Subaxial Cervical Spine Trauma: Evaluation And Surgical Decision-making.

Study Design Literature review. Objective To discuss the evaluation and management of subaxial cervical spine trauma (C3-7). Methods A literature review of the main imaging modalities, classification systems, and nonsurgical and surgical treatment performed. Results Computed tomography and reconstructions allow for accurate radiologic identification of subaxial cervical spine trauma in most cases. Magnetic resonance imaging can be utilized to evaluate the stabilizing discoligamentous complex, the nerves, and the spinal cord. The Subaxial Injury Classification (SLIC) is a new system that aids in injury classification and helps guide the decision-making process of conservative versus surgical treatment. Though promising, the SLIC system requires further validation. When the decision for surgical treatment is made, early decompression (less than 24 hours) has been associated with better neurologic recovery. Surgical treatment should be individualized based on the injury characteristics and surgeon's preferences. Conclusions The current state of subaxial cervical spine trauma is one of great progress. However, many questions remain unanswered. We need to continue to account for the individual patient, surgeon, and hospital circumstances that effect decision making and care.463-7

Diagnosis, risk factors, and management of sacral and pelvic fractures after instrumented lumbar fusions: a systematic review

To evaluate risk factors, diagnosis, and management of sacral and pelvic fractures (SPFs) after instrumented fusions. A systematic review following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed using the PubMed database. Articles with patients with an SPF after a lumbar instrumented fusion were included. The articles addressing specifically proximal junctional kyphosis were excluded. Eleven small cases series (level of evidence IV) were reviewed. The incidence of SPF was 1.86% in one study. The risk factors reported were elderly patients, multilevel surgery, long fusions stopping at L5 or S1 instead of the ilium, osteoporosis, obesity, and sagittal imbalance. Computed tomography scan was the preferential image modality for diagnosing. Nonsurgical treatment may be used in patients with tolerable pain and nondisplaced fracture. Persistent pain was an indication for surgery, as well as fracture displacement. The most common surgical treatment reported was an extension of the fusion to the iliac using iliac screws. SPFs after lumbar instrumented fusion are rare but clinically meaningful complications. The risk factors, diagnosis, and management of SPFs are described in our review.9554054

Bariatric surgery and low back pain: a systematic literature review

It is estimated that one third of the world population is overweight and 20% of adults have some low back symptoms at some point of their lives. The association of obesity and low back pain and physical deterioration has been well established. We designed this study to evaluate the role of bariatric surgery (BS) for lumbar spine symptoms in obese patients. A systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed database identifying lumbar spine symptoms (pain, functional status, disability index) and/or complications of lumbar spine surgery before and after BS. Study quality was assessed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Ten studies were identified. Nine evaluated the role of BS in low back pain and/or functional status before and after surgery: all reported that bariatric surgery had a positive impact in improving low back pain symptoms and decreasing disability in severely obese patients. One study evaluated the role of posterior lumbar surgery in patients who were obese at the time of surgery and those who had a previous bariatric procedure: bariatric surgery decreased postoperative surgical complications. The level of the evidence was low (III and IV). Bariatric surgery in severely obese patients decreases the intensity of low back symptoms and also decreases disability secondary to back problems. Additionally, bariatric surgery may be advantageous for patients who need a posterior lumbar surgery and are severely obese. Prospective studies with longer follow-up are necessary to confirm this conclusion.10110211

Spinal reconstruction techniques for traumatic spinal injuries: a systematic review of biomechanical studies

Many studies have provided evidence that short-segment posterior fixation (SSPF-1 level above and 1 below) with screws at the fracture level (SFL) are enough to achieve stability in some injury patterns, such as burst fractures, avoiding the need for circumferential reconstruction and long-segment instrumented fusion (LSIF-at least 2 levels above and 2 below). Given the potential benefits of avoiding unnecessary fusion in mobile healthy spinal segments, we performed a systematic review of biomechanical studies comparing different spinal reconstruction techniques for fractures of the thoracolumbar spine. A systematic literature review was performed in the PubMed and OVID databases of biomechanical studies comparing biomechanical differences between techniques of spine reconstructions. Eight studies were included and evaluated. Five of 6 studies reported stiffness improvement with SSPF and SFL, even comparable to circumferential fusion for a burst fracture. Two studies reported that LSPF has higher stiffness and restricts range of motion better than SSPF, but inclusion of screws in the fracture level is similar to LSPF (1 study). Finally, although SSPF is less stiff than anterior reconstruction, adding a SFL in SSPF results in similar stiffness than circumferential fusion for unstable burst fractures. Biomechanical studies analyzed generally suggested that SFL in SSPF may improve construction stiffness, and can even be compared with long-segment fixation or circumferential reconstruction in some scenarios. This construct option may be used to enhance stiffness in selected injury patterns, avoiding the needs of an additional anterior approach.9333834

