In patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) a distinction in surgical urgency is made on the basis of the severity of the initial neurological injury. The optimal timing of surgical decompression, as well as its impact on neurological recovery, is as of yet undetermined. This study addresses neurological improvement after early and late surgery for complete and incomplete cervical tSCI. A systematic search retrieved 15 publications of observational studies reporting outcome measurements after surgery in 1126 patients with cervical tSCI from PubMed and Embase databases. Surgery was considered early within 24 h, and late thereafter. An improvement of at least two grades on the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scale was considered clinically meaningful. The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed. Improvement rates were summarized using individual patient data in a Bayesian random effects model and compared for those with complete and incomplete tSCI after early and late surgery. In patients with complete cervical tSCI (n = 422), improvement was more frequent after early surgery than after late surgery (respectively, 22.6%, 95% credibility interval [CI]: 16.6–28.7% and 10.4%, 95% CI: 5.6–15.8%; odds ratio [OR] 2.6 [95% CI: 1.4–5.1]). Whereas in patients with incomplete cervical tSCI (n = 636), improvement was similar between early and late surgery (respectively 30.4%, 95% CI: 19.8–41.6% and 32.5%, 95% CI: 21.4–45.8%; OR 0.9 [95% CI: 0.4–1.9]). These data suggest a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with complete cervical tSCI, as surgical decompression within 24 h is more frequently associated with clinically meaningful improvement. In incomplete cervical tSCI, neurological outcome is similar between early and late surgery.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
StephanK., HuberS., HäberleS., KanzK.G., BührenV., van GriensvenM., MeyerB., BiberthalerP., LeferingR., Huber-WagnerS., and TraumaRegisterDGU. (2015). Spinal cord injury – incidence, prognosis, and outcome: an analysis of the TraumaRegister DGU. Spine J. 15, 1994–2001.
2.
McCaugheyE.J., PurcellM., McleanA.N., FraserM.H., BewickA., BorotkanicsR.J., and AllanD.B. (2016). Changing demographics of spinal cord injury over a 20-year period: a longitudinal population-based study in Scotland. Spinal Cord, 54, 270–276.
3.
ThompsonC., MutchJ., ParentS., and Mac-ThiongJ.-M. (2015). The changing demographics of traumatic spinal cord injury: an 11-year study of 831 patients. J. Spinal Cord Med. 38, 214–223.
4.
LoC., TranY., AndersonK., CraigA., and MiddletonJ. (2016). Functional priorities in persons with spinal cord injury: using discrete choice experiments to determine preferences. J. Neurotrauma, 33, 1958–1968.
5.
AarabiB., SansurC.A., IbrahimiD.M., SimardJ.M., HershD.S., DiazC., MassettiJ., and Akhtar-DaneshN. (2017). Intramedullary lesion length on postoperative magnetic resonance imaging is a strong predictor of ASIA Impairment Scale grade conversion following decompressive surgery in cervical spinal cord injury. Neurosurgery, 80, 610–620.
6.
Van MiddendorpJ.J., HosmanA.J., DondersA.R.T., PouwM.H., DitunnoJ.F.Jr, CurtA., GeurtsA.C., Van de MeentH., EM-SCI StudyGroup. (2011). A clinical prediction rule for ambulation outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet, 377, 1004–1010.
7.
WilsonJ.R., CadotteD.W., and FehlingsM.G. (2012). Clinical predictors of neurological outcome, functional status, and survival after traumatic spinal cord injury: a systematic review. J. Neurosurg. Spine, 17, Suppl.1, 11–26.
8.
ScivolettoG., MorgantiB., DitunnoP., DitunnoJ.F., and MolinariM. (2003). Effects of age on spinal cord lesion patients' rehabilitation. Spinal Cord, 41, 457–464.
9.
FurlanJ.C., and FehlingsM.G. (2009). The impact of age on mortality, impairment, and disability among adults with acute traumatic spinal cord injury. J. Neurotrauma, 26, 1707–1717.
10.
Al-HabibA.F., AttabibN., BallJ., BajammalS., CashaS., HurlbertR.J. (2011). Clinical predictors of recovery after blunt spinal cord trauma: systematic review. J. Neurotrauma, 28, 1431–1443.
11.
