Search

Data supporting the benefits of early surgical intervention in acute spinal cord injury (SCI) is growing. For early surgery to be accomplished, understanding the causes of variabilities that effect the timing of surgery is needed to achieve this goal. The purpose of this analysis is to determine factors that affect the timing of surgery for acute cervical SCI within the North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN) for SCI registry. Patients in the NACTN SCI registry from 2005 to 2019 with a cervical SCI, excluding acute traumatic central cord syndrome, were analyzed for time elapsed from injury to arrival to the hospital, and time to surgery. Two categories were defined: 1) Early Arrival with Early Surgery (EAES) commenced within 24 h of injury, and 2) Early Arrival but Delayed Surgery (EADS), with surgery occurring between 24 to 72 h post-injury. Patients' demographic features, initial clinical evaluation, medical comorbidities, neurological status, surgical intervention, complications, and outcome data were correlated with respect to the two arrival groups. Of the 222 acute cervical SCI patients undergoing surgery, 163 (73.4%) were EAES, and 59 (26.6%) were EADS. There was no statistical difference in arrival time between the EAES and EADS groups. There was a statistical difference in the median arrival time to surgery between the EAES group (9 h) compared with the EADS group (31 h; p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in race, sex, age, mechanism of injury, Acute Physiologic Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores, or medical comorbidities between the two groups, but the EAES group did present with a significantly lower systolic blood pressure (p < 0.05). EADS patients were more likely to present as an American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) D than EAES (p < 0.05). Early surgery was statistically more likely to occur if the injury occurred over the weekend (p < 0.05). There were variations in the rates of early surgery between the eight NACTN sites within the study, ranging from 57 to 100%. Of the 114 patients with 6-month outcome data, there was no significant change between the two groups regarding AIS grade change and motor/pin prick/light touch score recovery. A trend towards improved motor scores with early surgery was not statistically significant (p = 0.21). Although there is data that surgery within 24 h of injury improves outcomes and can be performed safely, there remain variations in care outside of clinical trials. In the present study of cervical SCI, NACTN achieved its goal of early surgery in 73.4% of patients from 2005-2019 who arrived within 24 h of their injury. Variability in achieving this goal was related to severity of neurological injury, the day of the week, and the treating NACTN center. Evaluating variations within our network improves understanding of potential systemic limitations and our decision-making process to accomplish the goal of early surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The bulbocavernosus reflex (BCR) has been used during the initial evaluation of a spinal cord injury patient as a metric to determine prognosis and whether the patient is in "spinal shock." This reflex has been less utilized over the last decade, and therefore a review was performed to assess the value of BCR in patient prognosis. The North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN) for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) is a consortium of tertiary medical centers that includes a prospective SCI registry. The NACTN registry data was analyzed to evaluate the prognostic implication of the BCR during the initial evaluation of a spinal cord injury patient. SCI patients were divided into those with an intact or absent BCR during their initial evaluation. Associations of participants' descriptors and neurological status on follow-up were performed, followed by associations with the presence of a BCR. A total of 769 registry patients with recorded BCRs were included in the study. The median age was 49 years (32-61 years), and the majority were male (n = 566, 77%) and white (n = 519, 73%). Among included patients, high blood pressure was the most common comorbidity (n = 230, 31%). Cervical spinal cord injury was the most common (n = 470, 76%) with fall (n = 320, 43%) being the most frequent mechanism of injury. BCR was present in 311 patients (40.4%), while 458 (59.6%) had a negative BCR within 7 days of injury or before surgery. At 6 months post-injury, 230 patients (29.9%) followed up, of which 145 had a positive BCR, while 85 had a negative BCR. The presence/absence of BCR was significantly different in patients with cervical (p = 0.0015) or thoracic SCI (p = 0.0089), or conus medullaris syndrome (p = 0.0035), and in those who were