Bertolotti first described articulation of the L5 transverse process with the sacrum as a cause of back pain in 1917. Since then little attention has been payed to these atypical articulations despite their high reported incidence. Here we describe our early experience of surgical treatment and propose a validated CT based classification of lumbosacral segment abnormalities (LSSA). 400 lumbosacral CT scans were reviewed (NBT), a classification devised and incidence of abnormalities recorded. 40 patients were selected and 4 independent observers classified each scan. Case notes for all patients (C&V) who received steroid injections into or surgical excision of LSSAs were reviewed. Results as follows: 5 types of abnormality were identified. Type 0 - normal Type 1 - asymmetrical shortening of the iliolumbar ligament Type 2 - transverse process of L5 within 2mm of the sacrum Type 3 - diarthrodial joint (3A: no evidence of degeneration 3B: degenerative change) Type 4 - transverse process and sacrum have fused Type 5 - extends to L4 54.5% of patients had abnormalities. The kappa values for the intra-observer results were 0.69 to 0.88 and the inter-observer ratings gave a combined score of over 0.7 indicating substantial agreement. Our CT classification of LSSAs is both straight forward to use and repeatable. The incidence of these abnormalities is higher in our population of CT scans compared to previous published series using plain radiographs. All patients treated with surgical excision of established articulations (Type 3A or above) reported good or excellent outcomes following excision.
To evaluate the incidence of primary venous thromboembolism (VTE),
epidural haematoma, surgical site infection (SSI), and 90-day mortality
after elective spinal surgery, and the effect of two protocols for
prophylaxis. A total of 2181 adults underwent 2366 elective spinal procedures
between January 2007 and January 2012. All patients wore anti-embolic
stockings, mobilised early and were kept adequately hydrated. In
addition, 29% (689) of these were given low molecular weight heparin
(LMWH) while in hospital. SSI surveillance was undertaken using the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria.Aims
Patients and Methods
Spinal cord injury following trauma is initially dealt with by acute hospitals. The early management including stabilization is usually performed by these centres. This is followed by onward referral to one of the Regional Spinal Injury Units. There is concern of both sides of the fence regarding mobilization following spinal cord injury. The acute hospitals want to avoid the problems of prolonged recumbency and the Regional Spinal Injury Units wish to avoid the problems of early aggressive mobilization. Therefore, we set out to discover if there was a standard approach to mobilising these patients following surgical stabilization, because of the oversubscribed resources of the spinal injury units and the wish to start mobilizing the injured as soon as possible. A comparative audit of the Regional Spinal Injury Units in the UK and North American Units. Regional Spinal Injury Units in United Kingdom and North America Clear Management Plan Mobilisation Schedule We had replies from all Regional Spinal Injury Units in the UK and from seven in North America. The Regional Spinal Injury Units all had differing approaches. Only a few were able to convey a clear management plan and mobilization schedule. Whereas the North American Units provided a ‘mobilize as able’ plan in all cases. The North American Units had a ‘mobilize as able’ policy, whereas the UK units had a mixed approach. A coherent collaboration between the spinal surgeons stabilizing these injuries and the spinal injury units providing rehabilitation would improve patient management.
