| Literature DB >> 35351077 |
Jason Laurita1, Jason E Brant1, Kiera Degener-O'Brien1, Spencer Smith1, Arilene Godoy1, Stephanie S Radoslovich1, Jung U Yoo2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is common practice to use a combination approach of computed tomography (CT) scan followed by upright radiographs when assessing traumatic thoracolumbar (TL) vertebral fractures. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical utility of upright spine radiographs in the setting of traumatic TL fracture management. Our null hypothesis is that upright TL radiographs rarely change management of acute vertebral fractures.Entities:
Keywords: Fracture; Kyphosis; Thoracolumbar; Upright radiograph; Vertebral
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35351077 PMCID: PMC8962529 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05243-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1Flowchart of Patients Included
Patient characteristics
| Total | Non-operative | Operative | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| Mean (SD) | 53.6 (22.3) | 52.9 (22.5) | 60.3 (20.2) | |
| Range | 18–95 | 18–95 | 25–79 | |
|
|
| |||
| Female | 37 | 34 (53%) | 3 (50%) | |
| Male | 33 | 30 (47%) | 3 (50%) | |
|
|
| |||
| No | 43 | 39 (61%) | 4 (67%) | |
| Yes | 27 | 25 (39%) | 2 (33%) | |
|
|
| |||
| Thoracic Fracture(s) | 31 | 30 (47%) | 1 (17%) | |
| Lumbar Fracture(s) | 29 | 25 (39%) | 4 (67%) | |
| Thoracic and Lumbar Fractures | 10 | 9 (14%) | 1 (17%) | |
|
| ||||
| T8 | 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| T9 | 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| T10 | 2 | 2 (3%) | 0 (0%) | |
| T11 | 5 | 4 (6%) | 1 (17%) | |
| T12 | 28 | 28 (44%) | 0 (0%) | |
| L1 | 27 | 22 (34%) | 5 (83%) | |
| L2 | 5 | 5 (8%) | 0 (0%) | |
| L3 | 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | |
|
| ||||
| No | 50 | 45 (70%) | 5 (83%) | |
| Yes | 20 | 19 (30%) | 1 (17%) | |
|
|
| |||
| Thoracic Compression | 24 | 24 (38%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Thoracic Burst | 11 | 10 (16%) | 1 (17%) | |
| Thoracic Flexion-Distraction | 2 | 2 (3%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Lumbar Compression | 17 | 15 (23%) | 2 (33%) | |
| Lumbar Burst | 16 | 13 (20%) | 3 (50%) | |
|
|
| |||
| 1 | 36 | 34 (53%) | 2 (33%) | |
| 2 | 16 | 15 (23%) | 1 (17%) | |
| 3 | 4 | 4 (6%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 4 | 12 | 9 (14%) | 3 (50%) | |
| 6 | 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 7 | 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | |
|
|
| |||
| No Injury | 53 | 50 (78%) | 3 (50%) | |
| Indeterminate/Suspected | 16 | 13 (20%) | 3 (50%) | |
| Injured | 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 (0%) | |
|
|
| |||
| Orthopaedic | 28 | 26 (41%) | 2 (33%) | |
| Neurosurgery | 42 | 38 (59%) | 4 (67%) | |
|
|
| |||
| No | 32 | 32 (50%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Yes | 38 | 32 (50%) | 6 (100%) | |
|
|
| |||
| No | 57 | 55 (86%) | 2 (33%) | |
| Yes | 13 | 9 (14%) | 4 (67%) |
Fig. 2Kyphosis angle measurement
Fig. 3Anterior vertebral body height measurement
Description of operative management cases
| Converted to Surgery After Outpaitent Follow Up | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Factors contributing to operative decision: Endpoint X-ray at one month follow up showed an increase in kyphosis of 24.4 degrees and an increase in anterior body height loss of 45% when compared to first upright X-ray. Patient was having unbearable pain. | Factors contributing to operative decision: Endpoint X-ray at three month follow up showed slight increase in kyphosis of 3.8 degrees and an increase in anterior body height loss of 7% when compared to first upright X-ray. Increased narrowing of T12-L1 disc space and osseous retropulsion on endpoint X-ray. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Degrees of kyphosis and anterior vertebral body height% loss for operative patients
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 3.4 | 3.4 | 27.8 | 35% | 38% | 80% |
|
| 1.6 | 6.3 | 10.1 | 45% | 40% | 47% |
|
| -6.9 | 15.8 | * | 31% | 77% | * |
|
| 14.8 | 28.7 | * | 50% | 61% | * |
|
| -4.5 | 10.9 | * | 10% | 63% | * |
|
| 1.2 | 13.5 | * | 32% | 40% | * |
*For cases 3–6, these patients converted to surgery during their index admission and the first X-ray is the same as the endpoint X-ray
Mean values between treatment groups at all imaging time points
| Non-operative | Operative | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Initial CT (SD) | 3.4 (8.0) | 1.6 (7.6) | |
| First X-Ray (SD) | 8 (10.2) | 13.1 (8.9) | |
| Endpoint X-Ray (SD) | 9.5 (11.8) | 17.8 (8.3) | |
|
| |||
| First X-Ray (SD) | 4.6 (7.0) | 11.5 (8.1) | |
| Endpoint X-Ray (SD) | 6.4 (9.0) | 16.2 (6.2) | |
|
| |||
| Initial CT (SD) | 28.3 (16.1) | 33.8 (13.9) | |
| First X-Ray (SD) | 37.5 (17.6) | 53.2 (16.1) | |
| Endpoint X-Ray (SD) | 42.5 (19.7) | 61.3 (15.9) | |
|
| |||
| First X-Ray (SD) | 9.3 (12.3) | 19.3 (24.1) | |
| Endpoint X-Ray (SD) | 13.5 (17.5) | 27.5 (22.8) |
Mean values within individual treatment groups from initial CT to first X-ray (A) and from initial CT to endpoint X-ray (B)
| A | Initial CT | First X-Ray | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Nonoperative (SD) | 3.4 (8.0) | 8 (10.2) | |
| Operative (SD) | 1.6 (7.6) | 13.1 (8.9) | |
|
| |||
| Nonoperative (SD) | 28.3 (16.1) | 37.5 (17.6) | |
| Operative (SD) | 33.8 (13.9) | 53.2 (16.1) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Nonoperative (SD) | 3.39 (8.08) | 9.5 (11.8) | |
| Operative (SD) | 1.6 (7.58) | 17.8 (8.34) | |
|
| |||
| Nonoperative (SD) | 28.3 (16.1) | 42.5 (19.7) | |
| Operative (SD) | 33.8 (13.9) | 61.3 (15.9) |