Early surgical intervention among patients with acute central cord syndrome is not associated with higher mortality and morbidity

Initial surgical management of spinal injuries in patients with multiple and/or severe injuries- the 2022 update of the German clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

Our aim was to update evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for the initial surgical management of spinal (cord) injuries in patients with multiple and/or severe injuries based on current evidence. This guideline topic is part of the 2022 update of the German Guideline on the Treatment of Patients with Multiple and/or Severe Injuries.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched to May 2021. Further literature reports were obtained from clinical experts. Randomised controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and comparative registry studies were included if they compared interventions and the timing of interventions for the initial surgical management of spinal (cord) injuries in patients with polytrauma and/or severe injuries. We considered patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, complication rates, and lengths of stay. Risk of bias was assessed using NICE 2012 checklists. The evidence was synthesised narratively, and expert consensus was used to develop recommendations and determine their strength.

RESULTS

Seven new studies were identified. All studies compared different moments for the initial surgical management of spinal injuries. Three recommendations were modified, and three additional recommendations were developed. All achieved strong consensus.

CONCLUSION

The following key recommendations are made. (1) Patients with spinal injuries or deformities with confirmed or assumed neurological deficits which can be treated operatively should undergo surgery as soon as possible (ideally on day 1) if their other medical conditions permit. (2) If suggested by fracture morphology with spinal canal compression or translational injury and if spinal neurological damage cannot be ruled out, assume the presence of spinal neurological damage until it can be ruled out. (3) In the absence of neurological signs and/or symptoms, unstable spinal injuries should be treated by early surgical stabilization based on the patient's overall condition. (4) Depending on the injury, an anterior and/or posterior approach or, in exceptional cases, a halo fixation device can be used to stabilize the cervical spine. (5) Posterior internal fixation should be used as the primary surgical technique for stabilizing injuries to the thoracic and lumbar spine.

Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome

Central cord syndrome (CCS) is the most common form of incomplete spinal cord injury, with an increasing incidence with the aging population. This is a clinical diagnosis defined by weakness greater in the upper than lower extremities and often prominent sensory complaints in the hands. CCS is typically seen in individuals with underlying cervical canal stenosis from spondylosis who experience sudden forceful movement of the neck, especially hyperextension, resulting in contusion of the spinal cord. The prognosis in CCS is relatively favorable with improvement in neurological deficits, except for fine motor control of the hands. Neuropathic pain may persist even in those with excellent motor recovery. Nonoperative management may be appropriate in selected patients, but surgery is usually necessary in those with poor neurological recovery or further deterioration. The optimal timing of surgical intervention has not been defined, but recent evidence suggests that early surgery (≤24 h) may lead to greater neurological recovery, shorter hospital stay, and fewer inpatient complications. Management in any given patient must be considered in the context of the anatomy and location of spinal cord compression, the presence of fractures or ligamentous instability, the temporal course of signs and symptoms, as well as the patient's overall health.

Timing of decompression in central cord syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study compared the recovery of motor function and the safety of early and delayed surgical intervention in patients with central cord syndrome (CCS).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were employed to retrieve the targeted studies published from inception to February 19, 2023. Comparative studies of early versus delayed surgical decompression in CCS based on American Spinal Injury Association motor score (AMS) recovery, complication rates, and mortality were selected. The statistical analyses were performed using STATA 16.0 and RevMan 5.4.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 13 studies comprising 8424 patients. Results revealed that early surgery improved AMS scores significantly compared with delayed surgery, with an increase in MDs by 7.22 points (95% CI 1.98-12.45; P = 0.007). Additionally, early surgery reduced the complication rates than delayed surgery (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67, P < 0.00001). However, no significant difference was observed in mortality between the two groups (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.75-1.26; P = 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Early surgical decompression for CCS can improve motor function and reduce the incidence of complications without affecting the mortality rate in patients. Future research should focus on investigating and analyzing the optimal window period for early CCS surgery. Additionally, the timing of surgery should be determined based on the patient's condition and available medical resources.

