Wayne M. Gluf

Atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation: a review of surgical indications, fusion rate, complications, and lessons learned in 191 adult patients

OBJECTnIn this, the first of two articles regarding C1-2 transarticular screw fixation, the authors assessed the rate of fusion, surgery-related complications, and lessons learned after C1-2 transarticular screw fixation in an adult patient series.nnnMETHODSnThe authors retrospectively reviewed 191 consecutive patients (107 women and 84 men; mean age 49.7 years, range 17-90 years) in whom at least one C1-2 transarticular screw was placed. Overall 353 transarticular screws were placed for trauma (85 patients), rheumatoid arthritis (63 patients), congenital anomaly (26 patients), os odontoideum (four patients), neoplasm (eight patients), and chronic cervical instability (five patients). Among these, 67 transarticular screws were placed in 36 patients as part of an occipitocervical construct. Seventeen patients had undergone 24 posterior C1-2 fusion attempts prior to referral. The mean follow-up period was 15.2 months (range 0.1-106.3 months). Fusion was achieved in 98% of cases followed to commencement of fusion or for at least 24 months. The mean duration until fusion was 9.5 months (range 3-48 months). Complications occurred in 32 patients. Most were minor; however, five patients suffered vertebral artery (VA) injury. One bilateral VA injury resulted in patient death. The others did not result in any permanent neurological sequelae.nnnCONCLUSIONSnBased on this series, the authors have learned important lessons that can improve outcomes and safety. These include techniques to improve screw-related patient positioning, development of optimal instrumentation, improved screw materials and design, and defining the role for stereotactic navigation. Atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation is highly effective in achieving fusion, and the complication rate is low when performed by properly trained surgeons.

Can surgery improve neurological function in penetrating spinal injury? A review of the military and civilian literature and treatment recommendations for military neurosurgeons

OBJECTnPenetrating spinal injury (PSI), although an infrequent injury in the civilian population, is not an infrequent injury in military conflicts. Throughout military history, the role of surgery in the treatment of PSI has been controversial. The US is currently involved in 2 military campaigns, the hallmark of both being the widespread use of various explosive devices. The authors reviewed the evidence for or against the use of decompressive laminectomy to treat PSI to provide a triservice (US Army, Navy, and Air Force) consensus and treatment recommendations for military neurosurgeons and spine surgeons.nnnMETHODSnA US National Library of Medicine PubMed database search that identified all literature dealing with acute management of PSI from military conflicts and civilian urban trauma centers in the post-Vietnam War period was undertaken.nnnRESULTSnNineteen retrospective case series (11 military and 8 civilian) met the study criteria. Eleven military articles covered a 20-year time span that included 782 patients who suffered either gunshot or blast-related projectile wounds. Four papers included sufficient data that analyzed the effectiveness of surgery compared with nonoperative management, 6 papers concluded that surgery was of no benefit, 2 papers indicated that surgery did have a role, and 3 papers made no comment. Eight civilian articles covered a 9-year time span that included 653 patients with spinal gunshot wounds. Two articles lacked any comparative data because of treatment bias. Two papers concluded that decompressive laminectomy had a beneficial role, 1 paper favored the removal of intracanal bullets between T-12 and L-4, and 5 papers indicated that surgery was of no benefit.nnnCONCLUSIONSnBased on the authors military and civilian PubMed literature search, most of the evidence suggests that decompressive laminectomy does not improve neurological function in patients with PSI. However, there are serious methodological shortcomings in both literature groups. For this and other reasons, neurosurgeons from the US Air Force, Army, and Navy collectively believe that decompression should still be considered for any patient with an incomplete neurological injury and continued spinal canal compromise, ideally within 24-48 hours of injury; the patient should be stabilized concurrently if it is believed that the spinal injury is unstable. The authors recognize the highly controversial nature of this topic and hope that this literature review and the proposed treatment recommendations will be a valuable resource for deployed neurosurgeons. Ultimately, the deployed neurosurgeon must make the final treatment decision based on his or her opinion of the literature, individual abilities, and facility resources available.

Management of unilateral cervical radiculopathy in the military: the cost effectiveness of posterior cervical foraminotomy compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

OBJECTnTo review the cost effectiveness for the management of a unilateral cervical radiculopathy with either posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in military personnel, with a particular focus on time required to return to active-duty service.nnnMETHODSnFollowing internal review board approval, the authors conducted a retrospective review of 38 cases in which patients underwent surgical management of unilateral cervical radiculopathy. Nineteen patients who underwent PCF were matched for age, treatment level, and surgeon to 19 patients who had undergone ACDF. Successful outcome was determined by return to full, unrestricted active-duty military service. The difference in time of return to active duty was compared between the groups. In addition, a cost analysis consisting of direct and indirect costs was used to compare the PCF group to the ACDF group.nnnRESULTSnA total of 21 levels were operated on in each group. There were 17 men and 2 women in the PCF group, whereas all 19 patients in the ACDF group were men. The average age at the time of surgery was 41.5 years (range 27-56 years) and 39.3 years (range 24-52 years) for the PCF and ACDF groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in operating room time, estimated blood loss, or postoperative narcotic refills. Complications included 2 cases of transient recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy in the ACDF group. The average time to return to unrestricted full duty was 4.8 weeks (range 1-8 weeks) in the PCF group and 19.6 weeks (range 12-32 weeks) in the ACDF group, a difference of 14.8 weeks (p < 0.001). The direct costs of each surgery were

Progressive vertebral body osteolysis after cervical disc arthroplasty.

3570 for the PCF and

Arthroplasty in the military: A preliminary experience with ProDisc-C and ProDisc-L

10,078 for the ACDF, a difference of

AlloDerm for duraplasty in Chiari malformation: superior outcomes

6508. Based on the 14.8-week difference in time to return to active duty, the indirect cost was calculated to range from

Rate of return to military active duty after single level lumbar interbody fusion: A 5-year retrospective review

13,586 to

False-negative magnetic resonance angiography with extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis: a report of two cases and review of the literature.

24,045 greater in the ACDF group. Total cost (indirect plus direct) ranged from

Hemorrhagic intramedullary hemangioblastoma of the cervical spinal cord presenting with acute-onset quadriparesis: Case report and review of the literature

20,094 to

Spinal Cord Compression Secondary to Epidural Fibrosis Associated with Percutaneously Placed Spinal Cord Stimulation Electrodes: Case Report and Review of the Literature

30,553 greater in the ACDF group.nnnCONCLUSIONSnIn the management of unilateral posterior cervical radiculopathy for military active-duty personnel, PCF offers a benefit relative to ACDF in immediate short-term direct and long-term indirect costs. The indirect cost of a service member away from full, unrestricted active duty 14.8 weeks longer in the ACDF group was the main contributor to this difference.