Route to diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy in a UK healthcare system: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) presents insidiously, making initial diagnosis challenging. Surgery has been shown to prevent further disability but existing spinal cord damage may be permanent. Delays in surgery lead to increased disability and reduced postoperative improvements. Therefore, rapid surgical assessment is key to improving patient outcomes. Unfortunately, diagnosis of DCM in primary care is often delayed. This study aimed to characterise patients with DCM route to diagnosis and surgical assessment as well as to plot disease progression over time. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational cohort study. SETTING: Single, tertiary centre using additional clinical records from primary and secondary care centres. PARTICIPANTS: One year of cervical MRI scans conducted at a tertiary neurosciences centre (n=1123) were screened for cervical cord compression, a corresponding clinical diagnosis of myelopathy and sufficient clinical documentation to plot a route to diagnosis (n=43). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to diagnosis from symptom onset, route to diagnosis and disease progression were the primary outcome measures in this study. Disease severity was approximated using a prospectively validated method for inferring modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (i-mJOA) functional scoring from clinical documentation. RESULTS: Patients received a referral to secondary care 6.4±7.7 months after symptom onset. Cervical MRI scanning and neurosurgical review occurred 12.5±13.0 and 15.8±13.5 months after symptom onset, respectively. i-mJOA was 16.0±1.7 at primary care assessment and 14.8±2.5 at surgical assessment. 61.0% of patients were offered operations. For those who received surgery, time between onset and surgery was 22.1±13.2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Route to surgical assessment was heterogeneous and lengthy. Some patients deteriorated during this period. This study highlights the need for a streamlined pathway by which patients with cervical cord compression can receive timely assessment and treatment by a specialist. This would improve outcomes for patients using existing treatments.Research in the senior author’s laboratory is supported by a core support grant from the Wellcome Trust and MRC to the Wellcome Trust-Medical Research Council Cambridge Stem Cell Institute. MRNK is supported by a NIHR Clinician Scientist Award. Disclaimer: This report is independent research arising from a Clinician Scientist Award, CS-2015-15-023, supported by the National Institute for Health Research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health

Cord compression defined by MRI is the driving factor behind the decision to operate in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy despite poor correlation with disease severity.

OBJECTIVES:The mainstay treatment for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) is surgical decompression. Not all cases, however, are suitable for surgery. Recent international guidelines advise surgery for moderate to severe disease as well as progressive mild disease. The goal of this study was to examine the factors in current practice that drive the decision to operate in DCM. STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. METHODS:1 year of cervical spine MRI scans (N = 1123) were reviewed to identify patients with DCM with sufficient clinical documentation (N = 39). Variables at surgical assessment were recorded: age, sex, clinical signs and symptoms of DCM, disease severity, and quantitative MRI measures of cord compression. Bivariate correlations were used to compare each variable with the decision to offer the patient an operation. Subsequent multivariable analysis incorporated all significant bivariate correlations. RESULTS:Of the 39 patients identified, 25 (64%) were offered an operation. The decision to operate was significantly associated with narrower non-pathological canal and cord diameters as well as cord compression ratio, explaining 50% of the variance. In a multivariable model, only cord compression ratio was significant (p = 0.017). Examination findings, symptoms, functional disability, disease severity, disease progression, and demographic factors were all non-significant. CONCLUSIONS:Cord compression emerged as the main factor in surgical decision-making prior to the publication of recent guidelines. Newly identified predictors of post-operative outcome were not significantly associated with decision to operate

Establishing Diagnostic Criteria for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [AO Spine RECODE-DCM Research Priority Number 3].

