In the present study, we evaluated the impact of the positioning of patients on the occurrence of a VAE during neurosurgical operations in the posterior cranial fossa. Over a period of 15 months, we included 137 patients in our study, of which 118 patients underwent surgery in the semi-sitting position and 19 in the supine position. Lindroos et al. have gained extensive experience by having used the semi-sitting position for almost 20 years (14, 17, 26, 31). The semi-sitting position optimizes the operation situation for the surgeon in that it causes a drainage of liquor and blood from the surgical field by gravity, decreases intracranial pressure and enables the monitoring of the motoric response of patients to cranial nerve stimulation (14, 17, 26, 32). In the semi-sitting position, the venous pressure at heart level may be below the atmospheric pressure, which puts patients at a potential risk for rapid air inflow from the surgical field into the venous circulation, i.e., causing a VAE (13). For fear of VAEs, some institutions refuse to use this position (7, 24).
The most frequent indication for surgery in a semi-sitting position was a vestibular schwannoma in this study, which is in accordance with the literature (24). At our institution, we almost exclusively operated on larger schwannomas that reached the fossa posterior (T3) and compressed the brain stem (T4) in the semi-sitting position, since it provides easier access and a total resection is more likely (27). Furthermore, Link et al. showed an increase in the quality of life in patients who underwent a complete resection (15). In our series, the greater spread of the tumor in patients operated in the semi-sitting position explains the prolonged duration of the procedure in these cases.
The position for a neurosurgical procedure depends on the surgeon’s experience and preferred operating technique (28). A metaanalysis of 1792 patients operated in the sitting positions found a low overall complication rate of 1.45% (9). Another institution reported that 192 patients had been operated on the posterior cranial fossa, of which 92 underwent the surgery in the sitting position and 100 in the horizontal position. The operating position had to be changed in 6 patients due to hemodynamic instability or uncontrolled VAE. However, 11% of patients operated in the horizontal position also showed severe VAE (24). The high rate of hemodynamically relevant VAE in that series compared to our data might be explained due to the lower level of the legs in the sitting position compared to the semi-sitting position used in our institution.
In the present study, we monitored all patients by the use of a TEE. In accordance with the literature, 56% of the patients in the semi-sitting position and 11% in the supine position experienced a VAE in the present study (3, 22, 24). So far, the use of a TEE is not the gold standard for monitoring patients undergoing such procedures. Some institutions diagnose VAEs only based on a change in EtCO2 (2, 21); Bithal et al. could not derive any benefits from the use of TEE monitoring either (1). If a TEE is used, VAEs can often be diagnosed before any hemodynamic changes are caused. By applying these techniques, many institutions have reported a decline of severe VAEs in the semi-sitting position (8-10, 14, 22).
In the present study, roughly 25% of the VAEs occurred during the first 30 minutes of the procedure, e.g., a typically critical period for injuries to the venae emissariae or small venous entry points in the skull or musculature. Other authors also detected VAEs at the beginning of their operations, leading them to assume that there is a link between the craniotomy and the VAE (10, 29).
Severe VAEs in the semi-sitting position with hemodynamic and respiratory changes were reported to occur in 3.3% (8) and 1.06% (9), but also in up to 50% (32). The first two incident rates described in retrospective studies, were based on intraoperative documentation. However, in emergency cases, the documentation is usually to be completed afterwards. The 50% of severe VAEs were derived from a prospective study, comparing a 30° and a 45° positioning of the head. In the latter positioning, the head marked the highest point of the patient. In our present study, 6% of all patients had a VAE grade III, defined by a decrease in EtCO2. There was no grade IV VAE, which would include hemodynamic changes. The main reason for the lower rate of a clinically-relevant VAE may be the combination of the patient’s leg elevation combined with the patient’s head bent toward the sternum, which most likely causes a decrease in the venous return to the right heart (32).
In some institutions, patients with a PFO are excluded from the semi-sitting position (10). However, autopsy studies revealed the incidence of a PFO in the general population as high as 35% (16, 18). At our institution, all patients who are preoperatively diagnosed with an intracardial shunt are discussed by a team of experts for their individually best solution. If these patients are still scheduled to have surgery in the semi-sitting position, they are informed of the potential consequences of a VAE, but these patients usually also suffer from larger tumors. However, in the present study, a pre-existing right-left shunt was associated with a lower risk of developing a VAE. This finding may be attributed to the fact that both the anesthesiologist and the neurosurgeon pay particular attention to avoiding any VAE in this specific situation. In addition, our institution has become quite experienced at this operation method over the past ten years by treating around 100 cases each year. To our knowledge, no patient at our institution has ever experienced any persisting damage by developing a VAE in the semi-sitting position. Nevertheless, once there is air in the right atrium in case of a PFO or other right-left shunts, there is no additional warning parameter, which means that any air embolism could lead to potentially deleterious neurological consequences (10, 19, 22). Hence, in our opinion, patients with a PFO or right-left shunt should be informed about this potentially higher risk. However, we do not consider a PFO to be a definite contraindication for the semi-sitting position. Other prospective studies came to similar conclusions (6, 7).
This study demonstrates that VAEs also occur in the supine position. In addition, patients with an existing venous-arterial shunt were less likely to experience a VAE regardless of their positioning, which suggests that the particular attention neurosurgeons and anesthesiologists direct to these patients to avoid VAEs may also have an impact.