The "state of the art" of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: An Italian neurosurgical survey

Riccardo Antonio Ricciuti; Fabrizio Mancini; Giusy Guzzi; Daniele Marruzzo; Alessandro Dario; Alessandro Della Puppa; Alessandro Ricci; Andrea Barbanera; Andrea Talacchi; Andreas Schwarz; Antonino Germanò; Antonino Raco; Antonio Colamaria; Antonio Santoro; Riccardo Boccaletti; Carlo Conti; Carlo Conti; Nunzia Cenci; Christian Cossandi; Claudio Bernucci; Corrado Lucantoni; Giovanni Battista Costella; Diego Garbossa; Donato Carlo Zotta; Federico De Gonda; Felice Esposito; Flavio Giordano; Giancarlo D'Andrea; Gianluca Piatelli; Gianluigi Zona; Giannantonio Spena; Giovanni Tringali; Giuseppe Barbagallo; Carlo Giussani; Maurizio Gladi; Andrea Landi; Angelo Lavano; Letterio Morabito; Luciano Mastronardi; Marco Locatelli; Michele D'Agruma; Michele Maria Lanotte; Nicola Montano; Orazio Santo Santonocito; Angelo Pompucci; Raffaele de Falco; Franco Randi; Sara Bruscella; Ivana Sartori; Francesco Signorelli; Luigino Tosatto; Roberto Trignani; Vincenzo Esposito; Gualtiero Innocenzi; Sergio Paolini; Vincenzo Vitiello; Michele Alessandro Cavallo; Francesco Sala

doi:10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796

The "state of the art" of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: An Italian neurosurgical survey

Riccardo Antonio Ricciuti, Fabrizio Mancini, Giusy Guzzi, Daniele Marruzzo, Alessandro Dario, Alessandro Della Puppa, Alessandro Ricci, Andrea Barbanera, Andrea Talacchi, Andreas Schwarz, Antonino Germanò, Antonino Raco, Antonio Colamaria, Antonio Santoro, Riccardo Boccaletti, Carlo Conti, Carlo Conti, Nunzia Cenci, Christian Cossandi, Claudio BernucciCorrado Lucantoni, Giovanni Battista Costella, Diego Garbossa, Donato Carlo Zotta, Federico De Gonda, Felice Esposito, Flavio Giordano, Giancarlo D'Andrea, Gianluca Piatelli, Gianluigi Zona, Giannantonio Spena, Giovanni Tringali, Giuseppe Barbagallo, Carlo Giussani, Maurizio Gladi, Andrea Landi, Angelo Lavano, Letterio Morabito, Luciano Mastronardi, Marco Locatelli, Michele D'Agruma, Michele Maria Lanotte, Nicola Montano, Orazio Santo Santonocito, Angelo Pompucci, Raffaele de Falco, Franco Randi, Sara Bruscella, Ivana Sartori, Francesco Signorelli, Luigino Tosatto, Roberto Trignani, Vincenzo Esposito, Gualtiero Innocenzi, Sergio Paolini, Vincenzo Vitiello, Michele Alessandro Cavallo, Francesco Sala

Research output: Contribution to journal › Original Article › peer-review

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (IOM) is widely used in neurosurgery but specific guidelines are lacking. Therefore, we can assume differences in IOM application between Neurosurgical centers.

RESEARCH QUESTION: The section of Functional Neurosurgery of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery realized a survey aiming to obtain general data on the current practice of IOM in Italy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 22-item questionnaire was designed focusing on: volume procedures, indications, awake surgery, experience, organization and equipe. The questionnaire has been sent to Italian Neurosurgery centers.

RESULTS: A total of 54 centers completed the survey. The annual volume of surgeries range from 300 to 2000, and IOM is used in 10-20% of the procedures. In 46% of the cases is a neurologist or a neurophysiologist who performs IOM. For supra-tentorial pathology, almost all perform MEPs (94%) SSEPs (89%), direct cortical stimulation (85%). All centers perform IOM in spinal surgery and 95% in posterior fossa surgery. Among the 50% that perform peripheral nerve surgery, all use IOM. Awake surgery is performed by 70% of centers. The neurosurgeon is the only responsible for IOM in 35% of centers. In 83% of cases IOM implementation is adequate to the request.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The Italian Neurosurgical centers perform IOM with high level of specialization, but differences exist in organization, techniques, and expertise. Our survey provides a snapshot of the state of the art in Italy and it could be a starting point to implement a consensus on the practice of IOM.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	102796
Journal	Brain and Spine
Volume	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796
Publication status	Published - 2024
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796

Cite this

Ricciuti, R. A., Mancini, F., Guzzi, G., Marruzzo, D., Dario, A., Della Puppa, A., Ricci, A., Barbanera, A., Talacchi, A., Schwarz, A., Germanò, A., Raco, A., Colamaria, A., Santoro, A., Boccaletti, R., Conti, C., Conti, C., Cenci, N., Cossandi, C., ... Sala, F. (2024). The "state of the art" of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: An Italian neurosurgical survey. Brain and Spine, 4, 102796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796