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. OBJECTIVES: To discuss the importance of establishing diagnostic criteria in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM), including factors that must be taken into account and challenges that must be overcome in this process. METHODS: Literature review summarising current evidence of establishing diagnostic criteria for DCM. RESULTS: Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) is characterised by a degenerative process of the cervical spine resulting in chronic spinal cord dysfunction and subsequent neurological disability. Diagnostic delays lead to progressive neurological decline with associated reduction in quality of life for patients. Surgical decompression may halt neurologic worsening and, in many cases, improves function. Therefore, making a prompt diagnosis of DCM in order to facilitate early surgical intervention is a clinical priority in DCM. CONCLUSION: There are often extensive delays in the diagnosis of DCM. Presently, no single set of diagnostic criteria exists for DCM, making it challenging for clinicians to make the diagnosis. Earlier diagnosis and subsequent specialist referral could lead to improved patient outcomes using existing treatment modalities

Establishing Diagnostic Criteria for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [AO Spine RECODE-DCM Research Priority Number 3].

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. OBJECTIVES: To discuss the importance of establishing diagnostic criteria in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM), including factors that must be taken into account and challenges that must be overcome in this process. METHODS: Literature review summarising current evidence of establishing diagnostic criteria for DCM. RESULTS: Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) is characterised by a degenerative process of the cervical spine resulting in chronic spinal cord dysfunction and subsequent neurological disability. Diagnostic delays lead to progressive neurological decline with associated reduction in quality of life for patients. Surgical decompression may halt neurologic worsening and, in many cases, improves function. Therefore, making a prompt diagnosis of DCM in order to facilitate early surgical intervention is a clinical priority in DCM. CONCLUSION: There are often extensive delays in the diagnosis of DCM. Presently, no single set of diagnostic criteria exists for DCM, making it challenging for clinicians to make the diagnosis. Earlier diagnosis and subsequent specialist referral could lead to improved patient outcomes using existing treatment modalities

A comparison of radiological descriptions of spinal cord compression with quantitative measures, and their role in non-specialist clinical management.

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is gold-standard for investigating Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM), a disabling disease triggered by compression of the spinal cord following degenerative changes of adjacent structures. Quantifiable compression correlates poorly with disease and language describing compression in radiological reports is un-standardised. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. OBJECTIVES: 1) Identify terminology in radiological reporting of cord compression and elucidate relationships between language and quantitative measures 2) Evaluate language's ability to distinguish myelopathic from asymptomatic compression 3) Explore correlations between quantitative or qualitative features and symptom severity 4) Investigate the influence of quantitative and qualitative measures on surgical referrals. METHODS: From all cervical spine MRIs conducted during one year at a tertiary centre (N = 1123), 166 patients had reported cord compression. For each spinal level deemed compressed by radiologists (N = 218), four quantitative measurements were calculated: 'Maximum Canal Compromise (MCC); 'Maximum Spinal Cord Compression' (MSCC); 'Spinal Canal Occupation Ratio' (SCOR) and 'Compression Ratio' (CR). These were compared to associated radiological reporting terminology. RESULTS: 1) Terminology in radiological reports was varied. Objective measures of compromise correlated poorly with language. "Compressed" was used for more severe cord compromise as measured by MCC (p<0.001), MSCC (p<0.001), and CR (p = 0.002). 2) Greater compromise was seen in cords with a myelopathy diagnosis across MCC (p<0.001); MSCC (p = 0.002) and CR (p<0.001). "Compress" (p<0.001) and "Flatten" (p<0.001) were used more commonly for myelopathy-diagnosis levels. 3) Measurements of cord compromise (MCC: p = 0.304; MSCC: p = 0.217; SCOR: p = 0.503; CR: p = 0.256) and descriptive terms (p = 0.591) did not correlate with i-mJOA score. 4) The only variables affecting spinal surgery referral were increased MSCC (p = 0.001) and use of 'Compressed' (p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Radiological reporting in DCM is variable and language is not fully predictive of the degree of quantitative cord compression. Additionally, terminology may influence surgical referrals.Welcome Trust NIH

