Cervical spine clearance in the traumatically injured patient: is multidetector CT scanning sufficient alone? Clinical article.

OBJECT: Clearance of the cervical spine in patients who have sustained trauma remains a contentious issue. Clinical examination alone is sufficient in neurologically intact patients without neck pain. Patients with neck pain or those with altered mental status or a depressed level of consciousness require further radiographic evaluation. However, no consensus exists as to the appropriate imaging modality. Some advocate multidetector CT (MDCT) scanning alone, but this has been criticized because MDCT is not sensitive in detecting ligamentous injuries that can often only be identified on MRI. METHODS: Patients were identified retrospectively from a prospectively maintained database at a Level I trauma center. All patients admitted between January 2004 and June 2011 who had a cervical MDCT scan interpreted by a board-certified radiologist as being without evidence of acute traumatic injury and who also had a cervical MRI study obtained during the same hospital admission were included. Data collected included patient demographics, mechanism of injury, Glasgow Coma Scale score at the time of MRI, the indication for and findings on MRI, and the number, type, and indication for cervical spine procedures. RESULTS: A total of 1004 patients were reviewed, of whom 614 were male, with an overall mean age of 47 years. The indication for MRI was neck pain in 662 patients, altered mental status in 467, and neurological signs or symptoms in 157. The MRI studies were interpreted as normal in 645 patients, evidencing ligamentous injury alone in 125, and showing nonspecific degenerative changes in the remaining patients. Of the 125 patients with ligamentous injuries, 66 (52.8%) had documentation of clearance (29 clinical, 37 with flexion-extension radiographs). Another 32 patients were presumed to be self-cleared, bringing the follow-up rate to 82% (98 of 119). Five patients died prior to clearance, and 1 patient was transferred to another facility prior to clearance. Based on these data, the 95% confidence interval for the assertion that clinically irrelevant ligamentous injury in the face of normal MDCT is 97%-100%. No patient with ligamentous injury on MRI was documented to require a surgical procedure or halo orthosis for instability. Thirty-nine patients ultimately underwent cervical surgical procedures (29 anterior and 10 posterior; 5 delayed) for central cord syndrome (21), quadriparesis (9), or discogenic radicular pain (9). None had an unstable spine. CONCLUSIONS: In this study population, MRI did not add any additional information beyond MDCT in identifying unstable cervical spine injuries. Magnetic resonance imaging frequently detected ligamentous injuries, none of which were found to be unstable at the time of detection, during the course of admission, or on follow-up. Magnetic resonance imaging provided beneficial clinical information and guided surgical procedures in patients with neurological deficits or radicular pain. An MDCT study with sagittal and coronal reconstructions negative for acute injury in patients without an abnormal motor examination may be sufficient alone for clearance.

The prognostic significance of traumatic brainstem injury detected on T2-weighted MRI.

OBJECT: Magnetic resonance imaging is frequently used to evaluate patients with traumatic brain injury in the acute and subacute setting, and it can detect injuries to the brainstem, which are often associated with poor outcomes. This study was undertaken to determine which MRI and clinical factors provide prognostic information in patients with traumatic brainstem injuries. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of cases involving patients admitted to a Level I trauma center who were identified in a prospective database as having suffered traumatic brainstem injury identified on MRI. Patient outcomes were dichotomized to dead/vegetative versus functional groups. Standard demographic data, admission Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, results of the motor component of the GCS examination at admission and 24 hours later, CT scan findings, and peak intracranial pressure were collected from medical records. Volumetric analysis of each patient's injuries was performed with T2-weighted and gradient echo sequences. The T2-weighted MRI sequence for each patient was reviewed to determine the anatomical location of injury within the brainstem and whether the injury crossed the midline. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients who met the study inclusion criteria were identified. At 6-month follow-up, 53% of these patients had poor outcomes and 47% had recovered. Patients with injuries to the medulla or deep bilateral injuries to the pons did not recover. The T2 volumes were found superior to gradient echo sequences in regard to predicting survival (ROC/AUC 0.67, p = 0.07 vs 0.60, p = 0.29, respectively), but neither reached statistical significance. The timing of MR image acquisition did not influence the findings. The time from admission to MRI did not differ significantly between the recovered group and the poor-outcome group (p = 0.52, Mann-Whitney test), and lesion size as measured by T2 volume did not vary with time to scan (R(2) = 0.03, p = 0.3, linear regression). Performing a stepwise logistic regression with all the variables yielded the following factors related to recovery: crossing midline, p = 0.0156, OR 0.075; and 24-hour GCS motor score, p = 0.0045, OR = 2.25, c-statistic 0.913. Further examination of these 2 factors disclosed the following: none of 15 patients with midline-crossing lesions and a 24-hour GCS motor score of 4 or less recovered; conversely, 12 of 13 patients with lesions that did not cross midline recovered, regardless of GCS motor score. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral injury to the pons and medulla as detected on T2-weighted MRI sequences was associated with poor outcome in patients with brainstem injuries; T2 volumes were found superior to gradient echo sequences in regard to predicting survival, but neither reached statistical significance. When MRI findings were coupled with clinical examination findings, a strong correlation existed between poor outcome and the combination of bilateral brainstem injury and a motor GCS score of 4 or less 24 hours after admission.

A multicenter, single-blind, prospective randomized trial to evaluate the safety of a polyethylene glycol hydrogel (Duraseal Dural Sealant System) as a dural sealant in cranial surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Incisional cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage after cranial surgery is a significant cause of morbidity due to poor wound healing and infection, meningitis, and pseudomeningocele formation. Many common dural closure techniques, such as sutures, autologous grafts, gelatin or collagen sponges, and fibrin glues, are used to achieve watertight closure, although none are US Food and Drug Administration approved for this use. DuraSeal Dural Sealant System is a polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for obtaining watertight dural closure when applied after standard dural suturing. This multicenter, prospective randomized study further evaluated the safety of a PEG hydrogel compared with common dural sealing techniques. METHODS: A total of 237 patients undergoing elective cranial surgery at 17 institutions were randomized to dural closure augmented with the PEG hydrogel or a control "standard of care" dural sealing technique after Valsalva maneuver demonstrated an intraoperative nonwatertight dural closure. Data were collected on complications resulting in unplanned postoperative interventions or reoperations, surgical site infections, CSF leaks, and other neurological complications within 30 days. Surgeons also provided data on the ease of use of the dural sealing techniques, as well as preparation and application times. RESULTS: The incidences of neurosurgical complications, surgical site infections, and CSF leaks were similar between treatment and control groups, with no statistically significant difference between the measures. In the PEG hydrogel group (n = 120), the incidence of neurosurgical complications was 5.8% (n = 7), the incidence of surgical site infections was 1.7% (n = 2), and the incidence of CSF leak was 0.8% (n = 1). In the control group (n = 117), the incidence of neurosurgical complications was 7.7% (n = 9), the incidence of surgical site infection was 2.6% (n = 3), and the incidence of CSF leak was 1.7% (n = 2). Sealant preparation time was less than 5 minutes in 96.6% of the PEG hydrogel group compared with 66.4% of controls (P < 0.001). The dural augmentation was applied in less than 1 minute in 85.7% of the PEG hydrogel group compared with 66.4% of the control group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The PEG hydrogel dural sealant used in this study has a similar safety profile to commonly used dural sealing techniques when used as dural closure augmentation in cranial surgery. The PEG hydrogel dural sealant demonstrated faster preparation and application times than other commonly used dural sealing techniques.

Revision of vagal nerve stimulator electrodes through a posterior cervical triangle approach: technical note.

BACKGROUND: We describe an approach to vagal nerve stimulator (VNS) lead replacement through the posterior cervical triangle. Scar around the structures of the carotid sheath is avoided and new leads are placed on a pristine section of the vagus nerve proximal to the original site. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: Skin incision from the implantation surgery is incorporated and extended to allow access to the posterior border of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM). Dissection proceeds along the posterior border of the SCM. The SCM and jugular vein are retracted anterior to expose a fresh segment of the vagal nerve immediately superficial to the carotid artery and proximal to the original electrode site. Once the nerve is adequately exposed, electrode placement proceeds in the standard fashion. Dysfunctional electrodes are left in place, and the lead wire is cut as near the electrodes as can be easily accessed. Three patients have undergone lead revision with this approach. Lead placement was successful and free from complications in all cases. CONCLUSION: The posterior cervical triangle approach provides a virgin dissection plane for VNS revision.