Somatosensory Evoked Potential Recordings for Decision Making on Instrumentation During Scoliosis Surgery

  • Y. Node
  • S. Uematsu
Conference paper


Somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) recordings for 270 patients who underwent corrective surgery for kyphoscoliosis were reviewed. When the SEP was normal during the instrumentations, the chance that the patient would awaken from the anesthesia with paralysis of the limb was 0.4%. SEP abnormalities occured most frequently during instrumental manipulation of the spinal column. The surgeon could adjust the distraction rods or compression apparatus whenever the potential deteriorated. The results reconfirmed the validity of intraoperative SEP and provides important information for surgeons to use in decision making during critical maneuvering of the spinal cord and surrounding neurovascular structures.


Somatosensory Evoke Potential Scoliosis Surgery Postoperative Neurological Deficit Spinal Cord Function Spinal Cord Monitoring 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Brown RH, Nash CL Jr, Berilla JA, Amaddio MD (1984) Cortical evoked potential monitoring — A system for intraoperative monitoring of spinal cord function. Spine 9: 256–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dinner DS, Luders H, Lesser RP, Morris HH, Barnett G, Klem CT (1986) Intraoperative spinal somatosensory evoked potential monitoring. J Neurosurg 65: 807–814PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lesser RP, Randzens PA, Luders H, Nuwer MR, Goldie WD, Morris HH, Dinner DS et al. (1986) Postoperative neurological deficits may occur despite unchanged intraoperative somatosensory evoked potentials. Ann Neurol 19: 22–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    MacEwen GD, Bunnell WP, Shiram K (1975) Acute neurological complications in the treatment of scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg 57 [A]: 404–408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mostegl A, Bauer R, Eichenauer M (1988) Intraoperative somatosensory potential monitoring. A clinical analysis of 127 surgical procedures. Spine 13: 396–400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roy EP 3rd, Gutmann L, Riggs JE, Jones ET, Byrd A, Ringel RA (1988) Intraoperative somatosensory evoked potential monitoring in scoliosis. Clin Orthop 229: 121–124Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Uematsu S, Rocca U (1981) Effect of compression, hypoxia, hypothermia and hyporelemia on the evoked potentials of the spinal cord. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 21: 229–252PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Uematsu S, Tolo V (1981) Recording of the somtosensory, evoked potentials during surgery for scoliosis and midline myelotomy to monitor spinal cord function. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 21: 253–266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wilber RG, Thompson GH, Shaffer JW, Brown RH, Nash CL (1984) Postoperative neurological deficits in segmental spinal instrumentations: A study using spinal cord monitoring. J Bone Joint Surg 66 [A]: 1178–1187PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Node
    • 1
  • S. Uematsu
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryNippon Medical SchoolBunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113Japan
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations