<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Neurosurgery Blog &#187; Spine</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/category/spine/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com</link>
	<description>Daily bibliographic and video review of the Neurosurgery Department. La Fe University Hospital. Valencia, Spain</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:00:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Cervical decompression and reconstruction without intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3781</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3781#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Developmental Malformations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cervical myelopathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cervical spine surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cervical spondylosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intraoperative monitoring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Motor evoked potential]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[somatosensory evoked potential]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J Neurosurg Spine 16:107–113, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.10.SPINE11199
The primary goal of this study was to review the immediate postoperative neurological function in patients surgically treated for symptomatic cervical spine disease without intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. The secondary goal was to assess the economic impact of intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in this patient population.
Methods. This study is a retrospective [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Cervical-decompression-and-reconstruction-without-intraoperative-neurophysiological-monitoring.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3783" title="Cervical decompression and reconstruction without intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Cervical-decompression-and-reconstruction-without-intraoperative-neurophysiological-monitoring-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>J Neurosurg Spine 16:107–113, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.10.SPINE11199</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The primary goal of this study was to review the immediate postoperative neurological function in patients surgically treated for symptomatic cervical spine disease without intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. The secondary goal was to assess the economic impact of intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in this patient population.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Methods. This study is a retrospective review of 720 consecutively treated patients who underwent cervical spine procedures. The patients were identified and the data were collected by individuals who were not involved in their care.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Results. A total of 1534 cervical spine levels were treated in 720 patients using anterior, posterior, and combined (360°) approaches. Myelopathy was present preoperatively in 308 patients. There were 185 patients with increased signal intensity within the spinal cord on preoperative T2-weighted MR images, of whom 43 patients had no clinical evidence of myelopathy. Three patients (0.4%) exhibited a new neurological deficit postoperatively. Of these patients, 1 had a preoperative diagnosis of radiculopathy, while the other 2 were treated for myelopathy. The new postoperative deficits completely resolved in all 3 patients and did not require additional treatment. The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for IOM during cervical decompression include 95925 and 95926 for somatosensory evoked potential monitoring of the upper and lower extremities, respectively, as well as 95928 and 95929 for motor evoked potential monitoring of the upper and lower extremities. In addition to the charge for the baseline [monitoring] study, patients are charged hourly for ongoing electrophysiology testing and monitoring using the CPT code 95920. Based on these codes and assuming an average of 4 hours of monitoring time per surgical case, the savings realized in this group of patients was estimated to be $1,024,754.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conclusions. With the continuing increase in health care costs, it is our responsibility as providers to minimize expenses when possible. This should be accomplished without compromising the quality of care to patients. This study demonstrates that decompression and reconstruction for symptomatic cervical spine disease without IOM may reduce the cost of treatment without adversely impacting patient safety.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3781/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Expansile Cervical Laminoplasty and Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion for Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3765</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3765#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surgical technique]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cervical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laminoplasty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myelopathy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3765</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Neurosurgery 70:264–277, 2012 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182305669
Controversy exists as to the best posterior operative procedure to treat multilevel compressive cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical, radiological, and patient satisfaction outcomes between expansile cervical laminoplasty (ECL) and cervical laminectomy and fusion (CLF).
