[Treatment strategies for pathological fractures of the spine]. / Versorgungsstrategien bei pathologischen Frakturen der Wirbelsäule.

BACKGROUND: Pathological fractures and instabilities of the spine are most often caused by primary tumors that hematogenously metastasize into the spine. In this context breast, prostate, kidney cell and bronchial carcinomas are the most relevant causative diseases. Furthermore, multiple myeloma is another frequent entity. Primary tumors of the spine are correspondingly rare and only make up a small proportion of all malignant processes in the spine. DECISION MAKING: The main symptom of pain is prognostically unfavorable in this context and is often associated with progressive instability or pathological fractures. To objectify the treatment approach the neurological status, an oncological assessment, the biomechanical stability and (systemic) general condition (NOMS criteria) of the patient have to be considered. Another major factor is the radiation sensitivity of the tumor. The spinal instability neoplastic (SIN) score is recommended to assess stability. Regardless of whether conservative or surgical treatment is carried out, interdisciplinary cooperation between the specialist departments must be guaranteed in order to achieve adequate treatment for the patient. TREATMENT: If a curative approach is followed an individualized and interdisciplinary surgical strategy must be performed to achieve an R0 resection, usually as a spondylectomy. In the case of palliative treatment, the goal of surgical treatment must be pain reduction, stability and avoidance or restoration of neurological deficits. This requires stabilization in a percutaneous or open technique, possibly in combination with decompression and local tumor debulking.

[Medical ID and emergency apps: A useful tool in emergency situations or a waste of time?] / Notfall-Apps: vergeudete Zeit oder sinnvolles Instrument in der präklinischen Versorgung von Traumapatienten?

BACKGROUND: In order to provide safe care to a patient in an emergency situation, it is useful to know something about the patient's previous medical conditions and medication. For this very reason smartphones have been equipped with so-called emergency apps (e.g. medical-ID, emergency-ID). The aim of our study was to find out whether the owners of smartphones are using the apps and whether medical professionals are trying to access this information. METHODS: We conducted a survey among patients in our outpatient clinic at a level one trauma center. We collected data over 3 months regarding the usage behavior of the aforementioned apps. We simultaneously asked emergency physicians at various hospitals about their experiences with these apps. RESULTS: We were able to interview 192 patients and 103 emergency physicians. The emergency apps were unknown to 45% (n = 79) of the respondents; only 10% (n = 19) of the respondents had the app with data stored. Furthermore, it was found that a total of 21% (n = 41) of the persons carried a note on themselves with previous illnesses and medication. Of the surveyed physicians, 42% (n = 44) stated that they had heard of the app before; however, only 6% (n = 5) routinely searched the smartphone for relevant information in the case of nonresponsive patients. Only 14% of physicians (n = 14) have successfully used the app so far. CONCLUSION: The collected data show that the emergency apps are still unknown to many patients and emergency physicians alike. Due to the low distribution it does not seem to be recommendable to search the smartphone for the apps in time-critical situations after accidents. For patients over 55 years of age, it currently seems more promising to search their wallets for information regarding their previous illnesses.

Open versus Percutaneous Stabilization of Thoracolumbar Spine Fractures: A Short-Term Functional and Radiological Follow-up.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: A prospective cohort study evaluates the functional and radiological outcome of thoracolumbar spine fractures treated either with open or percutaneous dorsal instrumentation. In recent years, several studies advocate percutaneous stabilization of spinal fractures in patients without neurological deficits. However, it is still debated whether percutaneous stabilization is superior to open dorsal instrumentation in spinal trauma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was performed between 2010 and 2012 at a Level 1 trauma center. Patients treated either with an open or a percutaneous dorsal instrumentation for traumatic fractures of the thoracolumbar spine (T11 to L2) were included. Fracture morphology, screw positioning and clinical parameters were analyzed. Standardized questionnaires (VAS-spine-score; Oswestry-disability-score; SF-36) and follow up radiographs were performed. RESULTS: Overall 72 patients (29 percutaneous; 43 open) could be included. The surgical and the early postsurgical course were similar between both groups. Furthermore the operative approach had no influence on the functional and radiological outcome one year after surgery, but the questionnaires showed moderate impairments within both groups. Also both groups showed a significant loss of reduction after the first postoperative month (p < 0.01). Within the open group a significantly higher amount of fracture reduction (p < 0.01) and a significantly reduced intraoperative radiation exposure was seen (open 105.9 sec.; percutaneous 143.1 sec; p < 0.05); whereas the percutaneous approach was associated with significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (open 2.2 g/dl; percutaneous 1.2 g/dl; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The functional and the radiological outcome of both groups was comparable one year after trauma. Minor advantages of the percutaneous system was less blood loss, whereas the open approach was associated with a significantly higher amount of initial reduction and significantly less intraoperative radiation exposure. Independent from the type of posterior fixation loss of reduction was already significant in the early postoperative course.

