The effect of various options for decompression of degenerated lumbar spine motion segments on the range of motion: a biomechanical in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a common disease in the aging population. Decompression surgery represents the treatment standard, however, a risk of segmental destabilization depending on the approach and extent of decompression is discussed. So far, biomechanical studies on techniques were mainly conducted on non-degenerated specimens. This biomechanical in vitro study aimed to investigate the increase in segmental range of motion (ROM) depending on the extent of decompression in degenerated segments. METHODS: Ten fresh frozen lumbar specimens were embedded in polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and loaded in a spine tester with pure moments of ± 7.5 Nm. The specimens were tested in their intact state for lateral bending (LB), flexion/extension (FE) and axial rotation (AR). Subsequently, four different decompression techniques were performed: unilateral interlaminar decompression (DC1), unilateral with "over the top" decompression (DC2), bilateral interlaminar decompression (DC3) and laminectomy (DC4). The ROM of the index segment was reported as percent (%) of the native state. RESULTS: Specimens were measured in their intact state prior to decompression. The mean ROM was defined as 100% (FE:6.3 ± 2.3°; LB:5.4 ± 2.8°; AR:3.0 ± 1.6°). Interventions showed a continuous ROM increase: FE (DC1: + 4% ± 4.3; DC2: + 4% ± 4.5; DC3: + 8% ± 8.3;DC4: + 20% ± 15.9), LB(DC1: + 4% ± 6.0; DC2: + 5% ± 7.3; DC3: + 8% ± 8.3; DC4: + 11% ± 9.9), AR (DC1: + 7% ± 6.0; DC2: + 9% ± 7.9; DC3: + 15% ± 11.5; DC4: + 19% ± 10.5). Significant increases in ROM for all motion directions (p < 0.05) were only obtained after complete laminectomy (DC4). CONCLUSION: Unilateral and/or bilateral decompressive surgery resulted in a statistically insignificant ROM increase, whereas complete laminectomy showed statistically significant ROM increase. If this ROM increase also has an impact on the clinical outcome and how to identify segments at risk for secondary lumbar instability should be evaluated in further studies.

Sacropelvic fixation techniques - Current update.

Sacropelvic is a complex junctional area owing to the complex regional anatomy and higher biomechanical stress. However extension of construct is indicated in cases with complex deformities, high grade spondylolisthesis, and complex fractures. The challenges remain which includes pseudoarthrosis and fixation failures. The fixation techniques have constantly evolved over time with better results with iliac screws and S2-alar-iliac screws. This article gives background on evolution, biomechanics, and recent update of use of robotics for sacropelvic fixation.

Management and prognosis of acute traumatic cervical central cord syndrome: systematic review and Spinal Cord Society-Spine Trauma Study Group position statement.

PURPOSE: Spinal Cord Society (SCS) and Spine Trauma Study Group (STSG) established a panel tasked with reviewing management and prognosis of acute traumatic cervical central cord syndrome (ATCCS) and recommend a consensus statement for its management. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA 2009 guidelines. Delphi method was used to identify key research questions and achieve consensus. PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched for corresponding keywords. The initial search retrieved 770 articles of which 37 articles dealing with management, timing of surgery, complications or prognosis of ATCCS were identified. The literature review and draft position statements were compiled and circulated to panel members. The draft was modified incorporating relevant suggestions to reach consensus. RESULTS: Out of 37 studies, 15 were regarding management strategy, ten regarding timing of surgery and 12 regarding prognosis of ATCCS. CONCLUSION: There is reasonable evidence that patients with ATCCS secondary to vertebral fracture, dislocation, traumatic disc herniation or instability have better outcomes with early surgery (< 24 h). In patients of ATCCS secondary to extension injury in stenotic cervical canal without fracture/fracture dislocation/traumatic disc herniation/instability, there is requirement of high-quality prospective randomized controlled trials to resolve controversy regarding early surgery versus conservative management and delayed surgery if recovery plateaus or if there is a neurological deterioration. Until such time decision on surgery and its timing should be left to the judgment of physician, deliberating on pros and cons relevant to the particular patient and involving the well-informed patient and relatives in decision making. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Treatment of Atlas Fractures: Recommendations of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review and expert recommendation. OBJECTIVES: To establish treatment recommendations for atlas fractures based on the knowledge of the experts of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma. METHODS: Neither high-level evidence studies comparing conservative and operative management nor studies matching different operative treatment strategies exist. This recommendation summarizes the knowledge of the experts of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma with regard to the treatment of atlas fractures. RESULTS: Most atlas fractures are the result of compression forces. A valuable morphological classification system has been described by Gehweiler. For an adequate diagnosis, a computed tomography is mandatory. To distinguish between stable and unstable type 3 injuries, it is necessary to evaluate the integrity of the transverse atlantal ligament (TAL) with magnetic resonance imaging and to classify the TAL lesions. The majority of atlas fractures are stable and will be successfully managed conservatively. Unstable atlas fractures (type 3b and sagittal split type 4 fractures) should be treated by surgical stabilization. Unstable atlas fractures (type 3b) with a midsubstance ligamentous disruption or severely dislocated ligamentous bony avulsions of the TAL can successfully be treated by a C1/2 fusion. Unstable atlas fractures (type 3b) with a moderately dislocated ligamentous bony avulsion of the TAL and sagittal split type 4 fractures may be treated by atlas osteosynthesis only. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas the majority of atlas fractures can be managed conservatively, in specific fracture patterns surgical treatment strategies have become the standard of care.