American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grade A (p = 0.0313). No significant relationship was observed between BCR results and demographics, AIS grade conversion, motor score changes (p = 0.1669), and changes in pin prick (p = 0.3795) and light touch scores (p = 0.8178). In addition, cohorts were not different in surgery decision (p = 0.7762) and injury to surgery time (p = 0.0681). In our review of the NACTN spinal cord registry, the BCR did not provide prognostic utility in the acute evaluation of spinal cord injury patients. Therefore, it should not be used as a reliable marker for predicting neurological outcomes post-injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a paucity of data comparing the demographics, mechanism of injury, and outcomes of upper versus lower cervical spinal cord injuries (cSCI). The study objective was to define different clinical manifestations of cSCI. Data were collected prospectively through centers of the North American Clinical Trials Network (NACTN). Data was collected on 470 patients (21% women, mean age 50 years). Cervical vertebral level was analyzed as an ordinal variable to determine a natural demarcation to classify upper versus lower cSCI. For continuous variable analysis, falls were associated with C3 more than C4 vertebral level injuries (60% vs. 42%; p = 0.0126), while motor vehicle accidents were associated with C4 more than C3 (40% vs. 29%; p = 0.0962). Motor International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury scores also demonstrated a natural demarcation between C3 and C4, with C3 having higher median American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor scores (40 [4-73] vs. 11 [3-59], p = 0.0227). There were no differences when comparing C2 to C3 nor C4 to C5. Given the significant differences seen between C3 and C4, but not C2 and C3 nor C4 and C5, upper cSCI was designated as C1-C3, and lower cSCI was designated as C4-C7. Compared with a lower cSCI, patients with an upper cSCI were more likely to have a fall as their mechanism of injury (54% vs. 36%; p = 0.0072). Patients with an ASIA C cSCI were likely to have an upper cervical injury: 23% vs. 11% (p = 0.0226). Additionally, patients with an upper cSCI were more likely to have diabetes prior to injury: 37% versus 22%, respectively (p = 0.0084). Lower cSCI were more likely injured through sports (19% vs. 8%, p = 0.0171) and present with ASIA A (42% vs. 25%, p = 0.0186) neurological grade. Patients with lower cSCI were also significantly more likely to have complications such as shock, pulmonary embolism, and pleural effusion. In conclusion, there appears to be a natural demarcation of injury type between C3 and C4. Upper cSCI (C1-C3) was more associated with falls and diabetes, whereas lower cSCI (C4-C7) was more associated with sports, worse ASIA scores, and more complications. Further research will be needed to understand the mechanistic and biological differences between these two groups and whether different treatments may be appropriate for each of these groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Questionnaires administered to practicing orthopedic and neurosurgical spine surgeons from various regions of the United States and abroad., Objectives: To determine similarities and differences in the treatment of spinal trauma., Summary of Background Data: Spinal trauma is generally referred to subspecialists of orthopedic or neurosurgical training. Prior studies have suggested that there is significant variability in the management of such injuries., Methods: Questionnaires based on eight clinical scenarios of commonly encountered cervical, thoracic, and lumbar injuries were administered to 35 experienced spinal surgeons. Surgeons completed profile information and answered approximately one dozen questions for each case. Data were analyzed with SPSS software to determine the levels of agreement and characteristics of respondents that might account for a lack of agreement on particular aspects of management., Results: Of the 35 surgeons completing the questionnaire, 63% were orthopedists, 37% were neurosurgeons, and 80% had been in practice for more than 5 years. Considerable agreement was found in the majority of clinical decisions, including whether or not to operate and the timing of surgery. Of the differences noted, neurosurgeons were more likely to obtain a MRI, and orthopedists were more likely to use autograft as a sole graft material. Physicians from abroad were, in general, more likely to operate and to use an anterior approach during surgery than physicians from the northeastern United States., Conclusions: More commonalities were identified in the management of spinal trauma than previously reported. When found, variability in opinion was related to professional and regional differences.