[The Anterior "Triple-/Quadruple" Technique for C1/C2 Trauma in the Elderly: First Experience with 16 Patients]. / Die ventrale "Triple-/Quadruple"-Schraubenosteosynthese für die traumatische C1-C2-Kombinationsverletzung des geriatrischen Patienten: erste operative Erfahrungen mit 16 Patienten.

INTRODUCTION: In geriatric patients the management of odontoid type II fractures is complicated by osteoporosis and atlantoaxial arthritis (spondylarthritis C1/C2) with an increased lever arm. Furthermore, a few of the odontoid fractures are accompanied by an atlas fracture resulting in the "atlantoaxial unhappy triad". Posterior C1/C2 spondylodesis with bilateral Magerl screws and C1 hooks is a strong biomechanical construct, however, the posterior approach is associated with several drawbacks such as increased risk of infection and increased blood loss. In contrast, the anterior bilateral C1/C2 transarticular screw fixation with additional odontoid screw fixation is also a known technique. Advantages of the anterior approach are shorter surgery time, lower intraoperative blood loss and lower risk of infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, all geriatric patients with an atlantoaxial arthritis and odontoid or combined atlantoaxial fracture treated at our institution between 01/2012 and 12/2014 with an anterior screw fixation were included. Following closed reduction, the surgical management was performed over a standard right anterior approach. At the end of surgery, operation time and blood loss were documented. During the hospital stay radiological follow-up of the upper cervical spine were performed to analyse the screw position. We also report the length of stay on intensive care unit, the hospital course and demographic data of the patients. Follow-up was planned after 6 weeks, 6, 12 and 18 months. During follow-up COMI evaluation and X-rays of the cervical spine were made. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: This study included 16 patients who underwent surgery for C1-C2 lesions. There were 9 females and 7 males. Median age at the time of operation was 76 years. At the time of surgery, fractures were classified as follows: 8 patients showed an "atlantoaxial unhappy triad", 8 patients had a type II odontoid fracture complicated by osteoporosis and atlantoaxial arthritis (spondylarthritis C1/C2). Average time for operative treatment was 100 ± 36.35 minutes with a median intraoperative fluoroscopy time of 161 seconds. The intraoperative blood loss was minimal (45 ± 22.80 ml). Length of stay was documented with 10 (± 4.60) days whereby the patients spent on average 0.8 days in the intensive care unit postoperatively. No serious morbidities, such as esophageal perforation, carotid artery laceration, neurological deterioration, and airway obstruction were reported. All cases of transient dysphagia resolved gradually and spontaneously without therapy. In 4 cases (25 %) we detected a penetration of the atlantooccipital joint without functional impairment. In one case we have seen an implant failure. The technique of anterior screw fixation of odontoid and bilateral transarticular C1-C2 anterior screw fixation provides a fast surgery without higher morbidity. Based on our findings, this technique and its feasibility is an alternative to known posterior C1/C2 spondylodesis in the elderly.

[Percutaneous stabilization of the thoracic and lumbar spine with active intraoperative reduction]. / Perkutane dorsale Stabilisierung der Brust- und Lendenwirbelsäule mit aktiver intraoperativer Repositionsmöglichkeit.

