Search

Study designSystematic review and meta-analysis.ObjectiveSurgical decompression is a cornerstone in the management of patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI); however, the influence of the timing of surgery on neurological recovery after acute SCI remains controversial. This systematic review aims to summarize current evidence on the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of early (≤24 hours) or late (>24 hours) surgery in patients with acute traumatic SCI for all levels of the spine. Furthermore, this systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence with respect to the impact of ultra-early surgery (earlier than 24 hours from injury) on these outcomes.MethodsA systematic search of the literature was performed using the MEDLINE database (PubMed), Cochrane database, and EMBASE. Two reviewers independently screened the citations from the search to determine whether an article satisfied predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. For all key questions, we focused on primary studies with the least potential for bias and those that controlled for baseline neurological status and specified time from injury to surgery. Risk of bias of each article was assessed using standardized tools based on study design. Finally, the overall strength of evidence for the primary outcomes was assessed using the GRADE approach. Data were synthesized both qualitatively and quantitively using meta-analyses.ResultsTwenty-one studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria and formed the evidence base for this review update. Seventeen studies compared outcomes between patients treated with early (≤24 hours from injury) compared to late (>24 hours) surgical decompression. An additional 4 studies evaluated even earlier time frames: 24 hours) results in clinically meaningful improvements in neurological recovery. Further studies are required to delineate the role of ultra-early surgery in patients with acute SCI.

Multiple types and classes of medications are administered in the acute management of traumatic spinal cord injury. Prior clinical studies and evidence from animal models suggest that several of these medications could modify (i.e., enhance or impede) neurological recovery. We aimed to systematically determine the types of medications commonly administered, alone or in combination, in the transition from acute to subacute spinal cord injury. For that purpose, type, class, dosage, timing, and reason for administration were extracted from two large spinal cord injury datasets. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the medications administered within the first 60 days after spinal cord injury. Across 2040 individuals with spinal cord injury, 775 unique medications were administered within the two months after injury. On average, patients enrolled in a clinical trial were administered 9.9 ± 4.9 (range 0-34), 14.3 ± 6.3 (range 1-40), 18.6 ± 8.2 (range 0-58), and 21.5 ± 9.7 (range 0-59) medications within the first 7, 14, 30, and 60 days post-injury, respectively. Those enrolled in an observational study were administered on average 1.7 ± 1.7 (range 0-11), 3.7 ± 3.7 (range 0-24), 8.5 ± 6.3 (range 0-42), and 13.5 ± 8.3 (range 0-52) medications within the first 7, 14, 30, and 60 days post-injury, respectively. Polypharmacy was commonplace (up to 43 medications per day per patient). Approximately 10% of medications were administered acutely as prophylaxis (e.g., against the development of pain or infections). To our knowledge, this was the first time acute pharmacological practices have been comprehensively examined after spinal cord injury. Our study revealed a high degree of polypharmacy in the acute stages of spinal cord injury, raising the potential to impact neurological recovery. All results can be interactively explored on the RXSCI web site ( https://jutzelec.shinyapps.io/RxSCI/ ) and GitHub repository ( https://github.com/jutzca/Acute-Pharmacological-Treatment-in-SCI/ ).

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., Author(s): Benjamin M. Davies 1,2,*, Xiaoyu Yang 1, Danyal Z. Khan 3,4, Oliver D. Mowforth 1,2, Alvaro Y. Touzet 5, Aria Nouri 1,6, James S. Harrop 7, Bizhan Aarabi 8, [...]

