Search

• Biomechanical simulation of axial force induction testing C1/2 Harms Construct. • Lateral Mass screws construct resulted from 142.04 µm/m to 188.54 µm/m. • Pedicle screws construct resulted from 165.98 µm/m to 195.95 µm/m. • Pedicle screws in a C1/2 Harms Construct were not superior compared to lateral mass screws. The use of the posterior arch of C1 as pedicle has shown beneficial stability regarding screw loosening, however, the C1 pedicle screw placement is challenging. Therefore, the study aimed to analyse the bending forces of the Harms construct used in fixation of C1/C2 when using pedicle screws compared to lateral mass screws. Five cadaveric specimens with a mean age of 72 years at death and bone mineral density measuring for 512.4 Hounsfield Units (HU) on average were used. A custom-made biomechanical setup was used to test the specimens with a C1/C2 Harms construct each with the use of lateral mass screws and pedicle screws in sequence. Strain gauges were used to analyse the bending forces from C1 to C2 in cyclic axial compression (μm/m). All underwent cyclic biomechanical testing using 50, 75 and 100 N. In all specimens, placement of lateral mass screws and pedicle screws was feasible. All underwent cyclic biomechanical testing. For the lateral mass screw, a bending of 142.04 µm/m at 50 N, 166.56 µm/m at 75 N and 188.54 µm/m at 100 N was measured. For the pedicle screws, bending force was slightly elevated with 165.98 µm/m at 50 N, 190.58 µm/m at 75 N and 195.95 µm/m at 100 N. However, bending forces did not vary significantly. In all measurements, no statistical significance was found when comparing pedicle screws and lateral mass screws. The lateral mass screw used in the Harms Construct to stabilize C1/2 showed less bending forces, therefore the construct with lateral mass screws appears more stable in axial compression compared to the one with pedicle screws. However, bending forces did not vary significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• In Italy, spinal injuries are most frequently caused by road accidents (59.9%, mainly cervico-thoracic) than by falls (35.1%, mainly lumbar). • Most patients with spinal injuries (70.7%) have a high injury severity score patients, i.e. ISS≥16. • Trauma patients have more severe spinal injuries in fall cases (40.1%) compared to RA (21.9% to 26.3%). • A spinal cord injury (SCI) complicated 13.7% fractures. SCI decreased with aging and extremities associated injuries but increased at higher ISS. • Among upper cervical injuries, the probability of a severe fracture increased by 5.95 times in the presence of facial associated injuries. Traumatic spinal injuries are frequent and their management is debated, especially in major trauma patients. This study aims to describe a large population of major trauma patients with vertebral fractures to improve prevention measures and fracture management. Retrospective analysis of 6274 trauma patients prospectively collected between October 2010 and October 2020. Collected data include demographics, mechanism of trauma, type of imaging, fracture morphology, associated injuries, injury severity score (ISS), survival, and death timing. The statistical analysis focused on mechanism of trauma and the search of predictive factors for critical fractures. Patients showed a mean age of 47 years and 72.5% were males. Trauma included 59.9% of road accidents and 35.1% of falls. 30.7% patients had at least a severe fracture, while 17.2% had fractures in multiple spinal regions. 13.7% fractures were complicated by spinal cord injury (SCI). The mean ISS of the total population was 26.4 (SD 16.3), with 70.7% patients having an ISS≥16. There is a higher rate of severe fractures in fall cases (40.1%) compared to RA (21.9% to 26.3%). The probability of a severe fracture increased by 164% in the case of fall and by 77% in presence of AIS≥3 associated injury of head/neck while reduced by 34% in presence of extremities associated injuries. Multiple level injuries increased with ISS rise and in the case of extremities associated injuries. The probability of a severe upper cervical fracture increased by 5.95 times in the presence of facial associated injuries. The mean length of stay was 24.7 days and 9.6% of patients died. In Italy, road accidents are still the most frequent trauma mechanism and cause more cervico-thoracic fractures, while falls cause more lumbar fractures. Spinal cord injuries represent an indicator of more severe trauma. In motorcyclists or fallers/jumpers, there is a higher risk of severe fractures. When a spinal injury is diagnosed, the probability of a second vertebral fracture is consistent. These data could help the decisional workflow in the management of major trauma patients with vertebral injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The extrication of patients following a road traffic collision is among the basic procedures in emergency medicine. Thus, extrication is a frequently performed procedure by most of the emergency medical services worldwide. The appropriate extrication procedure depends on the patient's current condition and accompanying injuries. A rapid extrication should be performed within a few minutes, and the cervical spine (at least) should be immobilized. To our knowledge, the scientific literature and current guidelines do not offer detailed recommendations on the extrication of injured patients. Thus, the aim of