Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Ochsner Journal
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Ochsner Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Minimally Invasive 1- and 2-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Does It Improve Patient Outcome?

Juanita Garces, J. Franklin Berry, Edison P. Valle-Giler and Wale A. R. Sulaiman
Ochsner Journal March 2014, 14 (1) 57-61;
Juanita Garces
Department of Neurosurgery, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
Department of Neurosurgery, Tulane Medical Center, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Franklin Berry
Department of Neurosurgery, Tulane Medical Center, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edison P. Valle-Giler
Department of Neurosurgery, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
Department of Neurosurgery, Tulane Medical Center, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wale A. R. Sulaiman
Department of Neurosurgery, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Despite the widespread use of intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in many types of spinal surgeries, an absence of data comparing monitored a nd unmonitored postoperative outcomes places IOM's efficacy into question. A lack of consensus among surgeons about when to use monitoring also raises concerns about its overuse in routine and low-risk procedures.

Methods We performed a retrospective database review of 112 patients undergoing a 1- or 2-level minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Our analysis focused on patient demographics, use of IOM, length of surgery, hospital length of stay, the perioperative complication of pedicle screw malposition, and average hospital cost.

Results For the 73 patients who underwent MIS-TLIF with intraoperative neuromonitoring, their hospital length of stay (P=0.8) and need for pedicle screw revisions (P=0.93) were not statistically significant compared to the 39 patients who underwent MIS-TLIF procedures without IOM. The incidence of reoperation was 5.48% and 5.13%, and average length of stay was 3.25 days and 3.13 days, respectively. However, the cost of surgery and the length of surgery were significantly higher in the monitored group compared to the nonmonitored group (P=0.008 and P=0.009, respectively).

Conclusion IOM is widely used in spine surgery, but our retrospective review shows that its use does not necessarily decrease the incidence of malpositioning of pedicle screws. In fact, no statistical difference was detected in the incidence of screw malposition in the 2 groups of patients. On the other hand, IOM adds cost and increases the length of surgery. Because the use of IOM did not make a difference in the incidence of pedicle screw malpositioning and because of the comparative cost analysis for both groups of patients, we believe that the use of IOM for MIS-TLIF provides no added benefit.

Keywords
  • Monitoring–intraoperative
  • spinal fusion
  • surgical procedures–minimally invasive

Footnotes

  • The authors have no financial or proprietary interest in the subject matter of this article.

  • © Academic Division of Ochsner Clinic Foundation
View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ochsner Journal
Vol. 14, Issue 1
Mar 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign up with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ochsner Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Minimally Invasive 1- and 2-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Does It Improve Patient Outcome?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ochsner Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ochsner Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Minimally Invasive 1- and 2-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Does It Improve Patient Outcome?
Juanita Garces, J. Franklin Berry, Edison P. Valle-Giler, Wale A. R. Sulaiman
Ochsner Journal Mar 2014, 14 (1) 57-61;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Minimally Invasive 1- and 2-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Does It Improve Patient Outcome?
Juanita Garces, J. Franklin Berry, Edison P. Valle-Giler, Wale A. R. Sulaiman
Ochsner Journal Mar 2014, 14 (1) 57-61;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Cited By...

  • Does intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring matter in noncomplex spine surgeries?
  • Recent Publications by Ochsner Authors: October 2013 - March 2014
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Gestational Age of Delivery in Pregnancies Complicated by Diabetes
  • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Perinatal Outcomes in Patients Treated With and Without Hydroxychloroquine
  • A Single-Institution Case Series of Outpatient Same-Day Mastectomy: Implementation of a Quality Improvement Project and Initiative for Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
Show more ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Monitoring–intraoperative
  • spinal fusion
  • surgical procedures–minimally invasive

Current Post at the Blog

COPE Provides a Framework for Ethical Peer Review

Our Content

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Featured Contributors
  • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • Archive at PubMed Central

Information & Forms

  • Instructions for Authors
  • Instructions for Reviewers
  • Submission Checklist
  • FAQ
  • License for Publishing-Author Attestation
  • Patient Consent Form
  • Submit a Manuscript

Services & Contacts

  • Permissions
  • Sign up for our electronic table of contents
  • Feedback Form
  • Contact Us

About Us

  • Editorial Board
  • About the Ochsner Journal
  • Ochsner Health
  • University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School
  • Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers

© 2021 Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Powered by HighWire