Aims

The aim of the present study was to analyze the oncological and neurological outcome of patients undergoing interdisciplinary treatment for primary malignant bone and soft-tissue tumours of the spine within the last seven decades, and changes over time.

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine whether early surgical treatment results in better neurological recovery 12 months after injury than late surgical treatment in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI).

The most common injury in rugby resulting in spinal cord injury (SCI) is cervical facet dislocation. We report on the outcome of a series of 57 patients with acute SCI and facet dislocation sustained when playing rugby and treated by reduction between 1988 and 2000 in Conradie Hospital, Cape Town. A total of 32 patients were completely paralysed at the time of reduction. Of these 32, eight were reduced within four hours of injury and five of them made a full recovery. Of the remaining 24 who were reduced after four hours of injury, none made a full recovery and only one made a partial recovery that was useful. Our results suggest that low-velocity trauma causing SCI, such as might occur in a rugby accident, presents an opportunity for secondary prevention of permanent SCI. In these cases the permanent damage appears to result from secondary injury, rather than primary mechanical spinal cord damage. In common with other central nervous system injuries where ischaemia determines the outcome, the time from injury to reduction, and hence reperfusion, is probably important.

In order to prevent permanent neurological damage after rugby injuries, cervical facet dislocations should probably be reduced within four hours of injury.

We analysed the influence of the timing of surgery (< 48 hours, group 1, 21 patients vs > 48 hours, group 2, 14 patients) on the neurological outcome and restoration of mobility in 35 incomplete tetra- and paraplegic patients with metastatic spinal-cord compression.

Pain and neurological symptoms were assessed using the American Spinal Injury Association impairment scale. More improvement was found in group 1 than in group 2 when comparing the pre-operative findings with those both immediately post-operatively (p = 0.021) and those at follow-up at four to six weeks (p = 0.010). In group 1 the number of pre-operatively mobile patients increased from 17 (81%) to 19 patients (90%) whereas the number of mobile patients in group 2 changed from nine (64%) to ten (71%).

These results suggest that early surgical treatment in patients with metastatic spinal-cord compression gives a better neurological outcome even in a palliative situation.

Surgical decompression of the spinal canal is presently accepted worldwide as the method of treatment for thoracolumbar burst fractures with neurological deficit in the belief that neurological recovery may be produced or enhanced. Our clinical and laboratory experience, however, indicates that the paralysis occurs at the moment of injury and is not related to the position of the fragments of the fracture on subsequent imaging. Since the preoperative geometry of the fracture may be of no relevance, our hypothesis, backed by more than two decades of operative experience, is that alteration of the canal by ‘surgical clearance’ does not affect the neurological outcome.

We have reviewed the existing world literature in an attempt to find evidence-based justification for the variety of surgical procedures used in the management of these fractures. We retrieved 275 publications on the management of burst fractures of which 60 met minimal inclusion criteria and were analysed more closely. Only three papers were prospective studies; the remainder were retrospective descriptive analyses. None of the 60 articles included control groups. The design of nine studies was sufficiently similar to allow pooling of their results, which failed to establish a significant advantage of surgical over non-surgical treatment as regards neurological improvement. Significant complications were reported in 75% of papers, including neurological deterioration. Surgical treatment for burst fracture in the belief that neurological improvement can be achieved is not justified, although surgery may still occasionally be indicated for structural reasons. This information should not be withheld from the patients.