Concomitant Traumatic Brain Injury Delays Surgery in Patients With Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Growing evidence supports prompt surgical decompression for patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI). Rates of concomitant tSCI and traumatic brain injury (TBI) range from 10% to 30%. Concomitant TBI may delay tSCI diagnosis and surgical intervention. Little is known about real-world management of this common injury constellation that carries significant clinical consequences. This study aimed to quantify the impact of concomitant TBI on surgical timing in a national cohort of patients with tSCI.

METHODS

Patient data were obtained from the National Trauma Data Bank (2007-2016). Patients admitted for tSCI and who received surgical intervention were included. Delayed surgical intervention was defined as surgery after 24 hours of admission. Multivariable hierarchical regression models were constructed to measure the risk-adjusted association between concomitant TBI and delayed surgical intervention. Secondary outcome included favorable discharge status.

RESULTS

We identified 14 964 patients with surgically managed tSCI across 377 North American trauma centers, of whom 2444 (16.3%) had concomitant TBI and 4610 (30.8%) had central cord syndrome (CCS). The median time to surgery was 20.0 hours for patients without concomitant TBI and 24.8 hours for patients with concomitant TBI. Hierarchical regression modeling revealed that concomitant TBI was independently associated with delayed surgery in patients with tSCI (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6). Although CCS was associated with delayed surgery (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.4-1.7), we did not observe a significant interaction between concomitant TBI and CCS. In the subset of patients with concomitant tSCI and TBI, patients with severe TBI were significantly more likely to experience a surgical delay than patients with mild TBI (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant TBI delays surgical management for patients with tSCI. This effect is largest for patients with tSCI with severe TBI. These findings should serve to increase awareness of concomitant TBI and tSCI and the likelihood that this may delay time-sensitive surgery.

Five-year mortality after traumatic central cord syndrome in Wales

Aims

Traumatic central cord syndrome (CCS) typically follows a hyperextension injury and results in motor impairment affecting the upper limbs more than the lower, with occasional sensory impairment and urinary retention. Current evidence on mortality and long-term outcomes is limited. The primary aim of this study was to assess the five-year mortality of CCS, and to determine any difference in mortality between management groups or age.

Methods

Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a traumatic CCS between January 2012 and December 2017 in Wales were identified. Patient demographics and data about injury, management, and outcome were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to assess mortality and between-group differences.

Results

A total of 65 patients were identified (66.2% male (n = 43), mean age 63.9 years (SD 15.9)). At a minimum of five years' follow-up, 32.3% of CCS patients (n = 21) had died, of whom six (9.2%) had died within 31 days of their injury. Overall, 69.2% of patients (n = 45) had been managed conservatively. There was no significant difference in age between conservatively and surgically managed patients (p = 0.062). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant difference in mortality between patients managed conservatively and those managed surgically (p = 0.819). However, there was a significant difference in mortality between the different age groups (< 50 years vs 50 to 70 years vs > 70 years; p = 0.001). At five years' follow-up, 55.6% of the patient group aged > 70 years at time of injury had died (n = 15). Respiratory failure was the most common cause of death (n = 9; 42.9%).

Conclusion

Almost one-third of patients with a traumatic CCS in Wales had died within five years of their injury. The type of management did not significantly affect mortality but their age at the time of injury did. Further work to assess the long-term functional outcomes of surviving patients is needed to generate more reliable prognostic information.

Surgery on the Day of Admission Decreases Postoperative Complication Rates for Patients With Central Cord Syndrome: An Analysis of National Surgical Quality Improvement (NSQIP) Data From 2010 to 2020

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to determine what constitutes "early optimal timing" of surgical management of central cord syndrome (CCS) with respect to a reduction of medical complications.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Data varies on the optimal time for surgical treatment of CCS with some studies favoring early intervention and others advocating that surgery can or should be delayed for 2-6 weeks.

