Damage control orthopaedics: State of the art.

Damage control orthopaedics (DCO) originally consisted of the provisional immobilisation of long bone - mainly femur - fractures in order to achieve the advantages of early treatment and to minimise the risk of complications, such as major pain, fat embolism, clotting, pathological inflammatory response, severe haemorrhage triggering the lethal triad, and the traumatic effects of major surgery on a patient who is already traumatised (the "second hit" effect). In recent years, new locations have been added to the DCO concept, such as injuries to the pelvis, spine and upper limbs. Nonetheless, this concept has not yet been validated in well-designed prospective studies, and much controversy remains. Indeed, some researchers believe the indiscriminate application of DCO might be harmful and produce substantial and unnecessary expense. In this respect, too, normalised parameters associated with the acid-base system have been proposed, under a concept termed early appropriate care, in the view that this would enable patients to receive major surgical procedures in an approach offering the advantages of early total care together with the apparent safety of DCO. This paper discusses the diagnosis and treatment of severely traumatised patients managed in accordance with DCO and highlights the possible drawbacks of this treatment principle.

Surgical Infection after Posterolateral Lumbar Spine Arthrodesis: CT Analysis of Spinal Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of infection after instrumented lumbar spine surgery, the demographic and surgical variables associated with acute infection, and the influence of infection and debridement on the consolidation of spinal fusion. METHODS: After obtaining approval from the hospital ethics committee, an observational study was made on a prospective cohort of consecutive patients surgically treated by posterolateral lumbar spine arthrodesis (n = 139, 2005-2011). In all cases, the minimum follow-up period was 18 months. The following bivariate analysis was conducted of demographic and surgical variables: non-infection group (n = 123); infection group (n = 16). Fusion rates were determined by multislice CT. Logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Incidence of deep infection requiring debridement: 11.51% (95% confidence interval, 5.85-17.18]). Bivariate analysis: differences were observed in hospital stay (7.0 days [range, 4-10] vs 14.50 days [range, 5.25-33.75]; P = 0.013), surgical time (3.15 h vs 4.09 h; P = 0.004), body mass index (25.11 kg/m2 [22.58-27.0] vs 26.02 kg/m2 [24.15 to 29.38]; P = 0.043), Charlson comorbidity index (median, 0 vs 1; P = 0.027), and rate of unsuccessful consolidation according to CT (18.4% vs 72.7%; P = 0.0001). In a model of multivariate logistic regression, taking as the dependent variable unsuccessful arthrodesis after 1 year, and adjusting for the other independent variables (infection, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, and surgical time), the only variable that was significantly associated with an outcome of unsuccessful spinal fusion after 1 year was infection, with OR = 12.44 (95% confidence interval, 2.50-61.76). CONCLUSION: Deep infection after instrumented lumbar spine arthrodesis is a common complication that compromises the radiographic outcome of surgery. Patients who develop a postoperative infection and require debridement surgery are 12 times less likely to achieve satisfactory radiological fusion.

Spinopelvic injuries. Facts and controversies.

Spinopelvic injuries result from high energy trauma with overloading through the sacrum. These lesions can accomplish either bone fractures, ligament injuries or, most commonly, both. They may be accompanied with other associated life threatening injuries and cause biomechanical instability with potential fracture non-union, mal-union and subsequent lifetime pain and disability. Surgical stabilization of spinopelvic injuries requires planning in order to apply the appropriate osteosynthesis principles (compression; neutralization; buttressing and tension band). In general terms simple sacral fractures can be treated under compression by iliosacral screws. However, as more complex ones cannot be compressed, they need vertical support and neutralization of shearing forces (neutralization and buttressing principles). For that purpose, spinopelvic instrumentations appear to be the current appropriate technique of stabilization. In the herein paper the general principles of sacral fracture osteosynthesis are discussed, as well as its application to spinopelvic injuries. Controversies on positioning, surgical approach, per-operative traction, sacral laminectomy, type of biomechanical construct, length of fixation, screws length, mode of weight bearing, and osteosynthesis hardware removal are discussed.

Allograft plus OP-1 enhances ossification in posterolateral lumbar fusion: A seven year follow-up.

PURPOSE: To study the results of the combination of allograft plus BMP-7 in comparison with allograft alone in posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A blinded controlled consecutive prospective cohort of skeletally mature patients study. One hundred and ten patients underwent posterolateral lumbar instrumented arthrodesis. Allograft randomly compacted onto either the right or the left side of the articular and the posterior aspect of the transverse processes of lumbar spine. The same procedure performed on the contralateral side, but allograft was previously mixed with osteogenic protein (OP-1). Clinical, x-ray and CT-scan long follow-up performed. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: More bone continuity was found with allograft plus OP-1 than with allograft alone (p>0.0038). The amount of bone mass was greater on the OP-1 side (p<0.001). No local or systemic adverse effect were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Allograft on one side plus allograft with BMP-7 on the other achieved a fusion rate of 93 per cent. Allograft combined with BMP-7 was more effective than allograft alone.

Surgical treatment of spondylodiscitis. An update.

CONCEPT: Spondylodiscitis refers to an infection affecting the intervertebral disk, the vertebral body or the posterior arch of the vertebra being aetiologically, pyogenic, granulomatous (tuberculosis, brucellosis, or fungal infection) or parasitic. DIAGNOSIS: Spondylodiscitis diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms, a combination of erythrocyte sedimentation rate with C-reactive protein (CRP) tests and, less useful, leukocytosis. Blood culture is also a very cost-effective method of identifying organisms. Plain radiographs are useful, however changes may take several months to appear. Radionuclide tests are currently less used; nevertheless, fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) shows encouraging results particularly when magnetic resonance images (MRI) are unconvincing in the distinction between degenerative changes and infection. MRI with gadolinium enhancement is the choice for image diagnosis. MANAGEMENT: Medical management is usually the basis for treatment, alone or in combination with surgery. Surgical approach, either by endoscopy or open, is indicated for biopsy when clinical evolution is unsatisfactory and no micro-organism has been isolated, and also whenever a root, spinal cord or dural compression is seen on MRI; spinal instability or severe deformity are also clear indications for surgical treatment. Less invasive surgery either CT-scan guided or, particularly, by endoscopy has good results. However open surgery is still the standard. The anterior approach allows for anterior disc and bone debridement. The posterior approach is indicated when posterior elements are involved or in the presence of an epidural abscess. Although good results have been claimed, the use of instrumentation in the presence of an infected focus is controversial, as the use of cages or BMPs are.

Spondylodiscitis in patients under haemodyalisis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to reach conclusions about the diagnosis and treatment of a series of patients with spondylodiscitis under haemodialysis treatment. METHODS: We collected and studied 23 patients included in a prospective database from two neighbouring hospitals. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: The diagnosis was frequently made very late and early negative cultures were not uncommon; magnetic resonance images allowed for an early diagnosis with accurate anatomical information. Empirical antibiotic treatment with prompt surgery produced good results in patients under risk of, or having neurological problems. Surgical approaches did not differ from pyogenic or tuberculous spondylodiscitis. Age in our series was not a predictive issue. CONCLUSIONS: Whenever a patient under haemodialysis has symptoms of spinal disease, particularly back pain with fever, they should undergo an MRI. If diagnosis of spondylodiscitis is made prompt empirical antibiotherapy should be instituted. Blood cultures should be performed and tissue samples taken for cultures; however, culture outcome must not delay therapy. Early surgical decompression leads to good results.