Rate of Reoperation Following Decompression-Only Procedure for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review of Literature.

Background: Management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with decompression-only procedure has been performed for its added benefit of a shorter duration of surgery, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. However, reported failure rates for decompression-only procedures vary depending on the methods utilized for decompression. Hence, we aim to identify the failure rates of individual methods of decompression-only procedures performed for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: An independent systematic review of 4 scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, Web of Science) was performed to identify relevant articles as per the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Studies reporting on failure rates defined by reoperation at the index level following decompression-only procedure for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included for analysis. Studies were appraised using ROBINS tool of Cochrane, and analysis was performed using the Open Meta[Analyst] software. Results: The overall failure rate of decompression-only procedure was 9.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] [6.5-11.7]). Furthermore, open decompression had failure rate of 10.9% (95% CI [6.0-15.8]), while microendoscopic decompression had failure rate of 6.7% (95% CI [2.9-10.6]). The failure rate gradually increased from 6.9% (95% CI [2.0-11.7]) at 1 year to 7% (95% CI [3.6-10.3]), 11.7% (95% CI [4.5-18.9]), and 11.7% (95% CI [6.6-16.7]) at 2, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Single level decompression had a failure rate of 9.6% (95% CI [6.3-12.9]), while multilevel decompression recorded a failure rate of 8.7% (95% CI [5.6-11.7]). Conclusion: High-quality evidence on the decompression-only procedure for degenerative spondylolisthesis is limited. The decompression-only procedure had an overall failure rate of 9.1% without significant differences between the decompression techniques. Level of Evidence: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Conservative Treatment for Spontaneous Resolution of Postoperative Symptomatic Thoracic Spinal Epidural Hematoma-A Case Report.

Introduction: Postoperative epidural hematomas of the cervical and thoracic spine can pose a great risk of rapid neurological impairment and sometimes require immediate decompressive surgery. Case Report: We present the case of a young patient operated on for stabilization of a two-level thoracic vertebra fracture who developed total paralysis due to an epidural hematoma postoperatively. The course of epidural hematoma was quickly reversed with the help of a conservative technique that prevented revision surgery. The patient regained complete neurologic function very rapidly, and has been well on every follow-up to date. Conclusion: There is a role of similar maneuvers as described in this case to be employed in the management of postoperative epidural hematomas. However, prolonged watchful waiting should still be discouraged, and patients should remain ready for revision surgery if there are no early signs of rapid recovery.

Operative versus non-operative management of blunt pancreatic trauma in children: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: Blunt abdominal trauma is the major cause of abdominal injury in children. No clear guidelines exist for the initial management of blunt pancreatic trauma in children. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of initially non-operative versus initially operative treatment in children with blunt pancreatic injury. METHODS: Studies including children (<18 years) with blunt pancreatic injuries published in any language after year 1990 were included. Total of 849 studies were identified by searching PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Database. After review, 42 studies met inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. There were 1754 patients, of whom 1095 were initially managed non-operatively (NOM), and 659 operatively (OM). Primary outcome was non-operative management success rate, and secondary outcomes were mortality, complications (including specifically pseudocysts and pancreatic fistulas), percent of patients and days on total parenteral nutrition (TPN), length of hospital stay and readmissions. RESULTS: There was no difference in mortality between NOM and OM groups. The incidence of pseudocysts was significantly higher in NOM group compared to OM (P<0.001), especially for AAST grade III or higher (P<0.00001). Overall incidence of pancreatic fistulas was significantly lower for NOM group (p = 0.02) but no difference was observed for AAST grades III or higher (p = 0.49). There was no difference in the length of hospital stay (P = 0.31). Duration of total parenteral nutrition was not different for all AAST grades (P = 0.35), but was significantly shorter for OM group for AAST grades III and higher (p = 0.0001). There was no overall difference in readmissions (P = 0.94). Overall success rate of initial non-operative treatment was 87%. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with pancreatic trauma can initially be treated non-operatively, while early surgical treatment may benefit patients with lesions of the main pancreatic duct. ERCP offers both highly accurate diagnosis and potential treatment of ductal injuries.