Search

Study Design: Literature Review. Objective: Myelopathy affecting the thoracic spinal cord can arise secondary to several aetiologies which have similar presentation and management. Consequently, there are many uncertainties in this area, including optimal terminology and definitions. Recent collaborative cervical spinal research has led to the proposal and subsequent community adoption of the name degenerative cervical myelopathy(DCM), which has facilitated the establishment of internationally-agreed research priorities for DCM. We put forward the case for the introduction of the term degenerative thoracic myelopathy(DTM) and degenerative spinal myelopathy(DSM) as an umbrella term for both DCM and DTM. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was performed to identify degenerative thoracic myelopathy literature in Embase and MEDLINE. Results: Conditions encompassed within DTM include thoracic spondylotic myelopathy, ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, ossification of the ligamentum flavum, calcification of ligaments, hypertrophy of ligaments, degenerative disc disease, thoracic osteoarthritis, intervertebral disc herniation, and posterior osteophytosis. The classic presentation includes girdle pain, gait disturbance, leg weakness, sensory disturbance, and bladder or bowel dysfunction, often with associated back pain. Surgical management is typically favoured with post-surgical outcomes dependent on many factors, including the causative pathology, and presence of additional stenosis. Conclusion: The clinical entities encompassed by the term DTM are interrelated, can manifest concurrently, and present similarly. Building on the consensus adoption of DCM in the cervical spine and the recent proposal of degenerative cervical radiculopathy(DCR), extending this common nomenclature framework to the terms degenerative spinal myelopathy and degenerative thoracic myelopathy will help improve recognition and communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: A modified Delphi study. Objective: To assess current practice patterns in the management of cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) and develop a simplified, practical classification system which offers ease of use in the acute setting, incorporates modern diagnostic tools and provides utility in determining treatment strategies for cervical SCI. Methods: A three-phase modified Delphi procedure was performed between April 2020 and December 2021. During the first phase, members of the AOSpine SCI Knowledge forum proposed variables of importance for classifying and treating cervical SCI. The second phase involved an international survey of spine surgeons gauging practices surrounding the role and timing of surgery for cervical SCI and opinions regarding factors which most influence these practices. For the third phase, information obtained from phases 1 and 2 were used to draft a new classification system. Results: 396 surgeons responded to the survey. Neurological status, spinal stability and cord compression were the most important variables influencing decisions surrounding the role and timing of surgery. The majority (>50%) of respondents preferred to perform surgery within 24 hours post-SCI in clinical scenarios in which there was instability, severe cord compression or severe neurology. Situations in which <50% of respondents were inclined to operate early included: SCI with mild neurological impairments, with cord compression but without instability (with or without medical comorbidities), and SCI without cord compression or instability. Conclusions: Spinal stability, cord compression and neurological status are the most important variables influencing surgeons' practices surrounding the surgical management of cervical SCI. Based on these results, a simplified classification system for acute cervical SCI has been proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Modified DELPHI Consensus Process Objective: To agree a single unifying term and definition. Globally, cervical myelopathy caused by degenerative changes to the spine is known by over 11 different names. This inconsistency contributes to many clinical and research challenges, including a lack of awareness. Method: AO Spine RECODE-DCM (Research objectives and Common Data Elements Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy). To determine the index term, a longlist of candidate terms and their rationale, was created using a literature review and interviews. This was shared with the community, to select their preferred terms (248 members (58%) including 149 (60%) surgeons, 45 (18%) other healthcare professionals and 54 (22%) People with DCM or their supporters) and finalized using a consensus meeting. To determine a definition, a medical definition framework was created using inductive thematic analysis of selected International Classification of Disease definitions. Separately, stakeholders submitted their suggested definition which also underwent inductive thematic analysis (317 members (76%), 190 (59%) surgeons, 62 (20%) other healthcare professionals and 72 (23%) persons living with DCM or their supporters). Using this definition framework, a working definition was created based on submitted content, and finalized using consensus meetings. Results: Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy was selected as the unifying term, defined in short, as a progressive spinal cord injury caused by narrowing of the cervical spinal canal Conclusion: A consistent term and definition can support education and research initiatives. This was selected using a structured and iterative methodology, which may serve as an exemplar for others in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Clinical practice guideline development. Objectives: Acute spinal cord injury (SCI) can result in devastating motor, sensory, and autonomic impairment; loss of independence; and reduced quality of life. Preclinical evidence suggests that early decompression of the spinal cord may help to limit secondary injury, reduce damage to the neural tissue, and improve functional outcomes. Emerging evidence indicates that "early" surgical decompression completed within 24 hours of injury also improves neurological recovery in patients with acute SCI. The objective of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to update the 2017 recommendations on the timing of surgical decompression and to evaluate the evidence with respect to ultra-early surgery (in particular, but not