Search

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, [...]

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 designSystematic review. Surgical decompression for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is associated with perioperative complications, including difficulty or discomfort with swallowing (dysphagia) as well as changes in sound production (dysphonia). This systematic review aims to (1) outline how dysphagia and dysphonia are defined in the literature and (2) assess the quality of definitions using a novel 4-point rating system.MethodsAn electronic database search was conducted for studies that reported on dysphagia, dysphonia or other related complications of DCM surgery. Data extracted included study design, surgical details, as well as definitions and rates of surgical complications. A 4-point rating scale was developed to assess the quality of definitions for each complication.ResultsOur search yielded 2,673 unique citations, 11 of which met eligibility criteria and were summarized in this review. Defined complications included odynophagia (n = 1), dysphagia (n = 11), dysphonia (n = 2), perioperative swelling complications (n = 2), and soft tissue swelling (n = 3). Rates of dysphagia varied substantially (0.0%-50.0%) depending on whether this complication was patient-reported (4.4%); patient-reported using a modified Swallowing Quality of Life questionnaire (43.1%) or the Bazaz criteria (8.8%-50.0%); or diagnosed using an extensive protocol consisting of clinical assessment, a bedside swallowing test, evaluation by a speech and language pathologist and a modified barium swallowing test/fiberoptic endoscopy (42.9%). The reported incidences of dysphonia also ranged significantly from 0.6% to 38.0%.ConclusionThere is substantial variability in reported rates of dysphagia and dysphonia due to differences in data collection methods, diagnostic strategies, and definitions. Consolidation of nomenclature will improve evaluation of the overall safety of surgery.

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 Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objective: The primary objective was to evaluate the impact of the upper instrumented level (UIV) being at C2 vs C3 in posterior cervical construct on patient reported outcomes (PROs) up to 24 months after surgery for cervical degenerative myelopathy (DCM). Secondary objectives were to compare operative time, intra-operative blood loss (IOBL), length of stay (LOS), adverse events (AEs) and re-operation. Methods: Patients who underwent a posterior cervical instrumented fusion (3 and + levels) with a C2 or C3 UIV, with 24 months follow-up were analyzed. PROs (NDI, EQ5D, SF-12 PCS/MCS, NRS arm/neck pain) were compared using ANCOVA. Operative duration, IOBL, AEs, and re-operation were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed on patient presenting with pre-operative malalignment (cervical sagittal vertical axis ≥40 mm and/or T1slope- cervical lordosis >15°). Results: 173 patients were included, of which 41 (24%) had a C2 UIV and 132 (76%) a C3 UIV. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for the changes in PROs up to 24 months. Subgroup analysis of patients with pre-operative malalignment showed a trend towards greater improvement in the NDI at 12 months with a C2 UIV (P =.054). Operative time, IOBL and peri-operative AEs were more in C2 group (P <.05). There was no significant difference in LOS and re-operation (P >.05). Conclusion: In this observational study, up to 24 months after surgery for posterior cervical fusion in DCM greater than 3 levels, PROs appear to evolve similarly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectivesDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) involves extrinsic spinal cord compression causing tissue injury and neurological dysfunction. Asymptomatic spinal cord compression (ASCC) is more common, but its significance is poorly defined. This study investigates if: (1) ASCC can be automatically diagnosed using spinal cord shape analysis; (2) multiparametric quantitative MRI can detect similar spinal cord tissue injury as previously observed in DCM.DesignProspective observational longitudinal cohort study.SettingSingle centre, tertiary care and research institution.Participants40 neurologically intact subjects (19 female, 21 male) divided into groups with and without ASCC.InterventionsNone.Outcome measuresClinical assessments: modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and physical examination. 3T MRI assessments: automated morphometric analysis compared with consensus ratings of spinal cord compression, and measures of tissue injury: cross-sectional area, diffusion fractional anisotropy, magnetisation transfer ratio and T2*-weighted imaging white to grey matter signal intensity ratio (T2*WI WM/GM) extracted from rostral (C1-3), caudal (C6-7) and maximally compressed levels.ResultsASCC was present in 20/40 subjects. Diagnosis with automated shape analysis showed area under the curve >97%. Five MRI metrics showed differences suggestive of tissue injury in ASCC compared with uncompressed subjects (p

BackgroundPatients with mild degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) are often managed non-operatively, and surgery is recommended if neurological progression occurs. However, detection of progression is often subjective. Quantitative MRI (qMRI) directly measures spinal cord (SC) tissue changes, detecting axonal injury, demyelination, and atrophy. This longitudinal study compared multiparametric qMRI with clinical measures of progression in non-operative DCM patients.Methods26 DCM patients were followed. Clinical data included modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) and additional assessments. 3T qMRI data included cross sectional area, diffusion fractional anisotropy, magnetization transfer ratio, and T2*-weighted white/grey matter signal ratio, extracted from the compressed SC and above/below. Progression was defined as 1) patients' subjective impression, 2) 2-point mJOA decrease, 3) ≥3 clinical measures worsening ≥5%, 4) increased compression on MRI, or 5) ≥1 of 10 qMRI measures or composite score worsening (p < 0.004, corrected).ResultsFollow-up (13.5 ± 4.9 months) included mJOA in all 26 patients, MRI in 25, and clinical/qMRI in 22. 42.3% reported subjective worsening, compared with mJOA (11.5%), MRI (20%), comprehensive assessments (54.6%), and qMRI (68.2%). Relative to subjective worsening, qMRI showed 100% sensitivity and 53.3% specificity compared with comprehensive assessments (75%, 60%), mJOA (27.3%, 100%), and MRI (18.2%, 81.3%). A decision-making algorithm incorporating qMRI identified progression and recommended surgery for 11 subjects (42.3%).ConclusionsQuantitative MRI shows high sensitivity to detect myelopathic progression. Our results suggest that neuroplasticity and behavioural adaptation may mask progressive SC tissue injury. qMRI appears to be a useful method to confirm subtle myelopathic progression in individual patients, representing an advance toward clinical translation of qMRI.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195733.].

