Spinal infection: state of the art and management algorithm

Spinal infection is a rare pathology although a concerning rising incidence has been observed in recent years. This increase might reflect a progressively more susceptible population but also the availability of increased diagnostic accuracy. Yet, even with improved diagnosis tools and procedures, the delay in diagnosis remains an important issue. This review aims to highlight the importance of a methodological attitude towards accurate and prompt diagnosis using an algorithm to aid on spinal infection management. METHODS: Appropriate literature on spinal infection was selected using databases from the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. RESULTS: Literature reveals that histopathological analysis of infected tissues is a paramount for diagnosis and must be performed routinely. Antibiotic therapy is transversal to both conservative and surgical approaches and must be initiated after etiological diagnosis. Indications for surgical treatment include neurological deficits or sepsis, spine instability and/or deformity, presence of epidural abscess and upon failure of conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A methodological assessment could lead to diagnosis effectiveness of spinal infection. Towards this, we present a management algorithm based on literature findings

Septic hematogenous lumbar spondylodiscitis in elderly patients with multiple risk factors: efficacy of posterior stabilization and interbody fusion with iliac crest bone graft

The conservative and operative treatment strategies of hematogenous spondylodiscitis in septic patients with multiple risk factors are controversial. The present series demonstrates the outcome of 18 elderly patients (median age, 72 years) with septic hematogenous spondylodiscitis and intraspinal abscess treated with microsurgical decompression and debridement of the infective tissue, followed by posterior stabilization and interbody fusion with iliac crest bone graft in one or two lumbar segments. The majority of the patients were unsuccessfully treated with intravenous antibiotics prior to the operation. Antibiotic therapy was continued for more than 6 weeks postoperatively. Morbidity and early mortality amounted to 50 and 17%, respectively. Three patients died in the hospital from internal complications after an initial postoperative improvement of the inflammatory clinical signs and laboratory parameters. Fifteen patients recovered from the spinal infection. Three of them died several months after discharge (cerebral hemorrhage, malignancy and unknown cause). Twelve patients had excellent or good outcomes during the follow-up period of at least 1 year. The series shows that operative decompression and eradication of the intraspinal and intervertebral infective tissue with fusion and stabilization via a posterior approach is possible in septic patients with multiple risk factors and leads to good results in those patients, who survive the initial severe stage of the septic disease. However, the morbidity and mortality suggest that this surgical treatment is not the therapy of first choice in high-risk septic patients, but may be considered in patients when conservative management has failed

Treatment modality in type II odontoid fractures defines the outcome in elderly patients

BACKGROUND: Odontoid fractures account for approximately 20% of all fractures of the cervical spine. They represent the most common cervical spine injury for patients older than 70 years, the majority being type II fractures (65-74%), which are considered to be relatively unstable. The management of these fractures is controversial. Possible treatment options are either conservative or surgical. Surgical procedures include either anterior screw fixation of the odontoid or posterior C1/C2 fusion. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of the three treatment modalities in elderly patients. METHODS: Between June 2004 and February 2010, all patients older than 65 years (n = 47) with type II fractures of the odontoid according to the Anderson and D'Alonso classification were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: In the non-operatively managed cohort, 11 patients (79%) died postoperatively within a mean period of 23 months. In all other cases (n = 3), radiographs demonstrated non-union. The mean lateral displacement was 1.9 mm (range 0--5,8 mm) and a mean angulation of 29,1[degree sign] (range 0-55[degree sign]) was found.Anterior screw fixation was carried out in 17 patients. The non-union rate in this cohort was 77%. In patients with a posterior C1-C2 fusion, a bony fusion of the posterior elements was found in 15 of 16 cases (93%). Survival rates were significantly higher among the group of patients who were treated with anterior screw fixation or posterior C1/C2 fusion compared to the conservatively treated group. CONCLUSION: We found the best clinical results with low rates of non-union as well as low mortality rates following posterior C1/C2 fusion making this our treatment of choice especially in an elderly patient collective

