Les myélopathies cervicarthrosiques : résultat clinique et radiologique de la chirurgie sur une série de 135 patients opérés au service de neurochirurgie CHU Avicenne

La myélopathie cervicarthrosique est un syndrome clinique en relation avec la diminution des dimensions du canal rachidien, la cervicarthrose est l'étiologie principale après 50 ans. L'objectif du traitement est de rétablir les dimensions du canal rachidien cervical. Le choix de la technique chirurgicale sera guidé par  l'analyse des signes cliniques, imageries, pré opératoire en fonction de laquelle sera pratiquée soit la voie antérieure, postérieure, ou exceptionnellement la voie  combinée. Notre étude a pour but dans un premier temps d'évaluer à long terme les résultats cliniques et radiologiques de la chirurgie ensuite répondre à cette  préoccupation : La lordose cervicale pré  opératoire et postopératoire sont t-elles des facteurs de bon pronostic ? Nous rapportons une étude  rétrospective entre  2000 et 2013 portant sur 135 patients opérés dans notre formation et  emplissant les critères inclusions. La collecte des données s'est faite en s'aidant du dossier  médical des patients  (échelle d'Association des orthopédistes Japonais), Imagerie (Radio, TDM, IRM), mesure de l'angle de courbure rachidienne en pré et  postopératoire, ceci dans le but d'évaluer à long terme les résultats clinique et radiologique de la chirurgie. Ont été inclus dans notre étude 135 patients, 82  Hommes (60%), 53 femmes (40%) avec un âge moyen de 52 ans, ayant consulté pour des motifs divers (Névralgies cervicobrachiales, lourdeur des membres,  troubles génito-sphinctériens). Soixante cinq patients (48%) ont bénéficié d'un abord antérieur (dissectomie, cloward, somatotomie médiane), 64 patients (47%)  ont été opérés par voie postérieure (laminectomie de 1 à 3 niveaux) et 6 patients (5%) ont bénéficié d'un  abord combiné dans un délai moyen de 3 mois devant la  persistance des symptômes. Le niveau cervical le plus touché était C5C6 suivie de C4C5. L'évolution globale de nos patients était favorable dans 58% des cas,  stationnaire dans 41% des cas et 1% d'aggravation. Soixante patients ayant présentés une amélioration en postopératoire avaient une courbure rachidienne en  lordose, contre 17 patients en raideur et aucun patient en cyphose (p<0.05). En définitive, la myélopathie est une pathologie fréquente dans la pratique  neurochirurgicale, le diagnostic s'est beaucoup amélioré grâce à l'avènement de IRM, plusieurs voies d'abords sont utilisées en fonction des données cliniques et  d'imageries, l'évolution reste favorable si la prise en charge est précoce avant l'apparition des déformations importantes de l'alignement sagittal du rachis.Key words: Myélopathie, cervicarthrose, chirurgie, lordose cervicale, évolutio

Promotion of a neurosurgical academic journal on social media: a 1-year experience

BACKGROUND Social media (SoMe) use, in all of its forms, has seen massively increased throughout the past two decades, including academic publishing. Many journals have established a SoMe presence, yet the influence of promotion of scientific publications on their visibility and impact remains poorly studied. The European Journal of Neurosurgery «Acta Neurochirurgica» has established its SoMe presence in form of a Twitter account that regularly promotes its publications. We aim to analyze the impact of this initial SoMe campaign on various alternative metrics (altmetrics). METHODS A retrospective analysis of all articles published in the journal Acta Neurochirurgica between May 1st, 2018, and April 30th, 2020, was performed. These articles were divided into a historical control group - containing the articles published between May 1st, 2018, and April 30th, 2019, when the SoMe campaign was not yet established - and into an intervention group. Several altmetrics were analyzed, along with website visits and PDF downloads per month. RESULTS In total, 784 articles published during the study period, 128 (16.3%) were promoted via Twitter. During the promotion period, 29.7% of published articles were promoted. Overall, the published articles reached a mean of 31.3 ± 50.5 website visits and 17.5 ± 31.25 PDF downloads per month. Comparing the two study periods, no statistically significant differences in website visits (26.91 ± 32.87 vs. 34.90 ± 61.08, p = 0.189) and PDF downloads (17.52 ± 31.25 vs. 15.33 ± 16.07, p = 0.276) were detected. However, overall compared to non-promoted articles, promoted articles were visited (48.9 ± 95.0 vs. 29.0 ± 37.0, p = 0.005) and downloaded significantly more (25.7 ± 66.7 vs. 16.6 ± 18.0, p = 0.045) when compared to those who were not promoted during the promotion period. CONCLUSIONS We report a 1-year initial experience with promotion of a general neurosurgical journal on Twitter. Our data suggest a clear benefit of promotion on article site visits and article downloads, although no single responsible element could be determined in terms of altmetrics. The impact of SoMe promotion on other metrics, including traditional bibliometrics such as citations and journal impact factor, remains to be determined