@article{d1caef818d17472083d4f7ef1096f388,

title = "The {"}state of the art{"} of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: An Italian neurosurgical survey",

abstract = "INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (IOM) is widely used in neurosurgery but specific guidelines are lacking. Therefore, we can assume differences in IOM application between Neurosurgical centers.RESEARCH QUESTION: The section of Functional Neurosurgery of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery realized a survey aiming to obtain general data on the current practice of IOM in Italy.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 22-item questionnaire was designed focusing on: volume procedures, indications, awake surgery, experience, organization and equipe. The questionnaire has been sent to Italian Neurosurgery centers.RESULTS: A total of 54 centers completed the survey. The annual volume of surgeries range from 300 to 2000, and IOM is used in 10-20% of the procedures. In 46% of the cases is a neurologist or a neurophysiologist who performs IOM. For supra-tentorial pathology, almost all perform MEPs (94%) SSEPs (89%), direct cortical stimulation (85%). All centers perform IOM in spinal surgery and 95% in posterior fossa surgery. Among the 50% that perform peripheral nerve surgery, all use IOM. Awake surgery is performed by 70% of centers. The neurosurgeon is the only responsible for IOM in 35% of centers. In 83% of cases IOM implementation is adequate to the request.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The Italian Neurosurgical centers perform IOM with high level of specialization, but differences exist in organization, techniques, and expertise. Our survey provides a snapshot of the state of the art in Italy and it could be a starting point to implement a consensus on the practice of IOM.",

author = "Ricciuti, {Riccardo Antonio} and Fabrizio Mancini and Giusy Guzzi and Daniele Marruzzo and Alessandro Dario and {Della Puppa}, Alessandro and Alessandro Ricci and Andrea Barbanera and Andrea Talacchi and Andreas Schwarz and Antonino German{\`o} and Antonino Raco and Antonio Colamaria and Antonio Santoro and Riccardo Boccaletti and Carlo Conti and Carlo Conti and Nunzia Cenci and Christian Cossandi and Claudio Bernucci and Corrado Lucantoni and Costella, {Giovanni Battista} and Diego Garbossa and Zotta, {Donato Carlo} and {De Gonda}, Federico and Felice Esposito and Flavio Giordano and Giancarlo D'Andrea and Gianluca Piatelli and Gianluigi Zona and Giannantonio Spena and Giovanni Tringali and Giuseppe Barbagallo and Carlo Giussani and Maurizio Gladi and Andrea Landi and Angelo Lavano and Letterio Morabito and Luciano Mastronardi and Marco Locatelli and Michele D'Agruma and Lanotte, {Michele Maria} and Nicola Montano and Santonocito, {Orazio Santo} and Angelo Pompucci and {de Falco}, Raffaele and Franco Randi and Sara Bruscella and Ivana Sartori and Francesco Signorelli and Luigino Tosatto and Roberto Trignani and Vincenzo Esposito and Gualtiero Innocenzi and Sergio Paolini and Vincenzo Vitiello and Cavallo, {Michele Alessandro} and Francesco Sala",

note = "kein Lehr-KH genannt",

year = "2024",

doi = "10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

pages = "102796",

journal = "Brain and Spine",

issn = "2772-5294",

publisher = "Elsevier ",

}

Ricciuti, RA, Mancini, F, Guzzi, G, Marruzzo, D, Dario, A, Della Puppa, A, Ricci, A, Barbanera, A, Talacchi, A, Schwarz, A, Germanò, A, Raco, A, Colamaria, A, Santoro, A, Boccaletti, R, Conti, C, Conti, C, Cenci, N, Cossandi, C, Bernucci, C, Lucantoni, C, Costella, GB, Garbossa, D, Zotta, DC, De Gonda, F, Esposito, F, Giordano, F, D'Andrea, G, Piatelli, G, Zona, G, Spena, G, Tringali, G, Barbagallo, G, Giussani, C, Gladi, M, Landi, A, Lavano, A, Morabito, L, Mastronardi, L, Locatelli, M, D'Agruma, M, Lanotte, MM, Montano, N, Santonocito, OS, Pompucci, A, de Falco, R, Randi, F, Bruscella, S, Sartori, I, Signorelli, F, Tosatto, L, Trignani, R, Esposito, V, Innocenzi, G, Paolini, S, Vitiello, V, Cavallo, MA & Sala, F 2024, 'The "state of the art" of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: An Italian neurosurgical survey', Brain and Spine, vol. 4, pp. 102796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796

TY - JOUR

T1 - The "state of the art" of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring

T2 - An Italian neurosurgical survey

AU - Ricciuti, Riccardo Antonio

AU - Mancini, Fabrizio

AU - Guzzi, Giusy

AU - Marruzzo, Daniele

AU - Dario, Alessandro

AU - Della Puppa, Alessandro

AU - Ricci, Alessandro

AU - Barbanera, Andrea

AU - Talacchi, Andrea

AU - Schwarz, Andreas

AU - Germanò, Antonino

AU - Raco, Antonino

AU - Colamaria, Antonio

AU - Santoro, Antonio

AU - Boccaletti, Riccardo

AU - Conti, Carlo

AU - Cenci, Nunzia

AU - Cossandi, Christian

AU - Bernucci, Claudio

AU - Lucantoni, Corrado

AU - Costella, Giovanni Battista

AU - Garbossa, Diego

AU - Zotta, Donato Carlo

AU - De Gonda, Federico

AU - Esposito, Felice

AU - Giordano, Flavio

AU - D'Andrea, Giancarlo

AU - Piatelli, Gianluca

AU - Zona, Gianluigi

AU - Spena, Giannantonio

AU - Tringali, Giovanni

AU - Barbagallo, Giuseppe

AU - Giussani, Carlo

AU - Gladi, Maurizio

AU - Landi, Andrea

AU - Lavano, Angelo

AU - Morabito, Letterio

AU - Mastronardi, Luciano

AU - Locatelli, Marco

AU - D'Agruma, Michele

AU - Lanotte, Michele Maria

AU - Montano, Nicola

AU - Santonocito, Orazio Santo

AU - Pompucci, Angelo

AU - de Falco, Raffaele

AU - Randi, Franco

AU - Bruscella, Sara

AU - Sartori, Ivana

AU - Signorelli, Francesco

AU - Tosatto, Luigino

AU - Trignani, Roberto

AU - Esposito, Vincenzo

AU - Innocenzi, Gualtiero

AU - Paolini, Sergio

AU - Vitiello, Vincenzo

AU - Cavallo, Michele Alessandro

AU - Sala, Francesco

N1 - kein Lehr-KH genannt

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (IOM) is widely used in neurosurgery but specific guidelines are lacking. Therefore, we can assume differences in IOM application between Neurosurgical centers.RESEARCH QUESTION: The section of Functional Neurosurgery of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery realized a survey aiming to obtain general data on the current practice of IOM in Italy.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 22-item questionnaire was designed focusing on: volume procedures, indications, awake surgery, experience, organization and equipe. The questionnaire has been sent to Italian Neurosurgery centers.RESULTS: A total of 54 centers completed the survey. The annual volume of surgeries range from 300 to 2000, and IOM is used in 10-20% of the procedures. In 46% of the cases is a neurologist or a neurophysiologist who performs IOM. For supra-tentorial pathology, almost all perform MEPs (94%) SSEPs (89%), direct cortical stimulation (85%). All centers perform IOM in spinal surgery and 95% in posterior fossa surgery. Among the 50% that perform peripheral nerve surgery, all use IOM. Awake surgery is performed by 70% of centers. The neurosurgeon is the only responsible for IOM in 35% of centers. In 83% of cases IOM implementation is adequate to the request.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The Italian Neurosurgical centers perform IOM with high level of specialization, but differences exist in organization, techniques, and expertise. Our survey provides a snapshot of the state of the art in Italy and it could be a starting point to implement a consensus on the practice of IOM.

AB - INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (IOM) is widely used in neurosurgery but specific guidelines are lacking. Therefore, we can assume differences in IOM application between Neurosurgical centers.RESEARCH QUESTION: The section of Functional Neurosurgery of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery realized a survey aiming to obtain general data on the current practice of IOM in Italy.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 22-item questionnaire was designed focusing on: volume procedures, indications, awake surgery, experience, organization and equipe. The questionnaire has been sent to Italian Neurosurgery centers.RESULTS: A total of 54 centers completed the survey. The annual volume of surgeries range from 300 to 2000, and IOM is used in 10-20% of the procedures. In 46% of the cases is a neurologist or a neurophysiologist who performs IOM. For supra-tentorial pathology, almost all perform MEPs (94%) SSEPs (89%), direct cortical stimulation (85%). All centers perform IOM in spinal surgery and 95% in posterior fossa surgery. Among the 50% that perform peripheral nerve surgery, all use IOM. Awake surgery is performed by 70% of centers. The neurosurgeon is the only responsible for IOM in 35% of centers. In 83% of cases IOM implementation is adequate to the request.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The Italian Neurosurgical centers perform IOM with high level of specialization, but differences exist in organization, techniques, and expertise. Our survey provides a snapshot of the state of the art in Italy and it could be a starting point to implement a consensus on the practice of IOM.

U2 - 10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796

DO - 10.1016/j.bas.2024.102796

M3 - Original Article

C2 - 38698806

SN - 2772-5294

VL - 4

SP - 102796

JO - Brain and Spine

JF - Brain and Spine

ER -

The "state of the art" of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: An Italian neurosurgical survey

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this