No Need for Sternal Fixation in Traumatic Sternovertebral Fractures: Outcomes of a 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: Combined sternal and spinal fractures are rare traumatic injuries and present a high risk of spinal and thoracic wall instability. Limited research has addressed the treatment of sternovertebral injuries and biomechanical need for sternal fixation to achieve spinal healing. Methods: A 10-year retrospective cohort study was conducted, including patients with sternovertebral fractures admitted to our level-1 trauma centre between 2007 and 2016. Patients who died during hospital admission, military patients, patients with isolated upper cervical spine or lower lumbar spine fractures, and patients lost to follow-up were excluded. Results: In 10 years, 73 patients with sternovertebral fractures were included. Mean injury severity score was 24 (range 4-57). Most sternal fractures were located in the sternal body and manubrium. Spinal fractures were type A (52%), B (40%), or C (8%), and were located in the subaxial cervical (21%), upper thoracic (16%), thoracic (21%), thoracolumbar (47%) area; 7 patients had spinal fractures at multiple levels. Fourteen patients (19%) had a neurological deficit. A total of 42 patients received conservative and 31 patients received operative spinal treatment. Two patients (3%) underwent primary sternal fixation. Sternal failure rate was 1% and biomechanical spinal failure rate was 8%, there was no difference in treatment failure between surgical and conservative spinal treatment. Associated thoracic injuries did not influence sternal or spinal treatment outcomes. Conclusions: These findings indicate that conservative sternal treatment in presence of spinal fractures is safe and effective. The low spinal treatment failure rates imply that sternal fixation is not necessary to achieve spinal stability

Current treatment and outcomes of traumatic sternovertebral fractures: a systematic review

Purpose: Combined sternal and spinal fractures are rare traumatic injuries with significant risk of spinal and thoracic wall instability. Controversy remains with regard to treatment strategies and the biomechanical need for sternal fixation to achieve spinal healing. The present study aimed to assess outcomes of sternovertebral fracture treatment. Methods: A systematic review of literature on the treatment of traumatic sternovertebral fractures was conducted. Original studies published after 1990, reporting sternal and spinal healing or stability were included. Studies not reporting treatment outcomes were excluded. Results: Six studies were included in this review, with a total study population of 98 patients: 2 case series, 3 case reports, and 1 retrospective cohort study. 10 per cent of sternal fractures showed displacement. Most spinal fractures were located in the thoracic spine and were AOSpine type A (51%), type B (35%), or type C (14%). 14 per cent of sternal fractures and 49% of spinal fractures were surgically treated. Sternal treatment failure occurred in 5% of patients and biomechanical spinal failure in 8%. There were no differences in treatment failure between conservative and operative treatment. Conclusion: Literature on traumatic sternovertebral fracture treatment is sparse. Findings indicate that in most patients, sternal fixation is not required to achieve sternal and spinal stability. However, results of the current review should be cautiously interpreted, since most included studies were of poor quality

Time to Surgical Treatment for Metastatic Spinal Disease: Identification of Delay Intervals

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Minimizing delays in referral, diagnosis and treatment of patients with symptomatic spinal metastases is important for optimal treatment outcomes. The primary objective of this study was to investigate several forms of delay from the onset of symptoms until surgical treatment of spinal metastases for patients with and without a known preexisting known malignancy. METHODS: All patients receiving surgical treatment for spinal metastases in a single tertiary spine center were identified. Referral patterns were reconstructed and the total delay was divided into 4 categories: patient delay (onset of symptoms until medical consultation), diagnostic delay (medical consultation until diagnosis), referral delay (diagnosis until referral to spine surgeon) and treatment delay (referral spine to surgeon until treatment). These intervals were compared between patients with and without a known preexisting malignancy. RESULTS: The median total delay was 99 days, patient delay 19 days, diagnostic delay 21,5 days, referral delay 7 days, treatment delay 8 days and diagnosis and treatment delay combined 18,5 days. No difference in total delay was observed between patients with and without a known preexisting malignancy. Total delay was not significantly associated with patient age, sex, oncological history, tumor prognosis and spinal level of the tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with symptomatic spinal metastases experience considerable delays, even after metastatic spinal disease has been diagnosed, regardless of a preexisting malignancy. By identifying and eliminating the causes of these delays, diagnosis, referral and treatment may be expedited leading to improved patient outcome

Influence of severity and level of injury on the occurrence of complications during the subacute and chronic stage of traumatic spinal cord injury:a systematic review

