A case series of penetrating spinal trauma: comparisons to blunt trauma, surgical indications, and outcomes.

OBJECTIVEWhile blunt spinal trauma accounts for the majority of spine trauma, penetrating injuries affect a substantial number of patients. The goal of this study was to examine the epidemiology of penetrating spine injuries compared with blunt injuries and review the operative interventions and outcomes in the penetrating spine injury group.METHODSThe prospectively maintained trauma database was queried for spinal fractures from 2012 to 2018. Charts from patients with penetrating spine trauma were reviewed.RESULTSA total of 1130 patients were evaluated for traumatic spinal fractures; 154 injuries (13.6%) were secondary to penetrating injuries. Patients with penetrating injuries were significantly younger (29.2 years vs 44.1 years, p < 0.001), more likely male (87.7% vs 69.2%, p < 0.001), and more commonly African American (80.5% vs 33.3%, p < 0.05). When comparing primary insurers, the penetrating group had a significantly higher percentage of patients covered by Medicaid (60.4% vs 32.6%, p < 0.05) or prison (3.9% vs 0.1%, p < 0.05) or being uninsured (17.5% vs 10.3%, p < 0.05). The penetrating group had a higher Injury Severity Score on admission (20.2 vs 15.6, p < 0.001) and longer hospital length of stay (20.1 days vs 10.3 days, p < 0.001) and were less likely to be discharged home (51.3% vs 65.1%, p < 0.05). Of the penetrating injuries, 142 (92.2%) were due to firearms. Sixty-three patients (40.9%) with penetrating injuries had a concomitant spinal cord or cauda equina injury. Of those, 44 (69.8%) had an American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade of A. Ten patients (15.9%) improved at least 1 AIS grade, while 2 patients (3.2%) declined at least 1 AIS grade. Nine patients with penetrating injuries underwent neurosurgical intervention: 5 for spinal instability, 4 for compressive lesions with declining neurological examination results, and 2 for infectious concerns, with some patients having multiple indications. Patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention did not show a significantly greater change in AIS grade than those who did not. No patient experienced a complication directly related to neurosurgical intervention.CONCLUSIONSPenetrating spinal trauma affects a younger, more publicly funded cohort than blunt spinal trauma. These patients utilize more healthcare resources and are more severely injured. Surgery is undertaken for limiting progression of neurological deficit, stabilization, or infection control.

Management of cerebrospinal fluid leak from cervical gunshot wounds with external ventricular drainage: a small case series.

Historically, the surgical management of gunshot wounds to the spine has been controversial. Repair of a persistent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak is a generally agreed upon indication. The management of such CSF leaks typically involves lumbar drainage or direct surgical repair. Here, the authors report two cases of CSF diversion with an external ventricular drain (EVD) in patients with cervical gunshot wounds. Both patients had spinal canal obliteration or physiologic myelographic block at or below the level of injury. To the best of the author's knowledge, these are the first two reports of successful EVD treatment of persistent CSF leaks related cervical gunshot wounds. The authors also propose a CSF treatment algorithm for cervical gunshot wounds that includes EVD.