METHODS: We performed a prospective, randomized study of ECL vs CLF in patients suffering from cervical spondylotic [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/A_Prospective_Randomized_Trial_Comparing.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3768" title="A_Prospective,_Randomized_Trial_Comparing" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/A_Prospective_Randomized_Trial_Comparing-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>Neurosurgery 70:264–277, 2012 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182305669</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Controversy exists as to the best posterior operative procedure to treat multilevel compressive cervical spondylotic myelopathy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical, radiological, and patient satisfaction outcomes between expansile cervical laminoplasty (ECL) and cervical laminectomy and fusion (CLF).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">METHODS: We performed a prospective, randomized study of ECL vs CLF in patients suffering from cervical spondylotic myelopathy. End points included the Short Form-36, Neck Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale, modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score, Nurick score, and radiographic measures.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">RESULTS: A survey of academic North American spine surgeons (n = 30) demonstrated that CLF is the most commonly used (70%) posterior procedure to treat multilevel spondylotic cervical myelopathy. A total of 16 patients were randomized: 7 to CLF and 9 to ECL. Both groups showed improvements in their Nurick grade and Japanese Orthopedic Association score postoperatively, but only the improvement in the Nurick grade for the ECL group was statistically significant (P &lt; .05). The cervical range of motion between C2 and C7 was reduced by 75% in the CLF group and by only 20% in the ECL group in a comparison of preoperative and postoperative range of motion. The overall increase in canal area was significantly (P &lt; .001) greater in the CLF group, but there was a suggestion that the adjacent level was more narrowed in the CLF group in as little as 1 year postoperatively.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">CONCLUSION: In many respects, ECL compares favorably to CLF. Although the patient numbers were small, there were significant improvements in pain measures in the ECL group while still maintaining range of motion. Restoration of spinal canal area was superior in the CLF group.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3765/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Midterm outcome after a microsurgical unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3750</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3750#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surgical technique]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinical outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[degenerative spondylolisthesis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unilateral approach]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3750</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J Neurosurg Spine 16:68–76, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.7.SPINE11222
The aim of this study was to evaluate the results and effectiveness of bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach in the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).
Methods. Operations were performed in 84 selected patients (mean age 62.1 ± 10 years) with lumbar DS between the years 2001 and 2008. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/New-approach-for-degenerative-spondylolisthesis.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3755" title="New approach for degenerative spondylolisthesis" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/New-approach-for-degenerative-spondylolisthesis-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>J Neurosurg Spine 16:68–76, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.7.SPINE11222</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The aim of this study was to evaluate the results and effectiveness of bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach in the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Methods. Operations were performed in 84 selected patients (mean age 62.1 ± 10 years) with lumbar DS between the years 2001 and 2008. The selection criteria included lower back pain with or without sciatica, neurogenic claudication that had not improved after at least 6 months of conservative treatment, and a radiological diagnosis of Grade I DS and lumbar stenosis. Decompression was performed at 3 levels in 15.5%, 2 levels in 54.8%, and 1 level in 29.7% of the patients with 1 level of spondylolisthesis. All patients were followed up for at least 24 months. For clinical evaluations, a visual analog scale, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Neurogenic Claudication Outcome Score (NCOS) were used. Spinal canal size and (neutral and dynamic) slip percentages were measured both pre- and postoperatively.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Results. Neutral and dynamic slip percentages did not significantly change after surgery (p = 0.67 and p = 0.63, respectively). Spinal canal size increased from 50.6 ± 5.9 to 102.8 ± 9.5 mm2 (p &lt; 0.001). The ODI decreased significantly in both the early and late follow-up evaluations, and good or excellent results were obtained in 64 cases (80%). The NCOS demonstrated significant improvement in the late follow-up results (p &lt; 0.001). One patient (1.2%) required secondary fusion during the follow-up period.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conclusions. Postoperative clinical improvement and radiological findings clearly demonstrated that the unilateral approach for treating 1-level and multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis with DS is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive method in terms of reducing the need for stabilization.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3750/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patient comorbidity score predicting the incidence of perioperative complications: assessing the impact of comorbidities on complications in spine surgery</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3740</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3740#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:00:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comorbidity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine surgery]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3740</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J Neurosurg Spine 16:37–43, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.9.SPINE11283
