Methods

We performed a telephonic survey, contacting every UK spinal deformity centre. The questionnaire probed how each unit compared to the recommended standards.

Methods

Medical records of 30 consecutive patients at an average age of 19(18-24)were reviewed. All patients had segmental fixation with dual rod and pedicle screw construct followed by decortication supplemented with matrix strips/allograft chips. Minimum follow up 1.5 years, average of 2 years (1.5-3). First follow up at 3 months postoperatively and than 6 months subsequently. All patients were evaluated using criteria described by Betz et al for “possible pseudoarthrosis” which included persistent back pain, defects in the fusion mass, loosening of pedicle screws, junctional kyphosis and curve progression of more than 10 degrees from initial standing postoperative PA views.

There were no infections. Average time to clinically and radiographically evident fusion was 12 months (range 10-16). Radiographically visible unfused facet joints were encountered in 3 patients towards the end of the construct. One patient had extension of the construct to treat junctional kyphosis. Other two remained asymptomatic. None had Progression of deformity. One patient developed pars defect at level below construct and was treated with extension of fusion.

Methods and results

Medical records of 30 children with spinal deformity treated were evaluated. There were 14 male and 16 female patients at an average age of 4.9 years (1-14) at the time of presentation. These included 18 idiopathic, 11 congenital and a 14 year old with delayed growth having GH treatment. All patients underwent dual growing rod construct using hook and pedicle screw instrumentation. Extensions were carried out at approximately 6 monthly intervals. Average follow up was 4.2 years (2-8.5) with an average of 7.3(3-15) extension/exchange procedures per patient. Average immediate postoperative Cobb angle was 29(15-55) from a preoperative Cobb of 68(55-100) and this was maintained to a final mean Cobb angle of 30(15-60). Average gain in T1-S1 length was 5.7(3.5-9.8) cm. Five patients had final fusion at an average age of 15.5 years.

There were no infections following primary operation. Out of 249 procedures including extensions/exchange, there were 9(4.5%) episodes of deep infection in 7 patients requiring debridement. Four patients (13%) had revisions for rod breakage/screw loosening/hook pullout/junctional kyphosis and three(10%) had prominent implants.

Methods and Results

113 consecutive patients with discogenic back pain were treated with Dynesys as the sole intervention. Inclusion criteria included mri proven disc degeneration and an improvement in symptoms following an injection into the disc with local anaesthetic and steroid (spinal disc probing). Patients were followed up for a minimum of 5 years, with outcome measures including SF-36, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual pain analogue scores (VPAS). Additional factors reviewed included previous spinal operations, complications, loosening and revision rates with subsequent outcomes.

Mean pre-operative ODI was 49.5, SF-36 was 37.6 and VPAS back pain was 60.9. At one year post operatively, these scores were 36.9, 49.4 and 39.8, at five years follow up, the scores were 33.3, 51.8 and 40.1 respectively. We note wide variations in our results. Several significant factors appear to contribute to the outcome of surgery. These include undergoing surgery before the age of 43, no more than 2-level disc degeneration, leg pain less than VPAS 4, and no previous spinal surgery.

19 patients had screw loosening evident on plain film x-rays (4 requiring removal), and 2 patients had screw breakages. 19 patients had implant removal for failure and 2 patients went on to have a fusion procedure.

Methods

A telephonic survey was carried out which comprised of questions relating to current practice of thromboprophylaxis in major spinal units across the UK. Questions probed practice with regard to trauma versus elective surgery, agents used, timing of prophylaxis, length of treatment and whether practice has changed since the introduction of NICE guidelines.

Study Method

We present a case series of two patients with ankylosed cervical spines who developed neurological complications following application of rigid collar for cervical spine injuries as per the ATLS protocol.

This has been followed up with a survey of A&E and T&O doctors who regularly apply cervical collars for suspected unstable cervical spine injuries. The survey was conducted telephonically using a standard questionnaire. 75 doctors completed the questionnaire. A&E doctors = 42, T&O = 33. Junior grade = 38, middle grade = 37. Trauma management frontline experience >1yr = 50, <1yr = 25. Of the 75 respondents 68/75 (90.6%) would follow the ATLS protocol in applying rigid collar in potentially unstable cervical spine injuries. 58/75 (77.3%) would clinically assess the patient prior to applying collar. Only 43/75 (57.3%) thought the patients relevant past medical history would influence collar application.

Respondents were asked whether they were aware of any pitfalls to rigid collar application in suspected neck injuries. 34/75 (45.3%) stated that they were NOT aware of pitfalls. The lack of awareness was even higher 17/25 (68%) amongst doctors with less that 12 months frontline experience. When directly asked whether ankylosing spondylitis should be regarded as a pitfall then only 43/75 (57.3%) answered in the affirmative.