PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Anne M Padberg

Publications and source records attributed to Anne M Padberg.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Intraoperative electrophysiologic monitoring: considerations for complex spinal surgery.

Intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring techniques have evolved as the complexity of spinal surgery has increased and the limitations of individual modalities have become apparent. Current monitoring strategies include a combination of techniques directed toward detecting changes in sensory, motor, and nerve root function. Close coordination and communication between the monitoring personnel, surgeon, and anesthesiologist is essential to effective intraoperative monitoring.

Adolescent↗

Increased risk of postoperative neurologic deficit for spinal surgery patients with unobtainable intraoperative evoked potential data.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of 4,310 patients undergoing spinal surgery between 1994 and 2003. OBJECTIVES: To examine the incidence and potential causality of unobtainable somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) and neurogenic mixed evoked potential (NMEP) data for a population of spinal surgery patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patients with absent or unobtainable evoked potential data may increase the risk of undetected neurologic injury. To date, a comprehensive review of this patient population has not been reported. METHODS: A total of 4,310 consecutive orthopedic spinal surgeries at one institution from January 1994 through December 2003 were reviewed. Cases lacking sufficient monitoring data, despite functional neural integrity (ambulators, intact sensation), were identified. Diagnoses were divided into six general categories. The association between absent evoked potential data and associated neurologic and/or medical pathology was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 59 of 4,310 cases (1.37%) had absent SSEP and/or NMEP intraoperative data despite functional neural integrity (44 ambulators/15 nonambulators)" 5.08% of study patients awoke with increased neurologic deficit (3 of 59), 2 global deficits, and 1 nerve root deficit. The incidence of postoperative neurologic deficit in the entire surgical population was 0.77% (33 of 4,310), 8 global (0.19%), and 25 nerve root deficits (0.058%). A Fisher's exact test demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the incidence in these two populations (P = 0.0121) and the incidence of global paraplegic deficits (P = 0.0075). CONCLUSION: Patients with unobtainable data pose a much higher risk (P = 0.0121) for postoperative neurologic deficits. Multiple Stagnara wake-up tests are strongly recommended when evoked potential data cannot be obtained.

Adolescent↗

The significance of anode location for stimulus-evoked electromyography during iliosacral screw placement.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of anode location on the current threshold required to provoke an electromyograph response during stimulus-evoked electromyography for iliosacral screw placement. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Level I trauma center. PATIENTS: Nineteen consecutive patients with 23 unstable posterior pelvic ring injuries treated with iliosacral screws. INTERVENTION: Iliosacral screws were inserted percutaneously over guidewires. Twenty-seven screws were inserted, all into the first sacral vertebrae. The guidewire was used as the cathode for constant-current, stimulus-evoked electromyography for all data collection. Stimulus-evoked electromyographs were obtained with the guidewire at four different stations: at the sacroiliac joint (station I), at the first sacral neuroforamen (station II), in the body of the sacrum (station III), and when the iliosacral screw was in final position over the guidewire (station IV). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Stimulus-evoked electromyographs were obtained with the anode at four different locations for each of the implant stations. Location A had the anode adjacent to the percutaneous insertion site of the guidewire, location B at the ipsilateral anterior superior iliac spine, location C at the midline, and location D at the contralateral anterior superior iliac spine. RESULTS: Moving the anode from midline (location C) toward the entry point of the guidewire increased the current threshold required to provoke an EMG response as much as 67.1% (p < 0.05). Moving the anode from midline to the contralateral anterior superior iliac spine decreased thresholds as much as 3.4% (p > 0.05). In one case, anode placement close to the guidewire insertion site (locations A and B) failed to identify a potentially dangerous implant because current thresholds were >8 mA. With the anode at the midline, current thresholds were <8 mA, indicating unsafe guidewire position leading to redirection of the guidewire. CONCLUSION: The physical location of the anode during stimulus-evoked electromyography monitoring for iliosacral screw placement significantly changes the current thresholds required to provoke an electromyograph response. Current thresholds required to stimulate nerves increase as the anode is moved toward the stimulating electrode. Anode placement ipsilateral to the stimulating electrode may provide a false indication of safe guidewire placement. We recommend anode location at or beyond the midline for stimulus-evoked electromyography monitoring during iliosacral screw placement.

Adolescent↗

Can triggered electromyograph thresholds predict safe thoracic pedicle screw placement?

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective clinical study of thoracic pedicle screws monitored with triggered electromyographic testing. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity of recording rectus abdominis triggered electromyographs to assess thoracic screw placement. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Triggered electromyographic testing from lower extremity myotomes has identified medially placed lumbar pedicle screws. Higher thresholds indicate intraosseous placement because of increased resistance to current flow. Lower thresholds correspond to compromised pedicles with potential for nerve impingement. No clinical study has correlated an identical technique with rectus muscle recordings, which are innervated from T6 to T12. METHODS: A total of 677 thoracic screws were placed in 92 consecutive patients. Screws placed from T6 and T12 were evaluated using an ascending method of stimulation until a compound muscle action potential was obtained from the rectus abdominis. Threshold values were compared both in absolute terms and also in relation to other intrapatient values. RESULTS: Screws were separated into three groups: Group A (n = 650 screws) had thresholds >6.0 mA and intraosseus placement. Group B (n = 21) had thresholds <6.0 mA but an intact medial pedicle border on reexamination and radiographic confirmation. Group C (n = 6) had thresholds <6.0 mA and medial wall perforations confirmed by tactile and/or visual inspection. Thus, 3.9% (27 of 677) of all screws had thresholds <6.0 mA. Only 22% (6 of 27) had medial perforation. Group B screws averaged a 54% decrease from the mean as compared with a 69% decrease for Group C screws (P = 0.0160). There were no postoperative neurologic deficits or radicular chest wall complaints. CONCLUSION: To assess thoracic pedicle screw placement, triggered electromyographic thresholds <6.0 mA, coupled with values 60-65% decreased from the mean of all other thresholds in a given patient, should alert the surgeon to suspect a medial pedicle wall breach.

Action Potentials↗