Sonication in Patients With Spinal Cord Stimulation: A New Approach for Infection Diagnostics.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) offers improvement in pain and function for several chronic pain conditions. There are concerns regarding bacterial colonization of the temporary lead extensions and subsequent infection risk in a two-session implantation procedure. Although there is no standardized evaluation of SCS lead contamination, this study evaluates the infection rate and microbial colonization of SCS lead extensions with sonication, a method that is established in implant-related infection diagnostics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study comprised 32 patients with a two-stage SCS implantation procedure. Microbial colonization of the lead extensions was assessed with sonication. The presence of organisms in the subcutaneous tissue was evaluated separately. Surgical-site infections were recorded. Patient demographics and risk factors including diabetes, tobacco use, obesity, trial length, and infection parameters in serum were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 55 years. On average, the trial length was 13 days. In seven cases (21.9%), a microbial lead colonization was found with sonication. In contrast, there was one positive culture (3.1%) from the subcutaneous tissue samples. The C-reactive protein and leukocyte count remained at the preoperative level. One early surgical-site infection (3.1%) occurred. No other late infections occurred six months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: There is a discrepancy between the presence of microbial colonization and the occurrence of clinically relevant infections. Although the rate of microbial colonization of the lead extensions is high (21.9%), the surgical-site infection rate remained low (3.1%). Therefore, we can conclude that the two-session procedure is a safe approach that is not associated with a higher incidence of infection. Although the sonication method cannot be used as the sole tool for detecting infections in patients with SCS, it can provide additional value in microbial diagnostics in combination with clinical and laboratory parameters and conventional microbiological methods.

The influence of total disc arthroplasty with Mobidisc prosthesis on lumbar spine and pelvic parameters: a prospective in vivo biomechanical study with a minimum 3 year of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the impact of Mobidisc implant on spinopelvic parameters, with particular focus on the preservation of the lumbar lordosis (LL) and on the segmental lordosis (SL) of the treated and adjacent segments. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 63 consecutive patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease who underwent Mobidisc implantation at the Clinic for Spinal Diseases in Strasbourg, France. Based on the profile images of the whole, the following static spinopelvic parameters were measured and analysed: lumbar lordosis L1-S1 (LL), SL for L3-L4, L4-L5 and L5-S1, sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT) and pelvic incidence. In the lumbar spine images, the anterior (ADH) and posterior disc height (PDH) were measured prior to surgery and at the different follow-up appointments. The preoperative and postoperative values were compared and statistically analysed at different time intervals. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were included in the study. The average age of the patients was 41.4 years (range 27-59 years). The mean follow-up was 44 months (range 36-71 months). Overall, total disc replacement (TDR) led to an increase in LL which increased TED over time. The preoperative LL measured 48.9° ± 10.1° and 53.4° ± 9.9° at 3 years follow-up (p < 0.0001). In the cohort of patients who underwent TDR at L4-5, the LL increased from 51.6° ± 10° to 56.2° ± 9.2° at the last FU (p = 0.006). All other spinopelvic parameters remained stable between the preoperative values and the last follow-up. In the patients who underwent L5-S1 TDR, a significant increase in LL was also observed between preoperative data and at the last FU (from 47.8° ± 10.1° to 53.3° ± 10.1°, p < 0.0001). Following L5-S1 TDR, the SS increased from 32.9° ± 8.3° to 35.6° ± 7.4° (p = 0.05) and the PT decreased from 15.4° ± 6.2° to 11.6° ± 5.7° between preoperative values and the last follow-up. Considering the entire cohort, the SL L5-S1 increased significantly from 5.9° ± 4.2° preoperatively to 8.1° ± 4.4° (p < 0.01) at the last FU, while at the L4-L5 level, the SL remained stable from 9.9 ± 4.5° to 10.7° ± 3.8° (p = 0.3). After L4-5 TDR, an increase in ADH and PDH at the treated level was observed, while these parameters progressively decreased in the adjacent segment. In patients who underwent L5-S1 TDR, a significant increase in L5-S1 ADH and PDH was observed from 18.8 ± 9.1 to 28.4 ± 11.1 and from 9.5 ± 3.8 to 17.6 ± 9.5 pixels, respectively. ADH and PDH at the proximal adjacent levels L3-4 and L4-5 were reduced. We did not observe any case of implant failure or damage to the bone/implant interface. CONCLUSION: TDR with Mobidisc allows for an improvement of LL and SL at the treated level. An increase in both anterior and posterior disc height was observed at the treated level. While disc height decreased at the adjacent level, further studies are required to investigate whether these changes are clinically relevant.

Treatment of acute and chronic elbow instability with a hinged external fixator after fracture dislocation.

This is a retrospective analysis of the clinical and radiological outcome in 24 patients with acute or chronic posttraumatic elbow instability, who were treated with open reduction, internal fixation and a hinged external fixator. The instability was acute after elbow fracture dislocation in 11 cases; the other 13 had chronic posttraumatic instability of the elbow. Concentric stability and a sufficient range of motion of the elbow joint were achieved in all cases. The addition of a hinged external fixator in noncompliant patients, who underwent open reduction and internal fixation of an acute or chronic posttraumatic unstable elbow, allows early intensive mobilisation and can improve the clinical outcome after these complex elbow injuries.