FehlingsM.G., TetreaultL.A., WilsonJ.R., AarabiB., AndersonP., ArnoldP.M., BrodkeD.S., BurnsA.S., ChibaK., DettoriJ.R., FurlanJ.C., HawrylukG., HollyL.T., HowleyS., JejiT., Kalsi-RyanS., KotterM., KurpadS., MarinoR.J., MartinA.R., MassicotteE., MerliG., MiddletonJ.W., NakashimaH., NagoshiN., PalmieriK., SinghA., SkellyA.C., TsaiE.C., VaccaroA., YeeA., and HarropJ.S. (2017). A clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with acute spinal cord injury and central cord syndrome: recommendations on the timing (≤24 hours versus >24 hours) of decompressive surgery. Glob. Spine J. 7(3, Suppl.):195S–202S.
12.
DvorakM.F., NoonanV.K., FallahN., FisherC.G., FinkelsteinJ., KwonB.K., RiversC.S., AhnH., PaquetJ., TsaiE.C., TownsonA., AttabibN., BaileyC.S., ChristieS.D., DrewB., FourneyD.R., FoxR., HurlbertR.J., JohnsonM.G., LinassiA.G., ParentS., FehlingsM.G., RHSCIR Network. (2015). The influence of time from injury to surgery on motor recovery and length of hospital stay in acute traumatic spinal cord injury: an observational Canadian cohort study. J. Neurotrauma, 32, 645–654.
13.
van MiddendorpJ.J. (2012). Letter to the editor regarding: “Early versus delayed decompression for traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: results of the Surgical Timing in Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (STASCIS).”. Spine J. 12, 540.
14.
ter WengelP.V., FellerR.E., StadhouderA., et al. (2018). Timing of surgery in traumatic spinal cord injury: a national, multidisciplinary survey. Eur. Spine J. 27, 1831–1838.
15.
GlennieR.A., BaileyC.S., TsaiE.C., NoonanV.K., RiversC.S., FourneyD.R., AhnH., KwonB.K., PaquetJ., DrewB., FehlingsM.G., AttabibN., ChristieS.D., FinkelsteinJ., HurlbertR.J., ParentS., and DvorakM.F. (2017). An analysis of ideal and actual time to surgery after traumatic spinal cord injury in Canada. Spinal Cord, 55, 618–623.
16.
WerndleM.C., ZoumprouliA., SedgwickP., and PapadopoulosM.C. (2012). Variability in the treatment of acute spinal cord injury in the United Kingdom: results of a national survey. J. Neurotrauma, 29, 880–888.
17.
SamuelA.M., BohlD.D., BasquesB.A., Diaz-ColladoP.J., LukasiewiczA.M., WebbM.L., and GrauerJ.N. (2015). Analysis of delays to surgery for cervical spinal cord injuries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40, 992–1000.
18.
DevivoM.J. (2012). Epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury: trends and future implications. Spinal Cord, 50, 365–372.
19.
DvorakM.F., NoonanV.K., FallahN., et al. (2014). Minimizing errors in acute traumatic spinal cord injury trials by acknowledging the heterogeneity of spinal cord anatomy and injury severity: an observational Canadian cohort analysis. J. Neurotrauma, 31, 1540–1547.
20.
StroupD.F., BerlinJ.A., MortonS.C., OlkinI., WilliamsonG.D., RennieD., MoherD., BeckerB.J., SipeT.A., and ThackerS.B. (2000). Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 283, 2008–2012.
21.
WesterveldL.A., VerlaanJ.J., and OnerF.C. (2009). Spinal fractures in patients with ankylosing spinal disorders: a systematic review of the literature on treatment, neurological status and complications. Eur. Spine J. 18, 145–156.
22.
JacobsW.B., and FehlingsM.G. (2008). Ankylosing spondylitis and spinal cord injury: origin, incidence, management, and avoidance. Neurosurg. Focus, 24, E12.
23.
BenzelE.C., and LarsonS.J. (1987). Functional recovery after decompressive spine operation for cervical spine fractures. Neurosurgery, 20, 742–746.
24.
MaynardF.M.Jr., BrackenM.B., CreaseyG., DitunnoJ.F.Jr., DonovanW.H., DuckerT.B., GarberS.L., MarinoR.J., StoverS.L., TatorC.H., WatersR.L., WilbergerJ.E., and YoungW. (1997). International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury. American Spinal Injury Association. Spinal Cord, 35, 266–274.
25.
