ABSTRACT
Adult cervical spine traumatic facet joint dislocations occur when excessive traumatic forces displace the vertebrae's facets, leading to loss of joint congruence. Reduction requires either cranial traction or open surgical procedures. This study aims to appraise the effects of different surgical techniques in the treatment of subaxial cervical spine acute traumatic facet blocks in adults. This study was based on a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, registered in Prospero (CRD42021279249). The PICO question was composed of adults with acute cervical spine traumatic facet dislocations submitted to anterior or posterior surgical approaches, associated or not with cranial traction for reduction. Each surgical technique was compared to the other. The primary clinical outcomes included neurological improvement or worsening and surgical success/failure rates. The anterior approach without cranial traction was efficient in reducing facet displacements. Skull traction was an efficient and immediate method to achieve spine dislocation reductions. Differences were not present among techniques regarding neurological improvement. There were no surgical failures in patients operated on via the posterior approach. The need to decompress and stabilize the cervical spine can be achieved by anterior or posterior surgical approaches, and there is no clear answer as to which initial approach is superior to the other.
Subject(s)
Joint Dislocations , Spinal Fusion , Spinal Injuries , Zygapophyseal Joint , Adult , Cervical Vertebrae/injuries , Cervical Vertebrae/surgery , Humans , Joint Dislocations/surgery , Spinal Fusion/methods , Spinal Injuries/surgery , Zygapophyseal Joint/injuries , Zygapophyseal Joint/surgeryABSTRACT
Incongruities in the terminology and in the Brazilian legislation about percutaneous facet procedures (PFPs) for the treatment of chronic lower back pain are frequently the subject of litigations between health professionals and supplementary healthcare providers. The Brazilian Hierarchical Classification of Medical Procedures (CBHPM, in the Portuguese acronym) describes four types of PFPs, while the Brazilian Unified Supplementary Health Terminology (TUSS, in the Portuguese acronym) describes five distinct lumbar PFPs, which correlate with the ones described on the List of Procedures and Events in Health, created by the Brazilian National Agency of Supplementary Health (ANS, in the Portuguese acronym). In the present paper, we review the terminology of the procedures, proposing the unification of the terminology and the abolition of redundancies in the tables. Finally, we developed a single terminology proposal for the PFPs based on their complexity and objectives to be used for the treatment of lower back pain.