Background: Current measures to prevent spinal surgical site infection (SSI) lack compliance and lead to antimicrobial resistance. We aimed to examine the effectiveness of bundled preoperative intranasal photodynamic disinfection therapy (nPDT) and chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) body wipes in the prophylaxis of spine SSIs in adults, as well as determine our institutional savings attributable to the use of this strategy and identify adverse events reported with nPDT-CHG. Methods: We performed a 14-year prospective observational interrupted time-series study in adult (age > 18 yr) patients undergoing emergent or elective spine surgery with 3 time-specific cohorts: before rollout of our institution's nPDT-CHG program (2006-2010), during rollout (2011-2014) and after rollout (2015-2019). We used unadjusted bivariate analysis to test for temporal changes across patient and surgical variables, and segmented regression to estimate the effect of nPDT-CHG on the annual SSI incidence rates per period. We used 2 models to estimate the cost of nPDT-CHG to prevent 1 additional SSI per year and the annual cumulative cost savings through SSI prevention. Results: Over the study period, 13 493 patients (mean 964 per year) underwent elective or emergent spine surgery. From 2006 to 2019, the mean age, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score and mean Spine Surgical Invasiveness Index (SSII) score increased from 48.4 to 58.1 years, from 1.7 to 2.6, and from 15.4 to 20.5, respectively (p < 0.001). Unadjusted analysis confirmed a significant decrease in the annual number (74.6 to 26.8) and incidence (7.98% to 2.67%) of SSIs with nPDT-CHG (p < 0.001). After adjustment for mean age, mean CCI score and mean SSII score, segmented regression showed an absolute reduction in the annual SSI incidence rate of 3.36% per year (p < 0.001). The estimated annual cost to prevent 1 additional SSI per year was about $1350-$1650, and the estimated annual cumulative cost savings were $2 484856-S2 495 016. No adverse events were reported with nPDT-CHG. Conclusion: Preoperative nPDT-CHG administration is an effective prophylactic strategy for spinal SSIs, with significant cost savings. Given its rapid action, minimal risk of antimicrobial resistance, broad-spectrum activity and high compliance rate, preoperative nPDT-CHG decolonization should be the standard of care for all patients undergoing emergent or elective spine surgery. Contexte : L'application des mesures de prévention des infections des plaies opératoires (IPO) du rachis laisse actuellement à désirer et pourrait contribuer à la résistance aux antibiotiques. Nous avons voulu vérifier l'efficacité de la thérapie photodynamique antimicrobienne (TPA) intranasale préopératoire alliée à l'utilisation de lingettes désinfectantes à la chlorhexidine (LDC) pour le corps en prophylaxie des IPO du rachis chez des adultes, calculer les économies réalisées par notre établissement grâce à la stratégie TPD-LDC et recenser ses effets indésirables. Méthodes : Nous avons procédé à une étude observationnelle de séries chronologiques interrompues échelonnée sur une période de 14 ans chez des adultes (âgés de >18 ans) soumis à une chirurgie urgente ou non urgente du rachis auprès de 3 cohortes chronologiques spécifiques : avant le déploiement de la stratégie dans notre établissement (2006-2010), puis durant (2011-2014) et après son déploiement (2015-2019). Nous avons appliqué une analyse bivariée non ajustée pour vérifier les changements dans le temps selon la patientèle et les paramètres chirurgicaux, et segmenté la régression pour estimer l'effet de la stratégie TPA-LDC sur les taux d'incidence annuels moyens d'IPO par période. Nous avons utilisé 2 modèles pour estimer le coût de la stratégie TPA-LDC apte à prévenir une IPO additionnelle par année et les économies cumulatives annuelles moyennes générées par la prévention des IPO. Résultats : Durant la période de l'étude, 13 493 malades (964 par année en moyenne) ont subi une chirurgie urgente ou non urgente du rachis. Entre 2006 et 2011 et entre 2015 et 2019, l'âge moyen, l'indice moyen de comorbidité de Charlson (ICC) et l'indice moyen d'invasivité de la chirurgie du rachis (IICR) sont passés de 48,4 à 58,1 ans, de 1,7 à 2,6 et de 15,4 à 20,5, respectivement (p < 0,001). L'analyse non ajustée a confirmé une baisse significative du nombre annuel (de 74,6 à 26,8) et de l'incidence (de 7,98% à 2,67%) des IPO associée à la stratégie TPA-LDC (p < 0,001). Après ajustement pour tenir compte de l'âge, de l'ICC et de l'IICR moyens, la régression segmentée a montré une réduction absolue du taux d'incidence annuel des IPO de 3,36% par année (p < 0,001). Le coût annuel moyen estimé pour prévenir une IPO additionnelle a été d'environ 1350$-1650$, et les économies cumulatives annuelles moyennes estimées ont été de 2484856 $-2 495 016$. Aucun effet indésirable n'a été signalé avec la stratégie TPA-LDC. Conclusion : L'application préopératoire de la stratégie TPA-LDC est une mesure prophylactique efficace pour les IPO du rachis, et donne lieu à des économies significatives. Compte tenu de sa rapidité d'action, du risque minimal de résistance aux antibiotiques, de son activité à large spectre et du taux d'observance élevé, la décolonisation préopératoire par TPA-LDC devrait être une norme de soins pour l'ensemble de la patientèle soumise à une chirurgie urgente ou non urgente du rachis., Surgical site infections (SSIs) are devastating postoperative complications associated with substantial morbidity, prolonged length of stay (LOS) and increased health care-related costs. (1) The rate of SSIs after spine surgery [...]

