Aims.
Initial treatment of traumatic spinal cord injury remains as controversial in 2023 as it was in the early 19th century, when Sir Astley Cooper and Sir Charles Bell debated the merits or otherwise of surgery to relieve cord compression. There has been a lack of high-class evidence for early surgery, despite which expeditious intervention has become the surgical norm. This evidence deficit has been progressively addressed in the last decade and more modern statistical methods have been used to clarify some of the issues, which is demonstrated by the results of the SCI-POEM trial. However, there has never been a properly conducted trial of surgery versus active conservative care. As a result, it is still not known whether early surgery or active physiological management of the unstable injured spinal cord offers the better chance for recovery. Surgeons who care for patients with traumatic spinal cord injuries in the acute setting should be aware of the arguments on all sides of the debate, a summary of which this annotation presents. Cite this article:
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the Mobi-C implant
in cervical disc degeneration, a randomised study was conducted,
comparing the Mobi-C prosthesis arthroplasty with anterior cervical
disc fusion (ACDF) in patients with single level cervical spondylosis. From January 2008 to July 2009, 99 patients were enrolled and
randomly divided into two groups, those having a Mobi-C implant
(n = 51; 30 men, 21 women) and those undergoing ACDF (n = 48; 28
men, 20 women).The patients were followed up for five years, with
the primary outcomes being the Japanese Orthopaedic Association
score, visual analogue scale for pain and the incidence of further
surgery. The secondary outcomes were the Neck Disability Index and
range of movement (ROM) of the treated segment.Aims
Patients and Methods