Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Global Spine J ; 14(1_suppl): 49S-55S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38324602

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVES: To compare decision-making between an expert panel and real-world spine surgeons in thoracolumbar burst fractures (TLBFs) without neurological deficits and analyze which factors influence surgical decision-making. METHODS: This study is a sub-analysis of a prospective observational study in TL fractures. Twenty two experts were asked to review 183 CT scans and recommend treatment for each fracture. The expert recommendation was based on radiographic review. RESULTS: Overall agreement between the expert panel and real-world surgeons regarding surgery was 63.2%. In 36.8% of cases, the expert panel recommended surgery that was not performed in real-world scenarios. Conversely, in cases where the expert panel recommended non-surgical treatment, only 38.6% received non-surgical treatment, while 61.4% underwent surgery. A separate analysis of A3 and A4 fractures revealed that expert panel recommended surgery for 30% of A3 injuries and 68% of A4 injuries. However, 61% of patients with both A3 and A4 fractures received surgery in the real world. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a 1% increase in certainty of PLC injury led to a 4% increase in surgery recommendation among the expert panel, while a .2% increase in the likelihood of receiving surgery in the real world. CONCLUSION: Surgical decision-making varied between the expert panel and real-world treating surgeons. Differences appear to be less evident in A3/A4 burst fractures making this specific group of fractures a real challenge independent of the level of expertise.

2.
J Orthop Trauma ; 35(12): e496-e501, 2021 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34387567

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To (1) demonstrate that the AO Spine Sacral Classification System can be reliably applied by general orthopaedic surgeons and subspecialists universally around the world and (2) delineate those injury subtypes that are most difficult to classify reliably to refine the classification before evaluating clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Agreement study. SETTING: All-level trauma centers, worldwide. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-two members of the AO Trauma and AO Spine community. INTERVENTION: The AO Sacral Classification System was applied by each surgeon to 26 cases in 2 independent assessments performed 3 weeks apart. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS: A total of 8097 case assessments were performed. The kappa coefficient for interobserver agreement for all cases was 0.72/0.75 (assessment 1/assessment 2), representing substantial reliability. When comparing classification grading (A/B/C) regardless of subtype, the kappa coefficient was 0.84/0.85, corresponding to excellent reliability. The kappa coefficients for interobserver reliability were 0.95/0.93 for type A fractures, 0.78/0.79 for type B fractures, and 0.80/0.83 for type C fractures. The overall kappa statistic for intraobserver reliability was 0.82 (range 0.18-1.00), representing excellent reproducibility. When only evaluating morphology type (A/B/C), the average kappa value was 0.87 (range 0.18-1.00), representing excellent reproducibility. CONCLUSION: The AO Spine Sacral Classification System is universally reliable among general orthopaedic surgeons and subspecialists worldwide, with substantial interobserver and excellent intraobserver reliability.


Assuntos
Fraturas Ósseas , Cirurgiões , Humanos , Variações Dependentes do Observador , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sacro
3.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 46(10): 649-657, 2021 05 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33337687

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Global cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification by examining the perceived injury severity by surgeon across AO geographical regions and practice experience. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous subaxial cervical spine injury classifications have been limited by subpar interobserver reliability and clinical applicability. In an attempt to create a universally validated scheme with prognostic value, AO Spine established a subaxial cervical spine injury classification involving four elements: injury morphology, facet injury involvement, neurologic status, and case-specific modifiers. METHODS: A survey was sent to 272 AO Spine members across all geographic regions and with a variety of practice experience. Respondents graded the severity of each variable of the classification system on a scale from zero (low severity) to 100 (high severity). Primary outcome was to assess differences in perceived injury severity for each injury type over geographic regions and level of practice experience. RESULTS: A total of 189 responses were received. Overall, the classification system exhibited a hierarchical progression in subtype injury severity scores. Only three subtypes showed a significant difference in injury severity score among geographic regions: F3 (floating lateral mass fracture, P = 0.04), N3 (incomplete spinal cord injury, P = 0.03), and M2 (critical disk herniation, P = 0.04). When stratified by surgeon experience, pairwise comparison showed only two morphological subtypes, B1 (bony posterior tension band injury, P = 0.02) and F2 (unstable facet fracture, P = 0.03), and one neurologic subtype (N3, P = 0.02) exhibited a significant difference in injury severity score. CONCLUSION: The AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System has shown to be reliable and suitable for proper patient management. The study shows this classification is substantially generalizable by geographic region and surgeon experience, and provides a consistent method of communication among physicians while covering the majority of subaxial cervical spine traumatic injuries.Level of Evidence: 4.


