Search

Background: Sufficient and timely spinal cord decompression is a critical surgical objective for neurological recovery in spinal cord injury (SCI). Residual cord compression may be associated with disturbed cerebrospinal fluid pressure (CSFP) dynamics., Objectives: This study aims to assess whether intrathecal CSFP dynamics in SCI following surgical decompression are feasible and safe, and to explore the diagnostic utility., Methods: Prospective cohort study. Bedside lumbar CSFP dynamics and cervical MRI were obtained following surgical decompression in N = 9 with mostly cervical acute-subacute SCI and N = 2 patients with non-traumatic SCI. CSFP measurements included mean CSFP, cardiac-driven CSFP peak-to-valley amplitudes (CSFPp), Valsalva maneuver, and Queckenstedt's test (firm pressure on jugular veins, QT). From QT, proxies for cerebrospinal fluid pulsatility curve were calculated (ie, relative pulse pressure coefficient; RPPC-Q). CSFP metrics were compared to spine-healthy patients. computer tomography (CT)-myelography was done in 3/8 simultaneous to CSFP measurements., Results: Mean age was 45 ± 9 years (range 17-67; 3F), SCI was complete (AIS A, N = 5) or incomplete (AIS B-D, N = 6). No adverse events related to CSFP assessments. CSFP rise during QT was induced in all patients [range 9.6-26.6 mmHg]. However, CSFPp was reduced in 3/11 (0.1-0.3 mmHg), and in 3/11 RPPC-Q was abnormal (0.01-0.05). Valsalva response was reduced in 8/11 (2.6-23.4 mmHg). CSFP dynamics corresponded to CT-myelography., Conclusions: Comprehensive bedside lumbar CSFP dynamics in SCI following decompression are safe, feasible, and can reveal distinct patterns of residual spinal cord compression. Longitudinal studies are required to define critical thresholds of impaired CSFP dynamics that may impact neurological recovery and requiring surgical revisions.

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common non-traumatic spinal cord disorder and characterized by progressive neurological impairment. Generally, it is still underdiagnosed and referral to spine specialists is often late, when patients already present with incomplete cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). To improve early diagnosis and accelerate referral, diagnostic criteria for DCM are required. Recently, AO Spine RECODE- DCM (REsearch Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy) (aospine.org/recode), an international, interdisciplinary and interprofessional initiative, including patients with DCM, was funded with the aim to accelerate knowledge discovery that can change outcomes. In this perspective we advocate for the participation of SCI specialists in this process, where the expertise and perspective on this disorder and requirements for the diagnostic and therapeutic work up is well developed., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a progressive chronic spinal cord injury estimated to affect 1 in 50 adults. Without standardised guidance, clinical research studies have selected outcomes at their discretion, often underrepresenting the disease and limiting comparability between studies. Utilising a standard minimum data set formed via multi-stakeholder consensus can address these issues. This combines processes to define a core outcome set (COS)—a list of key outcomes—and core data elements (CDEs), a list of key sampling characteristics required to interpret the outcomes. Further "how" these outcomes should be measured and/or reported is then defined in a core measurement set (CMS). This can include a recommendation of a standardised time point at which outcome data should be reported. This study defines a COS, CDE, and CMS for DCM research. Methods and findings: A minimum data set was developed using a series of modified Delphi processes. Phase 1 involved the setup of an international DCM stakeholder group. Phase 2 involved the development of a longlist of outcomes, data elements, and formation into domains. Phase 3 prioritised the outcomes and CDEs using a two-stage Delphi process. Phase 4 determined the final DCM minimal data set using a consensus meeting. Using the COS, Phase 5 finalised definitions of the measurement construct for each outcome. In Phase 6, a systematic review of the literature was performed, to scope and define the psychometric properties of measurement tools. Phase 7 used a modified Delphi process to inform the short-listing of candidate measurement tools. The final measurement set was then formed through a consensus meeting (Phase 8). To support implementation, the data set was then integrated into template clinical research forms (CRFs) for use in future clinical trials (Phase 9). In total, 28 outcomes and 6 domains (Pain, Neurological Function, Life Impact, Radiology, Economic Impact, and Adverse Events) were entered into the final COS. Thirty two outcomes and 4 domains (Individual, Disease, Investigation, and Intervention) were entered into the final CDE. Finally, 4 outcome instruments (mJOA, NDI, SF-36v2, and SAVES2) were identified for the CMS, with a recommendation for trials evaluating outcomes after surgery, to include baseline measurement and at 6 months from surgery. Conclusions: The AO Spine RECODE-DCM has produced a minimum data set for use in DCM clinical trials today. These are available at https://myelopathy.org/minimum-dataset/. While it is anticipated the CDE and COS have strong and durable relevance, it is acknowledged that new measurement tools, alongside an increasing transition to study patients not undergoing surgery, may necessitate updates and adaptation, particularly with respect to the CMS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the most common cause of non-traumatic incomplete spinal cord injury, but its pathophysiology is poorly understood. As spinal cord compression observed in standard MRI often fails to explain a patient's status, new diagnostic techniques to assess DCM are one of the research priorities. Minor cardiac-related cranio-caudal oscillations of the cervical spinal cord are observed by phase-contrast MRI (PC-MRI) in healthy controls (HCs), while they become pathologically increased in patients suffering from degenerative cervical myelopathy. Whether transversal oscillations (i.e., anterior-posterior and right-left) also change in DCM patients is not known. Methods: We assessed spinal cord motion simultaneously in all three spatial directions (i.e., cranio-caudal, anterior-posterior, and right-left) using sagittal PC-MRI and compared physiological oscillations in 18 HCs to pathological changes in 72 DCM patients with spinal canal stenosis. The parameter of interest was the amplitude of the velocity signal (i.e., maximum positive to maximum negative peak) during the cardiac cycle. Results: Most patients suffered from mild DCM (mJOA score 16 (14-18) points), and the majority (68.1%) presented with multisegmental stenosis. The spinal canal was considerably constricted in DCM patients in all segments compared to HCs. Under physiological conditions in HCs, the cervical spinal cord oscillates in the cranio-caudal and anterior-posterior directions, while right-left motion was marginal [e.g., segment C5 amplitudes: cranio-caudal: 0.40 (0.27-0.48) cm/s; anterior-posterior: 0.18 (0.16-0.29) cm/s; right-left: 0.10 (0.08-0.13) cm/s]. Compared to HCs, DCM patients presented with considerably increased cranio-caudal oscillations due to the cardinal pathophysiologic change in non-stenotic [e.g., segment C5 amplitudes: 0.79 (0.49-1.32) cm/s] and stenotic segments [.g., segment C5 amplitudes: 0.99 (0.69-1.42) cm/s]). In contrast, right-left [e.g., segment C5 amplitudes: non-stenotic segment: 0.20 (0.13-0.32) cm/s; stenotic segment: 0.11 (0.09-0.18) cm/s] and anterior-posterior oscillations [e.g., segment C5 amplitudes: non-stenotic segment: 0.26 (0.15-0.45) cm/s; stenotic segment: 0.11 (0.09-0.18) cm/s] remained on low magnitudes comparable to HCs. Conclusion: Increased cranio-caudal oscillations of the cervical cord are the cardinal pathophysiologic change and can be quantified using PC-MRI in DCM patients. This study addresses spinal cord oscillations as a relevant biomarker reflecting dynamic mechanical cord stress in DCM patients, potentially contributing to a loss of function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Development of a clinical practice guideline following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) process. Objective: The objectives of this study were to develop guidelines that outline the utility of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) to detect intraoperative spinal cord injury (ISCI) among patients undergoing spine surgery, to define a subset of patients undergoing spine surgery at higher risk for ISCI and to develop protocols to prevent, diagnose, and manage ISCI. Methods: All systematic reviews were performed according to PRISMA standards and registered on PROSPERO. A multidisciplinary, international Guidelines Development Group (GDG) reviewed and discussed the evidence using GRADE protocols. Consensus was defined by 80% agreement among GDG members. A systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) meta-analysis was performed to synthesize pooled evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of IONM to detect ISCI among patients undergoing spinal surgery. The IONM modalities evaluated included somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), motor evoked potentials (MEPs), electromyography (EMG), and multimodal neuromonitoring. Utilizing this knowledge and their clinical experience, the multidisciplinary GDG created recommendations for the use of IONM to identify ISCI in patients undergoing spine surgery. The evidence related to existing care pathways to manage ISCI was summarized and based on this a novel AO Spine-PRAXIS care pathway was created. Results: Our recommendations are as follows: (1) We recommend that intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring be employed for high risk patients undergoing spine surgery, and (2) We suggest that patients at "high risk" for ISCI during spine surgery be proactively identified, that after identification of such patients, multi-disciplinary team discussions be undertaken to manage patients, and that an intraoperative protocol including the use of IONM be implemented. A care pathway for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of ISCI has been developed by the GDG. Conclusion: We anticipate that these guidelines will promote the use of IONM to detect and manage ISCI, and promote the use of preoperative and intraoperative checklists by surgeons and other team members for high risk patients undergoing spine surgery. We welcome teams to implement and evaluate the care pathway created by our GDG. [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]

Although many frailty tools have been used to predict traumatic spinal injury (TSI) outcomes, identifying predictors of outcomes after TSI in the aged population is difficult. Frailty, age, and TSI association are interesting topics of discussion in geriatric literature. However, the association between these variables are yet to be clearly elucidated. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the association between frailty and TSI outcomes. The authors searched Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science for relevant studies. Studies with observational designs that assessed baseline frailty status in individuals suffering from TSI published from inception until 26th March 2023 were included. Length of hospital stay (LoS), adverse events (AEs), and mortality were the outcomes of interest. Of the 2425 citations, 16 studies involving 37,640 participants were included. The modified frailty index (mFI) was the most common tool used to assess frailty. Meta-analysis was employed only in studies that used mFI for measuring frailty. Frailty was significantly associated with increased in-hospital or 30-day mortality (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 1.93 [1.19; 3.11]), non-routine discharge (pooled OR: 2.44 [1.34; 4.44]), and AEs or complications (pooled OR: 2.00 [1.14; 3.50]). However, no significant relationship was found between frailty and LoS (pooled OR: 3.02 [0.86; 10.60]). Heterogeneity was observed across multiple factors, including age, injury level, frailty assessment tool, and spinal cord injury characteristics. In conclusion, although there is limited data concerning using frailty scales to predict short-term outcomes after TSI, the results showed that frailty status may be a predictor of in-hospital mortality, AEs, and unfavorable discharge destination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]