limited to, <12 hours after acute SCI). Methods: A multidisciplinary, international, guideline development group (GDG) was formed that consisted of spine surgeons, neurologists, critical care specialists, emergency medicine doctors, physical medicine and rehabilitation professionals, as well as individuals living with SCI. A systematic review was conducted based on accepted methodological standards to evaluate the impact of early (within 24 hours of acute SCI) or ultra-early (in particular, but not limited to, within 12 hours of acute SCI) surgery on neurological recovery, functional outcomes, administrative outcomes, safety, and cost-effectiveness. The GRADE approach was used to rate the overall strength of evidence across studies for each primary outcome. Using the "evidence-to-recommendation" framework, recommendations were then developed that considered the balance of benefits and harms, financial impact, patient values, acceptability, and feasibility. The guideline was internally appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. Results: The GDG recommended that early surgery (≤24 hours after injury) be offered as the preferred option for adult patients with acute SCI regardless of level. This recommendation was based on moderate evidence suggesting that patients were 2 times more likely to recover by ≥ 2 ASIA Impairment Score (AIS) grades at 6 months (RR: 2.76, 95% CI 1.60 to 4.98) and 12 months (RR: 1.95, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.18) if they were decompressed within 24 hours compared to after 24 hours. Furthermore, patients undergoing early surgery improved by an additional 4.50 (95% 1.70 to 7.29) points on the ASIA Motor Score compared to patients undergoing surgery after 24 hours post-injury. The GDG also agreed that a recommendation for ultra-early surgery could not be made on the basis of the current evidence because of the small sample sizes, variable definitions of what constituted ultra-early in the literature, and the inconsistency of the evidence. Conclusions: It is recommended that patients with an acute SCI, regardless of level, undergo surgery within 24 hours after injury when medically feasible. Future research is required to determine the differential effectiveness of early surgery in different subpopulations and the impact of ultra-early surgery on neurological recovery. Moreover, further work is required to define what constitutes effective spinal cord decompression and to individualize care. It is also recognized that a concerted international effort will be required to translate these recommendations into policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Clinical practice guideline development following the GRADE process. Objectives: Hemodynamic management is one of the only available treatment options that likely improves neurologic outcomes in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). Augmenting mean arterial pressure (MAP) aims to improve blood perfusion and oxygen delivery to the injured spinal cord in order to minimize secondary ischemic damage to neural tissue. The objective of this guideline was to update the 2013 AANS/CNS recommendations on the hemodynamic management of patients with acute traumatic SCI, acknowledging that much has been published in this area since its publication. Specifically, we sought to make recommendations on 1. The range of mean arterial pressure (MAP) to be maintained by identifying an upper and lower MAP limit; 2. The duration of such MAP augmentation; and 3. The choice of vasopressor. Additionally, we sought to make a recommendation on spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP) targets. Methods: A multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG) was formed that included health care professionals from a wide range of clinical specialities, patient advocates, and individuals living with SCI. The GDG reviewed the 2013 AANS/CNS guidelines and voted on whether each recommendation should be endorsed or updated. A systematic review of the literature, following PRISMA standards and registered in PROSPERO, was conducted to inform the guideline development process and address the following key questions: (i) what are the effects of goal-directed interventions to optimize spinal cord perfusion on extent of neurological recovery and rates of adverse events at any time point of follow-up? and (ii) what are the effects of particular monitoring techniques, perfusion ranges, pharmacological agents, and durations of treatment on extent of neurological recovery and rates of adverse events at any time point of follow-up? The GDG combined the information from this systematic review with their clinical expertise in order to develop recommendations on a MAP target range (specifically an upper and lower limit to target), the optimal duration for MAP augmentation, and the use of vasopressors or inotropes. Using methods outlined by the GRADE working group, recommendations were formulated that considered the balance of benefits and harms, financial impact, acceptability, feasibility and patient preferences. Results: The GDG suggested that MAP should be augmented to at least 75-80 mmHg as the "lower limit," but not actively augmented beyond an "upper limit" of 90-95 mmHg in order to optimize spinal cord perfusion in acute traumatic SCI. The quality of the evidence around the "target MAP" was very low, and thus the strength of this recommendation is weak. For duration of hemodynamic management, the GDG "suggested" that MAP be augmented for a duration of 3-7 days. Again, the quality of the evidence around the duration of MAP support was very low, and thus the strength of this recommendation is also weak. The GDG felt that a recommendation on the choice of vasopressor or the use of SCPP targets was not warranted, given the dearth of available evidence. Conclusion: We provide new recommendations for blood pressure management after acute SCI that acknowledge the limitations of the current evidence on the relationship between MAP and neurologic recovery. It was felt that the low quality of existing evidence and uncertainty around the relationship between MAP and neurologic recovery justified a greater range of MAP to target, and for a broader range of days post-injury than recommended in previous guidelines. While important knowledge gaps still remain regarding hemodynamic management, these recommendations represent current perspectives on the role of MAP augmentation for acute SCI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]