Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Eur Spine J ; 21(5): 855-62, 2012 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22094387

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To evaluate fracture healing, functional outcomes, complications, and mortality associated with rigid cervical collars. METHODS: Thirty-four patients with <50% odontoid displacement were treated with a rigid cervical collar for 12 weeks (Average age = 84 years). Outcome scores were compared with a group of 40 age-matched control subjects (Average age 79.3). RESULTS: At average 14.9-month follow-up, only 6% demonstrated radiographic evidence of fracture healing and 70% had mobile odontoid nonunion. NDI scores indicated only mild disability, pain scores were low, and neither differed significantly from age-matched controls. Mobile odontoid nonunion was not associated with higher levels of disability or neck pain. Mortality rate was 11.8%. Treatment complications occurred in 6% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Odontoid nonunion and instability are high in geriatric patients treated with a rigid cervical collar. Fracture healing and stability did not correlate with improved outcomes. Outcomes did not differ significantly from age-matched cohorts.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas/terapia , Evaluación Geriátrica , Apófisis Odontoides/lesiones , Aparatos Ortopédicos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Vértebras Cervicales , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Curación de Fractura , Fracturas Óseas/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas Mal Unidas/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Apófisis Odontoides/diagnóstico por imagen , Radiografía , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Spine J ; 12(7): 559-67, 2012 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22801003

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: There is a paucity of literature examining the clinical yield of in-hospital postoperative radiographs for patients who have had instrumented single-level spinal fusions with intraoperative fluoroscopic guidance. Many spinal surgeons consider postoperative standing radiographs to be the appropriate standard of care, even in patients who have an uneventful postoperative course. PURPOSE: To evaluate the additional clinical yield and cost-effectiveness of in-hospital postoperative standing radiographs for patients undergoing instrumented single-level cervical and lumbar fusions in which intraoperative fluoroscopy is used. Are postoperative standing radiographs necessary before hospital discharge? STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of 100 consecutive degenerative spinal surgical cases in which intraoperative fluoroscopic imaging was compared with immediate postoperative radiographs using a vertebral grid mapping technique. METHODS: A retrospective review of 100 consecutive patients who had an instrumented single-level cervical (30) or lumbar (70) fusion for a degenerative spinal condition performed by the same surgeon using intraoperative fluoroscopy. All patients had a documented uneventful postoperative hospitalization without evidence of new postoperative neurologic finding. All patients had both anteroposterior (AP) and lateral intraoperative fluoroscopic images and same-hospitalization standing AP and lateral radiographic images, which were performed within 72 hours postoperatively. Intraoperative and postoperative images were compared by two observers independently using a vertebral grid mapping technique to locate screw position and control magnification differences. Study parameters included screw tip position grids, interbody graft position, segmental sagittal plane alignment, spondylolisthesis grade, and hospital charges for patient imaging and interpretation. RESULTS: Early instrumentation failure and/or screw position change was not observed in any patient. Seventy-four patients demonstrated a grid match for all screw tip positions on both true AP and lateral radiographs. Twenty-six patients had either a postoperative AP or lateral radiograph that was clinically malrotated and precluded comparison with the intraoperative true fluoroscopic images. Segmental sagittal alignment difference between intraoperative fluoroscopic and postoperative radiographic sagittal images averaged only 1.2° (range, 0-9) and was not statistically significant (paired Student t test, p=.88). Significant difference between intraoperative and immediate postoperative interbody graft position and spondylolisthesis grade was not demonstrated in any patient. Patient hospital billing charges for postoperative AP and lateral radiographic imaging with interpretation averaged $600. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who have a single-level instrumented fusion and a documented uneventful postoperative course, in-hospital postoperative standing AP and lateral radiographs do not appear to provide additional clinically relevant information when intraoperative fluoroscopy is properly used. Fluoroscopy also demonstrated more consistent accuracy and a potential for significant cost savings.


Asunto(s)
Degeneración del Disco Intervertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Cuidados Posoperatorios/métodos , Fusión Vertebral/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Fluoroscopía , Humanos , Degeneración del Disco Intervertebral/cirugía , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Monitoreo Intraoperatorio , Cuidados Posoperatorios/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA