Surgical intervention ≤ 24 hours versus > 24 hours after injury for the management of acute traumatic central cord syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the efficacy, outcomes, and complications of surgical intervention performed within 24 hours (≤ 24 hours) versus after 24 hours (> 24 hours) in managing acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS). METHODS: Articles pertinent to the study were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment procedures and outcomes according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRIMSA) guidelines. RESULTS: Seven articles comprising 488 patients were included, with 188 (38.5%) patients in the ≤ 24-hour group and 300 (61.5%) in the > 24-hour group. Significant differences were not found between groups in terms of demographic characteristics, injury mechanism, spinal cord compression level, neuroimaging features, and the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score at admission. Both groups had a similar approach to surgery and steroid administration. The surgical complication rate was significantly higher in the > 24-hour group (4.5%) compared to the ≤ 24-hour group (1.2%) (p = 0.05). Clinical follow-up duration was similar at 12 months (interquartile range 3-36) for both groups (p > 0.99). The ≤ 24-hour group demonstrated a not statistically significant greater improvement in ASIA motor score, with a mean difference of 12 (95% CI -20.7 to 44.6) compared to the > 24-hour group. CONCLUSIONS: The present study indicates potential advantages of early (≤ 24 hours) surgery in ATCCS patients, specifically in terms of lower complication rates. However, further research is needed to confirm these findings and their clinical implications.

Early versus late surgical decompression for patients with acute traumatic central cord syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The optimal decompression time for patients presenting with acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) has been debated, and a high level of evidence is lacking. PURPOSE: To compare early (<24 hours) versus late (≥24 hours) surgical decompression for ATCCS. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Medline, PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to March 15th, 2023. The primary outcome was American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score. Secondary outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), total complications, overall mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and ICU LOS. The GRADE approach determined certainty in evidence. RESULTS: The nine studies included reported on 5,619 patients, of whom 2,099 (37.35%) underwent early decompression and 3520 (62.65%) underwent late decompression. The mean age (53.3 vs 56.2 years, p=.505) and admission ASIA motor score (mean difference [MD]=-0.31 [-3.61, 2.98], p=.85) were similar between the early and late decompression groups. At 6-month follow-up, the two groups were similar in ASIA motor score (MD= -3.30 [-8.24, 1.65], p=.19). However, at 1-year follow-up, the early decompression group had a higher ASIA motor score than the late decompression group in total (MD=4.89 [2.89, 6.88], p<.001, evidence: moderate), upper extremities (MD=2.59 [0.82, 4.36], p=.004) and lower extremities (MD=1.08 [0.34, 1.83], p=.004). Early decompression was also associated with lower VTE (odds ratio [OR]=0.41 [0.26, 0.65], p=.001, evidence: moderate), total complications (OR=0.53 [0.42, 0.67], p<.001, evidence: moderate), and hospital LOS (MD=-2.94 days [-3.83, -2.04], p<.001, evidence: moderate). Finally, ICU LOS (MD=-0.69 days [-1.65, 0.28], p=.16, evidence: very low) and overall mortality (OR=1.35 [0.93, 1.94], p=.11, evidence: moderate) were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis of these studies demonstrated that early decompression was beneficial in terms of ASIA motor score, VTE, complications, and hospital LOS. Furthermore, early decompression did not increase mortality odds. Although treatment decision-making has been individualized, early decompression should be considered for patients presenting with ATCCS, provided that the surgeon deems it appropriate.

Benefits of Early Surgical Treatment for Patients with Multilevel Cervical Canal Stenosis of Acute Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, there exists considerable debate surrounding the optimal treatment approaches for different subtypes of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). The purpose of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of the benefits associated with conservative treatment and treatments with different surgical periods for patients diagnosed with acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) and multilevel cervical canal stenosis (CCS). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, and 93 patients who met inclusion and exclusion criteria in our hospital between 2015 and 2020 were followed for a minimum duration of 2 years. Among them, 30 patients (Group A) received conservative treatment, 18 patients (Group B) received early surgery (≤7 days), and 45 patients (Group C) received late surgery (>7 days). The American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, and recovery rate (RR) were evaluated. Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze prognostic determinants. Cost-utility analysis was performed based on the EQ-5D scale. RESULTS: The ASIA grade, JOA score, and RR of all three groups improved compared with the previous evaluation (P < 0.05). During follow-up, the ASIA grade, JOA score, and RR of Group B were all better than for Group A and Group C (P < 0.05), while there was no significant difference between Group A and C (P > 0.05). The EQ-5D scale in Group B was optimal at the last follow-up. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of Group A was the lowest, while that of Group B compared to Group A was less than the threshold of patients' willingness to pay. Age, initial ASIA grade, and treatment types significantly affected the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Both conservative and surgical treatments yield good results. Compared with patients who received conservative treatment and late surgery, patients who received early surgery had better clinical function and living quality. Despite the higher cost, early surgery is cost-effective when compared to conservative treatment. Younger age, initial better ASIA grade, and earlier surgery were associated with better prognosis.

Prognostic and risk factors for the surgical efficacy of central spinal cord syndrome in patients with preexisting degenerative cervical spinal cord compression.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the prognostic and risk factors related to surgical treatment of central spinal cord syndrome (CSS) and to find out the optimal timing of operative management. METHODS: From January 2011 to January 2019, a consecutive series of 128 patients with CSS confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were retrospectively analyzed including their clinical records and radiologic data from a prospectively maintained database in a single center. RESULTS: According to the prognosis evaluated by the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA), American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score (AMS), and ASIA impairment scale (AIS) grade, the overall postoperative outcome was good. Finally, it was found that surgical timing, presence of myelopathy or not at baseline, AMS at admission, and compression ratio were independent factors affecting the prognosis. Surgery as soon as possible after the occurrence of CSS is still advocated. CONCLUSION: Cervical myelopathy at baseline, compression ratio, and AMS score on admission were independent prognostic factors for the surgical treatment of CSS. If surgical indications are clear, early surgical intervention should be actively considered.

Treatment of acute traumatic central cord syndrome: a score-based approach based on the literature.

PURPOSE: Acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) accounts for up to 70% of incomplete spinal cord injuries, and modern improvements in surgical and anaesthetic techniques have given surgeons more treatment options for the ATCCS patient. We present a literature review of ATCCS, with the aim of elucidating the best treatment option for the varying ATCCS patient characteristics and profiles. We aim to synthesise the available literature into a simple-to-use format to aid in the decision-making process. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and CINAHL databases were searched for relevant studies and improvement in functional outcomes were calculated. To allow for direct comparison of functional outcomes, we chose to focus solely on studies which utilised the ASIA motor score and improvements in ASIA motor score. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included for review. There were a total of 749 patients, of which 564 were treated surgically and 185 were treated conservatively. There was a significantly higher average motor recovery percentage amongst surgically-treated patients as compared to conservatively treated patients (76.1% vs. 66.1%, p value = 0.04). There was no significant difference between the ASIA motor recovery percentage of patients treated with early surgery and delayed surgery (69.9 vs. 77.2, p value = 0.31). Delayed surgery after a trial of conservative management is also an appropriate treatment strategy for certain patients, and the presence of multiple comorbidities portend poor outcomes. We propose a score-based approach to decision making in ATCCS, by allocating a numerical score for the patient's clinical neurological condition, imaging findings on CT or MRI, history of cervical spondylosis and comorbidity profile. CONCLUSIONS: An individualised approach to each ATCCS patient, considering their unique characteristics will lead to the best outcomes, and the use of a simple scoring system, can aid clinicians in choosing the best treatment for ATCCS patients.

Early surgical intervention alleviates sensory symptoms following acute traumatic central cord syndrome.

PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of early versus delayed surgery on sensory abnormalities in acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS). METHODS: Pressure pain threshold (PPT), temporal summation (TS), conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and pain assessments were performed in 72 ATCCS patients (early vs. delayed surgical treatment: 32 vs. 40) and 72 healthy subjects in this ambispective cohort study. These examinations, along with mechanical detection threshold (MDT) and disabilities of arm, shoulder and hand (DASH), were assessed at 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: Preoperatively, more delayed surgical patients had neuropathic pain below level compared with early surgical patients (P < 0.05). Both early and delayed surgical patients showed reduced PPT in common painful areas and increased TS, while reduced CPM only existed in the latter (P < 0.05). Reduced PPT in all tested areas, along with abnormalities in TS and CPM, was observed in patients with durations over 3 months. Both incidences and intensities of pain and pain sensitivities in common painful areas were reduced in both treatment groups postoperatively, but only early surgical treatment improved the CPM and TS. Follow-up analysis demonstrated a higher MDT and lower PPT in hand, greater TS, greater DASH, lower pain intensities and higher incidence of dissatisfaction involving sensory symptoms in delayed surgical patients than in early surgical patients (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Central hypersensitivity may be involved in the persistence of sensory symptoms in ATCCS, and this augmented central processing may commence in the early stage. Early surgical treatment may reverse dysfunction of endogenous pain modulation, thus reducing the risk of central sensitization and alleviating sensory symptoms.

Effectiveness of different surgical methods in the treatment of acute central cord syndrome without fractures and dislocations of the cervical spine.

BACKGROUND: Acute central cord syndrome (ACCS) without fractures or dislocations is the most common form of incomplete spinal cord injury. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of different surgical methods in the treatment of acute central cord syndrome without fractures or dislocations of the cervical spine. METHODS: A total of 164 patients with ACCS without fracture or dislocation of the cervical spine treated in our hospital from May 2012 to October 2019 were recruited and assigned to study group A and study group B according to different treatment modalities, with 82 cases in each group. Study group A underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, and study group B was treated with posterior cervical laminectomy. The American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) classification and motor scores of all cases at admission and at discharge were recorded, and the treatment outcomes of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the ASIA classification and ASIA motor scores between the two groups at admission (P> 0.05). One year after surgery, the ASIA motor scores and sensory scores were not statistically significant between the two groups (P> 0.05) but showed significant improvement compared to the preoperative scores (P< 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both anterior cervical discectomy and fusion and posterior cervical laminectomy can improve the ASIA classification, ASIA motor scores, and sensory scores of ACCS patients without fractures or dislocations of the cervical spine. Therefore, surgical methods should be adopted based on the patients' conditions.

Surgical Efficacy and Prognostic Factors for Acute Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome Without Fracture and Dislocation.

This study was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of surgical treatment of acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) without fracture and dislocation and explore surgical timing and factors influencing postoperative recovery of spinal cord function. We retrospectively collected the general and clinical data of 112 patients with ATCCS (American Spinal Injury Association impairment scale grade C or D) without fracture and dislocation who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital from January 2013 to August 2019. We used statistical methods to evaluate the safety of the operation and explore the timing of surgery and the factors influencing postoperative recovery of spinal cord function. The mean age of the 112 patients was 60.64±12.91 years. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and the American Spinal Injury Association motor score (AMS) of the 112 patients were significantly higher at final follow-up than at admission. No significant difference in recovery of spinal cord function was seen between the early operation group (≤4 days) and the late operation group (>4 days). Comparison of patients with a good prognosis vs a poor prognosis showed that age, intrahand muscle strength at admission, maximum spinal cord compression, maximum canal compromise, length of high-intensity signal in the spinal cord on sagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, AMS, and American Spinal Injury Association injury grade D/C at admission had a significant effect on recovery of spinal cord function. Surgical treatment of ATCCS without fracture and dislocation is safe and effective. Age, admission AMS and American Spinal Injury Association impairment scale score, intrinsic hand muscle strength, maximum canal compromise, maximum spinal cord compression, and length of high-intensity signal in the spinal cord can be used to predict postoperative recovery of spinal cord function. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(6):325-332.].

Early vs Late Surgical Decompression for Central Cord Syndrome.

Importance: The optimal clinical management of central cord syndrome (CCS) remains unclear; yet this is becoming an increasingly relevant public health problem in the face of an aging population. Objective: To provide a head-to-head comparison of the neurologic and functional outcomes of early (<24 hours) vs late (≥24 hours) surgical decompression for CCS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients who underwent surgery for CCS (lower extremity motor score [LEMS] - upper extremity motor score [UEMS] ≥ 5) were included in this propensity score-matched cohort study. Data were collected from December 1991 to March 2017, and the analysis was performed from March 2020 to January 2021. This study identified patients with CCS from 3 international multicenter studies with data on the timing of surgical decompression in spinal cord injury. Participants were included if they had a documented baseline neurologic examination performed within 14 days of injury. Participants were eligible if they underwent surgical decompression for CCS. Exposures: Early surgery was compared with late surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Propensity scores were calculated as the probability of undergoing early compared with late surgery using the logit method and adjusting for relevant confounders. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio by an optimal-matching technique. The primary end point was motor recovery (UEMS, LEMS, American Spinal Injury Association [ASIA] motor score [AMS]) at 1 year. Secondary end points were Functional Independence Measure (FIM) motor score and complete independence in each FIM motor domain at 1 year. Results: The final study cohort consisted of 186 patients with CCS. The early-surgery group included 93 patients (mean [SD] age, 47.8 [16.8] years; 66 male [71.0%]), and the late-surgery group included 93 patients (mean [SD] age, 48.0 [15.5] years; 75 male [80.6%]). Early surgical decompression resulted in significantly improved recovery in upper limb (mean difference [MD], 2.3; 95% CI, 0-4.5; P = .047), but not lower limb (MD, 1.1; 95% CI, -0.8 to 3.0; P = .30), motor function. In an a priori-planned subgroup analysis, outcomes were comparable with early or late decompressive surgery in patients with ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grade D injury. However, in patients with AIS grade C injury, early surgery resulted in significantly greater recovery in overall motor score (MD, 9.5; 95% CI, 0.5-18.4; P = .04), owing to gains in both upper and lower limb motor function. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found early surgical decompression to be associated with improved recovery in upper limb motor function at 1 year in patients with CCS. Treatment paradigms for CCS should be redefined to encompass early surgical decompression as a neuroprotective therapy.

Comparison of Anterior and Posterior Approaches for Acute Traumatic Central Spinal Cord Syndrome with Multilevel Cervical Canal Stenosis without Cervical Fracture or Dislocation.

Introduction: This is a retrospective comparative study that aims to compare the benefits of different surgical approaches for patients with multilevel cervical canal stenosis (CCS) without cervical fracture or dislocation of acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS). Methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, 59 patients were included in the study. Among them, 35 patients (Group A) received anterior surgery and 24 patients (Group B) received posterior surgery. Primary outcome measures were American Spinal Cord Injury Association (Asia) grade, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and recovery rate (RR). Secondary outcome measures included operation time, intraoperative blood loss, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, cervical sagittal parameters, and complications. Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze prognostic determinants. Results: Compared with Group B, Group A had longer operation time and more intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.05). However, the VAS score of Group B was higher than that of Group A at discharge (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in cervical sagittal plane parameters between the two groups (P > 0.05). Postoperative complications were different in the two groups. During follow-up, the Asia grade, the JOA score, and RR of both groups improved (P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05). Younger age, earlier surgery, and better preoperative Asia grade were correlated with better prognosis. Conclusions: For patients with multilevel CCS without cervical fracture or dislocation of ATCCS, both surgical approaches had good outcomes. Although no significant differences were found in the primary outcome measures between the two groups, there were different recommendations for the secondary outcome measures. Younger age, earlier surgery, and better preoperative Asia grade were protective factors for better prognosis.

The Relationship Between Preoperative Cervical Sagittal Balance and Clinical Outcome of Acute Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the sagittal radiological parameters related to clinical recovery of patients with acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) and determine the diagnostic value of related variables. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 104 patients with ATCCS. Six cervical sagittal balance parameters were collected: Cobb angle, T1 slope, neck tilt, thoracic inlet angle (TIA), C2-C7 sagittal vertex axis, T1 slope - C2-C7 Cobb angle. The patients were assigned to an ideal improvement group and poor improvement group according to their recovery rate. Receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve were used to evaluate the significant results of logistic regression and the optimal diagnostic value. RESULTS: Preoperative and postoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores indicated a good recovery after surgical intervention. Radiological findings revealed that neck tilt and TIA were risk factors for poor neurological improvement of patients with ATCCS. Area under the curve (95% confidence interval) values of neck tilt and TIA were 0.763 (0.660-0.866) and 0.749 (0.643-0.855), and cutoff values were 39.1° and 65.6°, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lower neck tilt and TIA are risk factors for poor outcomes in patients with ATCCS after surgery. Neck tilt <39° and TIA <66° had significant diagnostic value for poor prognosis.

Length of Cervical Stenosis, Admission ASIA Motor Scores, and BASIC Scores Are Predictors of Recovery Rate Following Central Cord Syndrome.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) parameters and radiological scoring systems could be used as a reliable assessment tool for predicting neurological recovery trajectory following acute traumatic central cord injury syndrome (CCS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Controversy remains in whether CCS should be managed conservatively or by early surgical decompression. It is essential to understand how clinical and radiological parameters correlate with neurological deficits and how they predict recovery trajectories. METHODS: We identified patients with CCS admitted between 2011 and 2018 with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Cervical MRIs were analyzed for cord/canal dimensions, Brain and Spinal Injury Center (BASIC) scores and sagittal grading as ordinal scales of intraparenchymal cord injury. Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) recovery rates (≥50% as good, < 50% as poor) were analyzed against these variables by logistic regression and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Additionally, we evaluated American Spinal Injury Association motor scale (AMS) scores/recovery rates. RESULTS: Sixty patients were included, of which 30 were managed conservatively and 30 via surgical decompression. The average follow-up duration for the entire cohort was (51.1 ±â€Š25.7) months. Upon admission, sagittal grading correlated with AMS and JOA scores (P < 0.01, ß = 0.48). Volume of the C2 to C7 canal and axial cord area over the site of maximal compression correlated with AMS and JOA scores respectively (P = 0.04, ß = 0.26; P = 0.01, ß = 0.28). We determined admission AMS more than 61 to be a clinical cutoff for good recovery (area under the receiver operating curve [AUC] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-0.85, sensitivity 80.9%, specificity 69.2%, P < 0.01). Radiological cutoffs to identify patients with poor recovery rates were length of cervical spinal stenosis more than 3.9 cm (AUC = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63-0.87, specificity 91.7%, sensitivity 52.2%, P < 0.01), BASIC score of more than 1 (AUC = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.56-0.81, specificity 80.5%, sensitivity 51.1%, P = 0.02). Surgical decompression performed as a salvage procedure upon plateau of recovery did not improve neurological outcomes. CONCLUSION: Clinical and radiological parameters upon presentation were prognosticative of neurological recovery rates in CCS. Surgery performed beyond the acute post-injury period failed to improve outcomes.Level of Evidence: 3.

Pros and Cons of Early and Very Early Surgery for Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome with Spinal Stenosis: Literature Review and Case Report.

BACKGROUND: The case of a 69-year-old patient with an acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) with preexisting spinal stenosis raised a discussion over the question of conservative versus surgical treatment in the acute setting. We provide a literature overview on the management (conservative vs. surgical treatment) of ATCCS with preexisting spinal stenosis. METHODS: We reviewed the literature concerning essential concepts for the management of ATCCS with spinal stenosis and cervical spinal cord injury. The data retrieved from these studies were applied to the potential management of an illustrative case report. RESULTS: Not rarely has ATCCS an unpredictable neurologic course because of its dynamic character with secondary injury mechanisms within the cervical spinal cord in the early phase, the possibility of functional deterioration, and the appearance of a neuropathic pain syndrome during late follow-up. The result of the literature review favors early surgical treatment in ATCCS patients with preexisting cervical stenosis. CONCLUSION: Reluctance toward aggressive and timely surgical treatment of ATCCS should at least be questioned in patients with preexisting spinal stenosis.