Present attempts to control health care costs focus on reducing the incidence of complications and hospital-acquired conditions (HACs). One approach uses restriction or elimination of hospital payments for HACs. Present approaches assume that all HACs are created equal and that payment restrictions should be applied uniformly. Patient factors, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/MI-AP1.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3748" title="MI-AP" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/MI-AP1-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>J Neurosurg Spine 16:37–43, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.9.SPINE11283</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Present attempts to control health care costs focus on reducing the incidence of complications and hospital-acquired conditions (HACs). One approach uses restriction or elimination of hospital payments for HACs. Present approaches assume that all HACs are created equal and that payment restrictions should be applied uniformly. Patient factors, and especially patient comorbidities, likely impact complication incidence. The relationship of patient comorbidities and complication incidence in spine surgery has not been prospectively reported.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective assessment of complications in spine surgery during a 6-month period; an independent auditor and a validated definition of perioperative complications were used. Initial demographics captured relevant patient comorbidities. The authors constructed a model of relative risk assessment based on the presence of a variety of comorbidities. They examined the impact of specific comorbidities and the cumulative effect of multiple comorbidities on complication incidence.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine patients undergoing 259 procedures at a tertiary care facility were evaluated during the 6-month duration of the study. Eighty percent of the patients underwent fusion procedures. One hundred thirty patients (52.2%) experienced at least 1 complication, with major complications occurring in 21.4% and minor complications in 46.4% of the cohort. Major complications doubled the median duration of hospital stay, from 6 to 12 days in cervical spine patients and from 7 to 14 days in thoracolumbar spine patients. At least 1 comorbid condition was present in 86% of the patients. An increasing number of comorbidities strongly correlated with increased risk of major, minor, and any complications (p = 0.017, p &lt; 0.0001, and p &lt; 0.0001, respectively). Patient factors correlating with increased risk of specific complications included systemic malignancy and cardiac conditions other than hypertension.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities significantly increase the risk of perioperative complications. An increasing number of comorbidities in an individual patient significantly increases the risk of a perioperative adverse event. Patient factors significantly impact the relative risk of HACs and perioperative complications.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3740/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Perioperative surgical complications of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a single-center experience</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3713</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3713#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 23:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Durotomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Infection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J Neurosurg Spine 16:44–50, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.9.SPINE11373
Since its original description in 1982, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has grown in popularity as a means for achieving circumferential fusion. The authors sought to define the perioperative complication rates of the TLIF procedure at a large academic medical center.
Methods. For all eligible patients from a consecutive series [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/tlif.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3718" title="tlif" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/tlif-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>J Neurosurg Spine 16:44–50, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.9.SPINE11373</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Since its original description in 1982, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has grown in popularity as a means for achieving circumferential fusion. The authors sought to define the perioperative complication rates of the TLIF procedure at a large academic medical center.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Methods. For all eligible patients from a consecutive series of 531 TLIF procedures, the institution’s complication database and the medical record were reviewed to identify complications. Medical, nonprocedure-related complications such as myocardial infarction and pulmonary embolism were excluded due to inconsistency in the recording of these complications in the database. Rates were calculated for each type of complication, and subgroup analysis was performed to investigate the effect of previous lumbar surgery, and of multilevel versus single-level interbody fusion on complication rates. Odds ratios were calculated and evaluated using chi-square analysis.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Results. Five hundred thirty-one patients underwent a TLIF procedure during the study period. Two hundred forty-four patients (46%) had undergone a previous lumbar operation. Interbody fusion was performed at 1 level in 317 patients, at 2 levels in 188 patients, at 3 levels in 24 patients, and at 4 levels in 2 patients. One hundred thirty-five patients (25.4%) had at least one procedure-related complication. The most common complications were durotomy (14.3% of patients) and infection (3.8% of patients). Symptomatic screw misplacement (2.1% of patients) and interbody cage migration (1.8% of patients) were less common complications. The overall complication rate was greater in those patients who had undergone a previous operation (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.18–2.59; p &lt; 0.01) and in those who had multilevel surgery (OR 1.54, 95 % CI 1.04–2.28; p = 0.03), and the incidence of durotomy was higher in patients who had a previous operation (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.07–2.87; p = 0.03). These differences were statistically significant. Durotomy also occurred more frequently in patients who had multilevel interbody fusion (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.92–2.43; p = 0.13). A trend toward higher infection rates in those patients who underwent multilevel interbody fusion was observed (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.62–3.68; p = 0.49), but this was not statistically significant. Infection rates did not differ between revision and first-time surgeries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conclusions. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has gained widespread popularity as a procedure for achieving arthrodesis in the lumbar spine. Complications occurred more often in patients undergoing revision surgery or multilevel interbody fusion. Durotomy and infection were the most common complications in this series.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3713/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Early development and progression of heterotopic ossification in cervical total disc replacement</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3705</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3705#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cervical total disc replacement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heterotopic ossification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spontaneous fusion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3705</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J Neurosurg Spine 16:31–36, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.8.SPINE11303