the current study is to compare the effectiveness of spinal stabilization during various out-of-hospital extrication procedures.Methods: This is an explorative, biomechanical analysis of spine motion during different extrication procedures on an example patient. Movement of the cervical spine was measured using a wireless human motion tracker. Movement of the thoracic and lumbar spine was quantified with 12 strain gauge sensors, which were positioned paravertebrally on both sites along the thoracic and lumbar spine. To interpret angular movement, a motionscore was developed based on newly defined axioms on the biomechanics of the injured spine.Results: Self-extrication showed the least spinal movement (overall motionscore sum = 667). Movement in the cervical spine could further be reduced by applying a cervical collar. The extrication by a rescue boa showed comparable results in overall spinal movement compared to the traditional extrication via spineboard (overall motionscore sum = 1862vs. 1743). Especially in the cervical spine, the spinal movement was reduced (motionscore sum = 339 vs. 595). However, the thoracic spine movement was increased (motionscore sum = 812 vs. 432).Conclusion: In case of a suspected cervical spine injury, guided self-extrication seems to be the best option. If the patient is not able to perform self-extrication, using a rescue boa might reduce cervical spinal movement compared to the traditional extrication procedure. Since promising results are shown in the case of extrication using a patient transfer sheet that has already been placed below the driver, future developments should focus on novel vehicle seats that already include an extrication device. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The role of routine dedicated spinal imaging and immobilisation following gunshot wounds (GSW) to the head, neck or torso has been debated. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of spinal column injury requiring stabilisation in evaluable patients following gunshot injury. Methods: A retrospective study from of a Level I trauma centre from January 1995 to December 2004. All patients with GSW to the head, neck or torso and bony spinal column injury underwent medical record review to determine injury type, presentation, presence of concomitant spinal cord injury, treatment and outcome. Results: A total of 4204 patients sustaining GSW to the head, neck or torso were identified. Complete medical records were available for the 327 (7.8%) patients with bony spinal column injury. Among these patients, 173 (52.9%) sustained spinal cord injury. Two patients (0.6%) with GSW to the torso and bony spinal column injury required operative spinal intervention. The indication for operative intervention in both cases was removal of a foreign body or bony fragment for decompression of the spinal canal. None of the 4204 patients sustaining GSW to the head, neck or torso demonstrated spinal instability requiring operative intervention, and only 2/327 (0.6%) required any form of operative intervention for decompression. Conclusion: Spinal instability following GSW with spine injury is very rare. Routine spinal imaging and immobilisation is unwarranted in examinable patients without symptoms consistent with spinal injury following GSW to the head, neck or torso. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: A 10-year retrospective study of all spinal injuries presenting to the Leeds Teaching Hospitals between 1991 and 2001.The hospitals provide secondary care to a population of 750,000 and tertiary care to a population of 2–3 million. In total 1119 spinal injuries were studied. The overall survival rate was 89%. The commonest age group for presentation was 25–29 years with a secondary peak in the seventh decade, a mean overall of 43 years. 66% of injuries occurred in males. The commonest cause was a fall from a height (44%), with road traffic accidents (RTA) causing 43%. Pedestrians were most at risk within the road traffic group, making up 63% of cases. Isolated cervical spine injuries made up 37% of all cases. Cervical fractures were most associated with neurological injury (50%). Immediate survival has increased over the decade from 83% in 1991 to 93% in 2001. The probability of survival was significant at P = 0.006 and actual survival at P = 0.012 (Pearson correlation). The causal analysis has not been carried out but it is thought likely that improved quality of care is responsible. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The concept of “damage control” surgery was originally developed for massive abdominal trauma and also successfully applied to the management of lone bone injuries. More recently this has been extended to severely injured patients with spine injuries. This paper provided an overview of how damage control principles can be applied to multitrauma patients with spine injuries, to patients with isolated spine injuries and to spine injuries with and without neurology. The role of neuroimaging in acute spine trauma and controversies in the pharmaceutical approach to spine injuries are discussed. Additional prospective controlled trials are required to delineate the role and timing of damage control surgery in acute spine injury. With improved neuroimaging early spinal damage control surgery will be formally established in the management of spine trauma. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]