Basilar invagination: surgical results

Basilar invagination (BI) is a congenital craniocervical junction (CCJ) anomaly represented by a prolapsed spine into the skull-base that can result in severe neurological impairment. In this paper, we retrospective evaluate the surgical treatment of 26 patients surgically treated for symptomatic BI. BI was classified according to instability and neural abnormalities findings. Clinical outcome was evaluated using the Nürick grade system. A total of 26 patients were included in this paper. Their age ranged from 15 to 67 years old (mean 38). Of which, 10 patients were male (38%) and 16 (62%) were female. All patients had some degree of tonsillar herniation, with 25 patients treated with foramen magnum decompression. Nine patients required a craniocervical fixation. Six patients had undergone prior surgery and required a new surgical procedure for progression of neurological symptoms associated with new compression or instability. Most of patients with neurological symptoms secondary to brainstem compression had some improvement during the follow-up. There was mortality in this series, 1 month after surgery, associated with a late removal of the tracheal cannula. Management of BI requires can provide improvements in neurological outcomes, but requires analysis of the neural and bony anatomy of the CCJ, as well as occult instability. The complexity and heterogeneous presentation requires attention to occult instability on examination and attention to airway problems secondary to concomitant facial malformations.Basilar invagination (BI) is a congenital craniocervical junction (CCJ) anomaly represented by a prolapsed spine into the skull-base that can result in severe neurological impairment. Materials and Methods: In this paper, we retrospective evaluate the sur527884sem informaçãosem informaçã

Avaliação do SLICS no tratamento das lesões da coluna cervical sub-axial

The SLICS (Sub-axial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System) was proposed to help in the decision-making of sub-axial cervical spine trauma (SCST), even though the literature assessing its safety and efficacy is scarce. Method: We compared a cohort series of patients surgically treated based on surgeon's preference with patients treated based on the SLICS. Results: From 2009-10, 12 patients were included. The SLICS score ranged from 2 to 9 points (mean of 5.5). Two patients had the SLICS < 4 points. From 2011-13, 28 patients were included. The SLICS score ranged from 4 to 9 points (mean of 6). There was no neurological deterioration in any group. Conclusion: After using the SLICS there was a decrease in the number of patients with less severe injuries that were treated surgically. This suggests that the SLICS can be helpful in differentiating mild from severe injuries, potentially improving the results of treatment.The SLICS (Sub-axial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System) was proposed to help in the decision-making of sub-axial cervical spine trauma (SCST), even though the literature assessing its safety and efficacy is scarce. Method: We compared a cohort s735445449sem informaçãosem informaçãoO SLICS (Sub-axial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System) foi proposto para auxílio na tomada de decisão no tratamento do traumatismo da coluna cervical sub-axial. Contudo, existem poucos trabalhos que avaliem sua segurança e eficácia. Método: Rea

Thoracolumbar injury classification and injury severity score system: a literature review of its safety

Study Design Systematic literature review. Objective The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score System (TLICS) is widely used to help guide the treatment of thoracolumbar spine trauma. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of the TLICS in clinical practice. Methods Using the Medline database without time restriction, we performed a systematic review using the keyword Thoracolumbar Injury Classification, searching for articles utilizing the TLICS. We classified the results according to their level of evidence and main conclusions. Results Nine articles met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. One article evaluated the safety of the TLICS based on its clinical application (level II). The eight remaining articles were based on retrospective application of the score, comparing the proposed treatment suggested by the TLICS with the treatment patients actually received (level III). The TLICS was safe in surgical and nonsurgical treatment with regards to neurologic status. Some studies reported that the retrospective application of the TLICS had inconsistencies with the treatment of burst fractures without neurologic deficits. Conclusions This literature review suggested that the TLICS use was safe especially with regards to preservation or improvement of neurologic function. Further well-designed multicenter prospective studies of the TLICS application in the decision making process would improve the evidence of its safety. Special attention to the TLICS application in the treatment of stable burst fractures is necessary.The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score System (TLICS) is widely used to help guide the treatment of thoracolumbar spine trauma. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of the TLICS in clinical practice. Methods Using the Me618085sem informaçãosem informaçã

Incidence Of Basilar Invagination In Patients With Tonsillar Herniation? A Case Control Craniometrical Study.

A retrospective case-control study based on craniometrical evaluation was performed to evaluate the incidence of basilar invagination (BI). Patients with symptomatic tonsillar herniation treated surgically had craniometrical parameters evaluated based on CT scan reconstructions before surgery. BI was diagnosed when the tip of the odontoid trespassed the Chamberlain's line in three different thresholds found in the literature: 2, 5 or 6.6 mm. In the surgical group (SU), the mean distance of the tip of the odontoid process above the Chamberlain's line was 12 mm versus 1.2 mm in the control (CO) group (p<0.0001). The number of patients with BI according to the threshold used (2, 5 or 6.6 mm) in the SU group was respectively 19 (95%), 16 (80%) and 15 (75%) and in the CO group it was 15 (37%), 4 (10%) and 2 (5%).72706-1