Prophylactic surgery is invalid intreatment of spinal injury without fracture and dislocationcomplicated by cervical spinal canal stenosis / 实用医学杂志

Objective In this study,we aim to evaluate the risk and incidence of traumatic cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) in patients with traumatic cervical spinal canal stenosis (CSCS) without major fracture or dislocation,and evaluate the feasibility of preventive decompression surgery. Methods This study included eighty?seven patients with traumatic CSCI without major fracture or dislocation treated in our department between 2005 and 2012. Mann?Whitney U test was used for statistical analyses. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to calculate the relative and absolute risks for the incidence of traumatic CSCI without major fracture or dislocation related with CSCS. Results The relative risk for the incidence of traumatic CSCI with CSCS was 145.7 times higher than that for the incidence without CSCS. However ,only 0.000026% of patients with CSCS may be able to avoid developing traumatic CSCI if they underwent decompression surgery before trauma. Conclusions Prophylactic surgical management for CSCS might not significantly affect the incidence of traumatic CSCI.

Clinical Influence of Cervical Spinal Canal Stenosis on Neurological Outcome after Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury without Major Fracture or Dislocation

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. PURPOSE: To clarify the influence of cervical spinal canal stenosis (CSCS) on neurological functional recovery after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) without major fracture or dislocation. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The biomechanical etiology of traumatic CSCI remains under discussion and its relationship with CSCS is one of the most controversial issues in the clinical management of traumatic CSCI. METHODS: To obtain a relatively uniform background, patients non-surgically treated for an acute C3-4 level CSCI without major fracture or dislocation were selected. We analyzed 58 subjects with traumatic CSCI using T2-weighted mid-sagittal magnetic resonance imaging. The sagittal diameter of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) column, degree of canal stenosis, and neurologic outcomes in motor function, including improvement rate, were assessed. RESULTS: There were no significant relationships between sagittal diameter of the CSF column at the C3-4 segment and their American Spinal Injury Association motor scores at both admission and discharge. Moreover, no significant relationships were observed between the sagittal diameter of the CSF column at the C3-4 segment and their neurological recovery during the following period. CONCLUSIONS: No relationships between pre-existing CSCS and neurological outcomes were evident after traumatic CSCI. These results suggest that decompression surgery might not be recommended for traumatic CSCI without major fracture or dislocation despite pre-existing CSCS.