Study designSystematic review (update).ObjectiveDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a progressive degenerative spine disease that is increasingly managed surgically. The objective of this study is to determine the role of nonoperative treatment in the management of DCM by updating a systematic review published by Rhee and colleagues in 2013. The specific aims of this review were (1) to determine the comparative efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of nonoperative and surgical treatment; (2) to assess whether myelopathy severity differentially affects outcomes of nonoperative treatment; and (3) to evaluate whether activities or minor injuries are associated with neurological deterioration.MethodsMethods from the original review were used to search for new literature published between July 20, 2012, and February 12, 2015.ResultsThe updated search yielded 2 additional citations that met inclusion criteria and compared the efficacy of conservative management and surgical treatment. Based on a single retrospective cohort, there were no significant differences in posttreatment Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) or Neck Disability Index scores or JOA recovery ratios between patients treated nonoperatively versus operatively. A second retrospective study indicated that the incidence rate of hospitalization for spinal cord injury was 13.9 per 1000 person-years in a nonoperative group compared with 9.4 per 1000 person-years in a surgical group (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.57; 95% confidence interval = 1.11-2.22; P = .011).ConclusionNonoperative management results in similar outcomes as surgical treatment in patients with a modified JOA ≥ 13, single-level myelopathy and intramedullary signal change on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Furthermore, patients managed nonoperatively for DCM have higher rates of hospitalization for spinal cord injury than those treated surgically. The overall level of evidence for these findings was rated as low.

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.

The Institute of Medicine defines clinical practice guidelines as "statements that include recommendations intended to optimize patient care that are informed by a systematic review of evidence and an assessment of the benefits and harms of alternative care options." Guidelines help clinicians implement best evidence into practice and encourage informed shared decision making with patients. Guidelines are intended to enhance the quality of patient care by discouraging ineffective and potentially harmful interventions and standardizing practice. Standards for the development and appraisal of guidelines, such as those proposed by the Institute of Medicine and other organizations, help assure guideline quality and credibility. Primary standards include establishing transparency, managing conflicts of interest, forming a multidisciplinary guideline development group, conducting methodologically sound systematic reviews, developing evidence-based recommendations, balancing risks and harms, and rating the strength of recommendations based on the confidence in the evidence. Furthermore, the guideline document must be appraised internally and externally and updated when new evidence arises. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation process helps appraise the existing body of evidence as well as provide an interactive framework for weighing the benefits and harms of treatment options and translating evidence to recommendations. This article summarizes the methodology used to develop clinical practice guidelines for the management of degenerative cervical myelopathy and acute spinal cord injury.

ObjectiveTo develop recommendations on the timing of surgical decompression in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) and central cord syndrome.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted to address key relevant questions. A multidisciplinary guideline development group used this information, along with their clinical expertise, to develop recommendations for the timing of surgical decompression in patients with SCI and central cord syndrome. Based on GRADE, a strong recommendation is worded as "we recommend," whereas a weak recommendation is presented as "we suggest."ResultsConclusions from the systematic review included (1) isolated studies reported statistically significant and clinically important improvements following early decompression at 6 months and following discharge from inpatient rehabilitation; (2) in one study on acute central cord syndrome without instability, a marginally significant improvement in total motor scores was reported at 6 and 12 months in patients managed with early versus late surgery; and (3) there were no significant differences in length of acute care/rehabilitation stay or in rates of complications between treatment groups. Our recommendations were: "We suggest that early surgery be considered as a treatment option in adult patients with traumatic central cord syndrome" and "We suggest that early surgery be offered as an option for adult acute SCI patients regardless of level." Quality of evidence for both recommendations was considered low.ConclusionsThese guidelines should be implemented into clinical practice to improve outcomes in patients with acute SCI and central cord syndrome by promoting standardization of care, decreasing the heterogeneity of management strategies, and encouraging clinicians to make evidence-informed decisions.

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.

Background: Healthcare inequities for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) represent a major priority area for trauma quality improvement. We hypothesized a relationship between health insurance status and timing of withdrawal of life sustaining treatment (WLST) for adults with severe TBI. Methods: This multicenter retrospective observational cohort study utilized data collected between 2017 and 2020. We identified adult (age ≥ 16) patients with isolated severe TBI admitted participating Trauma Quality Improvement Program centers. We determined the relationship between insurance status (public, private, and uninsured) and the timing of WLST using a competing risk survival analysis framework adjusting for baseline, clinical, injury and trauma center characteristics. Multivariable cause-specific Cox regressions were used to compute adjusted hazard ratios (HR) reflecting timing of WLST, accounting for mortality events. We also quantified the between-center residual variability in WLST using the median odds ratio (MOR) and measured insurance status association with access to rehabilitation at discharge. Results: We identified 42,111 adults with isolated severe TBI treated across 509 trauma centers across North America. There were 10,771 (25.6%) WLST events in the cohort and a higher unadjusted incidence of WLST events was evident in public insurance patients compared to private or uninsured groups. After adjustment, WLST occurred earlier for publicly insured (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.12) and uninsured patients (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18–1.41) compared to privately insured patients. Access to rehabilitation was lower for both publicly insured and uninsured patients compared to patients with private insurance. Accounting for case-mix, the MOR was 1.49 (95% CI 1.43–1.55), reflecting significant residual between-center variation in WLST decision-making. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the presence of disparate WLST practices independently associated with health insurance status. Additionally, these results emphasize between-center variability in WLST, persisting despite adjustments for measurable patient and trauma center characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]