Study on accuracy and interobserver reliability of the assessment of odontoid fracture union using plain radiographs or CT scans

In odontoid fracture research, outcome can be evaluated based on validated questionnaires, based on functional outcome in terms of atlantoaxial and total neck rotation, and based on the treatment-related union rate. Data on clinical and functional outcome are still sparse. In contrast, there is abundant information on union rates, although, frequently the rates differ widely. Odontoid union is the most frequently assessed outcome parameter and therefore it is imperative to investigate the interobserver reliability of fusion assessment using radiographs compared to CT scans. Our objective was to identify the diagnostic accuracy of plain radiographs in detecting union and non-union after odontoid fractures and compare this to CT scans as the standard of reference. Complete sets of biplanar plain radiographs and CT scans of 21 patients treated for odontoid fractures were subjected to interobserver assessment of fusion. Image sets were presented to 18 international observers with a mean experience in fusion assessment of 10.7 years. Patients selected had complete radiographic follow-up at a mean of 63.3 ± 53 months. Mean age of the patients at follow-up was 68.2 years. We calculated interobserver agreement of the diagnostic assessment using radiographs compared to using CT scans, as well as the sensitivity and specificity of the radiographic assessment. Agreement on the fusion status using radiographs compared to CT scans ranged between 62 and 90% depending on the observer. Concerning the assessment of non-union and fusion, the mean specificity was 62% and mean sensitivity was 77%. Statistical analysis revealed an agreement of 80–100% in 48% of cases only, between the biplanar radiographs and the reconstructed CT scans. In 50% of patients assessed there was an agreement of less than 80%. The mean sensitivity and specificity values indicate that radiographs are not a reliable measure to indicate odontoid fracture union or non-union. Regarding experience in years of all observers taking part in the study, there were no significant differences for specificity (P = 0.88) or sensitivity (P = 0.26). Further analysis revealed that if a non-union was judged present by an observer then, on average, each observer changed decision regarding the presence of a ‘stable’ or ‘unstable non-union’ in 4.2 of all the 21 cases (range 0–8 changes per observer). We investigated the interobserver reliability of the assessment of fusion in odontoid fractures using biplanar radiographs compared to CT scans. A sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 62% for the radiographs resemble a substantial lack of agreement if different observers evaluate odontoid union. Biplanar radiographs are judged not a reliable measure to detect odontoid fracture union or non-union. The union rates of odontoid fractures have to be revisited and CT scans as the endpoint anchor in outcome studies of treatment related union rates are recommended

Type II odontoid fractures in the elderly: an evidence-based narrative review of management

Considerable controversy exists regarding the optimal management of elderly patients with type II odontoid fractures. There is uncertainty regarding the consequences of non-union. The best treatment remains unclear because of the morbidity associated with prolonged cervical immobilisation versus the risks of surgical intervention. The objective of the study was to evaluate the published literature and determine the current evidence for the management of type II odontoid fractures in elderly. A search of the English language literature from January 1970 to date was performed using Medline and the following keywords: odontoid, fractures, cervical spine and elderly. The search was supplemented by cross-referencing between articles. Case reports and review articles were excluded although some were referred to in the discussion. Studies in patients aged 65 years with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were selected. One-hundred twenty-six articles were reviewed. No class I study was identified. There were two class II studies and the remaining were class III. Significant variability was found in the literature regarding mortality and morbidity rates in patients treated with and without halo vest immobilisation. In recent years several authors have claimed satisfactory results with anterior odontoid screw fixation while others have argued that this may lead to increased complications in this age group. Lately, the posterior cervical (Goel–Harms) construct has also gained popularity amongst surgeons. There is insufficient evidence to establish a standard or guideline for odontoid fracture management in elderly. While most authors agree that cervical immobilisation yields satisfactory results for type I and III fractures in the elderly, the optimal management for type II fractures remain unsolved. A prospective randomised controlled trial is recommended