OBJECTIVE: Operative treatment of vertebral fractures is focused on stabilization of the spine and decompression of the spinal cord and nerves. In German-speaking countries, it is common to restore the sagittal profile by fracture reduction. The use of percutaneous systems has been limited due to inferior reduction possibilities compared to open systems. The improved reduction options offered by newer percutaneous systems extend their application to highly deformed fractures. INDICATIONS: Unstable thoracic, lumbar and lumbosacral spine fractures; unacceptable spinal deformities. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Need for open decompression or cross-bracing; relative contraindication: obesity or cachexia. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: 3 cm skin incision 1.5 cm lateral to the radiological border of the pedicle. Incision of the fascia and blunt preparation to the facet joints. Guidewire placement via fluoroscopy. Tapping and cannulated screw setting. Insertion of the longitudinal rods and reduction using special reduction tools. Rod fixation with locking caps, wound closure, dressing. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Pain-related mobilization, physiotherapy, indication for anterior fusion to be considered. RESULTS: In 2012, 80 patients (42 female, 38 male) with a mean age of 59.7 years received posterior stabilization (27 open, 53 percutaneous). Intraoperative radiation was significantly higher in the percutaneous group compared with the open group (percutaneous: 212 s; open: 146 s; p < 0.05), while the length of surgical treatment was significantly shorter (percutaneous: 107 min; open: 143 min; p < 0.05). Accuracy of screw positioning and the amount of reduction was similar in both groups. Major complications did not occur.

[Cost-benefit analysis of cranial computed tomography in mild traumatic brain injury--appropriate depiction within the G-DRG system?]. / Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse der Schnittbildgebung beim leichten Schädel-Hirn-Trauma--Wie sachgerecht ist die Abbildung im G-DRG-System?

BACKGROUND: The treatment of patients with mild head injury is related to a continuous lack of finances. The current investigation summarises radiological costs of patients from a level I trauma centre and discusses the indication for CT scanning within the G-DRG system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study includes all patients who underwent a CCT scan in 2011. Diagnosis, length of stay and cost data were recorded for every patient. Finally, frequent diagnosis groups were summarised to clusters (Basis-DRG/MDC 21A). RESULTS: A total of 380 patients was treated. Within the largest group (G-DRG B80Z) the costs for a CCT already took up one quarter of the total proceedings. In combination with the high cost for monitoring patients with mild head injuries this causes an ongoing lack of finances. CONCLUSION: In spite of the often necessary CCT investigation in mild head injuries, the earnings do not cover the costs of the patients. To improve the situation clear guidelines for CCT scanning should be provided and the reimbursement in particular in the diagnosis group of the G-DRG B80Z has to be improved.

A meta-analysis of operative versus nonoperative treatment in 463 scapular neck fractures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Treatment of scapular neck fractures remains controversial. Advantages of surgical treatments, such as anatomical restoration of fracture displacement, are counterbalanced by approach morbidity. We conducted a meta-analysis of 463 scapular neck fractures and compared clinical, functional, and radiographical outcomes in operatively and nonoperatively treated scapular neck fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted, including the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Manuscripts were included if they reported a precise description of treatment, complications, functional outcomes, and/or radiographic evaluation. Data about day-to-day activities, level of pain-freeness, range of motion, functional grading, and radiographical assessment were pooled and compared using fixed effects models. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A total of 22 manuscripts were relevant, including 1 prospective cohort study and 21 retrospective studies. The studies showed a high heterogeneity in the result assessment. Most patients had concomitant injuries. In total, 234 out of the 463 fractures were treated operatively. Pain-freeness and radiographic outcome measurements were significantly better in the operatively treated group, whereas range of motion was significantly improved in the nonoperative treated patients. Complication rate for surgical treatment was about 10%. From the achievable data, there was no bias detected when comparing the two treatment groups. However, those data could not be analyzed for all included studies. For the same reason, the role of additional surgical treatment for concomitant injuries to the shoulder girdle could not be cleared completely. Caution should be exercised, and individual injury patterns have to be taken into consideration when considering the best treatment options.