Analysis and evaluation of the systems used for the assessment of the cervical spine function: a systematic review

Author(s):  
Paola A. Vásquez-Ucho ◽  
Gandhi F. Villalba-Meneses ◽  
Kevin O. Pila-Varela ◽  
Carlos P. Villalba-Meneses ◽  
Iván Iglesias ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. e562-e572
Author(s):  
Amy J. Wang ◽  
Kevin T. Huang ◽  
Timothy R. Smith ◽  
Yi Lu ◽  
John H. Chi ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 570-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad Cook ◽  
Eric Hegedus ◽  
Christopher Showalter ◽  
Phillip S. Sizer

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-208
Author(s):  
Yoshihiro Katsuura ◽  
Jeremy Bruce ◽  
Samuel Taylor ◽  
Lawrence Gullota ◽  
Han Jo Kim

Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: To assess the current literature regarding the relationship between the shoulder and the spine with regard to (1) overlapping pain pathways; (2) differentiating history, exam findings, and diagnostic findings; (3) concomitant pathology and optimal treatments; and (4) cervical spine-based etiology for shoulder problems. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed according to the guidelines set forth by the Cochrane Collaboration. Studies were included if they examined the clinical, anatomical, or physiological overlap between the shoulder and cervical spine. Two reviewers screened and selected full texts for inclusion according to the objectives of the study. Quality of evidence was graded using OCEBM (Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine) and MINORS (Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies) scores. Results: Out of 477 references screened, 76 articles were included for review and grouped into 4 main sections (overlapping pain pathways, differentiating exam findings, concomitant/masquerading pathology, and cervical spine-based etiology of shoulder pathology). There is evidence to suggest cervical spine pathology may cause shoulder pain and that shoulder pathology may cause neck pain. Specific examination tests used to differentiate shoulder and spine pathology are critical as imaging studies may be misleading. Diagnostic injections can be useful to confirm sources of pain as well as predicting the success of surgery in both the shoulder and the spine. There is limited evidence to suggest alterations in the relationship between the spine and the scapula may predispose to shoulder impingement or rotator cuff tears. Moreover, cervical neurological lesions may predispose patients to developing rotator cuff tears. The decision to proceed with shoulder or spine surgery first should be delineated with careful examination and the use of shoulder and spine diagnostic injections. Conclusion: Shoulder and spine pathology commonly overlap. Knowledge of anatomy, pain referral patterns, shoulder kinematics, and examination techniques are invaluable to the clinician in making an appropriate diagnosis and guiding treatment. In this review, we present an algorithm for the identification and treatment of shoulder and cervical spine pathology.


2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameer H. Halani ◽  
Griffin R. Baum ◽  
Jonathan P. Riley ◽  
Gustavo Pradilla ◽  
Daniel Refai ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE Esophageal perforation is a rare but well-known complication of anterior cervical spine surgery. The authors performed a systematic review of the literature to evaluate symptomatology, direct causes, repair methods, and associated complications of esophageal injury. METHODS A PubMed search that adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines included relevant clinical studies and case reports (articles written in the English language that included humans as subjects) that reported patients who underwent anterior spinal surgery and sustained some form of esophageal perforation. Available data on clinical presentation, the surgical procedure performed, outcome measures, and other individual variables were abstracted from 1980 through 2015. RESULTS The PubMed search yielded 65 articles with 153 patients (mean age 44.7 years; range 14–85 years) who underwent anterior spinal surgery and sustained esophageal perforation, either during surgery or in a delayed fashion. The most common indications for initial anterior cervical spine surgery in these cases were vertebral fracture/dislocation (n = 77), spondylotic myelopathy (n = 15), and nucleus pulposus herniation (n = 10). The most commonly involved spinal levels were C5–6 (n = 51) and C6–7 (n = 39). The most common presenting symptoms included dysphagia (n =63), fever (n = 24), neck swelling (n = 23), and wound leakage (n = 18). The etiology of esophageal perforation included hardware failure (n = 31), hardware erosion (n = 23), and intraoperative injury (n = 14). The imaging modalities used to identify the esophageal perforations included modified contrast dye swallow studies, CT, endoscopy, plain radiography, and MRI. Esophageal repair was most commonly achieved using a modified muscle flap, as well as with primary closure. Outcomes measured in the literature were often defined by the time to oral intake following esophageal repair. Complications included pneumonia (n = 6), mediastinitis (n = 4), osteomyelitis (n = 3), sepsis (n = 3), acute respiratory distress syndrome (n = 2), and recurrent laryngeal nerve damage (n = 1). The mortality rate of esophageal perforation in the analysis was 3.92% (6 of 153 reported patients). CONCLUSIONS Esophageal perforation after anterior cervical spine surgery is a rare complication. This systematic review demonstrates that these perforations can be stratified into 3 categories based on the timing of symptomatic onset: intraoperative, early postoperative (within 30 days of anterior spinal surgery), and delayed. The most common source of esophageal injury is hardware erosion or migration, each of which may vary in their time to symptomatic manifestation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document