SLIC评分系统在下颈椎损伤治疗中的应用

目的 探讨SLIC评分系统在指导治疗下颈椎损伤中的作用.方法 自2007年5月至2009年2月基于SLIC评分系统治疗34例下颈椎损伤患者,男21例,女13例;平均年龄31.5岁.损伤节段:C42例,C5 1例,C6 1例,C3-42例,C4-5 4例,C5-6 11例,C6-7 9例,C7～T11例,C3-5 1例,C4-6 1例,C6～T1 1例.受伤至手术时间1～30 d,平均7.1 d.神经功能按美国脊髓损伤协会(ASIA)分级:A级6例,B级17例,C级7例,D级3例,E级1例.根据SLIC评分系统评分:1分1例,3分1例,4分1例,5分3例,6分5例,7分6例,8分13例,9分3例,10分1例.2例<4分的患者采用非手术治疗;1例等于4分和31例>4分的患者依据SLIC评分系统中损伤形态学不同结合椎间盘韧带复合体损伤和神经功能状况选择前路、后路或前后联合入路手术治疗. 结果 34例患者术后随访7～18个月,平均11.5个月.2例保守治疗者骨折愈合,神经根性损害恢复,颈痛缓解.32例手术患者植骨均在6～9个月内融合,椎间高度和生理曲度无明显异常.治疗后除6例脊髓完全性损伤者神经功能无明显变化外,其余患者神经功能均有不同程度的改善,ASIA分级平均改善1.1级.本组无切口感染、内固定松动或断裂、椎体塌陷、假关节形成、神经损害等并发症发生.结论 SLIC评分系统简便、易于掌握,在其指导下对颈椎损伤进行手术与非手术治疗具有重要意义.     

下颈椎屈曲分离型Ⅰ度损伤的临床特点及治疗

目的探讨下颈椎屈曲分离型Ⅰ度损伤的临床特点与治疗方案。方法回顾性分析1995年1月至2004年12月间收治的12例出现迟发性症状的下颈椎屈曲分离型Ⅰ度损伤病例。12例患者伤后均有短暂的颈痛及颈部活动受限症状,6例有一过性神经损伤。8例于伤后当时对损伤作出了正确诊断,2例误诊,2例漏诊。原始损伤后12例均经保守治疗有效。经过平均274d的无症状期后,12例均出现了迟发性颈痛症状,10例伴迟发性神经损害。MRI检查发现,12例均为不稳定型损伤。结果12例患者均采用了手术治疗。颈前路手术9例,前、后联合入路手术3例。术后平均随访33．1个月。所有患者的颈痛症状基本消失,7例的神经症状消失。X线片显示椎体间均已达到骨性融合,均恢复了颈椎的正常生理曲度。结论对稳定性的判断失误可导致患者出现迟发性损害。MRI有助于对损伤的稳定性作出早期判断。对于不稳定型损伤,应早期行手术治疗。前路手术适用于大多数急性与陈旧性损伤。对少数畸形较僵硬的陈旧性损伤患者,可采用前、后联合入路的术式。     

下颈椎损伤分类评分系统的临床应用

目的评估SLIC评分系统对下颈椎损伤治疗的指导作用。方法对76例下颈椎损伤患者行颈椎X线、CT、MRI检查和系统的神经学体检,按照SLIC系统的原则对骨折形态、间盘韧带复合体(DLC)状态和神经功能状态3个方面进行评估。根据影像学检查将骨折形态分为:无异常、压缩型、爆裂型、牵张型和旋转/平移型;将DLC损伤分为:无损伤型、不确定型、断裂型;根据神经学体检将神经损伤状态分为:无损伤、神经根损伤、完全性/不完全性脊髓损伤和持续脊髓压迫损伤。根据SLIC评分系统选择治疗方法,评估患者的神经功能恢复情况和并发症发生情况。结果 76例均获得随访,时间9~22(12.6±1.2)个月。15例评分≤4分的患者选择非手术治疗,其中有4例评分=4分者转为手术治疗;8例评分=4分及53例评分≥5分的患者均选择手术治疗。治疗后除6例脊髓完全性损伤者神经功能无好转外,其余患者神经功能均有不同程度的改善。结论 SLIC评分系统具有较高的可靠性,且使用简单,易于掌握,此方法对于颈椎损伤的评估较全面和准确,可以作为患者临床治疗选择的依据。     

老年颈椎损伤的特点及治疗

目的：评价老年人颈椎损伤的特点与治疗方法。方法：对31例老年颈椎损伤进行回顾性分析。结果：本组老年颈椎损伤发生率5．47％,其原因多为跌落伤,损伤类型以颈椎过伸性损伤和中央脊髓损伤综合征为常见。77．42％的患者伴有脊髓损伤,病死率为9．67％,保守治疗的骨折不愈合率为18．57％,21．43％的患者神经功能无改善,手术治疗后仍有14．28％患者神经功能无明显改善。结论：老年颈椎损伤死亡率及骨折不愈合率较高,手术治疗应在伤后早期进行。     

创伤性下颈椎不稳定的治疗策略选择

目的探讨创伤性下颈椎不稳定的外科治疗方法及其预后。方法1998年1月～2006年5月对77例创伤性下颈椎不稳定患者采用Allen—Fergurson下颈椎损伤分类方法，结合患者的全身情况及伴随损伤状况、神经学状态、致压物部位、有无伴随的创伤性椎间盘突出或损坏、有无伴随的小关节交锁脱位、损伤累及的节段及数目、患者的经济状况和自我要求来决定相应的治疗方案。采用前路、后路或前后联合入路进行下颈椎减压和重建，其中前路手术41例，后路手术28例，前后联合入路手术8例。结果所有患者术后获平均3年8个月（3个月～6年1个月）随访。最常见的损伤类型为屈曲．牵张型和屈曲-压缩型。术前平均JOA和VAS评分分别为10．5分和8．6分，术后分别为15．1分和2．8分。ASIA评分从术前的平均51．5分提高到术后最终随访时的65．2分。不完全性脊髓损伤患者ASIA神经功能评级平均提高1～2级，完全性脊髓损伤者无恢复。术前平均Cobb角、椎体前滑移距离、椎间隙高度分别为后凸23．0°、6．2mm和67％，术后最终随访时分别为前凸2．6°、0．4mm和94％。所有手术节段均完全融合。12例患者发生术后并发症或合并症。结论应根据下颈椎损伤的类型并具体结合患者的全身情况和损伤节段的局部病理解剖及神经学状况来综合考虑最佳的手术策略。     

颈椎飞鞭损伤研究现状与进展

颈椎飞鞭损伤是颈部常见损伤,其发生机制及治疗最佳方法目前尚存争议.颈椎飞鞭损伤后产生慢性疼痛和劳动能力的丧失并非罕见,社会资源和经济成本耗费巨大.而颈椎飞鞭损伤后患者的临床表现和康复时间存在很大的个体差异性,且近来研究发现社会地位、碰撞严重程度、索赔与诉讼、身体与心理因素等都与颈椎飞鞭损伤预后有关.给医师的诊治带来了很...     

6种颈椎曲度测量方法的可信度及可重复性比较

目的 :比较6种颈椎曲度测量方法的可信度及可重复性。方法 :随机选取在我科接受颈椎X线检查的80例患者进行标准颈椎侧位拍片,由3名放射科医生采用基于距离[1Borden氏测量法;2颈椎曲度指数(CCI)法;3椎体质心测量法(CCL)测量方法]和基于角度(1C1-C7 Cobb角测量法;2C2-C7 Cobb角测量法;3Harrison氏测量法)共6种测量方法分别测量颈椎曲度。以2周为间隔分别独自测量两次,对测量结果进行统计分析。结果:6种测量方法均具有良好的可信度(r=0.752~0.968)和可重复性(r=0.703~0.915)。基于距离的测量方法中可信度以Borden氏测量法最高(r=0.938~0.968),其次为CCL法(r=0.855~0.908)及CCI法(r=0.775~0.821);可重复性以Borden氏测量法最好(r=0.888~0.915),其次为CCI法(r=0.819~0.862)及CCL法(r=0.810~0.859)。基于角度的测量方法中可信度以C2-C7 Cobb角测量法最高(r=0.871~0.895),其次为Harrison氏法(r=0.830~0.885)及C1-C7 Cobb角测量法(r=0.752~0.836);可重复性以Harrison氏法最好(r=0.868~0.880),其次为C2-C7 Cobb角测量法(r=0.859~0.876)及C1-C7 Cobb角测量法(r=0.703~0.837)。结论 :6种不同的颈椎曲度测量方法均具有良好的可信度及可重复性。基于距离的曲度测量方法以Borden氏测量法可信度及可重复性最好,基于角度的曲度测量方法以C2-C7 Cobb角测量法可信度最高,以Harrison氏法可重复性最好。     

