Cervical Collar Use Following Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The utility and risks associated with the use of cervical collars in the postoperative period after cervical spine surgery have been of debate. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the currently available evidence on the use of cervical collars after cervical spine surgery to assess their impact on outcomes. METHODS: A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords "cervical collar," "anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)," "posterior cervical decompression and fusion," "laminoplasty," "post-operative orthotic bracing," "cervical decompression," and "cervical orthosis" in all possible combinations. All English studies with the level of evidence of I to IV that were published from May 1, 1986, to December 3, 2023, were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 25 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and reviewed. Regarding anterior and posterior fusion procedures, cervical collar use demonstrated improved short-term patient-reported outcomes and pain control. While surgeon motivation for collar use was to increase fusion rates, this is not well drawn out in the literature with the majority of studies demonstrated no significant difference in fusion rates between patients who wore a cervical collar and those who did not. Regarding motion-preserving procedures such as cervical laminoplasty, patients with prolonged postoperative cervical collar use demonstrated increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased final range of motion (ROM). CONCLUSION: Surgeon motivation for postoperative cervical collar immobilization after completion of fusion procedures is to increase fusion rates and improve postoperative pain and disability despite this not being fully drawn out in the literature. After completion of motion-sparing procedures, the benefits of collar immobilization diminish with their prolonged use which could lead to increased rates of axial neck pain and decreased ROM. Cervical collar immobilization in the postoperative period should be considered its own intervention, with its own associated risk-benefit profile. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Utility of prophylactic closed suction drainage in open reduction and internal fixation for tibial plateau fracture.

PURPOSE: The usefulness of closed suction drains (CSD) after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of tibial plateau fractures is a contested topic. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of CSD in postoperative outcomes after tibial plateau fracture. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from patients who underwent primary repair of closed tibial plateau fractures via an anterolateral approach between June 2021 to May 2022 at a single academic center. Fifty-six patients were included and 28 received CSDs at time of surgery. P values less than 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were included. There was no significant difference in demographics, pre- and post-op hemoglobin, estimated blood loss during surgery, length of stay, postoperative MMEs and pain at 3 month follow-up, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), compartment syndrome, flexion contracture, use of incisional vac, infection rate, wound drainage, hematoma, neurologic pain, dehiscence, additional surgery, or range of motion at 3 months follow-up. We noted a significant difference in Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) on POD1, demonstrating greater pain in those in the CSD group. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the use of CSD in ORIF of tibial plateau fractures may not be of significant prophylactic benefit. CSDs in ORIF patients were associated with increased early postoperative pain and had no identifiable benefits. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.