ArticleChild's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery2025
Intraoperative neuromonitoring is not a useful adjunct for Chiari malformation decompressive surgery: a cost-benefit and legal analysis.
Article in Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPosterior fossa decompression is currently an operative treatment of choice for Chiari Malformation I (CM1). However, there is controversy surrounding the possible benefits of employing intraoperative neuromonitoring (INM) for this type of procedure. In addition to presenting our single-center experience on the use of INM, we analyze the cost associated with INM in Chiari Malformation (CM) decompression surgery using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) database and discuss the legal implications of somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) monitoring during decompression for CM1.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of all patients undergoing CM1 decompression with SSEP neuromonitoring from 2011 to 2018. We collected patient characteristics, hospital charges, and surgical cost data from the HCUP database for patients undergoing CM decompression. Finally, we performed a review within the Thompson Reuters Westlaw Edge database for reported litigation involving INM for CM decompression.
resultsNone of the 110 patients submitted to surgery for CM1 at our institution had any significant SSEP changes intraoperatively or developed post-operative neurological deterioration. There were higher mean total hospital charges and surgical costs associated with INM ($31,272) for patients who received INM compared to patients who did not receive INM ($24,112). A careful review of the Westlaw database with multiple-word search strategies revealed no reported medical malpractice claims regarding the absence of SSEP neuromonitoring in a CM decompression procedure.
conclusionUsing data collected at our institution and the HCUP national database, we showed that intraoperative neuromonitoring did not affect surgical planning and decision-making or post operative care, while adding unnecessary costs to CM decompression procedures. The absence of reported malpractice claims targeting the lack of neuromonitoring in CM cases suggests that SSEP neuromonitoring during CM may be unnecessary. We propose that neuromonitoring should not be used for routine CM decompression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39890655What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.