Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1368 - 1374
3 Oct 2020
McDonnell JM Ahern DP Lui DF Yu H Lehovsky J Noordeen H Molloy S Butler JS Gibson A

Aims

Whether a combined anteroposterior fusion or a posterior-only fusion is more effective in the management of patients with Scheuermann’s kyphosis remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the radiological and clinical outcomes of these surgical approaches, and to evaluate the postoperative complications with the hypothesis that proximal junctional kyphosis would be more common in one-stage posterior-only fusion.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients treated surgically for Scheuermann’s kyphosis between 2006 and 2014 was performed. A total of 62 patients were identified, with 31 in each group. Parameters were compared to evaluate postoperative outcomes using chi-squared tests, independent-samples t-tests, and z-tests of proportions analyses where applicable.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1007 - 1012
1 Sep 2023
Hoeritzauer I Paterson M Jamjoom AAB Srikandarajah N Soleiman H Poon MTC Copley PC Graves C MacKay S Duong C Leung AHC Eames N Statham PFX Darwish S Sell PJ Thorpe P Shekhar H Roy H Woodfield J

Aims

Patients with cauda equina syndrome (CES) require emergency imaging and surgical decompression. The severity and type of symptoms may influence the timing of imaging and surgery, and help predict the patient’s prognosis. Categories of CES attempt to group patients for management and prognostication purposes. We aimed in this study to assess the inter-rater reliability of dividing patients with CES into categories to assess whether they can be reliably applied in clinical practice and in research.

Methods

A literature review was undertaken to identify published descriptions of categories of CES. A total of 100 real anonymized clinical vignettes of patients diagnosed with CES from the Understanding Cauda Equina Syndrome (UCES) study were reviewed by consultant spinal surgeons, neurosurgical registrars, and medical students. All were provided with published category definitions and asked to decide whether each patient had ‘suspected CES’; ‘early CES’; ‘incomplete CES’; or ‘CES with urinary retention’. Inter-rater agreement was assessed for all categories, for all raters, and for each group of raters using Fleiss’s kappa.