Neurosurgeons’ experiences of conducting and disseminating clinical research in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol

Low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) face the greatest burden of neurotrauma. However, most of the research published in scientific journals originates from high-income countries, suggesting those in LMICs are either not engaging in research or are not publishing it. Evidence originating in high-income countries may not be generalisable to LMICs; therefore, it is important to nurture research capacity in LMICs so that a relevant evidence base can be developed. However, little is published about specific challenges or contextual issues relevant to increasing research activity of neurosurgeons in LMICs. Therefore, the aim of this study was to understand neurosurgeons’ experiences of, aspirations for and ability to conduct and disseminate clinical research in LMICs.Methods and analysisThis is a pragmatic qualitative study situated within the naturalistic paradigm using focus groups and interviews with a purposive sample of neurosurgeons from LMICs. First, we will conduct asynchronous online focus groups with 36 neurosurgeons to broadly explore issues relevant to the study aim. Second, we will select 20 participants for follow-up semistructured interviews to explore concepts in more depth and detail than could be achieved in the focus group. Interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis will be conducted following Braun and Clarke’s six stages and will be supported by NVIVO software.Ethics and disseminationThe University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee reviewed this study and provided a favourable opinion in January 2020 (REF PRE.2020.006). Participants will provide informed consent, be able to withdraw at any time and will have their contributions kept confidential. The findings of the study will be shared with relevant stakeholders and disseminated in conference presentations and journal publications.</jats:sec

Neurosurgeons' experiences of conducting and disseminating clinical research in low-income and middle-income countries: a reflexive thematic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Low-income and-middle-income countries (LMICs) are increasing investment in research and development, yet there remains a paucity of neurotrauma research published by those in LMICs. The aim of this study was to understand neurosurgeons' experiences of, aspirations for, and ability to conduct and disseminate clinical research in LMICs. DESIGN: This was a two-stage inductive qualitative study situated within the naturalistic paradigm. This study committed to an interpretivist way of knowing (epistemology), and considered reality subjective and multiple (ontology). Data collection used online methods and included a web-based survey tool for demographic data, an asynchronous online focus group and follow-up semistructured interviews. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's Reflexive Thematic Analysis supported by NVivo V.12. SETTING: LMICs. PARTICIPANTS: In April-July 2020, 26 neurosurgeons from 11 LMICs participated in this study (n=24 in the focus groups, n=20 in follow-up interviews). RESULTS: The analysis gave rise to five themes: The local landscape; creating capacity; reach and impact; collaborative inquiry; growth and sustainability. Each theme contained an inhibitor and stimulus to neurosurgeons conducting and disseminating clinical research, interpreted as 'the neurosurgical research potential in LMICs'. Mentorship, education, infrastructure, impact and engagement were identified as specific accelerators. Whereas lack of generalisability, absence of dissemination and dissemination without peer review may desensitise the impact of research conducted by neurosurgeons. CONCLUSION: The geographical, political and population complexities make research endeavour challenging for neurosurgeons in LMICs. Yet in spite of, and because of, these complexities LMICs provide rich opportunities to advance global neurosurgery. More studies are required to evaluate the specific effects of accelerators of research conducted by neurosurgeons and to understand the effects of desensitisers on high-quality, high-impact clinical research

Decompressive craniotomy: an international survey of practice.