Objective: Secondary health conditions (SHCs) are long-term complications that frequently occur due to traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) and can negatively affect quality of life in this patient population. This study provides an overview of the associations between the severity and level of injury and the occurrence of SHCs in tSCI. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Embase that retrieved 44 studies on the influence of severity and/or level of injury on the occurrence of SHCs in the subacute and chronic phase of tSCI (from 3 months after trauma). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Results: In the majority of studies, patients with motor-complete tSCI (American Spinal Injury Association [ASIA] Impairment Scale [AIS] grade A or B) had a significantly increased occurrence of SHCs in comparison to patients with motor-incomplete tSCI (AIS grade C or D), such as respiratory and urogenital complications, musculoskeletal disorders, pressure ulcers, and autonomic dysreflexia. In contrast, an increased prevalence of pain was seen in patients with motor-incomplete injuries. In addition, higher rates of pulmonary infections, spasticity, and autonomic dysreflexia were observed in patients with tetraplegia. Patients with paraplegia more commonly suffered from hypertension, venous thromboembolism, and pain. Conclusions: This review suggests that patients with a motor-complete tSCI have an increased risk of developing SHCs during the subacute and chronic stage of tSCI in comparison with patients with motor-incomplete tSCI. Future studies should examine whether systematic monitoring during rehabilitation and the subacute and chronic phase in patients with motor-complete tSCI could lead to early detection and potential prevention of SHCs in this population

Variation in global treatment for subaxial cervical spine isolated unilateral facet fractures.

PURPOSE To determine the variation in the global treatment practices for subaxial unilateral cervical spine facet fractures based on surgeon experience, practice setting, and surgical subspecialty. METHODS A survey was sent to 272 members of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System Validation Group worldwide. Questions surveyed surgeon preferences with regard to diagnostic work-up and treatment of fracture types F1-F3, according to the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System, with various associated neurologic injuries. RESULTS A total of 161 responses were received. Academic surgeons use the facet portion of the AO Spine classification system less frequently (61.6%) compared to hospital-employed and private practice surgeons (81.1% and 81.8%, respectively) (p = 0.029). The overall consensus was in favor of operative treatment for any facet fracture with radicular symptoms (N2) and for any fractures categorized as F2N2 and above. For F3N0 fractures, significantly less surgeons from Africa/Asia/Middle East (49%) and Europe (59.2%) chose operative treatment than from North/Latin/South America (74.1%) (p = 0.025). For F3N1 fractures, significantly less surgeons from Africa/Asia/Middle East (52%) and Europe (63.3%) recommended operative treatment than from North/Latin/South America (84.5%) (p = 0.001). More than 95% of surgeons included CT in their work-up of facet fractures, regardless of the type. No statistically significant differences were seen in the need for MRI to decide treatment. CONCLUSION Considerable agreement exists between surgeon preferences with regard to unilateral facet fracture management with few exceptions. F2N2 fracture subtypes and subtypes with radiculopathy (N2) appear to be the threshold for operative treatment

Costs Associated With Timely and Delayed Surgical Treatment of Spinal Metastases

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: Symptoms caused by spinal metastases are often difficult to distinguish from symptoms caused by non-malignant spinal disease, complicating timely diagnosis, referral and treatment. The ensuing delays may promote the risk of neurological deficits or severe mechanical instability and consequent emergency surgery, leading to poorer prognosis. Presumably, treatment delay may subsequently lead to more health-care consumption and therefore increased average costs of treatment. Methods: All patients surgically treated for spinal metastases were included in the current study. Based on the presence of alarming symptoms and urgency of the required intervention, patients were categorized as having received timely or delayed treatment. Pre-surgical, in-hospital, aftercare and total costs were analyzed and compared between the 2 groups. Results: In total, 299 patients were included, of which 205 underwent timely and 94 delayed treatment. There was no significant difference in pre-surigcal costs (€3.229,13 in the timely treated group vs. €2.528,70 in the delayed treatment group, p = 0.849). The in-hospital costs (€16.738,49 vs. €13.108,81, p < 0.001) and the aftercare costs (€13.950,37 vs. 3.981,93, p < 0.001) were significantly higher for delayed treatment vs. timely treatment, respectively. The total costs were €33.741,71 for delayed treatment and €20.318,52 for timely treatment (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The total costs for timely treated patients with spinal metastases are significantly lower compared with patients receiving delayed treatment. Investing in the optimization of referral patterns may therefore reduce the overall pretreatment delay and subsequently increase patient outcome, leading to better clinical outcomes at lower costs

Under pressure - A historical vignette on surgical timing in traumatic spinal cord injury

Introduction: It was not even a century ago when a spinal cord injury (SCI) would inevitably result in a fatal outcome, particularly for those with complete SCI. Throughout history, there have been extensive endeavours to change the prospects for SCI patients by performing surgery, even though many believed that there was no way to alter the catastrophic course of SCI. To this day, the debate regarding the efficacy of surgery in improving the neurological outcome for SCI patients persists, along with discussions about the timing of surgical intervention. Research question: How have the historical surgical results shaped our perspective on the surgical treatment of SCI? Material and methods: Narrative literature review. Results: Throughout history there have been multiple surgical attempts to alter the course of SCI, with conflicting results. While studies suggest a potential link between timing of surgery and neurological recovery, the exact impact of immediate surgery on individual cases remains ambiguous. It is becoming more evident that, alongside surgical intervention, factors specific to both the patient and their surgical treatment will significantly influence neurological recovery. Conclusion: Although a growing number of studies indicates a potential correlation of surgical timing and neurological outcome, the precise influence of urgent surgery on an individual basis remains uncertain. It is increasingly apparent that, despite surgery, patient- and treatment-specific factors will also play a role in determining the neurological outcome. Notably, these very factors have influenced the results in previous studies and our views concerning surgical timing