颈椎骨折脱位合并椎动脉损伤

目的　探讨颈椎骨折脱位与椎动脉损伤的相关性。方法　 2 0例闭合性颈椎创伤患者 ,同时接受颈椎MRI和椎动脉磁共振血管成像 (MRA)检查。结果　 2 0例闭合性颈椎损伤中 ,5例无椎动脉血流成像 ,均为单侧 ,左侧 2例 ,右侧 3例。其中颈椎骨折 3例 ,单侧小关节脱位 1例 ,无放射影像的异常脊髓损伤 1例。 4例椎动脉损伤患者无任何症状 ,1例有轻度头昏、嗜睡。结论　颈椎骨折脱位可并发椎动脉损伤 ,由于缺乏特异性症状 ,前瞻性MRA检查是最重要的方法。     

下颈椎牵张屈曲型损伤手术入路的选择及疗效分析

目的 回顾性分析不同手术入路治疗下颈椎牵张屈曲型损伤的疗效. 方法 回顾性分析自2002年8月至2008年8月手术治疗的30例下颈椎牵张屈曲型损伤患者,根据不同类型、是否合并椎间盘损伤和术前牵引复位情况选择不同的手术方法,其中前路手术7例,后路手术5例,前后联合入路手术18例.分析3组的损伤节段Cobb角、椎体水平移化的变化、神经功能恢复(Frankel评分)、融合时间、融合率、手术时间以及并发症情况. 结果所有患者获得5～24个月(平均8个月)随访,均获得骨性愈合,无内置物松动发生.所有患者Frankel评分术前平均为1.67分,术后为2.22分.术前Cobb角平均为7.78°,术后为1.79°;水平位移术前平均3.67 mm,术后恢复到0.53 mm.前后联合入路手术时间和出血量与单纯前路或后路手术比较筹异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),但在融合时间、Cobb角、椎体水平移位、融合率、神经功能恢复、并发症等方面差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),且3组手术前后的Cobb角、椎体水平移位和神经功能恢复方面差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05). 结论根据不同损伤情况选择不同手术入路治疗下颈椎牵张屈曲型损伤均可取得满意的疗效.手术入路的选择应根据关节突脱位、是否可以复位以及椎间盘损伤等情况综合考虑.     

下颈椎经关节螺钉钢板固定的生物力学研究

目的:研究下颈椎单独经关节螺钉固定与经关节螺钉钢板固定的三维稳定性之间的差异。方法:12具新鲜人体颈椎标本,制成C4,5、C5,6节段三柱损伤模型。随机选取6具标本在C4,5、C5,6行单独经关节螺钉固定,另6具标本在C4,5、C5,6行经关节螺钉钢板固定。在非限制性和非破坏性的试验条件下测试它们在前屈、后伸、左右侧弯和轴向旋转运动状态的稳定性,分别测试标本损伤模型制作前完整标本组(A组)、单独经关节螺钉固定组(B组)和螺钉钢板组(C组)3组数据。结果:单独经关节螺钉固定组和经关节螺钉钢板固定组在各方向的运动范围(ROM)和中性区(NZ)的均数均小于完整标本组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。经关节螺钉钢板固定在前屈运动中的ROM和NZ与单独经关节螺钉固定比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);在后伸、左右侧弯和轴向旋转运动中,经关节螺钉钢板固定的稳定性优于单独经关节螺钉固定,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:下颈椎经关节螺钉钢板固定的稳定性优于单独经关节螺钉固定,在使用下颈椎经关节螺钉时,相对于单独螺钉固定,建议以螺钉钢板形式固定。     

Intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of cervical spine measurements

Lateral flexion-extension radiographs of 72 patients with Down syndrome were used to assess the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the atlanto-dens interval, Wiesel-Rothman measurement, occiput atlas angle, and Power's ratio in flexion and extension. The radiographs were reviewed by three blinded observers on three different occasions with at least a 1-month interval between assessments. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to measure the reproducibility of the measurements from a given observer and the reliability between different observers. With the exception of observer one, the atlanto-dens interval had a statistically significant intraobserver agreement compared with any of the other measurements (p < 0.05). The atlanto-dens interval and the Wiesel-Rothman measurements tended to have better correlation between observers, although there was only fair agreement. The agreement, however, was statistically significant (p < 0.05) compared with Power's ratio. The degree of intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability may make it difficult to base treatment protocols on these measurements.     

