Monitoring rate and predictability of intraoperative monitoring in patients with intradural extramedullary and epidural metastatic spinal tumors.

STUDY DESIGN: Single-center retrospective study. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the monitoring rate, sensitivity and specificity of intraoperative monitoring (IOM) during removal of intradural extramedullary (IDEM) or epidural metastatic spinal tumors. Also, to assess the efficacy of monitoring somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) when motor-evoked potentials (MEP) are not measurable. SETTING: The Neuro-Oncology Clinic, National Cancer Center, Korea. METHODS: Patients (n=101) with IDEM or epidural metastatic spinal tumors at the cord level underwent surgeries monitored with SSEP and/or MEP. The monitoring rate was defined as negative when MEP or SSEP could not be measured after reversal of the neuromuscular block under general anesthesia. Positive IOM changes included more than a 50% change in the MEP or SSEP amplitude and more than a 10% delay in SSEP latency. RESULTS: MEP was measurable in 73% of patients. The MEP monitoring rate in patients with motor power grades of 3 or less was 39%, which was lower than that of SSEP (83%). The sensitivity, specificity and predictability of MEP for motor changes were 93, 90 and 91%, respectively. Conversely, the sensitivity, specificity and predictability of SSEP were 62, 97 and 89%, respectively. In patients in whom MEP was not measurable (n=24), SSEP was monitored with a predictability of 83%. CONCLUSION: In cases of extramedullary spinal tumors, MEP shows a higher sensitivity than SSEP does. However, the monitoring rate of MEP in non-ambulatory patients was lower than that of SSEP. In those cases, SSEP can be useful to monitor for postoperative neurological deficits.

Outcomes after combined laparoscopic gastrectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in gastric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy on patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer. METHODS: This single center study involved a retrospective review of a database of 400 patients who underwent consecutive laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy for early gastric cancer from June 2003 to July 2007. Outcomes in 26 patients who underwent both laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy were compared with outcomes from 364 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy without laparoscopic cholecystectomy. RESULTS: There were no postoperative 30-day mortalities in the combined cholecystectomy group. The mean surgery duration, time to first flatus and postoperative hospital stay for the laparoscopic gastric resection without combined operation were 181.7 min, 2.7 days and 9.7 days, respectively, and 196.7 min, 2.6 days and 8.8 days, respectively, for the combined cholecystectomy group. None of the postoperative complications was related to combined cholecystectomy. CONCLUSION: Performing a combined cholecystectomy prolonged the mean surgery duration by approximately 15 min, but had no effect on surgical outcomes. It appears that performing a cholecystectomy at the same time as laparoscopic gastric resection is safe and feasible in patients with both early gastric cancer and gallbladder disease.