Study designNarrative Review.ObjectivesThe objective of this review is to provide a stepwise approach to the assessment of patients with potential symptoms of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).MethodsN/A.ResultsDCM is an overarching term used to describe progressive compression of the cervical spinal cord by age-related changes to the spinal axis. These alterations to normal anatomy narrow the spinal canal, reduce the space available for the spinal cord, and may ultimately compress the ascending and descending neural tracts. Patients with DCM present with a wide range of symptoms that can significantly impact quality of life, including bilateral hand numbness and paresthesia, gait impairment, motor weakness of the upper and lower extremities, and bladder and bowel dysfunction. Unfortunately, DCM is often misdiagnosed, resulting in delayed assessment and management by the appropriate specialist. The proper evaluation of a patient with suspected DCM includes obtaining a detailed patient history, conducting a comprehensive neurological examination, and ordering appropriate tests to rule in or out other diagnoses.ConclusionThis review summarizes a stepwise approach to the diagnosis of patients with DCM.

Study designNarrative review.ObjectiveThe current review aimed to describe the role of existing techniques and emerging methods of imaging and electrophysiology for the management of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), a common and often progressive condition that causes spinal cord dysfunction and significant morbidity globally.MethodsA narrative review was conducted to summarize the existing literature and highlight future directions.ResultsAnatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is well established in the literature as the key imaging tool to identify spinal cord compression, disc herniation/bulging, and inbuckling of the ligamentum flavum, thus facilitating surgical planning, while radiographs and computed tomography (CT) provide complimentary information. Electrophysiology techniques are primarily used to rule out competing diagnoses. However, signal change and measures of cord compression on conventional MRI have limited utility to characterize the degree of tissue injury, which may be helpful for diagnosis, prognostication, and repeated assessments to identify deterioration. Early translational studies of quantitative imaging and electrophysiology techniques show potential of these methods to more accurately reflect changes in spinal cord microstructure and function.ConclusionCurrently, clinical management of DCM relies heavily on anatomical MRI, with additional contributions from radiographs, CT, and electrophysiology. Novel quantitative assessments of microstructure, perfusion, and function have the potential to transform clinical practice, but require robust validation, automation, and standardization prior to uptake.

Study designLiterature Review (Narrative).ObjectiveTo propose a new framework, to support the investigation and understanding of the pathobiology of DCM, AO Spine RECODE-DCM research priority number 5.MethodsDegenerative cervical myelopathy is a common and disabling spinal cord disorder. In this perspective, we review key knowledge gaps between the clinical phenotype and our biological models. We then propose a reappraisal of the key driving forces behind DCM and an individual's susceptibility, including the proposal of a new framework.ResultsPresent pathobiological and mechanistic knowledge does not adequately explain the disease phenotype; why only a subset of patients with visualized cord compression show clinical myelopathy, and the amount of cord compression only weakly correlates with disability. We propose that DCM is better represented as a function of several interacting mechanical forces, such as shear, tension and compression, alongside an individual's vulnerability to spinal cord injury, influenced by factors such as age, genetics, their cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and nervous system status, and time.ConclusionUnderstanding the disease pathobiology is a fundamental research priority. We believe a framework of mechanical stress, vulnerability, and time may better represent the disease as a whole. Whilst this remains theoretical, we hope that at the very least it will inspire new avenues of research that better encapsulate the full spectrum of disease.

Study designNarrative review.ObjectivesTo discuss the current understanding of the natural history of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).MethodsLiterature review summarizing current evidence pertaining to the natural history and risk factors of DCM.ResultsDCM is a common condition in which progressive arthritic disease of the cervical spine leads to spinal cord compression resulting in a constellation of neurological symptoms, in particular upper extremity dysfunction and gait impairment. Anatomical factors including cord-canal mismatch, congenitally fused vertebrae and genetic factors may increase individuals' risk for DCM development. Non-myelopathic spinal cord compression (NMSCC) is a common phenomenon with a prevalence of 24.2% in the healthy population, and 35.3% among individuals >60 years of age. Clinical radiculopathy and/or electrophysiological signs of cervical cord dysfunction appear to be risk factors for myelopathy development. Radiological progression of incidental Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament (OPLL) is estimated at 18.3% over 81-months and development of myelopathy ranges between 0-61.5% (follow-up ranging from 40 to 124 months between studies) among studies. In patients with symptomatic DCM undergoing non-operative treatment, 20-62% will experience neurological deterioration within 3-6 years.ConclusionCurrent estimates surrounding the natural history of DCM, particularly those individuals with mild or minimal impairment, lack precision. Clear predictors of clinical deterioration for those treated with non-operative care are yet to be identified. Future studies are needed on this topic to help improve treatment counseling and clinical prognostication.