Assessment of degenerative cervical myelopathy differs between specialists and may influence time to diagnosis and clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION:Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [DCM] often presents with non-specific symptoms and signs. It progresses insidiously and leads to permanent neurological dysfunction. Decompressive surgery can halt disease progression, however significant delays in diagnosis result in increased disability and limit recovery. The nature of early DCM symptoms is unknown, moreover it has been suggested incomplete examination contributes to missed diagnosis. This study examines how DCM is currently assessed, if assessment differs between stages of healthcare, and whether this influences patient management. STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. METHODS:Cervical MRI scans (N = 1123) at a tertiary neurosciences center, over a single year, were screened for patients with DCM (N = 43). Signs, symptoms, and disease severity of DCM were extracted from patient records. Patients were considered at 3 phases of clinical assessment: primary care, secondary care, and surgical assessment. RESULTS:Upper limb paraesthesia and urinary dysfunction were consistently the most and least prevalent symptoms respectively. Differences between assessing clinicians were present in the reporting of: limb pain (p<0.005), objective limb weakness (p = 0.01), hyperreflexia (p<0.005), Hoffmann reflex (p<0.005), extensor plantar reflex (p = 0.007), and lower limb spasticity (p<0.005). Pathological reflexes were least frequently assessed by primary care doctors. CONCLUSION:DCM assessment varies significantly between assessors. Reporting of key features of DCM is especially low in primary care. Incomplete assessment may hinder early diagnosis and referral to spinal surgery

Assessment of degenerative cervical myelopathy differs between specialists and may influence time to diagnosis and clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [DCM] often presents with non-specific symptoms and signs. It progresses insidiously and leads to permanent neurological dysfunction. Decompressive surgery can halt disease progression, however significant delays in diagnosis result in increased disability and limit recovery. The nature of early DCM symptoms is unknown, moreover it has been suggested incomplete examination contributes to missed diagnosis. This study examines how DCM is currently assessed, if assessment differs between stages of healthcare, and whether this influences patient management. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Cervical MRI scans (N = 1123) at a tertiary neurosciences center, over a single year, were screened for patients with DCM (N = 43). Signs, symptoms, and disease severity of DCM were extracted from patient records. Patients were considered at 3 phases of clinical assessment: primary care, secondary care, and surgical assessment. RESULTS: Upper limb paraesthesia and urinary dysfunction were consistently the most and least prevalent symptoms respectively. Differences between assessing clinicians were present in the reporting of: limb pain (p<0.005), objective limb weakness (p = 0.01), hyperreflexia (p<0.005), Hoffmann reflex (p<0.005), extensor plantar reflex (p = 0.007), and lower limb spasticity (p<0.005). Pathological reflexes were least frequently assessed by primary care doctors. CONCLUSION: DCM assessment varies significantly between assessors. Reporting of key features of DCM is especially low in primary care. Incomplete assessment may hinder early diagnosis and referral to spinal surgery

Cord compression defined by MRI is the driving factor behind the decision to operate in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy despite poor correlation with disease severity.

OBJECTIVES:The mainstay treatment for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) is surgical decompression. Not all cases, however, are suitable for surgery. Recent international guidelines advise surgery for moderate to severe disease as well as progressive mild disease. The goal of this study was to examine the factors in current practice that drive the decision to operate in DCM. STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. METHODS:1 year of cervical spine MRI scans (N = 1123) were reviewed to identify patients with DCM with sufficient clinical documentation (N = 39). Variables at surgical assessment were recorded: age, sex, clinical signs and symptoms of DCM, disease severity, and quantitative MRI measures of cord compression. Bivariate correlations were used to compare each variable with the decision to offer the patient an operation. Subsequent multivariable analysis incorporated all significant bivariate correlations. RESULTS:Of the 39 patients identified, 25 (64%) were offered an operation. The decision to operate was significantly associated with narrower non-pathological canal and cord diameters as well as cord compression ratio, explaining 50% of the variance. In a multivariable model, only cord compression ratio was significant (p = 0.017). Examination findings, symptoms, functional disability, disease severity, disease progression, and demographic factors were all non-significant. CONCLUSIONS:Cord compression emerged as the main factor in surgical decision-making prior to the publication of recent guidelines. Newly identified predictors of post-operative outcome were not significantly associated with decision to operate