Predictive Value of Somatosensory Evoked Potential Monitoring during Resection of Intraparenchymal and Intraventricular Tumors Using an Endoscopic Port.
- Author:
Parthasarathy THIRUMALA
1
;
Daniel LAI
;
Jonathan ENGH
;
Miguel HABEYCH
;
Donald CRAMMOND
;
Jeffrey BALZER
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: endoscopic port; somatosensory; evoked potentials; somatosensory; monitoring
- MeSH: Brain Neoplasms; Colloid Cysts; Evoked Potentials; Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory*; Humans; Monitoring, Intraoperative; Paresis; Retrospective Studies
- From:Journal of Clinical Neurology 2013;9(4):244-251
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) using upper and lower somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) is an established technique used to predict and prevent neurologic injury during intracranial tumor resections. Endoscopic port surgery (EPS) is a minimally-invasive approach to deep intraparenchymal and intraventricular brain tumors. The authors intended to evaluate the predictive value of SSEP monitoring during resection of intracranial brain tumors using a parallel endoscopic technique. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients operated on from 2007-2010 utilizing IONM in whom endoscopic ports were used to remove either intraparenchymal or intraventricular tumors. Cases were eligible for review if an endoscopic port was used to resect an intracranial tumor and the electronic chart included all intraoperative monitoring data as well as pre- and post-operative neurologic exams. RESULTS: 139 EPS cases met criteria for inclusion. Eighty five patients (61%) had intraparenchymal and fifty four (39%) had intraventricular tumors or colloid cysts. SSEP changes were seen in eleven cases (7.9%), being irreversible in three (2.2%) and reversible in eight cases (5.8%). Seven patients (5.0%) with intraparenchymal tumors had SSEP changes which met our criterea for significant changes while there were four (2.9%) with intraventricular (p-value=0.25). Five patients suffered post operative deficits, two reversible and two irreversible SSEP changes. Only one case exhibited post operative hemiparesis with no SSEP changes. The positive predictive value of SSEP was 45.4% and the negative predictive value was 99.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the high negative and low positive predictive values, the utility of SSEP monitoring for cylindrical port resections may be limited. However, the use of SSEP monitoring can be helpful in reducing the impact of endoscopic port manipulation when the tumor is closer to the somatosensory pathway.
