Search

Study Design: An expert-panel consensus-based content validation and case-based clinical validation study., Objective: To develop a novel scoring system for diagnosing instability in tuberculosis (TB) spine using an expert-panel consensus followed by clinical validation for validating the content., Summary of Background Data: Currently, diagnosis of instability is primarily experience-based which may lead to considerable variability and misdiagnosis in the hands of a relatively in-experienced spine surgeon. Considering the potential complications this entity entails, a universally accepted scoring criteria is very important for accurate and uniform diagnosis of instability in TB spine., Methods: The development of TB spine instability score (TSIS) followed a two-step process, one designing the instrument and the other obtaining judgemental evidence. For judgemental evidence a panel of experts was appointed to make appropriate modifications and content validation for finalizing the scoring instrument. This score was applied on 30 patients of TB spine and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were drawn for sensitivity and specificity analysis., Results: The comprehensive scoring criteria to diagnose instability in TB spine was approved after three rounds of expert panel discussions with an index of content validation more than 0.75 after final round of panel discussion. On case-based validation after plotting ROC curves, sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing stable and potentially unstable lesions at a cut-off score of 6 was 92.9% and 86.8% respectively whereas for diagnosing potentially unstable and unstable lesions at a cut-off score of 10 was 94.3% and 81.9%, respectively., Conclusion: TSIS is a comprehensive scoring system integrating demographic, anatomical, clinical, and radiological factors aimed at diagnosing instability in TB spine. The classification determines indications for surgical stabilization in patients with TB spine, with no or little neurological deficit.Level of Evidence: 4., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: A prospective multimodal study including clinical, radiological, serial postcontrast magnetic resonance imaging, intraoperative findings, and histopathological study., Objective: To document in vivo, the site of anatomical failure in lumbar disc herniation (LDH)., Summary of Background Data: Although in vitro mechanical disruption studies have implicated both the endplate junction (EPJ) and the annulus fibrosus (AF) as the site of failure in LDH, there are no in vivo human studies to document the exact anatomy of failure., Methods: One hundred eighty-one consecutive patients requiring microdiscectomy at a single level formed the study group. The status of the endplate and AF in the operated level (study discs) and the other discs (control) were evaluated by plain radiograph, thin slice computed tomographic scan, plain and contrast magnetic resonance imaging, intraoperative examination, and histopathological analysis., Results: LDH due to EPJ failure (EPJF- type I herniation) was more common (117; 65%) than annulus fibrosis rupture. Herniated discs had a significantly higher incidence of EPJF than control discs (P < 0.0001). The EPJF was evident radiologically as vertebral corner defect in 30 patients, rim avulsion in 46, frank bony avulsions in 24, and avulsion at both upper and lower EP in 4. Thirteen discs with normal EP radiologically had cartilage or bone avulsion intraoperatively. Sixty-four discs (35%) had intact EP of which annular high intensity zone was found in 21 (11%), suggesting a disruption of AF (type II herniation). Postcontrast magnetic resonance image of 20 patients showed dye leak at the EPJ proving EPJF as main cause of LDH., Conclusion: Our study provides the first in vivo evidence that LDH in humans is more commonly the result of EPJF than AF rupture and offers clinical validation of previous in vitro mechanical disruption studies. Future research must focus on the EPJ as a primary area of interest in LDH., Level of Evidence: N/A.