Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
-
Although multimodal intraoperative spinal cord monitoring provides greater accuracy, transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potential (TcMEP) monitoring became the gold standard for intraoperative spinal cord monitoring. However, there is no definite alarm point for TcMEPs because a multicenter study is lacking. Thus, based on their experience with 48 true-positive cases (that is, a decrease in potentials followed by a new neurological motor deficit postoperatively) encountered between 2007 and 2009, the authors set a 70% decrease in amplitude as the alarm point for TcMEPs. ⋯ This study is the first prospective multicenter study to investigate the alarm point of TcMEPs. The authors recommend the designation of an alarm point of a 70% decrease in amplitude for routine spinal cord monitoring, particularly during surgery for spinal deformity, OPLL, and extramedullary spinal cord tumor.
-
Case Reports Multicenter Study
The posterior pedicle screw construct: 5-year results for thoracolumbar and lumbar curves.
Several studies of the outcomes of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) with thoracolumbar and lumbar curves after treatment with posterior pedicle screws have been reported, but most of these studies reported only 2-year follow-up. The authors analyzed the radiographic and clinical outcomes of patients with thoracolumbar and lumbar curves treated with posterior pedicle screws after 5 years of follow-up. ⋯ Correction of the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes in this cohort of patients was maintained from the first follow-up measurements to 5 years after surgery. In addition, at 5 years after surgery total SRS-22 scores and inclinometer readings were improved from preoperative scores and measurements.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Cervical total disc replacement with the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc compared with anterior discectomy and fusion for treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter clinical trial: clinical article.
Cervical total disc replacement (TDR) is intended to treat neurological symptoms and neck pain associated with degeneration of intervertebral discs in the cervical spine. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the standard treatment for these indications since the procedure was first developed in the 1950s. While TDR has been shown to be a safe and effective alternative to ACDF for treatment of patients with degenerative disc disease (DDD) at a single level of the cervical spine, few studies have focused on the safety and efficacy of TDR for treatment of 2 levels of the cervical spine. The primary objective of this study was to rigorously compare the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc to ACDF for treatment of cervical DDD at 2 contiguous levels of the cervical spine. ⋯ The results of this study represent the first available Level I clinical evidence in support of cervical arthroplasty at 2 contiguous levels of the cervical spine using the Mobi-C cervical artificial disc. These results continue to support the use of cervical arthroplasty in general, but specifically demonstrate the advantages of 2-level arthroplasty over 2-level ACDF. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00389597 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial Observational Study
The efficacy of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: results from the NeuroPoint-SD registry: clinical article.
There is significant practice variation and considerable uncertainty among payers and other major stakeholders as to whether many surgical treatments are effective in actual US spine practice. The aim of this study was to establish a multicenter cooperative research group and demonstrate the feasibility of developing a registry to assess the efficacy of common lumbar spinal procedures using prospectively collected patient-reported outcome measures. ⋯ It is feasible to build a national spine registry for the collection of high-quality prospective data to demonstrate the effectiveness of spinal procedures in actual practice. Clinical trial registration no.: 01220921 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Can low-grade spondylolisthesis be effectively treated by either coflex interlaminar stabilization or laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion? Two-year clinical and radiographic results from the randomized, prospective, multicenter US investigational device exemption trial: clinical article.
Posterolateral spinal fusion (PSF) has long been the standard of care for degenerative spondylolisthesis, but less invasive, motion-preserving alternatives have been proposed to reduce the complications associated with fusion while still providing neural decompression and stabilization. The object of the current study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of coflex Interlaminar Stabilization compared with PSF to treat low-grade spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. ⋯ Low-grade spondylolisthesis was effectively stabilized by coflex and led to similar clinical outcomes, with improved perioperative outcomes, compared with PSF at 2 years. Reoperation rates, however, were higher in the coflex cohort. Patients in the fusion cohort experienced significantly increased superior and inferior level angulation and translation, while those in the coflex cohort experienced no significant adjacent or index level radiographic changes from baseline. Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization is a less invasive, safe, and equally efficacious clinical solution to PSF to treat low-grade spondylolisthesis, and it appears to reduce stresses at the adjacent levels. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00534235 (ClinicalTrials.gov).