Cauda equina syndrome

A comparison of available guidelines for the detection of cauda equina syndrome and assessing the need for further clinical guidance in Ireland

The cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a rare but critical disorder, which can result in devastating motor weakness and sensory deficit, alongside often irreversible bladder, bowel and sexual dysfunction. In addition to the clinical burden of disease, this syndrome results in a disproportionately high medicolegal strain due to missed or delayed diagnoses. Despite being an emergency diagnosis, often necessitating urgent surgical decompression to treat, we believe there is a lack of clarity for clinicians in the current literature, with no published Irish guideline concerning screening or detection. The current study aims to identify and analyse appropriate guidelines in relation to CES screening which are available to clinicians in Ireland. The study design included a comprehensive literature review and comparison of existing guidelines. The review identified 13 sources of appropriate guidance for clinicians working in Ireland. These resources included textbooks, websites and guidelines developed in the UK. No Irish guidelines or advice were available on CES screening/treatment at the time of review. This review demonstrated the lack of consensus and guidance for clinicians in Ireland on how to effectively screen for CES, judge who requires further imaging and investigations and how to rule out the condition. A national consensus on thorough screening and prompt investigation for CES is necessary, and the formulation of new CES guidelines would be a welcome addition to what is available to clinicians currently.

Aortoiliac occlusion mimicking cauda equina syndrome, a diagnostic dilemma: A case report and review of the literature

Background

Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a consequence of a variety of etiologies. CES is most commonly due to compression of the thecal sac and nerve roots by a massive disc herniation. However, it rarely presents secondary to aortic occlusion. Aortoiliac occlusive disorder is usually associated with chronic claudication, erectile dysfunction, and diminished lower limb pulses. Acute aortic occlusion, however, is associated with serious complications such as spinal cord infarction and ischemia. It is also associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Moreover, it poses a diagnostic challenge and may be overlooked. This report emphasizes the importance of considering vascular etiology as a differential diagnosis for CES.

Case Description

This case report describes a unique case of aortic occlusion mimicking CES in a 56-year-old female patient.

Conclusion

For patients presenting with cauda equina symptomatology, it is critical to consider vascular etiology, especially for those with cardiovascular risk factors. Spine surgeons and emergency physicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for vascular etiologies and consider appropriate imaging studies to promote early diagnosis and intervention to prevent subsequent neurological and life-threatening consequences.

Cauda equina syndrome

Cauda equina syndrome is an uncommon but serious cause of lower back pain resulting from compression of the cauda equina nerve roots, most commonly by lumbar disc herniation. Red flag symptoms, such as bladder dysfunction, saddle anaesthesia and sciatica, should lead to high clinical suspicion of cauda equina syndrome. The British Association of Spinal Surgeons has published an updated standard of care for these patients because of the potentially debilitating effects of missed cases of cauda equina syndrome. This review summarises these standards and provides a framework to support quick triage of at-risk patients. Immediate magnetic resonance imaging, within 1 hour of presentation to the emergency department, is crucial in patients with suspected cauda equina syndrome to allow prompt diagnosis and treatment. Urgent decompressive surgery is usually recommended for the best outcomes, to reduce morbidity and complication rates.

Publication Trends and Hot Spots in Cauda Equina Syndrome: A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Current Research

BACKGROUND

Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a relatively uncommon and complex disorder. Recently, there has been a surge in research on CES. Although the research directions are multifarious, the overall research trends are unclear at present. We aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles on CES and analyze the hot spots trends regarding CES related research by bibliometric analysis.

METHODS

Articles were obtained by conducting an English language search of the Web of Science Core Collection Databases with the keywords "cauda equina syndrome." The initial 390 articles returned from the search were analyzed by VOSviewer. Next, the top 100 most cited articles were further analyzed by title, authors, journal, year of publication, total citations, country of origin, institution, and keywords.

RESULTS

A total of 390 publications were identified. The top 100 most cited articles were listed in descending order of total citations (range: 196-11). These articles originated from 24 countries; among these countries, the United Kingdom contributed the most publications (n = 29). The most prolific journal was Spine (n = 27), and the University of Edinburgh was the most productive institution (n = 9).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of publications on CES increased steadily, with a stable rise in recent years. Some publications have been cited more than 100 times, indicating that these findings are widely accepted by relevant clinicians and contribute significantly to the knowledge of CES. This study represents the first bibliometric analysis and visualization of hot spots analysis and research trends on CES. We believe that this will aid clinical researchers in targeting future areas of research.