GeislerF.H., ColemanW.P., GriecoG., PoonianD., and Sygen Study Group (2001). Measurements and recovery patterns in a multicenter study of acute spinal cord injury. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 26 (24, Suppl.), S68–86.
26.
FrankelH.L., HancockD.O., HyslopG., MelzakJ., MichaelisL.S., UngarG.H., VernonJ.D., and WalshJ.J. (1969). The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. Paraplegia, 7, 179–192.
27.
De Witt HamerP.C., RoblesS.G., ZwindermanA.H., DuffauH., and BergerM.S. (2012). Impact of intraoperative stimulation brain mapping on glioma surgery outcome: a meta-analysis. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 2559–2565.
28.
Bourassa-MoreauÉ., Mac-ThiongJ.-M., LiA., et al. (2016). Do patients with complete spinal cord injury benefit from early surgical decompression? Analysis of neurological improvement in a prospective cohort study. J. Neurotrauma, 33, 301–306.
29.
CotlerJ.M., HerbisonG.J., NasutiJ.F., DitunnoJ.F., AnH., and WolffB.E. (1993). Closed reduction of traumatic cervical spine dislocation using traction weights up to 140 pounds. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 18, 386–390.
30.
FehlingsM.G., VaccaroA., WilsonJ.R., SinghA., W. CadotteD., HarropJ.S., AarabiB., ShaffreyC., DvorakM., FisherC., ArnoldP., MassicotteE.M., LewisS., and RampersaudR. (2012). Early versus delayed decompression for traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: results of the surgical timing in acute spinal cord injury study (STASCIS). PLoS One, 7, e32037.
31.
GrassnerL., WutteC., KleinB., et al. (2016). Early decompression (8 h) after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury improves functional outcome as assessed by spinal cord independence measure after one year. J. Neurotrauma, 33, 1658–1666.
32.
HanseboutR.R., and HanseboutC.R. (2014). Local cooling for traumatic spinal cord injury: outcomes in 20 patients and review of the literature. J. Neurosurg. Spine, 20, 550–561.
33.
JugM., KejžarN., VeselM., et al. (2015). Neurological recovery after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury is superior if surgical decompression and instrumented fusion are performed within 8 hours versus 8 to 24 hours after injury: a single center experience. J. Neurotrauma, 32, 1385–1392.
34.
LeviL., WolfA., RigamontiD., RaghebJ., MirvisS., and RobinsonW. (1991). Anterior decompression in cervical spine trauma: does the timing of surgery affect the outcome?. Neurosurg. 29, 216–222.
35.
LiuY., ShiC.G., WangX.W., ChenH.J., WangC, CaoP., GaoR., RenX.J., LuoZ.J., WangB., XuJ.G., TianJ.W., and YuanW. (2015). Timing of surgical decompression for traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. Int. Orthop. 39, 2457–2463.
36.
MattiassichG., GollwitzerM., GadererF., et al. (2017). Functional outcomes in individuals undergoing very early (<5 h) and early (5–24 h) surgical decompression in traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: analysis of neurological improvement from the austrian spinal cord injury study. J. Neurotrauma. 33
37.
NewtonD., EnglandM., DollH., and GardnerB.P. (2011). The case for early treatment of dislocations of the cervical spine with cord involvement sustained playing rugby. Bone Joint J. 93-B, 1646–1652.
38.
PapadopoulosS.M., SeldenN.R., QuintD.J., PatelN., GillespieB., and GrubeS. (2002). Immediate spinal cord decompression for cervical spinal cord injury: feasibility and outcome. J. Trauma, 52, 323–332.
39.
RandleM.J., WolfA., LeviL., et al. (1991). The use of anterior caspar plate fixation in acute cervical spine injury. Surg. Neurol. 36, 181–189.
40.
ShenY., ShenH.L., FengM.L., and ZhangW.B. (2015). Immediate reduction under general anesthesia and single-staged anteroposterior spinal reconstruction for fracture-dislocation of lower cervical spine. J. Spinal Disord. Tech. 28, E1–E8.
41.
UmeraniM.S., AbbasA., and SharifS. (2014). Clinical outcome in patients with early versus delayed decompression in cervical spine trauma. Asian Spine J. 8, 427–434.
42.
