Early Spinal Injury Stabilization in Multiple-Injured Patients: Do All Patients Benefit?
Clicks: 122
ID: 116540
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
30.0
/100
122 views
17 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #238 of 253 articles by views in journal of clinical medicine
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 253 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Background: Thoracolumbar spine fractures in multiple-injured patients are a common injury pattern. The appropriate timing for the surgical stabilization of vertebral fractures is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to analyse the impact of the timing of spinal surgery in multiple-injured patients both in general and in respect to spinal injury severity. Methods: A retrospective analysis of multiple-injured patients with an associated spinal trauma within the thoracic or lumbar spine (injury severity score (ISS) >16, age >16 years) was performed from January 2012 to December 2016 in two Level I trauma centres. Demographic data, circumstances of the accident, and ISS, as well as time to spinal surgery were documented. The evaluated outcome parameters were length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) (iLOS) and length of stay (LOS) in the hospital, duration of mechanical ventilation, onset of sepsis, and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), as well as mortality. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. Results: A total of 113 multiple-injured patients with spinal stabilization and a complete dataset were included in the study. Of these, 71 multiple-injured patients (63%) presented with an AOSpine A-type spinal injury, whereas 42 (37%) had an AOSpine B-/C-type spinal injury. Forty-nine multiple-injured patients (43.4%) were surgically treated for their spinal injury within 24 h after trauma, and showed a significantly reduced length of stay in the ICU (7.31 vs. 14.56 days; p < 0.001) and hospital stay (23.85 vs. 33.95 days; p = 0.048), as well as a significantly reduced prevalence of sepsis compared to those surgically treated later than 24 h (3 vs. 7; p = 0.023). These adverse effects were even more pronounced in the case where cutoffs were increased to either 72 h or 96 h. Independent risk factors for a delay in spinal surgery were a higher ISS (p = 0.036), a thoracic spine injury (p = 0.001), an AOSpine A-type spinal injury (p = 0.048), and an intact neurological status (p < 0.001). In multiple-injured patients with AOSpine A-type spinal injuries, an increased time to spinal surgery was only an independent risk factor for an increased LOS; however, in multiple-injured patients with B-/C-type spinal injuries, an increased time to spinal surgery was an independent risk factor for increased iLOS, LOS, and the development of sepsis. Conclusion: Our data support the concept of early spinal stabilization in multiple-injured patients with AOSpine B-/C-type injuries, especially of the thoracic spine. However, in multiple-injured patients with AOSpine A-type injuries, the beneficial impact of early spinal stabilization has been overemphasized in former studies, and the benefit should be weighed out against the risk of patients’ deterioration during early spinal stabilization.
| Reference Key |
herren2020journalearly
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Philipp Kobbe,Patrick Krug,Hagen Andruszkow,Miguel Pishnamaz,Martijn Hofman,Klemens Horst,Carolin Meyer,Max Joseph Scheyerer,Christoph Faymonville,G. Stein,Frank Hildebrand,Christian Herren;Philipp Kobbe;Patrick Krug;Hagen Andruszkow;Miguel Pishnamaz;Martijn Hofman;Klemens Horst;Carolin Meyer;Max Joseph Scheyerer;Christoph Faymonville;G. Stein;Frank Hildebrand;Christian Herren; |
| Journal | journal of clinical medicine |
| Year | 2020 |
| DOI |
10.3390/jcm9061760
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.