METHODS

This IRB-approved study was a retrospective cross-sectional review of surgical management outcomes for patients diagnosed with CCS using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, which consists of anonymized medical record data from the year 2010 to 2020. Patient data included age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, current procedural terminology codes, length of stay, and postoperative complications. Patients were grouped into admission-day surgery, next-day surgery, and late-surgery groups.

RESULTS

A total of 738 patients who underwent surgery to treat CCS were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2010 to 2020 and included in this study. Admission-day surgery compared with next-day surgery was associated with a decreased postoperative complication rate after multivariate analysis (odds ratio: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.28-0.97; P =0.0387) as well as shorter length of stay ( P <0.0001). Complication rates between the next-day-surgery cohort and late-surgery cohort did not differ after multivariate analysis (odds ratio: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.63-1.65; P =0.9451), but the length of stay was shorter for next-day surgery ( P <0.0001). Two-year rolling averages for the admission-day-surgery rate and next-day-surgery rate show a compound annual growth rate of 2.52% and 4.10%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients admitted for surgical treatment of CCS, those who receive admission-day surgery have significantly reduced 30-day complication rates as well as shorter length of stays. Therefore, we advocate that "early surgery" should be defined as surgery on the day of admission and should occur in as timely a manner as possible. Prior studies, which define "early surgery" as within 24 hours might, unfortunately, fall short of reaching the optimal threshold for the reduction of 30-day medical complications associated with the treatment of patients with CCS.

Which treatment provides the best neurological outcomes in acute spinal cord injury?

Initial treatment of traumatic spinal cord injury remains as controversial in 2023 as it was in the early 19th century, when Sir Astley Cooper and Sir Charles Bell debated the merits or otherwise of surgery to relieve cord compression. There has been a lack of high-class evidence for early surgery, despite which expeditious intervention has become the surgical norm. This evidence deficit has been progressively addressed in the last decade and more modern statistical methods have been used to clarify some of the issues, which is demonstrated by the results of the SCI-POEM trial. However, there has never been a properly conducted trial of surgery versus active conservative care. As a result, it is still not known whether early surgery or active physiological management of the unstable injured spinal cord offers the better chance for recovery. Surgeons who care for patients with traumatic spinal cord injuries in the acute setting should be aware of the arguments on all sides of the debate, a summary of which this annotation presents.

Electroactive Scaffolds to Improve Neural Stem Cell Therapy for Spinal Cord Injury

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a serious condition caused by damage to the spinal cord through trauma or disease, often with permanent debilitating effects. Globally, the prevalence of SCI is estimated between 40 to 80 cases per million people per year. Patients with SCI can experience devastating health and socioeconomic consequences from paralysis, which is a loss of motor, sensory and autonomic nerve function below the level of the injury that often accompanies SCI. SCI carries a high mortality and increased risk of premature death due to secondary complications. The health, social and economic consequences of SCI are significant, and therefore elucidation of the complex molecular processes that occur in SCI and development of novel effective treatments is critical. Despite advances in medicine for the SCI patient such as surgery and anaesthesiology, imaging, rehabilitation and drug discovery, there have been no definitive findings toward complete functional neurologic recovery. However, the advent of neural stem cell therapy and the engineering of functionalized biomaterials to facilitate cell transplantation and promote regeneration of damaged spinal cord tissue presents a potential avenue to advance SCI research. This review will explore this emerging field and identify new lines of research.

Pros and Cons of Early and Very Early Surgery for Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome with Spinal Stenosis: Literature Review and Case Report

BACKGROUND

 The case of a 69-year-old patient with an acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) with preexisting spinal stenosis raised a discussion over the question of conservative versus surgical treatment in the acute setting. We provide a literature overview on the management (conservative vs. surgical treatment) of ATCCS with preexisting spinal stenosis.

METHODS

 We reviewed the literature concerning essential concepts for the management of ATCCS with spinal stenosis and cervical spinal cord injury. The data retrieved from these studies were applied to the potential management of an illustrative case report.