Minimally invasive decompression alone versus fusion surgery for acute lumbar disk herniation combined incomplete cauda equina syndrome

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single center study.

BACKGROUND

Cauda equine syndrome (CES), which caused by acute lumbar disc herniation (LDH), often requires urgent surgical treatment. Currently, there is no standard defining the type of surgery, and approaches to the treatment of patients are based on the experience of the surgeon.

PURPOSE

to compare the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive decompression alone (Decompression alone group) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Fusion group) in the treatment of the incomplete CES, caused by acute LDH.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

89 patients with acute incomplete CES associated with LDH either underwent decompression alone and fusion surgery from January 2005 to January 2020 in single-center, and data were collected and retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the operation technics: the Decompression alone group (n = 46) and the Fusion group (n = 43). The perioperative clinical data (neurological deficit, control of the urinary bladder sphincter, ODI scale, SF-36) was used to assess the efficacy of the respective surgical methods before operation and with a minimum follow-up 24 months.

RESULTS

Verified statistical significance more bleeding, longer surgery time and hospital stay, in the Fusion group than in the Decompression alone group. The postoperative clinical data dramatic improved after Decompression alone and Fusion surgery. At early postoperative period registered better clinical outcomes according to ODI, SF-36 after Decompression alone surgery, but at minimum follow-up 24 months verified better in the Fusion group. The number of revision interventions in the Decompression alone group was 28.3% (n = 13), in Fusion group - 9.3% (n = 4) (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of acute incomplete CES due to LDH in our series was registered in 1.02% of patients (124 of 12087). In the Fusion group, in the long-term period, there were better clinical outcomes and fewer revision surgical interventions compared with Decompression alone.

Definition and surgical timing in cauda equina syndrome-An updated systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review identifying existing definitions of cauda equina syndrome (CES) and time to surgery in the literature for patients with CES.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Ovid Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, and trial registries were searched from October 1st, 2016, to 30th December 2022, and combined with articles identified from a previous systematic review by the same authors (studies published 1990-2016).

RESULTS

A total of 110 studies (52,008 patients) were included. Of these only 16 (14.5%) used established definitions in defining CES, including Fraser criteria (n = 6), British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) (n = 5), Gleave and MacFarlane (n = 2), and other (n = 3). Most reported symptoms were urinary dysfunction (n = 44, 40%%), altered sensation in the perianal region (n = 28, 25.5%) and bowel dysfunction (n = 20, 18.2%). Sixty-eight (61.8%) studies included details on time to surgery. There was an increase in percentage of studies defining CES published in the last 5 years compared to ones from 1990-2016 (58.6% vs 77.5.%, P = .045).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite Fraser recommendations, substantial heterogeneity exists in reporting of CES definitions, and a start point for time to surgery, with most authors using self-defined criteria. A consensus is required to define CES and time to surgery, to allow consistency in reporting and study analysis.

[Long-term results and predictors of postoperative outcomes in patients with cauda equina syndrome following degenerative lumbar spine disease]

Cauda equina syndrome (CES) associated with acute disc extrusion or spinal stenosis often requires emergency surgery. Analysis of the Pubmed, Medline and eLibrary databases revealed a few studies devoted to long-term postoperative outcomes in patients with CES caused by degenerative spine disease.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term postoperative results and predictors of clinical and neurological outcomes in patients with CES caused by degenerative lumbar spine disease.

MATERIAL AND METHODS. D

Ecompressive and decompressive-stabilizing procedures were performed in 211 patients with CES caused by degenerative lumbar spine disease between 2000 and 2020. Long-term clinical parameters were available in 174 patients with mean follow-up period of 7 years. Sixty-eight patients had unsatisfactory postoperative outcomes. We assessed postoperative clinical and neurological outcomes in patients with CES and predictors of these outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified the following predictors of clinical and neurological outcomes using binary logistic regression model: period between clinical manifestation and surgery >48 hours, preoperative neurological impairment, spinal canal diameter, surgical procedure, dimension of herniated disc, ASA score and long-term postoperative analgesia with narcotic analgesics.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative planning and possible correction of the above-mentioned risk factors will potentially improve postoperative outcomes in patients with CES caused by degenerative lumbar spine disease.