El TecleN.E., DahdalehN.S., BydonM., RayW.Z., TornerJ.C., and HitchonP.W. (2018). The natural history of complete spinal cord injury: a pooled analysis of 1162 patients and a meta-analysis of modern data. J. Neurosurg. Spine, 28, 436–443.
43.
FawcettJ.W., CurtA., SteevesJ.D., ColemanW.P., TuszynskiM.H., LammertseD., BartlettP.F., BlightA.R., DietzV., DitunnoJ., DobkinB.H., HavtonL.A., EllawayP.H., FehlingsM.G., PrivatA., GrossmanR., GuestJ.D., KleitmanN., NakamuraM., GaviriaM., and ShortD. (2007). Guidelines for the conduct of clinical trials for spinal cord injury as developed by the ICCP panel: spontaneous recovery after spinal cord injury and statistical power needed for therapeutic clinical trials. Spinal Cord, 45, 190–205.
44.
RutgesJ.P.H.J., KwonB.K., HeranM., AilonT., StreetJ.T., and DvorakM.F. (2017). A prospective serial MRI study following acute traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. Eur. Spine J. 26, 2324–2332.
45.
AarabiB., SimardJ.M., KuferaJ.A., AlexanderM., ZacherlK.M., MirvisS.E., ShanmuganathanK., SchwartzbauerG., MaulucciC.M., SlavinJ., AliK., MassettiJ., and EisenbergH.M. (2012). Intramedullary lesion expansion on magnetic resonance imaging in patients with motor complete cervical spinal cord injury. J. Neurosurg. Spine, 17, 243–250.
46.
Van MiddendorpJ.J., HosmanA.J.F., PouwM.H., and Van De MeentH. (2009). ASIA impairment scale conversion in traumatic SCI: is it related with the ability to walk?. A descriptive comparison with functional ambulation outcome measures in 273 patients. Spinal Cord, 47, 555–560.
47.
Kalsi-RyanS., WilsonJ., YangJ.M., and FehlingsM.G. (2014). Neurological grading in traumatic spinal cord injury. World Neurosurg. 82, 509–518.
48.
ZariffaJ., KramerJ.L.K., JonesL.A.T., LammertseD.P., CurtA., and SteevesJ.D. (2012). Sacral sparing in SCI: beyond the S4-S5 and anorectal examination. Spine, J.12, 389–400.
49.
KirshblumS., MillisS., MckinleyW., and TulskyD. (2004). Late neurologic recovery after traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 85, 1811–1817.
50.
Van MiddendorpJ.J., PouwM.H., HayesK.C., WilliamsR., ChhabraH.S., PutzC., VethR.P., GeurtsA.C., AitoS., KrizJ., McKinleyW., van AsbeckF.W., CurtA., FehlingsM.G., Van de MeentH., HosmanA.J., and EM-SCI Study Group Collaborators. (2010). Diagnostic criteria of traumatic central cord syndrome. Part 2: A questionnaire survey among Spine specialists. Spinal Cord, 48, 657–663.
51.
PouwM.H., Van MiddendorpJ.J., Van KampenA., CurtA., Van De MeentH., and HosmanA.J.F. (2011). Diagnostic criteria of traumatic central cord syndrome. Part 3: Descriptive analyses of neurological and functional outcomes in a prospective cohort of traumatic motor incomplete tetraplegics. Spinal Cord, 49, 614–622.
52.
FehlingsM.G., WilsonJ.R., TetreaultL.A., AarabiB., AndersonP., ArnoldP.M., BrodkeD.S., BurnsA.S., ChibaK., DettoriJ.R., FurlanJ.C., HawrylukG., HollyL.T., HowleyS., JejiT., Kalsi-RyanS., KotterM., KurpadS., KwonB.K., MarinoR.J., MartinA.R., MassicotteE., MerliG., MiddletonJ.W., NakashimaH., NagoshiN., PalmieriK., SkellyA.C., SinghA., TsaiE.C., VaccaroA., YeeA., and HarropJ.S. (2017). A clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with acute spinal cord injury: recommendations on the use of methylprednisolone sodium succinate. Glob. Spine J. 7(3,_Suppl.), 203S–211S.
53.
WerndleM.C., ZoumprouliA., SedgwickP., and PapadopoulosM.C. (2012). Variability in the treatment of acute spinal cord injury in the United Kingdom: results of a national survey. J. Neurotrauma, 29, 880–888.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