RESULTS

 Not rarely has ATCCS an unpredictable neurologic course because of its dynamic character with secondary injury mechanisms within the cervical spinal cord in the early phase, the possibility of functional deterioration, and the appearance of a neuropathic pain syndrome during late follow-up. The result of the literature review favors early surgical treatment in ATCCS patients with preexisting cervical stenosis.

CONCLUSION

 Reluctance toward aggressive and timely surgical treatment of ATCCS should at least be questioned in patients with preexisting spinal stenosis.

Elderly traumatic central cord syndrome in the United States: a review of management and outcomes

INTRODUCTION

As the incidence of elderly spinal cord injury rises, improved understanding of risk profiles and outcomes is needed. This review summarizes clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes specific to the elderly (≥65-years) with acute traumatic central cord syndrome in the United States.

EVIDENCE AQUISITION

Literature review of the PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases (01/2007-03/2020) regarding elderly subjects with acute traumatic central cord syndrome.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Nine studies met inclusion criteria. Acute traumatic central cord syndrome was more common among married (50%), Caucasian (22-71%) males (63-86%) with an annual income <40,999 U.S. dollars (30%). Mechanisms consisted predominantly of traumatic falls (32-55%) and motor vehicle collisions (15-34%), with admission American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grades D (25-79%) and C (21-51%). Mortality was 2-3%. American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale motor score, maximum canal compromise, and extent of parenchymal damage were predictors of one-year recovery. Greater comorbidities (heart failure, weight loss, coagulopathy, diabetes), lower income (<51,000 U.S. dollars), and age ≥80 were predictors of mortality. A substantial cohort underwent surgery (40-45%). Elderly patients were less likely to receive surgical intervention, and surgery timing had variable effects on recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients with acute traumatic central cord syndrome are uniquely at risk due to cumulative comorbidities, protracted recovery times, and unclear effects of surgical timing on outcomes. Prospective research should focus on validating age-specific risk factors, formalizing surgical indications, and delineating the impact of time to surgery on acute and long-term outcomes for this condition.

Efficacy of Early (≤ 24 Hours), Late (25-72 Hours), and Delayed (>72 Hours) Surgery with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Confirmed Decompression in American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale Grades C and D Acute Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome Caused by Spinal Stenosis

The therapeutic significance of timing of decompression in acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) caused by spinal stenosis remains unsettled. We retrospectively examined a homogenous cohort of patients with ATCCS and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evidence of post-treatment spinal cord decompression to determine whether timing of decompression played a significant role in American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score (AMS) 6 months following trauma. We used the t test, analysis of variance, Pearson correlation coefficient, and multiple regression for statistical analysis. During a 19-year period, 101 patients with ATCCS, admission ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grades C and D, and an admission AMS of ≤95 were surgically decompressed. Twenty-four of 101 patients had an AIS grade C injury. Eighty-two patients were males, the mean age of patients was 57.9 years, and 69 patients had had a fall. AMS at admission was 68.3 (standard deviation [SD] 23.4); upper extremities (UE) 28.6 (SD 14.7), and lower extremities (LE) 41.0 (SD 12.7). AMS at the latest follow-up was 93.1 (SD 12.8), UE 45.4 (SD 7.6), and LE 47.9 (SD 6.6). Mean number of stenotic segments was 2.8, mean canal compromise was 38.6% (SD 8.7%), and mean intramedullary lesion length (IMLL) was 23 mm (SD 11). Thirty-six of 101 patients had decompression within 24 h, 38 patients had decompression between 25 and 72 h, and 27 patients had decompression >72 h after injury. Demographics, etiology, AMS, AIS grade, morphometry, lesion length, surgical technique, steroid protocol, and follow-up AMS were not statistically different between groups treated at different times. We analyzed the effect size of timing of decompression categorically and in a continuous fashion. There was no significant effect of the timing of decompression on follow-up AMS. Only AMS at admission determined AMS at follow-up (coefficient = 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.21; p = 0.001). We conclude that timing of decompression in ATCCS caused by spinal stenosis has little bearing on ultimate AMS at follow-up.