| Literature DB >> 29279800 |
Jarvis W Walters1, Tammy R Kopelman2, Arpan A Patel3, Patrick J O'Neill2, Poya Hedayati4, Paola G Pieri2, Sydney J Vail2, Salvatore C Lettieri5,6, Iman Feiz-Erfan7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The failure rate for the closed/non-surgical treatment of thoracic and lumbar vertebral body fractures (TLVBF) in trauma patients has not been adequately evaluated utilizing computed tomography (CT) studies.Entities:
Keywords: Computed tomography; failure; fracture; lumbar; thoracic; vertebral body fracture
Year: 2017 PMID: 29279800 PMCID: PMC5705931 DOI: 10.4103/sni.sni_336_17
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Surg Neurol Int ISSN: 2152-7806
Figure 1A 69 year old male was involved in a motor cycle accident and suffered from a 2 column thoracic 6 fracture AO type B (a). He was braced but at 6 weeks time imaging revealed significant progression of post traumatic kyphotic deformity (b). Surgery was offered, but he refused since he was asymptomatic. He was followed up elsewhere and kept in brace for a total of 9 months. At 2 years after injury he remained asymptomatic
Figure 2A 71 year old male involved in a motor vehicle accident suffered from an lumbar 3 burst fracture AO type A3 (a). He was placed in a TLSO. At 3 months follow up, patient was asymptomatic. Imaging revealed significant collapse of the fracture (b). He was removed out of brace and had no further clinical complaints at 6 months follow up
Figure 3A 22 year old male was involved in a motor cycle accident and suffered from a lumbar 1 fracture AO type A2 (a). He was treated in a TLSO brace for 4.5 months but disclosed pseudo-arthrosis of the fractured vertebral body on imaging (b). Due to ongoing mechanical back pain he was fused operatively at an outside facility closer to his home and did well on follow up at 11 months
Distribution of patient population by mechanism of injury