Femoral nerve neuromonitoring for lateral lumbar interbody fusion surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) technique is an effective alternative to traditional anterior and posterior approaches to the lumbar spine; however, nerve injuries are the most reported postoperative complication. Commonly used strategies to avoid nerve injury (eg, limiting retraction duration) have not been effective in detecting or preventing femoral nerve injuries. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of emerging intraoperative femoral nerve monitoring techniques and the importance of employing prompt surgical countermeasures when degraded femoral nerve function is detected. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: We present the results from a retrospective analysis of a multi-center study conducted over the course of 3 years. PATIENT SAMPLE: One hundred and seventy-two lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures were reviewed. OUTCOME MEASURES: Intraoperative femoral nerve monitoring data was correlated to immediate postoperative neurologic examinations. METHODS: Femoral nerve evoked potentials (FNEP) including saphenous nerve somatosensory evoked potentials (snSSEP) and motor evoked potentials with quadriceps recordings were used to detect evidence of degraded femoral nerve function during the time of surgical retraction. RESULTS: In 89% (n=153) of the surgeries, there were no surgeon alerts as the FNEP response amplitudes remained relatively unchanged throughout the surgery (negative group). The positive group included 11% of the cases (n=19) where the surgeon was alerted to a deterioration of the FNEP amplitudes during surgical retraction. Prompt surgical countermeasures to an FNEP alert included loosening, adjusting, or removing surgical retraction, and/or requesting an increase in blood pressure from the anesthesiologist. All the cases where prompt surgical countermeasures were employed resulted in recovery of the degraded FNEP amplitudes and no postoperative femoral nerve injuries. In two cases, the surgeons were given verbal alerts of degraded FNEPs but did not employ prompt surgical countermeasures. In both cases, the degraded FNEP amplitudes did not recover by the time of surgical closure, and both patients exhibited postoperative signs of sensorimotor femoral nerve injury including anterior thigh numbness and weakened knee extension. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal femoral nerve monitoring can provide surgeons with a timely alert to hyperacute femoral nerve conduction failure, enabling prompt surgical countermeasures to be employed that can mitigate or avoid femoral nerve injury. Our data also suggests that the common strategy of limiting retraction duration may not be effective in preventing iatrogenic femoral nerve injuries.

Cost Analysis of Single-Level Lumbar Fusions.

STUDY DESIGN: Cost analysis of a retrospectively identified cohort of patients who had undergone primary single-level lumbar fusion at a single institution's orthopedic or neurosurgery department. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to analyze the determinants of direct costs for single-level lumbar fusions and identify potential areas for cost reduction. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent primary single-level lumbar fusion from fiscal years 2008 to 2012 were identified via administrative and departmental databases and were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded if they underwent multiple surgeries, had previous surgery at the same anatomic region, underwent corpectomy, kyphectomy, disc replacement, surgery for tumor or infection, or had incomplete cost data. Demographic data, surgical data, and direct cost data in the categories of supplies, services, room and care, and pharmacy, was collected for each patient. RESULTS: The cohort included 532 patients. Direct costs ranged from $8286 to $73 727 (median = $21 781; mean = $22 890 ± $6323). Surgical approach was an important determinant of cost. The mean direct cost was highest for the circumferential approach and lowest for posterior instrumented spinal fusions without an interbody cage. The difference in mean direct cost between transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions, anterior lumbar interbody fusions, and lateral transpsoas fusions was not statistically significant. Surgical supplies accounted for 44% of direct costs. Spinal implants were the primary component of supply costs (84.9%). Services accounted for 38% of direct costs and were highly dependent on operative time. Comorbidities were an important contributor to variance in the cost of care as evidenced by high variance in pharmacy costs and length of stay related to their management. CONCLUSION: The costs of spinal surgeries are highly variable. Important cost drivers in our analysis included surgical approach, implants, operating room time, and length of hospital stay. Areas of high cost and high variance offer potential targets for cost savings and quality improvements.