Axillary nerve monitoring during arthroscopic shoulder stabilization.
ABSTRACT This study evaluated the ability of a novel intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring method used to locate the axillary nerve, predict relative capsule thickness, and identify impending injury to the axillary nerve during arthroscopic thermal capsulorrhaphy of the shoulder.
Prospective cohort study.
Twenty consecutive patients with glenohumeral instability were monitored prospectively during arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Axillary nerve mapping and relative capsule thickness estimates were recorded before the stabilization portion of the procedure. During labral repair and/or thermal capsulorrhaphy, continuous and spontaneous electromyography recorded nerve activity. In addition, trans-spinal motor-evoked potentials of the fourth and fifth cervical roots and brachial plexus electrical stimulation, provided real-time information about nerve integrity.
Axillary nerve mapping and relative capsule thickness were recorded in all patients. Continuous axillary nerve monitoring was successfully performed in all patients. Eleven of the 20 patients underwent thermal capsulorrhaphy alone or in combination with arthroscopic labral repair. Nine patients underwent arthroscopic labral repair alone. In 4 of the 11 patients who underwent thermal capsulorrhaphy, excessive spontaneous neurotonic electromyographic activity was noted, thereby altering the pattern of heat application by the surgeon. In 1 of these 4 patients, a small increase in the motor latency was noted after the procedure but no clinical deficit was observed. There were no neuromonitoring or clinical neurologic changes observed in the labral repair group without thermal application. At last follow-up, no patient in either group had any clinical evidence of nerve injury or complications from neurophysiologic monitoring.
We successfully evaluated the use of intraoperative nerve monitoring to identify axillary nerve position, capsule thickness, and provide real-time identification of impending nerve injury and function during shoulder thermal capsulorrhaphy. The use of intraoperative nerve monitoring altered the heat application technique in 4 of 11 patients and may have prevented nerve injury.
Level II, prospective cohort study.
- Journal of Urology - J UROL. 01/2011; 185(4).
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Thermal capsular shrinkage was popular for the treatment of shoulder instability, despite a paucity of outcomes data in the literature defining the indications for this procedure or supporting its long-term efficacy. The purpose of this study was to perform a clinical evaluation of radiofrequency thermal capsular shrinkage for the treatment of shoulder instability, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. From 1999 to 2001, 101 consecutive patients with mild to moderate shoulder instability underwent shoulder stabilization surgery with thermal capsular shrinkage using a monopolar radiofrequency device. Follow-up included a subjective outcome questionnaire, discussion of pain, instability, and activity level. Mean follow-up was 3.3 years (range 2.0-4.7 years). The thermal capsular shrinkage procedure failed due to instability and/or pain in 31% of shoulders at a mean time of 39 months. In patients with unidirectional anterior instability and those with concomitant labral repair, the procedure proved effective. Patients with multidirectional instability had moderate success. In contrast, four of five patients with isolated posterior instability failed. Thermal capsular shrinkage has been advocated for the treatment of shoulder instability, particularly mild to moderate capsular laxity. The ease of the procedure makes it attractive. However, our retrospective review revealed an overall failure rate of 31% in 80 patients with 2-year minimum follow-up. This mid- to long-term cohort study adds to the literature lacking support for thermal capsulorrhaphy in general, particularly posterior instability. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11420-010-9187-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.HSS Journal 07/2011; 7(2):108-14.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The incidence of neurologic injury after proximal humerus fractures is variable, ranging from 6.2% to as much as 67%. However, it is unclear what factors might contribute to these injuries or whether they can be prevented by intraoperative nerve monitoring. Therefore, using intraoperative nerve monitoring, we assessed the incidence, pattern of nerve involvement, and predisposing factors for nerve injury before and during shoulder fracture fixation. We used continuous intraoperative monitoring of the brachial plexus in 37 patients undergoing open operative treatment of proximal humerus fractures. Impending intraoperative compromise of nerve function was signaled by sustained neurotonic EMG activity or greater than 50% amplitude attenuation of transcranial electrical motor evoked potentials (MEPs) (or both). When a nerve alert occurred, current surgical activity and arm and retractor position were recorded and adjustments were made to relieve tension. The intraoperative affected nerves included axillary (46%), combined (mixed plexopathy) (23%), radial (23%), musculocutaneous (4%), and ulnar (4%). Postoperatively, three patients had transient nerve palsies, which fully resolved within 3 weeks of surgery. Low body mass index (BMI) (22.7 ± 2.8), history of cervical spine disease, diabetes mellitus, and delay in surgical treatment (14 ± 2.9 days from time of injury) were associated with an increased incidence of nerve dysfunction. Our observations suggest transcranial electrical MEPs are sensitive indicators of impending iatrogenic injury to the brachial plexus or peripheral nerves (or both) during open operative treatment of proximal humerus fractures. The use of intraoperative nerve monitoring during these procedures may be considered for the prevention of nerve injury, particularly in patients with underlying cervical spine disease, low BMI, diabetes mellitus, and/or delay in surgical treatment greater than approximately 14 days. Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 01/2011; 469(9):2631-7. · 2.79 Impact Factor