Study designNarrative Review.ObjectiveTo (i) discuss why assessment and monitoring of disease progression is critical in Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM); (ii) outline the important features of an ideal assessment tool and (iii) discuss current and novel strategies for detecting subtle deterioration in DCM.MethodsLiterature review.ResultsDegenerative cervical myelopathy is an overarching term used to describe progressive injury to the cervical spinal cord by age-related changes of the spinal axis. Based on a study by Smith et al (2020), the prevalence of DCM is approximately 2.3% and is expected to rise as the global population ages. Given the global impact of this disease, it is essential to address important knowledge gaps and prioritize areas for future investigation. As part of the AO Spine RECODE-DCM (Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy) project, a priority setting partnership was initiated to increase research efficiency by identifying the top ten research priorities for DCM. One of the top ten priorities for future DCM research was: What assessment tools can be used to evaluate functional impairment, disability and quality of life in people with DCM? What instruments, tools or methods can be used or developed to monitor people with DCM for disease progression or improvement either before or after surgical treatment?ConclusionsWith the increasing prevalence of DCM, effective surveillance of this population will require both the implementation of a monitoring framework as well as the development of new assessment tools.

Background: Surgery for degenerative spine pathologies is typically performed on a scheduled basis; however, worsening symptoms may warrant emergency surgery. An increasing number of patients requiring emergency surgery has been observed (22.6% in 2006 to 34.8% in 2019). We sought to compare the outcomes of patients who received scheduled surgery and those who required emergency surgery. Methods: All patients treated between Jan. 1, 2006, and Dec. 31, 2019, were included. Retrospective comparisons were made between patients who were scheduled (elective) for surgery and those requiring emergency surgery, patients who were scheduled for surgery and those who decompensated while on the surgical waitlist and patients who presented as de novo emergencies and those who decompensated while on the surgical waitlist. Results: Among the 6217 patients with degenerative pathologies, 4654 (74.9%) patients were scheduled (elective) for surgery and 1563 (25.1%) were patients requiring emergency surgery. Compared with patients who were scheduled, patients requiring emergency surgery had a longer length of stay (LOS) in hospital (5.1 d, interquartile range [IQR] 2.7-11.2 v. 3.6 d, IQR 1.3-6.4, p < 0.001) and lower rate of home discharge (78.6% v. 94.2%, p < 0.001). Patients requiring emergency surgery were 1.34 times more likely to have any adverse events (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.68, p = 0.01). When compared with patients who were scheduled for surgery, those who decompensated while on the surgical waitlist had longer LOS (7.0 d, IQR 3.3-15.0 v. 3.6 d, IQR 1.3-6.4, p < 0.001), less home discharge (77.6% v. 94.2%, p < 0.001) and were 2.5 times more likely to have any adverse events (95% CI 1.5-4.1, p < 0.001). Patients who decompensated had a 2.1 times higher risk of having any adverse events than patients who presented as de novo emergencies (95% CI 1.2-3.6, p< 0.001). Conclusion: We observed worse perioperative outcomes for patients requiring emergency surgery for degenerative spinal conditions than for patients who were scheduled for surgery. Patients who decompensated while on the surgical waitlist had the worst outcomes. Contexte: Le traitement chirurgical des pathologies dégénératives de la colonne vertébrale est généralement planifié; l'aggravation des symptômes peut toutefois justifier une opération d'urgence. On constate d'ailleurs qu'un pourcentage croissant de patients ont besoin d'une telle intervention (22,6% en 2006 comparativement à 34,8% en 2019). Nous avons cherché à comparer les issues des patients ayant subi une intervention planifiée avec celles des patients nécessitant une opération d'urgence. Méthodes: Tous les patients traités entre le 1er janvier 2006 et le 31 décembre 2019 ont été inclus. Nous avons établi des comparaisons rétrospectives entre les patients allant subir une intervention planifiée (non urgente) et ceux ayant besoin d'une opération d'urgence, entre les patients allant subir une intervention planifiée et ceux ayant subi une décompensation alors qu'ils étaient sur une liste d'attente, et entre les patients nécessitant une opération urgente pour une pathologie de novo et ceux ayant subi une décompensation alors qu'ils étaient sur une liste d'attente. Résultats: Parmi les 6217 patients présentant des pathologies dégénératives, 4654 (74,9%) allaient subir une intervention planifiée (non urgente) et 1563 (25,1%) avaient besoin d'une opération d'urgence. Comparativement aux premiers, ces derniers restaient plus longtemps à l'hôpital (5,1 jours [écart interquartile (EI) 2,7-11,2] c. 3,6 jours [EI 1,3-6,4], p < 0,001) et présentaient un taux de congé plus faible (78,6% c. 94,2%, p < 0,001). Ils étaient 1,34 fois plus susceptibles d'être victimes d'un événement indésirable (intervalle de confiance [IC] de 95% 1,06-1,68, p = 0,01). Comparativement aux patients pour lesquels une intervention était prévue, ceux ayant subi une décompensation alors qu'ils étaient sur une liste d'attente restaient plus longtemps à l'hôpital (7,0 jours [EI 3,3-15,0] c. 3,6 jours [EI 1,3-6,4], p < 0,001), présentaient un taux de congé plus faible (77,6% c. 94,2%, p < 0,001) et étaient 2,5 fois plus susceptibles de subir un événement indésirable (IC de 95% 1,5-4,1, p < 0,001). Les patients ayant subi une décompensation présentaient un risque 2,1 fois plus élevé d'être victimes d'un événement indésirable, comparativement aux patients nécessitant une opération urgente pour une pathologie de novo (IC de 95% 1,2-3,6, p < 0,001). Conclusion: Nous avons observé des issues périopératoires moins favorables chez les patients ayant besoin de se faire opérer d'urgence pour des pathologies dégénératives de la colonne vertébrale, comparativement à ceux pour lesquels une intervention était prévue. Les patients ayant subi une décompensation alors qu'ils étaient sur une liste d'attente présentaient les pires issues., Older age demographics have increased the demand for spinal surgery, creating an ever-increasing burden for the health care system. (1) This is especially true for degenerative spinal pathologies such as [...]

