Spine
-
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.
-
Population-based cross-sectional study. ⋯ The results in this study suggest changes in muscle morphology in both NP cohorts. These results show some similarities with earlier findings in this research domain. Further studies based on controlled longitudinal designs are needed to facilitate data compilation, to draw stronger conclusions, and to integrate them into the treatment of patients with chronic NP.Level of Evidence: 4.
-
Retrospective review. ⋯ Although there were no differences in reoperation, reintubation, or mortality, there was a significantly higher cost for care and hospitalization in those who received PACU x-rays. Further studies are warranted to validate the results of the presented study.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Global cross-sectional survey. ⋯ 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.
-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Comparison of 2-level cervical disc replacement vs. 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the outpatient setting.
Retrospective cohort study. ⋯ To our knowledge, this is the largest multicenter study examining the safety of two-level outpatient CDR procedures. Outpatient two-level CDR was associated with similarly safe outcomes when compared to inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. This suggests that two-level CDR can be performed safely in the outpatient setting.Level of Evidence: 3.