Same Day Surgical Intervention Dramatically Minimizes Complication Occurrence and Optimizes Perioperative Outcomes for Central Cord Syndrome.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate associations between time to surgical intervention and outcomes for central cord syndrome (CCS) patients. BACKGROUND: As surgery is increasingly recommended for patients with neurological deterioration CCS, it is important to investigate the relationship between time to surgery and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CCS patients were isolated in Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2005-2013. Patients were grouped by time to surgery: same-day, 1-day delay, 2, 3, 4-7, 8-14, and >14 days. Means comparison tests compared patient factors, perioperative complications, and charges across patient groups. Controlling for age, comorbidities, length of stay, and concurrent traumatic fractures, binary logistic regression assessed surgical timing associated with increased odds of perioperative complication, using same-day as reference group. RESULTS: Included: 6734 CSS patients (64% underwent surgery). The most common injury mechanisms were falls (30%) and pedestrian accidents (7%). Of patients that underwent surgery, 52% underwent fusion, 30% discectomy, and 14% other decompression of the spinal canal. Breakdown by time to procedure was: 39% same-day, 16% 1-day, 10% 2 days, 8% 3 days, 16% 4-7 days, 8% 8-14 days, and 3% >14 days. Timing groups did not differ in trauma status at admission, although age varied: [minimum: 1 d (58±15 y), maximum: >14 d (63±13 y)]. Relative to other groups, same-day patients had the lowest hospital charges, highest rates of home discharge, and second lowest postoperative length of stay behind 2-day delay patients. Patients delayed >14 days to surgery had increased odds of perioperative cardiac and infection complications. Timing groups beyond 3 days showed increased odds of VTE and nonhome discharge. CONCLUSIONS: CCS patients undergoing surgery on the same day as admission had lower odds of complication, hospital charges, and higher rates of home discharge than patients that experienced a delay to operation. Patients delayed >14 days to surgery were associated with inferior outcomes, including increased odds of cardiac complication and infection.

Elderly traumatic central cord syndrome in the USA: a review of management and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: As the incidence of elderly spinal cord injury rises, improved understanding of risk profiles and outcomes is needed. This review summarizes clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes specific to the elderly (≥65-years) with acute traumatic central cord syndrome in the USA. EVIDENCE AQUISITION: Literature review of the PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases (01/2007-03/2020) regarding elderly subjects with acute traumatic central cord syndrome. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Nine studies met inclusion criteria. Acute traumatic central cord syndrome was more common among married (50%), Caucasian (22-71%) males (63-86%) with an annual income <40,999 USA dollars (30%). Mechanisms consisted predominantly of traumatic falls (32-55%) and motor vehicle collisions (15-34%), with admission American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grades D (25-79%) and C (21-51%). Mortality was 2-3%. American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale motor score, maximum canal compromise, and extent of parenchymal damage were predictors of one-year recovery. Greater comorbidities (heart failure, weight loss, coagulopathy, diabetes), lower income (<51,000 USA dollars), and age ≥80 were predictors of mortality. A substantial cohort underwent surgery (40-45%). Elderly patients were less likely to receive surgical intervention, and surgery timing had variable effects on recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients with acute traumatic central cord syndrome are uniquely at risk due to cumulative comorbidities, protracted recovery times, and unclear effects of surgical timing on outcomes. Prospective research should focus on validating age-specific risk factors, formalizing surgical indications, and delineating the impact of time to surgery on acute and long-term outcomes for this condition.

Central Cord Syndrome Redefined.

This article reviews the historical origins of central cord syndrome (CCS), the mechanism of injury, pathophysiology, and clinical implications. CCS is the most common form of incomplete spinal cord injury. CCS involves a spectrum of neurologic deficits preferentially affecting the hands and arms. Evidence suggests that in the twenty-first century CCS has become the most common form of spinal cord injury overall. In an era of big data and the need to standardize this particular diagnosis to unite outcome data, we propose redefining CCS as any adult cervical spinal cord injury in the absence of fracture/dislocation.

Efficacy of Early (≤ 24 Hours), Late (25-72 Hours), and Delayed (>72 Hours) Surgery with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Confirmed Decompression in American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale Grades C and D Acute Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome Caused by Spinal Stenosis.