Acute traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) can result in severe, lifelong neurological deficits. After SCI, Rho activation contributes to collapse of axonal growth cones, failure of axonal regeneration, and neuronal loss. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b/3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of Rho inhibitor VX-210 (9 mg) in patients after acute traumatic cervical SCI. The study enrolled patients 14-75 years of age with acute traumatic cervical SCIs, C4-C7 (motor level) on each side, and American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) Grade A or B who had spinal decompression/stabilization surgery commencing within 72 h after injury. Patients were randomized 1:1 with stratification by age (

Study Design: Retrospective observational cohort study. Objective: En bloc resection for primary tumours of the spine is associated with a high rate of adverse events (AEs). The objective was to explore the relationship between frailty/sarcopenia and major perioperative AEs, length of stay (LOS), and unplanned reoperation following en bloc resection of primary spinal tumours. Methods: This is a unicentre study consisting of adult patients undergoing en bloc resection for a primary spine tumor. Frailty was calculated with the modified frailty index (mFI) and spine tumour frailty index (STFI). Sarcopenia was quantified with the total psoas area/vertebral body area ratio (TPA/VB) at L3 and L4. Univariable regression analysis was used to quantify the association between frailty/sarcopenia and major perioperative AEs, LOS and unplanned reoperation. Results: 95 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mFI and STFI identified a frailty prevalence of 3% and 18%. Mean CT TPA/VB ratios were 1.47 (SD ±.05) and 1.83 (SD ±.06) at L3 and L4. Inter-observer reliability was.93 and.99 for CT and MRI L3 and L4 TPA/VB ratios. Unadjusted analysis demonstrated sarcopenia and mFI did not predict perioperative AEs, LOS or unplanned reoperation. Frailty defined by an STFI score ≥2 predicted unplanned reoperation for surgical site infection (SSI) (P <.05). Conclusions: The STFI was only associated with unplanned reoperation for SSI on unadjusted analysis, while the mFI and sarcopenia were not predictive of any outcome. Further studies are needed to investigate the relationship between frailty, sarcopenia and perioperative outcomes following en bloc resection of primary spinal tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute spinal cord injury (SCI) is a traumatic event that results in disturbances to normal sensory, motor, or autonomic function and ultimately affects a patient's physical, psychological, and social well-being. The management of patients with SCI has drastically evolved over the past century as a result of increasing knowledge on injury mechanisms, disease pathophysiology, and the role of surgery. There still, however, remain controversial areas surrounding available management strategies for the treatment of SCI, including the use of corticosteroids such as methylprednisolone sodium succinate, the optimal timing of surgical intervention, the type and timing of anticoagulation prophylaxis, the role of magnetic resonance imaging, and the type and timing of rehabilitation. This lack of consensus has prevented the standardization of care across treatment centers and among the various disciplines that encounter patients with SCI. The objective of this guideline is to form evidence-based recommendations for these areas of controversy and outline how to best manage patients with SCI. The ultimate goal of these guidelines is to improve outcomes and reduce morbidity in patients with SCI by promoting standardization of care and encouraging clinicians to make evidence-informed decisions.

