ReviewCureus2026
Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Spina Bifida and Tethered Cord Surgeries: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes.
Review in Cureus, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spina bifida and tethered cord syndrome (TCS) are forms of spinal dysraphism requiring surgical intervention to prevent progressive neurological decline. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) provides real-time feedback, allowing surgeons to minimize intraoperative injury during these procedures. This systematic review analyzed 19 primary studies published between 2015 and 2025 examining the role of IONM techniques, including somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP), motor evoked potentials (MEP), electromyography (EMG), and bulbocavernosus reflex (BCR), in spina bifida and tethered cord surgeries. Methodological quality and risk of bias were formally appraised using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. Multimodal IONM use was associated with favorable postoperative motor outcomes. Conversely, bladder and sphincter outcomes were more variable, particularly in complex or reoperative cases. The included literature demonstrated an overall moderate risk of bias, driven primarily by retrospective designs and lack of blinded outcome assessments. Longer-term comparative data suggested that differences between monitored and unmonitored cohorts may become more apparent over time, although this pattern remains hypothesis-generating. In lower-risk surgeries such as isolated filum terminale release, patients achieved favorable outcomes regardless of monitoring status, indicating limited added value of IONM in this subgroup. These findings support the selective, risk-adapted use of IONM while highlighting a moderate baseline risk of bias in the current literature. This underscores the need for standardized protocols and high-quality prospective studies with extended follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.