Assuntos
Vértebras Cervicais/lesões , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/classificação , Inquéritos e Questionários/normas , Adulto , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/diagnóstico
4.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 44(16): 1107-1117, 2019 Aug 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30896584

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: A post-test design biological experiment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the osteogenic effects of riluzole on human mesenchymal stromal cells and osteoblasts. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Riluzole may benefit patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) from a neurologic perspective, but little is known about riluzole's effect on bone formation, fracture healing, or osteogenesis. METHODS: Human mesenchymal stromal cells (hMSCs) and human osteoblasts (hOB) were obtained and isolated from healthy donors and cultured. The cells were treated with riluzole of different concentrations (50, 150, 450 ng/mL) for 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks. Cytotoxicity was evaluated as was the induction of osteogenic differentiation of hMSCs. Differentiation was evaluated by measuring alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity and with Alizarin red staining. Osteogenic gene expression of type I collagen (Col1), ALP, osteocalcin (Ocn), Runx2, Sox9, Runx2/Sox9 ratio were measured by qRT-PCR. RESULTS: No cytotoxicity or increased proliferation was observed in bone marrow derived hMSCs and primary hOBs cultured with riluzole over 7 days. ALP activity was slightly increased in hMSCs after treatment for 2 weeks with riluzole 150 ng/mL and slightly upregulated by 150% (150 ng/mL) and 90% (450 ng/mL) in hMSCs at 3 weeks. In hOBs, ALP activity almost doubled after 2 weeks of culture with riluzole 150 ng/mL (P < 0.05). More pronounced 2.6-fold upregulation was noticed after 3 weeks of culture with riluzole at both 150 ng/mL (P = 0.05) and 450 ng/mL (P = 0.05). No significant influence of riluzole on the mRNA expression of osteocalcin (OCN) was observed. CONCLUSION: The effect of riluzole on bone formation is mixed; low-dose riluzole has no effect on the viability or function of either hMSCs or hOBs. The activity of ALP in both cell types is upregulated by high-dose riluzole, which may indicate that high-dose riluzole can increase osteogenic metabolism and subsequently accelerate bone healing process. However, at high concentrations, riluzole leads to a decrease in osteogenic gene expression, including Runx2 and type 1 collagen. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.


Assuntos
Células-Tronco Mesenquimais/efeitos dos fármacos , Osteoblastos/efeitos dos fármacos , Osteogênese/efeitos dos fármacos , Riluzol/farmacologia , Fosfatase Alcalina/metabolismo , Diferenciação Celular/efeitos dos fármacos , Células Cultivadas , Colágeno Tipo I/metabolismo , Consolidação da Fratura , Humanos , Osteocalcina/metabolismo
5.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 40(23): E1250-6, 2015 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26165219

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: International validation study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of the spine surgeons' level of experience on the intraobserver reliability of the novel AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification system, and the appropriate classification according to this system. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Wide variability has been demonstrated for intraobserver reliability of the AOSpine classification system. The spine surgeons' level of experience may play a crucial role in the appropriate classification of thoracolumbar fractures, and the degree of reproducibility of the same observer on separate occasions. However, this has not been previously investigated. METHODS: After a training on the classification system, high quality CT images together with clinical data from 25 patients with thoracolumbar fractures were independently assessed by 100 spine surgeons from across the world on 2 different occasions, 1 month apart from each other. The spine surgeons were allocated to a subgroup, according to their years of experience. Intraobserver reliability was calculated for each individual surgeon and for each subgroup, using the Kappa statistics (κ). Descriptive statistics was used to describe any differences between the subgroups. Analysis of any misclassifications was performed by calculating sensitivity and specificity estimates. RESULTS: Almost all surgeons demonstrated at least moderate intraobserver reliability. All surgeon subgroups demonstrated substantial reliability (κ = 0.67-0.69) for fracture subtype grading, and almost all subgroups demonstrated excellent reliability (κ = 0.79-0.83) for fracture morphology type regardless of subtype identified. In general, the fractures were most frequently misclassified by the most experienced surgeons. No major differences were observed among the subgroups when comparing the sensitivity and specificity rates. CONCLUSION: This international study demonstrated that the spine surgeons' level of experience does not substantially influence the classification and intraobserver reliability of the recently described AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.


Assuntos
Vértebras Lombares/lesões , Fraturas da Coluna Vertebral/classificação , Vértebras Torácicas/lesões , Competência Clínica , Humanos , Variações Dependentes do Observador , Cirurgiões
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA