Surgical decompression for traumatic spinal cord injury in a tertiary center.

BACKGROUND: There are controversies regarding the importance and timing of spinal cord decompression following trauma. Documented evidence shows that early decompression in the setting of acute spinal cord injury (SCI) improves neurologic outcomes. Our objective was to evaluate the outcome of posttraumatic spinal cord decompression with or without spinal stabilization in our region. METHODOLOGY: We performed a cross-sectional study on adult patients who presented with acute spinal cord compression of traumatic etiology within a 2-year period. The primary outcome was change in Frankel's grading 6 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes were complication rates and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients made up of 24 (68.6%) males and 11 (31.4%) females were recruited into the study. The spectrum of injuries included cervical 27 (77.1%), thoracic 7 (20.0%), and lumbar vertebrae 1 (2.9%). The outcome as measured by Frankel's grade at 6 months after surgery showed improvement in 9 (25.7%) patients following intervention. All patients who presented with Frankel's Grade C and D improved to Grade E while none of those who presented with Frankel's Grade E deteriorated. The common complications of spine decompression and fixation in this series were surgical site infections (11.4%) and chest infections (11.4%), especially in high cervical injury. CONCLUSION: Spinal cord decompression with spinal stabilization enhances the rehabilitation of patients with unstable spine and completes spinal cord injuries. Our experience shows improvement in neurological function in patients with spinal cord decompression despite the challenges of instrumentation in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Surgical site infection in posterior spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) in spine surgery remain a significant cause of morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Factors affecting SSI includes patient's comorbidities, duration of surgery, type and indication for surgery among others. We intend to document our experience in our center and highlight possible factors influencing SSI in posterior spine surgery. METHODOLOGY: All consecutive patients who had posterior spine surgeries between January 2012 and July 2014 were recruited into the study. All patients who had wound infection were noted and culture sensitivities were documented as well. Results were analysed to get the infection rate, reasons for prolonged stay on admission as well as possible contributing factors to wound infections. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients' records were reviewed with 34 males and 28 females (male:female = 1.2:1). SSI was classified as deep or superficial to the fascia. Ten (16.1%) patients were found to have an SSI with 7 (11.3%) patients having deep infections and 3 (4.8%) had superficial infection. Vertebral level operated, etiology, and diagnosis were not statistically significant for SSI. However, spinal instrumentation, surgery on cervical region and wound inspection on or before postoperative day 5 were associated with an increase in the rate of SSI. Comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, and anemia were significant risk factors. The organisms cultured were Pseudomonas and Staphylococcus species. CONCLUSIONS: Wound infection is a significant complication of posterior spine surgery. This causes distress for both patient and surgeons alike. Uncontrolled diabetes, spine instrumentation and long duration of surgery are significant risk factors for SSI. Practices of early wound inspection, frequent wound dressing changes and not keeping to nontouch technique for changing and removing dressings are important risk factors for SSI in posterior spine surgeries that need to be changed to reduce the burden of SSI.