scholarly journals The Management of Unstable Cervical Spine Injuries

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. CMTIM.S12263
Author(s):  
Venu M. Nemani ◽  
Han Jo Kim

Injuries to the cervical spine can cause potentially devastating morbidity and even mortality. In this review we discuss the anatomy and biomechanics of the cervical spine. The evaluation and treatment of cervical spine injuries begins with the prompt immobilization of suspected injuries in the field. Once an assessment of the patient's neurological status is made, imaging studies are obtained, which can include X-rays, CT, and MRI. Careful scrutiny of the imaging studies for bony and/or ligamentous injury allows the physician to determine the mechanism of injury, which guides treatment. The ultimate treatment plan can consist of non-operative or operative management, and depends on patient specific factors (medical condition and neurological status), the mechanism of injury, and the resultant degree of instability. With prompt diagnosis and appropriate management, the morbidity of these injuries can be minimized.

Neurosurgery ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 920-923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis A. Robles

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Spine injuries can occur secondary to several aquatic recreational activities. A series of cases of patients who experienced cervical spine injuries secondary to ocean waves accidents is presented. A description and analysis of this kind of injury is performed. METHODS: Sixteen patients were treated from January 1999 to May 2005. The mechanism of accident, mechanism of injury, neurological status, radiographic findings, associated injuries, and treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: These injuries are common among older patients. More severe and devastating injuries occurred in young patients. The most common mechanism of injury is hyperextension associated to spondylosis, which usually caused central cord syndrome. CONCLUSION: Wave-related accidents in ocean bathers are secondary to lack of experience of swimming in the ocean and underestimating the danger of waves. Although different types of mechanism of injury occurred, hyperextension was the most common. High-risk patients are older people with preexisting cervical spondylosis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10
Author(s):  
Oleksii S. Nekhlopochyn ◽  
Ievgenii I. Slynko ◽  
Vadim V. Verbov

Cervical spine injuries are a fairly common consequence of mechanical impact on the human body. The subaxial level of the cervical spine accounts for approximately half to 2/3 of these injuries. Despite the numerous classification systems that exist for describing these injuries, the recommendations for treatment strategy are very limited, and currently none of them is universal and generally accepted. Consequently, treatment decisions are based on the individual experience of the specialist, but not on evidence or algorithms. While the classification system based on the mechanism of trauma originally proposed by B.L. Allen et al. and subsequently modified by J.H. Harris Jr et al., was comprehensive, but lacked evidence, which to some extent limited its clinical applicability. Similarly, the Subaxial Injury Classification System proposed by the Spine Trauma Group, had no distinct and clinically significant patterns of morphological damage. This fact hindered the standardization and unification of tactical approaches. As an attempt to solve this problem, in 2016 Alexander Vaccaro, together with AO Spine, proposed the AO Spine subaxial cervical spine injury classification system, using the principle of already existing AOSpine classification of thoracolumbar injuries. The aim of the project was to develop an effective system that provides clear, clinically relevant morphological descriptions of trauma patterns, which should contribute to the determination of treatment strategy. The proposed classification of cervical spine injuries at the subaxial level follows the same hierarchical approach as previous AO classifications, namely, it characterizes injuries based on 4 parameters: (1) injury morphology, (2) facet damage, (3) neurological status, and (4) specific modifiers. The morphology of injuries is divided into 3 subgroups of injuries: A (compression), B (flexion-distraction), and C (dislocations and displacements). Damage types A and B are divided into 5 (A0-A4) and 3 (B1-B3) subtypes, respectively. When describing damage of the facet joints, 4 subtypes are distinguished: F1 (fracture without displacement), F2 (unstable fracture), F3 (floating lateral mass) and F4 (dislocation). The system also integrates the assessment of neurological status, which is divided into 6 subtype). In addition, the classification includes 4 specific modifiers designed to better detail a number of pathological conditions. The performance evaluation of AOSpine SCICS showed a moderate to significant range of consistency and reproducibility. Currently, a quantitative scale for assessing the severity of classification classes has been proposed, which also, to a certain extent, contributes to decision-making regarding treatment strategy.


2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (172) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Agrawal

Cervical spine injury is relatively rare, occurring in only 2% to 3% of patients with blunt traumawho undergo imaging studies. However, timely and accurate recognition of cervical spine injuryis essential for the optimal management of patients with blunt trauma as subsequent morbidity includesprolonged immobilization. Evaluation of cervical spine injuries should begin in the emergencydepartment and involves a combination of pediatric, trauma, orthopedic, and neurosurgeons fordefinitive management. Knowing which patients are at highest risk for injuries will undoubtedlyinfluence decisions on how aggressively to pursue a potential cervical spine injury and can be achievedby establishing a multidisciplinary team approach that provides cervical spine immobilization,assessment, and clearance. Implementation of such guidelines will decrease time for cervical spineclearance and incidence of missed injuries. In this article different aspects of cervical spine injuriesand cervical spine clearance protocols are reviewed.Key words: cervical, injury, trauma, spine, vertebrae


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (02/03) ◽  
pp. 100-105
Author(s):  
Deepak Kumar Singh ◽  
Anuj Chhabra ◽  
Rakesh Kumar ◽  
Faran Ahmad ◽  
Kuldeep Yadav ◽  
...  

