RESUMEN
OBJECTIVEWith the advent of intraoperative electrophysiological neuromonitoring (IONM), surgical outcomes of various neurosurgical pathologies, such as brain tumors and spinal deformities, have improved. However, its diagnostic and therapeutic value in resecting intradural extramedullary (ID-EM) spinal tumors has not been well documented in the literature. The objective of this study was to summarize the clinical results of IONM in patients with ID-EM spinal tumors.METHODSA retrospective patient database review identified 103 patients with ID-EM spinal tumors who underwent tumor resection with IONM (motor evoked potentials, somatosensory evoked potentials, and free-running electromyography) from January 2010 to December 2015. Patients were classified as those without any new neurological deficits at the 6-month follow-up (group A; n = 86) and those with new deficits (group B; n = 17). Baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and IONM findings were collected and statistically analyzed. In addition, a meta-analysis in compliance with the PRISMA guidelines was performed to estimate the overall pooled diagnostic accuracy of IONM in ID-EM spinal tumor resection.RESULTSNo intergroup differences were discovered between the groups regarding baseline characteristics and operative data. In multivariate analysis, significant IONM changes (p < 0.001) and tumor location (thoracic vs others, p = 0.018) were associated with new neurological deficits at the 6-month follow-up. In predicting these changes, IONM yielded a sensitivity of 82.4% (14/17), specificity of 90.7% (78/86), positive predictive value (PPV) of 63.6% (14/22), negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.3% (78/81), and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.893. The diagnostic value slightly decreased in patients with schwannomas (AUC = 0.875) and thoracic tumors (AUC = 0.842). Among 81 patients who did not demonstrate significant IONM changes at the end of surgery, 19 patients (23.5%) exhibited temporary intraoperative exacerbation of IONM signals, which were recovered by interruption of surgical maneuvers; none of these patients developed new neurological deficits postoperatively. Including the present study, 5 articles encompassing 323 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis, and the overall pooled diagnostic value of IONM was a sensitivity of 77.9%, a specificity of 91.1%, PPV of 56.7%, and NPV of 95.7%.CONCLUSIONSIONM for the resection of ID-EM spinal tumors is a reasonable modality to predict new postoperative neurological deficits at the 6-month follow-up. Future prospective studies are warranted to further elucidate its diagnostic and therapeutic utility.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT), most commonly with aspirin and Clopidogrel, is the standard of care for intracranial stenting, including flow diversion. Clopidogrel response varies by individual. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the real-world precision of VerifyNow P2Y12 assessment (Accumetrics, San Diego, California) of Clopidogrel response. METHODS: Using a prospectively-collected, IRB-approved cerebral aneurysm database 643 patients were identified who were treated with the Pipeline embolization device from 2011 to 2017. Patients with multiple P2Y12 assays drawn within a 24-h window were identified. A single patient could contribute multiple, independent sets. Levels drawn before a 5-d course of DAT and patients who received alternative antiplatelet agents were excluded. Therapeutic range was defined as platelet reaction units (PRU) 60-200. RESULTS: A total of 1586 P2Y12 measurements were recorded; 293 (46%) patients had more than one assay. One hundred forty (22%) patients had multiple P2Y12 measurements within 24 h. These patients accounted for 230 independent 24-h sets. The average P2Y12 fluctuation across all sets was 35 points; the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles were 12, 26, and 48 points, respectively. Of the 230 24-h sets of P2Y12 assays, 76% remained within their original therapeutic category: 100 (43%) all therapeutic, 54 (23%) all hypo-responsive, and 21 (9%) all hyper-responsive. Twenty-four percent of patients fluctuated between therapeutic categories when multiple P2Y12 assessments were drawn within a 24-h period: 29 (13%) between hypo-response and therapeutic, 23 (10%) between hyper-response and therapeutic, and 3 (1%) between hypo-response and hyper-response. CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests P2Y12 is an often-imprecise measure, and this should be considered when utilizing P2Y12 levels for clinical decisions.