Study designSystematic review.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine (1) change in function, pain, and quality of life following structured nonoperative treatment for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM); (2) variability of change in function, pain, and quality of life following different types of structured nonoperative treatment; (3) differences in outcomes observed between certain subgroups (eg, baseline severity score, duration of symptoms); and (4) negative outcomes and harms resulting from structured nonoperative treatment.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Collaboration for articles published between January 1, 1950, and February 9, 2015. Studies were included if they evaluated outcomes following structured nonoperative treatment, including therapeutic exercise, manual therapy, cervical bracing, and/or traction. The quality of each study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and strength of the overall body of evidence was rated using guidelines outlined by the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group.ResultsOf the 570 retrieved citations, 8 met inclusion criteria and were summarized in this review. Based on our results, there is very low evidence to suggest that structured nonoperative treatment for DCM results in either a positive or negative change in function as evaluated by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score.ConclusionThere is a lack of evidence to determine the role of nonoperative treatment in patients with DCM. However, in the majority of studies, patients did not achieve clinically significant gains in function following structured nonoperative treatment. Furthermore, 23% to 54% of patients managed nonoperatively subsequently underwent surgical treatment.

IntroductionThe objective of this guideline is to outline the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in clinical decision making and outcome prediction in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted to address key questions related to the use of MRI in patients with traumatic SCI. This review focused on longitudinal studies that controlled for baseline neurologic status. A multidisciplinary Guideline Development Group (GDG) used this information, their clinical expertise, and patient input to develop recommendations on the use of MRI for SCI patients. Based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), a strong recommendation is worded as "we recommend," whereas a weaker recommendation is indicated by "we suggest."ResultsBased on the limited available evidence and the clinical expertise of the GDG, our recommendations were: (1) "We suggest that MRI be performed in adult patients with acute SCI prior to surgical intervention, when feasible, to facilitate improved clinical decision-making" (quality of evidence, very low) and (2) "We suggest that MRI should be performed in adult patients in the acute period following SCI, before or after surgical intervention, to improve prediction of neurologic outcome" (quality of evidence, low).ConclusionsThese guidelines should be implemented into clinical practice to improve outcomes and prognostication for patients with SCI.

IntroductionThe objective of this study is to develop evidence-based guidelines that recommend effective, safe and cost-effective thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted to address key questions relating to thromboprophylaxis in SCI. Based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), a strong recommendation is worded as "we recommend," whereas a weaker recommendation is indicated by "we suggest."ResultsBased on conclusions from the systematic review and expert panel opinion, the following recommendations were developed: (1) "We suggest that anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis be offered routinely to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in the acute period after SCI;" (2) "We suggest that anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis, consisting of either subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin or fixed, low-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) be offered to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in the acute period after SCI. Given the potential for increased bleeding events with the use of adjusted-dose UFH, we suggest against this option;" (3) "We suggest commencing anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis within the first 72 hours after injury, if possible, in order to minimize the risk of venous thromboembolic complications during the period of acute hospitalization."ConclusionsThese guidelines should be implemented into clinical practice in patients with SCI to promote standardization of care, decrease heterogeneity of management strategies and encourage clinicians to make evidence-informed decisions.

