ABSTRACT
Conjoint nerve root (CNR) is an embryological nerve root anomaly that mainly involves the lumbosacral region. The presence of CNR during tubular discectomy raises the chances of failure in spinal surgery and the risk of neural injuries. Tubular discectomy can be challenging in the presence of CNR owing to limited visualization. Here, we present a technical note on two cases of L5–S1 disc prolapse in the presence of conjoint S1 nerve root that was operated via a minimally invasive tubular approach. Any intraoperative suspicion of CNR while using the tubular approach should prompt the surgeon to perform a thorough tubular decompression prior to nerve root retraction. In patients with a large disc, disc should be approached via the axilla because the axillary area between the dura and the medial boarder of the root is very easy to approach in the presence of CNR. Safe performance of tubular discectomy is possible even in the presence of CNR in the lumbar spine.
ABSTRACT
Conjoint nerve root (CNR) is an embryological nerve root anomaly that mainly involves the lumbosacral region. The presence of CNR during tubular discectomy raises the chances of failure in spinal surgery and the risk of neural injuries. Tubular discectomy can be challenging in the presence of CNR owing to limited visualization. Here, we present a technical note on two cases of L5–S1 disc prolapse in the presence of conjoint S1 nerve root that was operated via a minimally invasive tubular approach. Any intraoperative suspicion of CNR while using the tubular approach should prompt the surgeon to perform a thorough tubular decompression prior to nerve root retraction. In patients with a large disc, disc should be approached via the axilla because the axillary area between the dura and the medial boarder of the root is very easy to approach in the presence of CNR. Safe performance of tubular discectomy is possible even in the presence of CNR in the lumbar spine.
ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze various diagnostic tools, including GeneXpert, for the management of tuberculosis of the spine. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Traditional diagnostic methods of microscopy, histology, and culture have low sensitivity and specificity for the management of tuberculosis of the spine. METHODS: Of the 262 treated cases of spinal tuberculosis, data on 1 year follow-up was available for 217 cases. Of these, only 145 cases with a confirmed diagnosis were selected for retrospective analysis. RESULTS: In 145 of the 217 patients (66.80%), diagnosis was confirmed on the basis of a culture. Of the 145 patients with a confirmed diagnosis, 98 (66.20%) patients were diagnosed on the basis of clinical presentation, whereas 123 (84.8%) exhibited a typical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) picture. In 99 surgically treated patients, the diagnosis was confirmed on the basis of an intraoperative tissue biopsy. Among the 46 patients treated conservatively, 35 underwent a transpedicular biopsy, 4 patients underwent computed tomography-guided biopsy, 6 patients were diagnosed on the basis of material obtained from a cold abscess, and 1 patient underwent an open biopsy. The sensitivity of the culture for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis was 66.80% (145/217) in our patients. Among the cases in which GeneXpert was used, the sensitivity for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis was 93.4% (43/46). Moreover, the sensitivity of GeneXpert to detect rifampicin resistance was 100% (7/7) in our study. CONCLUSIONS: Majority of the patients with tuberculosis of the spine can be diagnosed on the basis of a typical radiological presentation via MRI. In our study, 84.8% cases exhibited typical MRI findings. For patients presenting with atypical MRI features, a rapid and accurate diagnosis is possible by combining GeneXpert with MRI. The combined use of MRI and GeneXpert is a rapid and highly sensitive tool to diagnose tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in patients with tuberculosis of the spine. Furthermore, we achieved a 97.9% sensitivity for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and 100% sensitivity for the detection of rifampicin resistance in our study.