Spine
-
Cross-cultural adaptation and cross-sectional study. ⋯ The Hausa-RMDQ was successfully developed and proved to be a reliable and valid measure of functional disability in Hausa culture. This questionnaire is recommended for future clinical and scientific research purposes.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Bibliometric literature review. ⋯ Using citation analysis as an objective proxy for influence, certain publications can be distinguished from others due to their lasting impact and recognition from peers. Of the top cited Spine publications, many pertained to clinical outcomes (28%) and had a LOE of I, II, or III (60%). Although older publications have had longer time to accrue citations, those in the most recent decade comprise this list almost 2:1. Knowledge of these "classic" publications allows for a better overall understanding of the diagnosis, management, and future direction of spine health care.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Comparative Study
Comparison of Freshly Isolated Adipose Tissue-derived Stromal Vascular Fraction and Bone Marrow Cells in a Posterolateral Lumbar Spinal Fusion Model.
Rat posterolateral lumbar fusion model. ⋯ In a rat model, A-SVF cells yielded a comparable fusion mass volume and radiographic rate of fusion to BMCs when combined with a clinical-grade bone graft substitute. These results suggest the feasibility of using freshly isolated A-SVF cells in spinal fusion procedures.Level of Evidence: N/A.
-
Retrospective observational cohort study. ⋯ We propose a classification for the severity of ATCSCI based on DTI and DTT that may explain why some patients with ASIA A recover, whereas others do not.Level of Evidence: 4.
-
Comparative Study
Cervical Alignment Following Posterior Cervical Fusion Surgery: Cervical Pedicle Screw Versus Lateral Mass Screw Fixation.
Retrospective comparative study. ⋯ The present study is the first radiologic comparison of LMS and CPS fixation after posterior-only fusion surgery. CPS resulted in more reliable and well-preserved SA correction, whereas CL and SVA did not differ between the two groups over time due to loss of correction.Level of Evidence: 4.