Funder: National Institute for Health Research; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272Funder: University of Cambridge and the Royal College of Surgeons of EnglandBACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke have devastating consequences and are major global public health issues. For patients that require a cerebral decompression after suffering a TBI or stroke, a decompressive craniectomy (DC) is the most commonly performed operation. However, retrospective non-randomized studies suggest that a decompressive craniotomy (DCO; also known as hinge or floating craniotomy), where a bone flap is replaced but not rigidly fixed, has comparable outcomes to DC. The primary aim of this project was to understand the current extent of usage of DC and DCO for TBI and stroke worldwide. METHOD: A questionnaire was designed and disseminated globally via emailing lists and social media to practicing neurosurgeons between June and November 2019. RESULTS: We received 208 responses from 60 countries [40 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)]. DC is used more frequently than DCO, however, about one-quarter of respondents are using a DCO in more than 25% of their patients. The three top indications for a DCO were an acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and a GCS of 9-12, ASDH with contusions and a GCS of 3-8, and ASDH with contusions and a GCS of 9-12. There were 8 DCO techniques used with the majority (60/125) loosely tying sutures to the bone flap. The majority (82%) stated that they were interested in collaborating on a randomized trial of DCO vs. DC. CONCLUSION: Our results show that DCO is a procedure carried out for TBI and stroke, especially in LMICs, and most commonly for an ASDH. The majority of the respondents were interested in collaborating on a is a future randomized trial

Needs of Young African Neurosurgeons and Residents: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Introduction: Africa has many untreated neurosurgical cases due to limited access to safe, affordable, and timely care. In this study, we surveyed young African neurosurgeons and trainees to identify challenges to training and practice. Methods: African trainees and residents were surveyed online by the Young Neurosurgeons Forum from April 25th to November 30th, 2018. The survey link was distributed via social media platforms and through professional society mailing lists. Univariate and bivariate data analyses were run and a P-value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results: 112 respondents from 20 countries participated in this study. 98 (87.5%) were male, 63 (56.3%) were from sub-Saharan Africa, and 52 (46.4%) were residents. 39 (34.8%) had regular journal club sessions at their hospital, 100 (89.3%) did not have access to cadaver dissection labs, and 62 (55.4%) had never attended a WFNS-endorsed conference. 67.0% of respondents reported limited research opportunities and 58.9% reported limited education opportunities. Lack of mentorship (P = 0.023, Phi = 0.26), lack of access to journals (P = 0.002, Phi = 0.332), and limited access to conferences (P = 0.019, Phi = 0.369) were associated with the country income category. Conclusion: This survey identified barriers to education, research, and practice among African trainees and young neurosurgeons. The findings of this study should inform future initiatives aimed at reducing the barriers faced by this group

Neurosurgeons’ experiences of conducting and disseminating clinical research in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol

Low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) face the greatest burden of neurotrauma. However, most of the research published in scientific journals originates from high-income countries, suggesting those in LMICs are either not engaging in research or are not publishing it. Evidence originating in high-income countries may not be generalisable to LMICs; therefore, it is important to nurture research capacity in LMICs so that a relevant evidence base can be developed. However, little is published about specific challenges or contextual issues relevant to increasing research activity of neurosurgeons in LMICs. Therefore, the aim of this study was to understand neurosurgeons’ experiences of, aspirations for and ability to conduct and disseminate clinical research in LMICs.Methods and analysisThis is a pragmatic qualitative study situated within the naturalistic paradigm using focus groups and interviews with a purposive sample of neurosurgeons from LMICs. First, we will conduct asynchronous online focus groups with 36 neurosurgeons to broadly explore issues relevant to the study aim. Second, we will select 20 participants for follow-up semistructured interviews to explore concepts in more depth and detail than could be achieved in the focus group. Interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis will be conducted following Braun and Clarke’s six stages and will be supported by NVIVO software.Ethics and disseminationThe University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee reviewed this study and provided a favourable opinion in January 2020 (REF PRE.2020.006). Participants will provide informed consent, be able to withdraw at any time and will have their contributions kept confidential. The findings of the study will be shared with relevant stakeholders and disseminated in conference presentations and journal publications.</jats:sec

Promotion of a neurosurgical academic journal on social media: a 1-year experience

Acknowledgements: The authors sincerely thank Diana Epstein for her enduring support, and Bianca Battilana for her aid in preparing the dataset.Funder: University of ZurichBackground: Social media (SoMe) use, in all of its forms, has seen massively increased throughout the past two decades, including academic publishing. Many journals have established a SoMe presence, yet the influence of promotion of scientific publications on their visibility and impact remains poorly studied. The European Journal of Neurosurgery «Acta Neurochirurgica» has established its SoMe presence in form of a Twitter account that regularly promotes its publications. We aim to analyze the impact of this initial SoMe campaign on various alternative metrics (altmetrics). Methods: A retrospective analysis of all articles published in the journal Acta Neurochirurgica between May 1st, 2018, and April 30th, 2020, was performed. These articles were divided into a historical control group — containing the articles published between May 1st, 2018, and April 30th, 2019, when the SoMe campaign was not yet established — and into an intervention group. Several altmetrics were analyzed, along with website visits and PDF downloads per month. Results: In total, 784 articles published during the study period, 128 (16.3%) were promoted via Twitter. During the promotion period, 29.7% of published articles were promoted. Overall, the published articles reached a mean of 31.3 ± 50.5 website visits and 17.5 ± 31.25 PDF downloads per month. Comparing the two study periods, no statistically significant differences in website visits (26.91 ± 32.87 vs. 34.90 ± 61.08, p = 0.189) and PDF downloads (17.52 ± 31.25 vs. 15.33 ± 16.07, p = 0.276) were detected. However, overall compared to non-promoted articles, promoted articles were visited (48.9 ± 95.0 vs. 29.0 ± 37.0, p = 0.005) and downloaded significantly more (25.7 ± 66.7 vs. 16.6 ± 18.0, p = 0.045) when compared to those who were not promoted during the promotion period. Conclusions: We report a 1-year initial experience with promotion of a general neurosurgical journal on Twitter. Our data suggest a clear benefit of promotion on article site visits and article downloads, although no single responsible element could be determined in terms of altmetrics. The impact of SoMe promotion on other metrics, including traditional bibliometrics such as citations and journal impact factor, remains to be determined

Promotion of a neurosurgical academic journal on social media: a 1-year experience.

Acknowledgements: The authors sincerely thank Diana Epstein for her enduring support, and Bianca Battilana for her aid in preparing the dataset.Funder: University of ZurichBACKGROUND: Social media (SoMe) use, in all of its forms, has seen massively increased throughout the past two decades, including academic publishing. Many journals have established a SoMe presence, yet the influence of promotion of scientific publications on their visibility and impact remains poorly studied. The European Journal of Neurosurgery «Acta Neurochirurgica» has established its SoMe presence in form of a Twitter account that regularly promotes its publications. We aim to analyze the impact of this initial SoMe campaign on various alternative metrics (altmetrics). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all articles published in the journal Acta Neurochirurgica between May 1st, 2018, and April 30th, 2020, was performed. These articles were divided into a historical control group - containing the articles published between May 1st, 2018, and April 30th, 2019, when the SoMe campaign was not yet established - and into an intervention group. Several altmetrics were analyzed, along with website visits and PDF downloads per month. RESULTS: In total, 784 articles published during the study period, 128 (16.3%) were promoted via Twitter. During the promotion period, 29.7% of published articles were promoted. Overall, the published articles reached a mean of 31.3 ± 50.5 website visits and 17.5 ± 31.25 PDF downloads per month. Comparing the two study periods, no statistically significant differences in website visits (26.91 ± 32.87 vs. 34.90 ± 61.08, p = 0.189) and PDF downloads (17.52 ± 31.25 vs. 15.33 ± 16.07, p = 0.276) were detected. However, overall compared to non-promoted articles, promoted articles were visited (48.9 ± 95.0 vs. 29.0 ± 37.0, p = 0.005) and downloaded significantly more (25.7 ± 66.7 vs. 16.6 ± 18.0, p = 0.045) when compared to those who were not promoted during the promotion period. CONCLUSIONS: We report a 1-year initial experience with promotion of a general neurosurgical journal on Twitter. Our data suggest a clear benefit of promotion on article site visits and article downloads, although no single responsible element could be determined in terms of altmetrics. The impact of SoMe promotion on other metrics, including traditional bibliometrics such as citations and journal impact factor, remains to be determined