The surgical treatment of subaxial acute cervical spine facet dislocations in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Adult cervical spine traumatic facet joint dislocations occur when excessive traumatic forces displace the vertebrae's facets, leading to loss of joint congruence. Reduction requires either cranial traction or open surgical procedures. This study aims to appraise the effects of different surgical techniques in the treatment of subaxial cervical spine acute traumatic facet blocks in adults. This study was based on a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, registered in Prospero (CRD42021279249). The PICO question was composed of adults with acute cervical spine traumatic facet dislocations submitted to anterior or posterior surgical approaches, associated or not with cranial traction for reduction. Each surgical technique was compared to the other. The primary clinical outcomes included neurological improvement or worsening and surgical success/failure rates. The anterior approach without cranial traction was efficient in reducing facet displacements. Skull traction was an efficient and immediate method to achieve spine dislocation reductions. Differences were not present among techniques regarding neurological improvement. There were no surgical failures in patients operated on via the posterior approach. The need to decompress and stabilize the cervical spine can be achieved by anterior or posterior surgical approaches, and there is no clear answer as to which initial approach is superior to the other.

The impact of traumatic herniated discs in cervical facets dislocations treatments: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic facet dislocations in the subaxial cervical spine, also known as locked facets, are commonly associated with neurological deficits. The fear of the presence of an associated traumatic disc herniation and consequent neurological worsening usually causes a delay in the spinal realignment. This study's aim is an analysis of safety and efficacy when treating acute cervical traumatic facet dislocations using cranial-cervical traction or posterior open reduction and fixation in the presence of disc herniations. METHODS: Inclusion criteria addressed the following patient groups: (1) MRI diagnosis of traumatic cervical facet dislocations with disc herniation, (2) intervention: either cranial-cervical traction or posterior open reduction and fixation, (4) neurological outcomes after treatment, (5) adult 18 plus years of age, (6) sample sizes greater than 20 patients, (7) English language publication. The following databases and search tools were analyzed: MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Google Scholar, and the clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov), October 2021. RESULTS: Six studies were found, 2 with posterior open reduction and fixation and 4 with cranial-cervical traction, totalizing 197 patients. Neurological worsening was reported only in 1 case (0.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Traumatic disc herniation in cervical facet dislocations is not an absolute contraindication of cranial-cervical traction or posterior open reduction. Early realignment of the spine could bring more neurological benefits than waiting for an MRI or surgical discectomy. However, caution is needed in this review's data interpretation until prospective and well-designed studies are performed.

The effect of filum terminale sectioning for Chiari 1 malformation treatment: systematic review.

PURPOSE: Symptomatic Chiari type I malformation (CM) is treated with posterior fossa decompression with/ without duroplasty. Few authors suggested cerebellar tonsil caudal migration due to a supposed "caudal traction" of cranial nerve structures in a so-called occult tethered cord syndrome. For these authors, filum terminale (FT) sectioning may improve CM symptoms. The objective of this review is to evaluate the effect of FT sectioning on the treatment of CM. METHODS: Using the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews, we reviewed studies to evaluate patient's outcomes with CM who underwent FT sectioning. The MINORS instrument was used for methodological quality assessment. The included studies' levels of evidence (LOE) were classified according to the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine. RESULTS: Two studies from the same group of authors were included. We cannot assure if the cited cases in the first study were also included in their latter published study. The described results suggest that outcomes were not collected in a standardized fashion. Outcomes are described vaguely as a percentage of improvement. Case series samples were small and included not only patients with CM but also patients with scoliosis and syringomyelia. The MINORS score reported that both studies had low methodological quality. Both included studies were classified as level 4 of evidence. CONCLUSION: There is no scientific support for filum terminale sectioning in patients with CM without evidence of tethered cord. This procedure may be considered experimental and should be validated in a strict criterion of inclusion clinical trial comparing outcomes in posterior fossa decompression.

Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic literature review was to evaluate if intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) can prevent neurological injury during spinal operative surgical procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: IONM seems to have presumable positive effects in identifying neurological deficits. However, the role of IONM in the decrease of new neurological deficits remains unclear. METHODS: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews and Meta-analysis, we reviewed clinical comparative studies who evaluate the rate of new neurological events in patients who had a spinal surgery with and without IONM. Studies were then classified according to their level of evidence. Methodological quality was assessed according to methodological index for non-randomized studies instrument. RESULTS: Six studies were evaluated comparing neurological events with and without IONM use by the random effects model. There was a great statistical heterogeneity. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.72 {0.71; 1.79}, P = 0.4584. A specific analysis was done for two studies reporting the results of IONM for spinal surgery of intramedullary lesions. The OR was 0.1993 (0.0384; 1.0350), P = 0.0550. CONCLUSION: IONM did not result into fewer neurological events with the obtained evidence of the included studies. For intramedullary lesions, there was a trend to fewer neurological events in patients who underwent surgery with IONM. Further prospective randomized studies are necessary to clarify the indications of IONM in spinal surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Celiac plexus neurolysis for the treatment of upper abdominal cancer pain.

Optimal treatment of oncologic pain is a challenge to all professionals who deal with cancer and its complications. The management of upper abdominal pain is usually difficult and it is often refractory to conservative therapies. In this context, celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) appears to be an important and indispensable tool because it alleviates pain, gives comfort to patients and is a safe procedure. In this study, the importance of CPN is reviewed by a retrospective study of 74 patients with pain due to upper abdominal cancer. Almost all cases evaluated (94.6%) had an excellent result after CPN and the majority of side effects were transitory.