The purpose of cervical total disc replacement (TDR) is to decrease the incidence of adjacent segment disease through motion preservation. Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a well-known complication after hip and knee arthroplasties. There are few reports regarding HO in patients undergoing cervical TDR, however; and the occurrence of HO [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Early-development-and-progression-of-heterotopic-ossification-in-cervical-total-disc-replacement.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3710" title="Early development and progression of heterotopic ossification in cervical total disc replacement" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Early-development-and-progression-of-heterotopic-ossification-in-cervical-total-disc-replacement-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>J Neurosurg Spine 16:31–36, 2012. DOI: 10.3171/2011.8.SPINE11303</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The purpose of cervical total disc replacement (TDR) is to decrease the incidence of adjacent segment disease through motion preservation. Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a well-known complication after hip and knee arthroplasties. There are few reports regarding HO in patients undergoing cervical TDR, however; and the occurrence of HO and its effects on cervical motion have rarely been reported. Moreover, temporal progression of HO has not been fully addressed. One goal of this study involved determining the incidence of HO following cervical TDR, as identified from plain radiographs, and demonstrating the progression of HO during the follow-up period. A second goal consisted of determining whether segmental motion could be preserved and identifying the relationship between HO and clinical outcomes.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Methods. The authors conducted a retrospective clinical and radiological study of 28 consecutive patients who underwent cervical TDR with Mobi-C prostheses (LDR Medical) between September 2006 and October 2008. Radiological outcomes were evaluated using lateral dynamic radiographs obtained preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The occurrence of HO was interpreted on lateral radiographs using the McAfee classification. Cervical range of motion (ROM) was also measured. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) were used to evaluate clinical outcome.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Results. The mean follow-up period was 21.6 ± 7.0 months, and the mean occurrence of HO was at 8.0 ± 6.6 months postoperatively. At the last follow-up, 18 (64.3%) of 28 patients had HO: Grade I, 6 patients; Grade II, 8 patients; Grade III, 3 patients; and Grade IV, 1 patient. Heterotopic ossification progression was proportional to the duration of follow-up; HO was present in 3 (10.7%) of 28 patients at 1 month; 7 (25.0%) of 28 patients at 3 months; 11 (42.3%) of 26 patients at 6 months; 15 (62.5%) of 24 patients at 12 months; and 17 (77.3%) of 22 patients at 24 months. Cervical ROM was preserved in Grades I and II HO but was restricted in Grades III and IV HO. Clinical improvement according to the VAS and NDI was not significantly correlated with the occurrence of HO.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conclusions. The overall incidence of HO after cervical TDR was relatively high. Moreover, HO began unexpectedly to appear early after surgery. Heterotopic ossification progression was proportional to the time that had elapsed postoperatively. Grade III or IV HO can restrict the cervical ROM and may lead to spontaneous fusion; however, the occurrence of HO did not affect clinical outcome. The results of this study indicate that a high incidence of HO with the possibility of spontaneous fusion is to be expected during long-term follow-up and should be considered before performing cervical TDR.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3705/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Primary Vertebral Tumors: A Review of Epidemiologic, Histological and Imaging Findings, Part II: Locally Aggressive and Malignant Tumors</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3674</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3674#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Oncology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bone tumors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chondrosarcoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chordoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Multiple myeloma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Osteosarcoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Primary vertebral tumor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spinal malignancies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3674</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Neurosurgery 70:211–219, 2012 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31822d5f17
This second part of a comprehensive review of primary vertebral tumors focuses on locally aggressive and malignant tumors. As discussed in the earlier part of the review, both benign and malignant types of these tumors affect the adult and the pediatric population, and an understanding of their subtleties may increase their [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Chordoma-sacrum.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3677" title="Chordoma sacrum" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Chordoma-sacrum-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>Neurosurgery 70:211–219, 2012 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31822d5f17</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">This second part of a comprehensive review of primary vertebral tumors focuses on locally aggressive and malignant tumors. As discussed in the earlier part of the review, both benign and malignant types of these tumors affect the adult and the pediatric population, and an understanding of their subtleties may increase their effective resection. In this review, we discuss the epidemiologic, histological, and imaging features of the most common locally aggressive primary vertebral tumors (chordoma and giantcell tumor) and malignant tumors (chondrosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, multiple myeloma or plasmacytoma, and osteosarcoma). The figures used for illustration are from operative patients of the senior authors (Z.L.G. and J.H.C.). Taken together, parts 1 and 2 of this article provide a thorough and illustrative review of primary vertebral tumors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3674/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging in Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Spinal Cord Compression</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3657</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3657#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neurorradiology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cervical spondylotic myelopathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diffusion tensor imaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[magnetic resonance imaging]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3657</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Spine 2012 ; 37 : 48 – 56
Study Design. A prospective study evaluating a cohort of patients with spondylotic cervical spine compression.