Lamina-guided lateral mass screw placement in the sub-axial cervical spine

Lateral mass (LM) screws are commonly used in posterior instrumentation of the cervical spine because of their perceived safety over pedicle screws. A possible complication of cervical LM screw placement is vertebral artery injury or impingement. Several screw trajectories have been described to overcome the risks of neurovascular injury; however, each of these techniques relies on the surgeon’s visual estimation of the trajectory angle. As the reliability hereof is poorly investigated, alignment with a constant anatomical reference plane, such as the cervical lamina, may be advantageous. The aim of this investigation was to determine whether alignment of the LM screw trajectory parallel to the ipsilateral cervical lamina reliably avoids vertebral artery violation in the sub-axial cervical spine. 80 digital cervical spine CT were analysed (40 female, 40 male). Exclusion criteria were severe degeneration, malformations, tumour, vertebral body fractures and an age of less than 18 or greater than 80 years. Mean age of all subjects was 39.5 years (range 18–78); 399 subaxial cervical vertebrae (C3–C7) were included in the study. Measurements were performed on the axial CT view of C3–C7. A virtual screw trajectory with parallel alignment to the ipsilateral lamina was placed through the LM. Potential violation of the transverse foramen was assessed and the LM width available for screw purchase measured. There was no virtual violation of the vertebral artery of C3–C7 with lamina-guided LM screw placement. LM width available for screw purchase using this technique ranged from 5.2 to 7.4 mm. The sub-axial cervical lamina is a safe reference plane for LM screw placement. LM screws placed parallel to the ipsilateral lamina find sufficient LM width and are highly unlikely to injure the vertebral artery, even in bi-cortical placement. Placing LM screws parallel to the lamina appears favourable over conventional techniques.     

Operative spondylodesis in injuries of the lower cervical spine

In view of the high incidence of late instability during conservative treatment of cervical spine fractures, operative stabilization should be performed as soon as possible. Besides immediate decompression of the spinal cord, rapid mobilisation of the patient without external fixation is possible. We report on the results of operative treatment in 97 patients with injuries of the lower cervical spine. The indication for spondylodesis as well as the surgical methods and their complications are discussed.     

Screening cervical spine MRI after normal cervical spine CT scans in patients in whom cervical spine injury cannot be excluded by physical examination

Background

Cervical spine injuries can occur in as many as 10% of patients with blunt trauma with mental status changes from closed head injuries. Despite normal results on cervical spine computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is often recommended to exclude ligamentous or soft tissue injury.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted of trauma patients admitted to a level I trauma center from 2002 to 2006, in whom cervical spine injuries could not be excluded by physical examination. All patients with normal results on cervical spine CT followed by cervical spine MRI were included in the analysis.

Results

One hundred twenty patients underwent MRI to examine their cervical spines. Seven patients had abnormal MRI findings suggestive of acute traumatic injury. No MRI studies led to operative intervention. Screening MRI increased from 1% of comatose patients in 2002 to 18% in 2006.

Conclusions

The use of MRI in patients with normal results on cervical spine CT does not appear to alter treatment.     

Range of global motion of the cervical spine: intraindividual reliability and the influence of measurement device

Range of motion tests are often employed in the quantification of musculoskeletal impairment and in the assessment of the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. The aim of the present study was to compare the absolute values for, and the day-to-day reliability of, measures of cervical spinal mobility made with two computerised motion analysis devices. The ranges of cervical flexion, extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, and axial rotation in flexion and extension were determined for 19 volunteers using both the CA6000 Spine Motion Analyser and the Zebris CMS system; all measures were repeated on a second occasion 1–3 days later. The test-retest reliability was good for each instrument: there was no significant difference between the mean values derived on the two separate days (P>0.05), and the corresponding intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.75–0.93 for all primary movements and 0.57–0.93 for axial rotation in flexion or in extension. For each primary movement, ¶a small but significant difference (1–10%; P<0.05) between the values derived from the two instruments was observed, the systematic nature of which was revealed by the excellent correlation coefficients between them. For the measures of axial rotation in flexion or in extension, however, there was not only a poor correlation between the data obtained from the two devices, but the mean values also differed significantly. Each device is highly reliable in itself and can be used with confidence in longitudinal studies. The establishment of ‘normal’ values for the primary motions should take account of the slight differences observed between devices. Normal values for rotation in flexion or extension cannot be established until the source of the device-dependent difference is identified.     

Indications for surgery in upper cervical spine injury

20% of all spine injuries are cervical spine injuries. Surgical treatment of these injuries must take into account the great mobility of this part of the spinal column. Therefore, biomechanical aspects must be considered, especially in the upper cervical spine — C1 and C2. Describing our own therapeutical regimen in 35 patients with unstable upper cervical spine injuries we explain the biomechanical background and review the literature. It becomes evident that ventral approaches are superior to dorsal techniques for decompression, reposition, and stabilization with minimal loss of mobility.