RESUMO
PURPOSE: To develop a predictive scoring system to identify traumatic cervical spine injury patients at a high risk of having multilevel noncontiguous spinal fractures. METHODS: This 12-year retrospective observational cohort study included 588 traumatic cervical spine-injured patients. Patients were categorized into two groups: patients with multilevel noncontiguous spinal fractures and patients without this remote injury. Potential risk factors were examined using multivariable analysis to derive a predictive risk score from independent predictors. Results are presented as odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The accuracy of the calculated predicted score was demonstrated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC). RESULTS: The incidence of noncontiguous fracture among the patients was 17% (100 of 588). The independent risk factors associated with multilevel noncontiguous spinal fractures were motor weakness, intracranial injury, intrathoracic injury, and intraabdominal injury. The AuROC of the prediction score was 0.74 (95% CI 0.69, 0.80). The patients were classified into three groups, low-risk group (score< 1), moderate-risk group (score 1-2.5), and high-risk group (score≥ 3), based on the predicted risk of multilevel noncontiguous spinal fractures. CONCLUSIONS: This tool can potentially help preventing the missed diagnosis of cervical spine injuries with multilevel noncontiguous spinal fractures. CT scans or MRI of the entire spine to investigate remote multilevel noncontiguous spinal fractures may have a role in cervical spine-injured patients who have at least one of the independent risk factors and are strongly suggested for patients with scores in the high-risk group.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The rationale for gradually reducing radius (GR) femoral component aims to prevent flexion instability by gradually change the center of femoral rotation, unlike a discrete change by the multi-radius (MR) which is more common for most of total knee arthroplasties (TKA). However, no strong evidence has been reported the clinical significance of the GR design. METHODS: This patient-blinded, parallel, non-inferiority trial conducted between January 2018-December 2020. Patients with knee osteoarthritis consented for cruciate retaining TKA were randomly allocated to a GR or MR group. Primary outcome measures were knee functions at postoperative 6 and 12 months using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Secondary outcome measures were performance-based tests (30-s chair stand test, 40-m fast paced walk test, and 3-m timed up and go test), and knee motions. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled and randomized; GR (n = 30) and MR (n = 30) group. The changes of KOOS at 6 and 12 months from baseline showed clinical meaningful for both GR and MR group. At 6 and 12 months postoperatively, there was no significant difference between both groups in all KOOS subscales. The length of stay was not different between GR and MR group (5.93 ± 1.44 vs 6.17 ± 1.86 days, p = 0.59). Patients on both groups presented similar performance-based tests. However, the improvement in degrees of knee motion for the GR group was significantly greater than the MR group (34.67 ± 12.52 vs 23.67 ± 12.59, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: GR was noninferiority to MR for the functional outcomes and performances after TKA. The GR femoral component gave more knee motions than did the MR prostheses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.
