Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Use of monopolar cautery in patient with a vagal nerve stimulator during neuromuscular scoliosis surgery

  • Case Report
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 03 August 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

It is a historic and common practice while performing spine surgery on patients with a VNS has been to have the patient’s neurologist turn off the VNS generator in the pre-operative anesthetic care unit and to use bipolar rather than monopolar electrocautery. Here we report a case of a 16-year-old male patient with cerebral palsy and refractory epilepsy managed with an implanted VNS who had scoliosis surgery (and subsequent hip surgery) conducted with the use of monopolar cautery. Although VNS manufacturer guidelines suggest that monopolar cautery should be avoided, perioperative care providers should consider its selective use in high-risk instances (with greater risks of morbidity and mortality due to blood loss which outweigh the risk of surgical re-insertion of a VNS) such as cardiac or major orthopedic surgery. Considering the number of patients with VNS devices presenting for major orthopedic surgery is increasing, it is important to have an approach and strategy for perioperative management of VNS devices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [RS], upon reasonable request.

Change history

References

  1. Dalic L, Cook MJ (2016) Managing drug-resistant epilepsy: challenges and solutions. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 12:2605–2616

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Toffa DH, Touma L, El Meskine T et al (2020) Learnings from 30 years of reported efficacy and safety of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for epilepsy treatment: a critical review. Seizure 83:104–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. McMahon R, Morgan SJ, Brooks JT et al (2022) Does the presence of programmable implanted devices in patients with early onset scoliosis alter typical operative and postoperative practices? A survey of spine surgeons. Spine Deform 10:951–964. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00477-w

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ng WH, Donner E, Go C, Rutka JT et al (2010) Revision of vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) electrodes: review and report on use of ultra-sharp monopolar tip. Childs Nervous Syst 26:1081–1084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Yamamoto T (2015) Vagus nerve stimulation therapy: Indications, programing, and outcomes. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 55:. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.ra.2014-0405

  6. Yang J, Phi JH (2019) The present and future of vagus nerve stimulation. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2019.0037

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Jain A, Puvanesarajah V, Menga EN et al (2015) Unplanned hospital readmissions and reoperations after pediatric spinal fusion surgery. Spine 40:856–862. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000857

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sullivan BT, Abousamra O, Puvanesarajah V et al (2019) Deep infections after Pediatric spinal arthrodesis: differences exist with idiopathic, neuromuscular, or genetic and syndromic cause of deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101:2219–2225. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mikhail C, Pennington Z, Arnold PM et al (2020) Minimizing blood loss in spine surgery. Global Spine J 10:71S-83S. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568219868475

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Muraki R, Morita Y, Ida S et al (2022) Comparison of operative outcomes between monopolar and bipolar coagulation in hepatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis in a single center. BMC Gastroenterol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-022-02231-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Studer D, Stieger C, Reichlin CJ et al (2019) Spinal surgery with electrically evoked potential monitoring and monopolar electrocautery: is prior removal of a cochlear implant necessary? Otol Neurotol 40:E7–E13. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002062

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sharma A (2017) Cochlear implants: Should monopolar diathermy be avoided? British Journal of Dermatology. 177:

  13. Jeyakumar A, Wilson M, Sorrel JE et al (2013) Monopolar cautery and adverse effects on cochlear implants. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 139:694–697. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2013.3297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mangar D, Atlas GM, Kane PB (1991) Electrocautery-induced pacemaker malfunction during surgery. Canad J Anaesthesia. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03008198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Heller LI (1990) Surgical electrocautery and the runaway pacemaker syndrome. Pacing Clin Electrophys. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.1990.tb02160.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tien DA, Woodson EA, Anne S (2016) Safety of monopolar electrocautery in patients with cochlear implants. Ann Otology Rhinol Laryngol. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489416646792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jain A, Arora D, Mehta Y (2018) Cardiac surgery in a patient with implanted vagal nerve stimulator. Ann Card Anaesth. https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_108_17

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funds, grants, or other support was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

RS: made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, interpretation of data; MC: made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, interpretation of data; MJMV: made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, interpretation of data; JTR: made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rajendra Sakhrekar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr Mark Camp is a consultant for OrthoPediatrics Inc. and 7D Surgical Inc. (SeaSpine).

Ethics approval

Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of The Hospital for Sick Children. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to participate

Written informed consent was obtained from the parents.

Consent to publish

The participant has consented to the submission of the case report to the journal.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: 1 Affiliations Details for authors Rajendra Sakhrekar and Mark Camp were incorrectly given twice as ‘Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada’ but should have been ‘Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 1X8, Canada’ and ‘Division of Orthopaedics, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto 149 College Street, Room 508-A Toronto, ON M5T 1P5, Canada’. 2 Abstract and Conclusion The incorrect phrase “Although VNS manufacturer guidelines suggest that monopolar cautery should not be avoided” has been corrected to read “Although VNS manufacturer guidelines suggest that monopolar cautery should be avoided”. 3 Minor typographical corrections Missing blank spaces between words have been added at several places in the text.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sakhrekar, R., McVey, M.J., Rutka, J.T. et al. Use of monopolar cautery in patient with a vagal nerve stimulator during neuromuscular scoliosis surgery. Spine Deform 11, 1539–1542 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-023-00705-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-023-00705-x

Keywords

Navigation