Abstract Back Ground/Objective Cervical spine injuries are considered to be a major trauma and classified in various types. They are associated with various neurologic deficits and mortality rates. They account for 50 to 75% of all spine injuries. Various studies are associated with outcome of spinal cord injuries. Our aim was to analyze outcome of upper and lower cervical spine injuries. Study Design It was a retrospective study in all traumatic cervical spine injuries in all age groups at our center during the past 3 years. Method All cases operated in the past 3 years at our center were taken up for study. Initial hospital records were reviewed. Patients will be divided into two groups on the basis of anatomic level upper (C1 and C2) and lower (C3 or below) cervical spine. Outcomes were analyzed on criteria of demography, mechanism of injury, preoperative neurologic status, involvement of respiratory system, and time of surgery following injury. Result tatically significant test was applied for analysis of outcome of cervical spine injury based on aforementioned criteria. Conclusion In this study, survival rates of patients with upper and lower cervical spine injuries were calculated on the basis of mechanism of injury, preoperative neurologic status, respiratory involvement, and time of surgery following injury. Operative treatment of lower cervical injury was better associated with an improved outcome than upper cervical spine injuries. Further prospective study is required for better assessment.


2011 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua S. Easter ◽  
Roger Barkin ◽  
Carlo L. Rosen ◽  
Kevin Ban

Author(s):  
Philipp Raisch ◽  
Matthias K. Jung ◽  
Sven Y. Vetter ◽  
Paul A. Grützner ◽  
Michael Kreinest

Abstract Introduction There are no evidence-based recommendations for the post-operative treatment and application of soft or rigid cervical collars after operative treatment of injuries of the subaxial cervical spine. Cervical collars can restrict peak range of motion and serve as a reminder to the patient. However, they can also cause pressure ulcers. The aim of this online-based survey among German spine centres was to gain an overview of post-operative treatment and the application of soft or rigid cervical collars after surgical treatment of injuries of the subaxial cervical spine. Materials and Methods An online-based survey was conducted among 59 spine centres certified by the German Spine Society. It comprised seven items and the option of adding remarks in the form of open-ended responses. Results The return rate was 63% (37 out of 59). Of the 37 analysed spine centres, 51% routinely apply a cervical collar post-operatively, 27% apply a soft and 16% a rigid cervical collar, 8% sequentially apply first a rigid and later a soft cervical collar. Less than half of the spine centres (43%) routinely use no cervical collar. Rigid collars are applied for more than 6 weeks and soft collars up to 6 weeks at some spine centres. Standardised post-operative treatment plans are common. The selection of the post-operative treatment plan depends primarily on the type of injury and method of operation and partly on patient age and bone quality. The satisfaction of German spine centres with the current handling of post-operative treatment of subaxial cervical spine injuries is high. Discussion The post-operative treatment of injuries of the subaxial cervical spine at German spine centres is heterogeneous, and the evidence on advantages and disadvantages of the post-operative application of cervical collars is insufficient. Planning and implementation of randomised controlled clinical trials in subaxial cervical spine injuries is challenging.


Author(s):  
Vignesh S. ◽  
Pradeep B. ◽  
Balasubramanian D.

Background: Sub-axial cervical spine includes the C3 through C7 segments, a very mobile area of the spine with potential for devastating injuries as a result of instability and risk of spinal cord injury. Goal of treatment is to stabilize the spine and decompress when necessary, in order to promote the optimal environment for recovery.Methods: This is a retrospective study of 40 patients with sub-axial cervical spine injury who underwent surgery in this institute from January 2016 to March 2017.Results: Most of the patients were young males with road traffic accident. They underwent cerival traction for reducing translation and surgical management, mostly anterior procedures and in some cases posterior stabilisation.Conclusions: Most of the subaxial spine injuries can be treated by anterior procedures. Preoperative neurological status is an important predictor in postoperative neurological improvement.


2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-62
Author(s):  
Daniel J Blizzard ◽  
Michael A Gallizzi ◽  
Lindsay T Kleeman ◽  
Melissa M Erickson

ABSTRACT Injuries to the cervical spine in athletes are rare but potentially devastating outcomes resulting from involvement in sports activities. New rules and regulations implemented by national sports organizations have helped to decrease the rate of cervical spine and spinal cord injuries sustained by athletes. A basic understanding of cervical spine anatomy, physical examination and spine precautions is necessary for any physi cian evaluating athletes on the field to determine if transfer to higher level of care is needed. It is particularly important to know the systematic protocol for spine immobilization, neuro logic exam and helmet removal in a patient with a suspected cervical spine injury. While cervical strain is the most common cervical spine injury, physicians should be familiar with the presentation for other injuries, such as Burner's syndrome (Stinger), cervical disk herniation, transient quadriplegia and cervical spine fractures or dislocations. Special consideration is needed when evaluating patients with Down syndrome as they are at higher risk for atlantoaxial instability. Determination of when an athlete can return to play is patient-specific with early return to play allowed only in a completely asymptomatic patient. Kleeman LT, Gallizzi MA, Blizzard DJ, Erickson MM. Cervical Spine Injuries in Sports. The Duke Orthop J 2015;5(1):5862.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document