RESUMO
The diagnostic sub-categorization of cauda equina syndrome (CES) is used to aid communication between doctors and other healthcare professionals. It is also used to determine the need for, and urgency of, MRI and surgery in these patients. A recent paper by Hoeritzauer et al (2023) in this journal examined the interobserver reliability of the widely accepted subcategories in 100 patients with cauda equina syndrome. They found that there is no useful interobserver agreement for the subcategories, even for experienced spinal surgeons. This observation is supported by the largest prospective study of the treatment of cauda equina syndrome in the UK by Woodfield et al (2023). If the accepted subcategories are unreliable, they cannot be used in the way that they are currently, and they should be revised or abandoned. This paper presents a reassessment of the diagnostic and prognostic subcategories of cauda equina syndrome in the light of this evidence, with a suggested cure based on a more inclusive synthesis of symptoms, signs, bladder ultrasound scan results, and pre-intervention urinary catheterization. This paper presents a reassessment of the diagnostic and prognostic subcategories of CES the light of this evidence, with a suggested cure based on a more inclusive synthesis of symptoms, signs, bladder ultrasound scan results, and pre-intervention urinary catheterization.
Assuntos
Síndrome da Cauda Equina , Cirurgiões , Humanos , Síndrome da Cauda Equina/diagnóstico , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
Initial treatment of traumatic spinal cord injury remains as controversial in 2023 as it was in the early 19th century, when Sir Astley Cooper and Sir Charles Bell debated the merits or otherwise of surgery to relieve cord compression. There has been a lack of high-class evidence for early surgery, despite which expeditious intervention has become the surgical norm. This evidence deficit has been progressively addressed in the last decade and more modern statistical methods have been used to clarify some of the issues, which is demonstrated by the results of the SCI-POEM trial. However, there has never been a properly conducted trial of surgery versus active conservative care. As a result, it is still not known whether early surgery or active physiological management of the unstable injured spinal cord offers the better chance for recovery. Surgeons who care for patients with traumatic spinal cord injuries in the acute setting should be aware of the arguments on all sides of the debate, a summary of which this annotation presents.
Assuntos
Doenças Musculoesqueléticas , Compressão da Medula Espinal , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Traumatismos da Coluna Vertebral , Humanos , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/cirurgia , Traumatismos da Coluna Vertebral/cirurgia , Compressão da Medula Espinal/cirurgia , Doenças Musculoesqueléticas/cirurgia , Dissidências e Disputas , Descompressão Cirúrgica/métodos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
AIMS: Cervical radiculopathy is a significant cause of pain and morbidity. For patients with severe and poorly controlled symptoms who may not be candidates for surgical management, treatment with transforaminal epidural steroid injections (CTFESI) has gained widespread acceptance. However, a paucity of high-quality evidence supporting their use balanced against perceived high risks of the procedure potentially undermines the confidence of clinicians who use the technique. We undertook a systematic review of the available literature regarding CTFESI to assess the clinical efficacy and complication rates of the procedure. METHODS: OVID, MEDLINE, and Embase database searches were performed independently by two authors who subsequently completed title, abstract, and full-text screening for inclusion against set criteria. Clinical outcomes and complication data were extracted, and a narrative synthesis presented. RESULTS: Six studies (three randomized controlled trials and three non-randomized observational studies; 443 patients) were included in the final review. The aggregate data support the efficacy of CTFESI in excess of the likely minimal clinically important difference. No major complications were described. CONCLUSION: There is increasing evidence supporting the efficacy of CTFESI. Concerns regarding the occurrence of catastrophic complications, widely shared in the case report and anecdotal literature, were not found when reviewing the best available evidence. However, the strength of these findings remains limited by the lack of highly powered high-level studies and the heterogeneity of the studies available. Further high-quality studies are recommended to address the issues of efficacy and safety with CTFESI. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):567-574.
Assuntos
Radiculopatia , Humanos , Injeções Epidurais/métodos , Dor , Radiculopatia/tratamento farmacológico , Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
We report the case of a 46-year-old, otherwise healthy, man with chronic lower back pain and no evidence of nerve root compression who underwent diagnostic facet joint injections to assist in establishing where his pain sources were located and to try to help his spinal rehabilitation program. He presented with a facet joint infection 2 months after injection, in a manner that was indistinguishable from an acute intervertebral disc herniation. The diagnosis was confirmed on magnetic resonance imaging, and he was successfully treated with surgical debridement and antibiotics. Septic arthritis of a lumbar facet joint with an associated paraspinal abscess is a rare complication of facet joint infiltration with only two similar cases reported in the literature. We propose that this diagnosis be considered in patients who have undergone diagnostic facet joint injection who subsequently deteriorate with back and leg pain without another apparent cause.