative dermatomal evoked potentials were obtained before and after decompression. The changes were correlated with clinical outcome at the 3-month follow-up examination. To determine whether intraoperative dermatomal evoked potential latency asymmetry confirms nerve root compression and whether an improvement of latency asymmetry after decompression predicts a good clinical outcome. Intraoperative dermatomal evoked potential has been proposed as a test to assess the adequacy of nerve root decompression. Initial reports suggested improvement of dermatomal evoked potential amplitude and latency after decompression. The clinical efficacy is controversial because of its technical difficulty and inherent variation. Cervical recording was chosen to reduce the effects of anesthesia. The asymptomatic nerve root was used as a control. Quality of the tracings was determined by evoked potentials-to-noise amplitude ratio. Clinical outcome was based on patient's pain relief and satisfaction. Tracings of acceptable quality were obtained at baseline in 57.6% (19 of 33) of patients. A side-to-side latency asymmetry > 5% was defined as abnormal. Before decompression, 68.4% (13 of 19) of patients had an abnormal dermatomal evoked potential. After decompression, latency asymmetry returned to normal in every patient. Clinical outcome was good or excellent in 13 patients, fair in four patients, and poor in two patients. Dermatomal evoked potential latency improvements were not related to variation in clinical outcome. Intraoperative dermatomal evoked potential monitoring is technically demanding. Finding reproducible potentials is difficult. More research is necessary before general use of dermatomal evoked potentials for monitoring nerve root decompression.