The therapeutic significance of timing of decompression in acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) caused by spinal stenosis remains unsettled. We retrospectively examined a homogenous cohort of patients with ATCCS and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evidence of post-treatment spinal cord decompression to determine whether timing of decompression played a significant role in American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score (AMS) 6 months following trauma. We used the t test, analysis of variance, Pearson correlation coefficient, and multiple regression for statistical analysis. During a 19-year period, 101 patients with ATCCS, admission ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grades C and D, and an admission AMS of ≤95 were surgically decompressed. Twenty-four of 101 patients had an AIS grade C injury. Eighty-two patients were males, the mean age of patients was 57.9 years, and 69 patients had had a fall. AMS at admission was 68.3 (standard deviation [SD] 23.4); upper extremities (UE) 28.6 (SD 14.7), and lower extremities (LE) 41.0 (SD 12.7). AMS at the latest follow-up was 93.1 (SD 12.8), UE 45.4 (SD 7.6), and LE 47.9 (SD 6.6). Mean number of stenotic segments was 2.8, mean canal compromise was 38.6% (SD 8.7%), and mean intramedullary lesion length (IMLL) was 23 mm (SD 11). Thirty-six of 101 patients had decompression within 24 h, 38 patients had decompression between 25 and 72 h, and 27 patients had decompression >72 h after injury. Demographics, etiology, AMS, AIS grade, morphometry, lesion length, surgical technique, steroid protocol, and follow-up AMS were not statistically different between groups treated at different times. We analyzed the effect size of timing of decompression categorically and in a continuous fashion. There was no significant effect of the timing of decompression on follow-up AMS. Only AMS at admission determined AMS at follow-up (coefficient = 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.21; p = 0.001). We conclude that timing of decompression in ATCCS caused by spinal stenosis has little bearing on ultimate AMS at follow-up.

Early versus late surgical intervention for central cord syndrome: A nationwide all-payer inpatient analysis of length of stay, discharge destination and cost of care.

OBJECTIVE: Central cord syndrome (CCS) is the most common incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI), resulting in various degrees of neurologic compromise below the level of the affected cervical cord. The management of CCS is controversial regarding not only whether to surgically intervene, but also when surgery should occur. In this study, we conduct the largest multi-center study to date examining differences in inpatient outcomes, general discharge disposition, length of stay, and cost associated with early versus late surgical intervention for CCS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for years 2012-2015 for patients who underwent surgery with a primary diagnosis of CCS. The median interval between admission and intervention was noted. Patients operated upon prior to this timepoint were placed in the early surgery group, and others into the later surgery group. The groups were then compared, while using 1:1 propensity score matching to control for baseline presentation, with respect to mortality, discharge disposition, length of stay, and total charges. RESULTS: A total of 422 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The median time from admission to intervention was 2 days. Patients with higher initial severity of injury were more likely to undergo early surgery. Upon controlling for severity of initial presentation, earlier intervention did not appear to affect mortality or post-operative length of stay. However, patients operated upon earlier had more favorable discharge destinations (p = 0.025) and a lower associated cost of care ($198,050.70 vs. $243,048.10, p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Earlier surgical intervention for CCS may result in better patient disposition and less total charges. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Effect of Surgical Intervention on Neurologic Recovery in Patients with Central Cord Syndrome.

To review the experience of managing central cord syndrome (CCS) surgically, we retrospectively reviewed 71 patients from October 2015 to April 2017. Deteriorating neurologic status with evidence of radiologic compression and spinal instability were absolute indications for surgery. The American Spinal and Injury Association (ASIA) motor scores (AMS) were recorded at the time of admission (aAMS), 3 days postoperatively (3dAMS), 1 month postoperatively(1mAMS), and at final follow-up (fAMS). Analysis of variance was performed to compare 3dAMS, 1mAMS, and fAMS. Surgery was successful in all 71 patients without re-injury of the spinal cord, infection, or other perioperative complications. The postoperative AMS at 3 days, 1 month, and at the final follow-up significantly improved over preoperative scores. ASIA sensory scores at fAMS were significantly better than 3dAMS and1mAMS scores. The ASIA motor and sensory scores at 1mAMS showed no significant improvements compared with the 3dAMS. Therefore, for patients diagnosed with CCS, combined with evidence of radiologic compression and spinal instability, surgery was beneficial in terms of gains in neurologic recovery.