Objective. To analyze the potential of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the cervical spinal cord in the detection of changes associated with spondylotic myelopathy, with particular reference to clinical and electrophysiological fi ndings.
Summary of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/MRI-DTI-in-cervical-spondy-myelopathy.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3669" title="MRI-DTI in cervical spondy myelopathy" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/MRI-DTI-in-cervical-spondy-myelopathy-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>Spine 2012 ; 37 : 48 – 56</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Study Design. A prospective study evaluating a cohort of patients with spondylotic cervical spine compression.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Objective. To analyze the potential of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the cervical spinal cord in the detection of changes associated with spondylotic myelopathy, with particular reference to clinical and electrophysiological fi ndings.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Summary of Background Data. Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may provide confusing fi ndings because of a frequent disproportion between the degree of the spinal cord compression and clinical symptoms . The DTI is known to be more sensitive to subtle pathological changes of the spinal cord compared with conventional MRI. Methods. The DTI of the cervical spinal cord was performed within a group of 52 patients with spondylotic spinal cord compression and 13 healthy volunteers on a 1.5-T MRI scanner. All patients underwent clinical examination that differentiated between asymptomatic and symptomatic myelopathy subgroups, and 45 patients underwent electrophysiological examination. We measured the apparent diffusion coeffi cient and fractional anisotropy of the spinal cord at C2/C3 level without compression and at the maximal compression level (MCL). Sagittal spinal canal diameter, cross-sectional spinal cord area, and presence of T2 hyperintensity at the MCL were also recorded. Nonparametric statistical testing was used for comparison of controls with subgroups of patients.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Results. Significant differences in both the DTI parameters measured at the MCL, between patients with compression and control group, were found, while no difference was observed at the noncompression level. Moreover, fractional anisotropy values were lower and apparent diffusion coeffi cient values were higher at the MCL in the symptomatic patients than in the asymptomatic patients. The DTI showed higher potential to discriminate between clinical subgroups in comparison with standard MRI parameters and electrophysiological fi ndings.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conclusion. The DTI appears to be a promising imaging modality in patients with spondylotic spinal cord compression. It refl ects the presence of symptomatic myelopathy and shows considerable potential for discriminating between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3657/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thoracoscopic Resection of Symptomatic Herniated Thoracic Discs</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3607</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3607#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2012 10:13:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Outcome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surgical technique]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[endoscopic spine surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[herniated thoracic disc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thoracic discectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thoracoscopic discectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thoracoscopy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3607</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Spine 2012 ; 37 : 35 – 40
Study Design. Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained surgical database.
Objective. To report the indications, surgical procedures performed, and outcomes from the largest series of thoracoscopically treated herniated thoracic discs (HTDs). We also compared approach-related complications with an unmatched cohort undergoing thoracotomy for HTD.
