Rare True-Positive Isolated SSEP Loss With Preservation of MEPs Response During Scoliosis Correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Case report. OBJECTIVE: To report a case of a true-positive isolated somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) loss with preservation of motor evoked potential (MEP) response during scoliosis correction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Combined intraoperative monitoring uses SSEPs and MEPs to decrease the probability of observing false-negative events. In combination, SSEPs and MEPs have become a standard of care for spinal deformity surgery. However, literature review reveals several cases of false-negative response with combined SSEPs and MEPs, raising the contention that intraoperative monitoring does not reliably identify all isolated selective spinal cord dysfunction. METHODS: A 15-year-old female patient with a 65° right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis underwent correction and posterior spinal fusion with segmental pedicle screw instrumentation. After capture and derotation of the left concave rod, left-sided irreversible SSEP loss occurred whereas MEPs remained unchanged. After excluding systemic factors, anesthetic causes, or technical fault, deformity correction was released and instrumentation removed. No cortical breach was reported during pedicle screw removal. RESULTS: Postoperatively, no clinical sensory or motor deficit was present; computed tomography demonstrated a burst left pedicle at T10 with the medial pedicle wall fragment in direct contact with the dorsal spinal cord. Magnetic resonance imaging excluded cord edema or other evidence of injury. Three days after surgery, intraoperative monitoring showed delayed latencies and amplitudes of the left SSEP. An uneventful reinsertion of instrumentation and correction excluding the left T10 pedicle screw was performed 7 days after the initial surgery. CONCLUSION: This case report provides evidence of selective posterior spinal cord dysfunction with sparing of the anterior columns immediately after a correction maneuver and emphasizes the importance of simultaneous SSEP and MEP monitoring. To the authors' knowledge, there is no previous report of a true-positive isolated SSEP loss with preservation of MEP response during scoliosis correction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".