IntroductionThe objective of this study is to develop guidelines that outline the appropriate type and timing of rehabilitation in patients with acute spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted to address key questions related to rehabilitation in patients with acute SCI. A multidisciplinary guideline development group used this information, and their clinical expertise, to develop recommendations for the type and timing of rehabilitation. Based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), a strong recommendation is worded as "we recommend," whereas a weaker recommendation is indicated by "we suggest.ResultsBased on the findings from the systematic review, our recommendations were: (1) We suggest rehabilitation be offered to patients with acute spinal cord injury when they are medically stable and can tolerate required rehabilitation intensity (no included studies; expert opinion); (2) We suggest body weight-supported treadmill training as an option for ambulation training in addition to conventional overground walking, dependent on resource availability, context, and local expertise (low evidence); (3) We suggest that individuals with acute and subacute cervical SCI be offered functional electrical stimulation as an option to improve hand and upper extremity function (low evidence); and (4) Based on the absence of any clear benefit, we suggest not offering additional training in unsupported sitting beyond what is currently incorporated in standard rehabilitation (low evidence).ConclusionsThese guidelines should be implemented into clinical practice to improve outcomes and reduce morbidity in patients with SCI by promoting standardization of care, decreasing the heterogeneity of management strategies and encouraging clinicians to make evidence-informed decisions.

Study designGuideline development.ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to develop guidelines that outline how to best manage (1) patients with mild, moderate, and severe myelopathy and (2) nonmyelopathic patients with evidence of cord compression with or without clinical symptoms of radiculopathy.MethodsFive systematic reviews of the literature were conducted to synthesize evidence on disease natural history; risk factors of disease progression; the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of nonoperative and surgical management; the impact of preoperative duration of symptoms and myelopathy severity on treatment outcomes; and the frequency, timing, and predictors of symptom development. A multidisciplinary guideline development group used this information, and their clinical expertise, to develop recommendations for the management of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).ResultsOur recommendations were as follows: (1) "We recommend surgical intervention for patients with moderate and severe DCM." (2) "We suggest offering surgical intervention or a supervised trial of structured rehabilitation for patients with mild DCM. If initial nonoperative management is pursued, we recommend operative intervention if there is neurological deterioration and suggest operative intervention if the patient fails to improve." (3) "We suggest not offering prophylactic surgery for non-myelopathic patients with evidence of cervical cord compression without signs or symptoms of radiculopathy. We suggest that these patients be counseled as to potential risks of progression, educated about relevant signs and symptoms of myelopathy, and be followed clinically." (4) "Non-myelopathic patients with cord compression and clinical evidence of radiculopathy with or without electrophysiological confirmation are at a higher risk of developing myelopathy and should be counselled about this risk. We suggest offering either surgical intervention or nonoperative treatment consisting of close serial follow-up or a supervised trial of structured rehabilitation. In the event of myelopathic development, the patient should be managed according to the recommendations above."ConclusionsThese guidelines will promote standardization of care for patients with DCM, decrease the heterogeneity of management strategies and encourage clinicians to make evidence-informed decisions.

IntroductionThe objective of this guideline is to outline the appropriate use of methylprednisolone sodium succinate (MPSS) in patients with acute spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted to address key questions related to the use of MPSS in acute SCI. A multidisciplinary Guideline Development Group used this information, in combination with their clinical expertise, to develop recommendations for the use of MPSS. Based on GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), a strong recommendation is worded as "we recommend," whereas a weaker recommendation is indicated by "we suggest."ResultsThe main conclusions from the systematic review included the following: (1) there were no differences in motor score change at any time point in patients treated with MPSS compared to those not receiving steroids; (2) when MPSS was administered within 8 hours of injury, pooled results at 6- and 12-months indicated modest improvements in mean motor scores in the MPSS group compared with the control group; and (3) there was no statistical difference between treatment groups in the risk of complications. Our recommendations were: (1) "We suggest not offering a 24-hour infusion of high-dose MPSS to adult patients who present after 8 hours with acute SCI"; (2) "We suggest a 24-hour infusion of high-dose MPSS be offered to adult patients within 8 hours of acute SCI as a treatment option"; and (3) "We suggest not offering a 48-hour infusion of high-dose MPSS to adult patients with acute SCI."ConclusionsThese guidelines should be implemented into clinical practice to improve outcomes and reduce morbidity in SCI patients.