Summary of Background Data. Symptomatic HTDs [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Th.Disc-herniation.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3608" title="Th.Disc herniation" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Th.Disc-herniation-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>Spine 2012 ; 37 : 35 – 40</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Study Design. Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained surgical database.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Objective. To report the indications, surgical procedures performed, and outcomes from the largest series of thoracoscopically treated herniated thoracic discs (HTDs). We also compared approach-related complications with an unmatched cohort undergoing thoracotomy for HTD.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Summary of Background Data. Symptomatic HTDs are rare, and their surgical management is technically challenging.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Methods. A prospectively maintained surgical database of all patients undergoing surgery for symptomatic HTDs by the senior author (blinded for review) was reviewed. As needed, the database was supplemented with hospital and clinic charts and telephone conversations with patients. A triportal method of thoracoscopic discectomy was performed in all cases.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Results. Between 1994 and 2008, 121 patients underwent 125 thoracoscopic-assisted operations for 139 HTDs. Their mean age at surgery was 46.6 years. Indications for thoracoscopic resection currently include small symptomatic disc, anterior location, nonmorbidly obese patient, favorable chest anatomy, and T4–T11 location. Symptom duration averaged 32 months. Radiculopathy was the most common presentation, followed by myelopathy and pain (radiculopathic or back). The mean hospital stay was 4.8 days. Chest tubes remained in place for a mean of 3.2 days. At a mean follow-up of 2.4 years, myelopathy, radiculopathy, and back pain had resolved or improved at a rate of 91.1%, 97.6%, and 86.5%,of cases, respectively. Most patients (97.4%) would be willing to undergo the operation again. The complication rate was acceptable. Patients undergoing thoracoscopic excision had less approachrelated morbidity than an unmatched cohort undergoing excision using thoracotomy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Conclusion. Thoracoscopic-assisted microsurgical resection is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive method of treating symptomatic HTDs in appropriately selected patients. The symptoms of most patients improve or resolve with minimal morbidity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3607/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prevalence, Severity, and Impact of Foraminal and Canal Stenosis Among Adults With Degenerative Scoliosis</title>
		<link>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3592</link>
		<comments>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3592#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 23:00:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cba</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Spine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adult degenerative scoliosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adult idiopathic scoliosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adult scoliosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Central stenosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foramen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foraminal stenosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[radiculopathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stenosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surgery]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/?p=3592</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Neurosurgery 69:1181–1187, 2011 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31822a9aeb
Management approaches for adult scoliosis are primarily based on adults with idiopathic scoliosis and extrapolated to adults with degenerative scoliosis. However, the often substantially, but poorly defined, greater degenerative changes present in degenerative scoliosis impact the management of these patients.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence, severity, and impact of canal and foraminal [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Prevalence_Severity_and_Impact_of_Foraminal_and.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-thumbnail wp-image-3598" title="Prevalence,_Severity,_and_Impact_of_Foraminal_and" src="http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Prevalence_Severity_and_Impact_of_Foraminal_and-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>Neurosurgery 69:1181–1187, 2011 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31822a9aeb</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Management approaches for adult scoliosis are primarily based on adults with idiopathic scoliosis and extrapolated to adults with degenerative scoliosis. However, the often substantially, but poorly defined, greater degenerative changes present in degenerative scoliosis impact the management of these patients.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence, severity, and impact of canal and foraminal stenosis in adults with degenerative scoliosis seeking operative treatment.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">METHODS: A prospectively collected database of adult patients with deformity was reviewed for consecutive patients with degenerative scoliosis seeking surgical treatment, without prior corrective surgery. Patients completed the Oswestry Disability Index, SF-12, Scoliosis Research Society 22 questionnaire, and a pain numeric rating scale (0-10). Based on MRI or CT myelogram, the central canal and foraminae from T6 to S1 were graded for stenosis (normal or minimal/mild/moderate/severe).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were included (mean age, 68.9 years; range, 51-85). The mean leg pain numeric rating scale was 6.5, and the mean Oswestry Disability Index score was 53.2. At least 1 level of severe foraminal stenosis was identified in 97% of patients; 83% had maximum foraminal stenosis in the curve concavity. All but 1 patient reported significant radicular pain, including 78% with discrete and 19% with multiple radiculopathies. Of those with discrete radiculopathies, 76% had pain corresponding to areas of the most severe foraminal stenosis, and 24% had pain corresponding to areas of moderate stenosis.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">CONCLUSION: Significant foraminal stenosis was prevalent in patients with degenerative scoliosis, and the distribution of leg pain corresponded to levels of moderate or severe foraminal stenosis. Failure to address symptomatic foraminal stenosis when surgically treating adult degenerative scoliosis may negatively impact clinical outcomes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.neurosurgery-blog.com/archives/3592/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

