7 research outputs found

    AO-classification of thoracic and lumbar fractures—reproducibility utilizing radiographs and clinical information

    No full text
    This study was designed to assess the inter-observer reliability and intra-observer reproducibility of standard radiographic evaluation of 150 thoraco-lumbar fractures using the AO-classification. The influence of clinical information on agreement levels was also evaluated. Six observers (two junior and four senior residents) evaluated the radiographic images. The injuries were classified by each observer as either type A, B or C according to the AO-classification system and the levels of agreement were documented. After 3 months the injuries were again classified with the addition of the clinical findings of each patient and the level of agreement evaluated. The level of agreement was measured using Cohen’s Îș-test. The overall inter-observer agreement was rated as fair (0.291) in the first session and moderate (0.403) in the second. Intra-observer values ranged from slight (0.181) to moderate (0.488). The increased level of agreement in the second session was attributed to the value of additional clinical information, the learning curve of the junior residents and the simplicity of the classification

    Uninstrumented posterolateral spinal arthrodesis: is it the gold standard technique for I° and II° grade spondylolisthesis in adolescence?

    No full text
    We retrospectively reviewed the outcome of uninstrumented posterolateral spinal arthrodesis in 49 patients with lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis grades I° and II° in adolescent patients in the time of surgery, who participate at follow-up, between 1980 and 1995. The goal of our study is to analyse the clinical and radiographic imaging at long follow-up in uninstrumented posterolateral arthrodesis and to evaluate the efficiency and the validity of surgical technique in young patients (<18 years). All patients had failed previous conservative treatment. The average age at follow-up was 33.5 years (range 25–42 years) and the average follow-up time was 19.7 years (range 12–27 years). The clinical outcome measures were the Oswestry Disability Index, the SF-36, and the visual analogic score. All measures assessed the endpoint outcomes at 20 years after surgery. The outcome of spinal fusion was good with 43 (87.7%) patients attaining solid fusion, pseudoarthrosis in 6 patients (12.3%). None of our patients complained of excessive postoperative wound pain. Additionally, no complications, such as wound infection, were encountered. Satisfactory results were obtained in 94% of patients and this was closely associated with the rate of successful fusion. The results suggest that clinical outcome is closely related to the attainment of solid fusion
    corecore