Outcomes in Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures With a Thoracolumbar Injury Classification Score (TLICS) of 4 Treated With Surgery Versus Initial Conservative Management.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether surgery or nonoperative treatment has better clinical outcomes in neurologically intact patients with an intermediate severity thoracolumbar burst fracture. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Optimal management, whether initial operative or nonoperative treatment, for thoracolumbar injury classification score (TLICS) 4 burst fractures remains controversial. Better insight into the treatment which affords patients a better clinical outcome could significantly affect patient care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive cases of TLICS 4 burst fracture patients from 2007 to 2013 and minimum 6-month follow-up. Potential confounders examined included age, sex, injury severity score, initial kyphotic angle, injured facets, and interspinous widening. Outcomes were determined by standardized questionnaires [Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-item Short Form Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS), and back pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS)] and analyzed using regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 230 patients with burst fractures were identified, of which 67/230 (29%) were TLICS 4 and 47/67 (70%) had completed follow-up. No difference on univariate analysis was found between nonsurgical and surgical groups in mean ODI scores (P=0.27, t test), nor mean time to return to work (P=0.10, t test).Regarding outcomes, linear regression analysis revealed no association between having surgery and ODI (P=0.29), SF-12 PCS (P=0.59), or VAS (P=0.33). Furthermore, no difference was found between groups for employed patients working versus not working (P=0.09, the Fisher test), nor in mean time to return to work (P=0.30, Cox regression). CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the largest studies examining TLICS 4 burst fracture patients, adjusting for both clinical and radiologic confounders and reporting patient outcomes with minimum 6-month follow-up. No differences were found in outcomes between patients treated either surgically or nonsurgically. Studies focusing on early postoperative differences or cost-effectiveness might help in decision making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Pedicle screw insertion in the thoracolumbar spine: comparison of 4 guidance techniques in the intact cadaveric spine.

OBJECT: Pedicle screw fixation is a mainstay of thoracolumbar stabilization. Screw insertion using anatomical landmarks and fluoroscopy is common but can be technically challenging and generally involves substantial exposure to ionizing radiation. Computerized navigation has been reported to improve accuracy but is expensive and complex. The authors undertook this study to evaluate these 3 methods in comparison with a fourth technique using standard cervical distractor screws to mark the entry point and trajectory. METHODS: Four cadaveric human spines were used for this study. After an initial CT scan, 34 pedicle screws were inserted in each intact spine from T-1 to L-5 using the following 4 screw insertion guidance techniques (1 technique per specimen): use of anatomical landmarks, use of cervical distractor screws and spot fluoroscopy, fluoroscopy-based navigation, and fluoroscopy- and CT-based navigation (using merged imaging data). Postprocedural CT and anatomical dissection were then performed to evaluate screw position for site and degree of breach. RESULTS: The cervical distractor screw method had a breach rate of 5.9% versus 29.4%, 32.4%, and 20.6% for use of anatomical landmarks, fluoroscopic navigation, and fluoroscopic-CT navigation, respectively (p < 0.05). There is also a significant association between degree of medial and distal breach and the method of screw insertion (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical distractor screws as pedicle markers offer favorable insertion accuracy and reduction of radiation exposure compared with the other 3 methods used in clinical practice.

A pilot study of magnetic resonance imaging-guided closed reduction of cervical spine fractures.

STUDY DESIGN: We report on a prospective selective case series of 17 patients with cervical fracture-dislocations treated with closed reduction under MRI guidance. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the safe and effective use of in-line axial traction in the reduction of cervical fracture-dislocations using MRI guidance. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Closed reduction of the cervical spine for acute fracture-dislocations has been a traditional technique used for restoring vertebral alignment and providing neural element decompression. The safety of this technique has been questioned, with concerns of disc migration and overdistraction causing neurologic worsening cited as reasons to choose operative reduction and decompression as a safer option in some circumstances. METHODS: Seventeen patients with fracture-dislocations of the subaxial cervical spine were given a trial of traction under MRI guidance between 1999 and 2003. The incidence of posteriorly herniated disc material was noted, and the diameter of the spinal canal at the injured level was recorded before and after traction. RESULTS: All patients tolerated traction without neurologic worsening. Pretraction disc disruption was found in 15 of 17 (88.2%) of patients, with posterior herniation in 4 of 17 (23.5\%). Traction caused a return of herniated disc material toward the disc space in all cases. Canal dimensions improved in 11 of 17 patients, with canal diameter increasing by a factor of 1.1 to 3.0, with a mean improvement of 1.73. The process of reduction was observed to be a gradual one, with progressive, significant improvement in canal dimensions occurring before anatomic realignment. As distracting force was increased, sequential MRIs showed that canal dimensions did not diminish at any time in any patient. CONCLUSIONS: MRI monitoring in closed cervical reduction is a useful research tool for this technique. Closed reduction appears to be safe as used in this preliminary study and is effective in achieving immediate spinal cord decompression.