English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Objective: Our objective was to compeer the accuracy between two warning criteria during the intraoperative neurophysiologic monitorization for spine/spinal cord surgery. Method: We used two different warning criteria to detect neurological damage. The first criterion was the amplitude reduction of the somatossensory-evoked potentials (SEP) or motor-evoked potentials (MEP) greater than 50% at least in one limb and the second criterion was the complete loss of one of the same potentials. These results were compared with the neurological examination and the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) was calculated for each criterion. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, PLR and NLR were respectively for criterion 1 and 2 (0,92/0,58; 0,96/0,99; 24/46 and 0,09/0,57). Conclusion: The first criterion suggests a better sensitivity and accuracy as a warning criterion to avoid central neurological damage.

Accuracy of two different criteria for neurophysiological intraoperative monitoring (NIOM) in spine/spinal cord surgeries