Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2023
Intraoperative Neuromonitoring during Peripheral Arteriovenous Malformation Embolization.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yuan Frank, Gong Anna, Gowda Prateek, Khalil Adham, Farhan Ahmed, Hafezi-Nejad Nima, Bailey Christopher R, Mitchell Sally E, Gutierrez-Hernandez Sergio, Ritzl Eva K, Weiss Clifford R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM), including pre-embolization lidocaine injection challenge ("provocative testing") is associated with reduced risk of irreversible nerve injury during embolization of peripheral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with peripheral AVMs who underwent embolotherapy with IONM with provocative testing between 2012 and 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Data collected included patient demographic characteristics, AVM location and size, embolic agent used, IONM signal changes after lidocaine and embolic agent injections, postprocedural adverse events, and clinical outcomes. Decisions regarding whether embolization would proceed at specific locations were based on IONM findings after the lidocaine challenge and as embolization proceeded.
RESULTS: A cohort of 17 patients (mean age, 27 years ± 19; 5 women) who underwent 59 image-guided embolization procedures with adequate IONM data was identified. No permanent neurologic deficits occurred. Transient neurologic deficits were observed in 3 patients (4 sessions), comprising skin numbness (2 patients), extremity weakness (1 patient), and extremity weakness and numbness (1 patient). All neurologic deficits resolved by postoperative day 4 without additional treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: IONM, including provocative testing, during AVM embolization may minimize potential nerve injury.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with peripheral AVMs who underwent embolotherapy with IONM with provocative testing between 2012 and 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Data collected included patient demographic characteristics, AVM location and size, embolic agent used, IONM signal changes after lidocaine and embolic agent injections, postprocedural adverse events, and clinical outcomes. Decisions regarding whether embolization would proceed at specific locations were based on IONM findings after the lidocaine challenge and as embolization proceeded.
RESULTS: A cohort of 17 patients (mean age, 27 years ± 19; 5 women) who underwent 59 image-guided embolization procedures with adequate IONM data was identified. No permanent neurologic deficits occurred. Transient neurologic deficits were observed in 3 patients (4 sessions), comprising skin numbness (2 patients), extremity weakness (1 patient), and extremity weakness and numbness (1 patient). All neurologic deficits resolved by postoperative day 4 without additional treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: IONM, including provocative testing, during AVM embolization may minimize potential nerve injury.