Hideaki Nakajima1, Ai Takahashi2, Ippei Kitade2, Shuji Watanabe2, Kazuya Honjoh2, Akihiko Matsumine2. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, 23-3 Matsuoka Shimoaizuki, Eiheiji-cho, Yoshida-gun, Fukui, 910-1193, Japan. Electronic address: nhideaki@u-fukui.ac.jp. 2. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Fukui, 23-3 Matsuoka Shimoaizuki, Eiheiji-cho, Yoshida-gun, Fukui, 910-1193, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Even though the number of patients with cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) without major bone injury is increased, the treatment with either surgery or conservative measures remains controversial. The aim of this study was to assess its prognostic value in the prediction of useful motor recovery and to clarify whether the patients should be treated surgically are present. METHODS: We reviewed 63 patients (conservative, n = 36; surgery, n = 27) with CSCI without major bone injury (Frankel A-C). Neurological examination using modified Frankel grade at admission and 6 months after injury and International Stoke Mandeville Games (ISMG) classification at subacute phase after injury, MRI findings including rate of spinal cord compression, extent of cord damage and type of signal intensity change were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-five of 63 patients were improved to walk at 6 months after injury. In multivariate analysis, rate of spinal cord compression, extent of cord damage and improvement of ISMG grade were associated with useful motor recovery. There was no difference in the neurological improvement between conservative and surgical groups. However, patients with spinal cord compression of ≥33.2% showed better motor recovery at 6 months post-injury after surgery than those treated conservatively. There was a positive correlation between the improvement of ISMG grade at subacute phase and Frankel grade at 6 months post-injury. It is difficult to obtain satisfactory surgical outcome for patients with Frankel A or B1 on admission and/or extensive spinal cord damage on T2-weighted image. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative treatment is recommended for patients with CSCI without major bone injury. However, we also recommend surgical treatment to acquire walking ability for patients with spinal cord compression of ≥33.2% and low ISMG grade at subacute phase. Among such patients, careful consideration should be given to patients with Frankel A or B1 and/or extensive spinal cord damage on MRI.
BACKGROUND: Even though the number of patients with cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) without major bone injury is increased, the treatment with either surgery or conservative measures remains controversial. The aim of this study was to assess its prognostic value in the prediction of useful motor recovery and to clarify whether the patients should be treated surgically are present. METHODS: We reviewed 63 patients (conservative, n = 36; surgery, n = 27) with CSCI without major bone injury (Frankel A-C). Neurological examination using modified Frankel grade at admission and 6 months after injury and International Stoke Mandeville Games (ISMG) classification at subacute phase after injury, MRI findings including rate of spinal cord compression, extent of cord damage and type of signal intensity change were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-five of 63 patients were improved to walk at 6 months after injury. In multivariate analysis, rate of spinal cord compression, extent of cord damage and improvement of ISMG grade were associated with useful motor recovery. There was no difference in the neurological improvement between conservative and surgical groups. However, patients with spinal cord compression of ≥33.2% showed better motor recovery at 6 months post-injury after surgery than those treated conservatively. There was a positive correlation between the improvement of ISMG grade at subacute phase and Frankel grade at 6 months post-injury. It is difficult to obtain satisfactory surgical outcome for patients with Frankel A or B1 on admission and/or extensive spinal cord damage on T2-weighted image. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative treatment is recommended for patients with CSCI without major bone injury. However, we also recommend surgical treatment to acquire walking ability for patients with spinal cord compression of ≥33.2% and low ISMG grade at subacute phase. Among such patients, careful consideration should be given to patients with Frankel A or B1 and/or extensive spinal cord damage on MRI.