TL;DR: The booklet describes the recommended International Standards examination, including both sensory and motor components, and describes the ASIA (American Spinal Injury Association) Impairment Scale (AIS) to classify the severity (i.e. completeness) of injury.
Abstract: This article represents the content of the booklet, International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury, revised 2011, published by the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA). For further explanation of the clarifications and changes in this revision, see the accompanying article (Kirshblum S., et al. J Spinal Cord Med. 2011:doi 10.1179/107902611X13186000420242
The spinal cord is the major conduit through which motor and sensory information travels between the brain and body. The spinal cord contains longitudinally oriented spinal tracts (white matter) surrounding central areas (gray matter) where most spinal neuronal cell bodies are located. The gray matter is organized into segments comprising sensory and motor neurons. Axons from spinal sensory neurons enter and axons from motor neurons leave the spinal cord via segmental nerves or roots.
In the cervical spine, there are 8 nerve roots. Cervical roots of C1-C7 are named according to the vertebra above which they exit (i.e. C1 exits above the C1 vertebra, just below the skull and C6 nerve roots pass between the C5 and C6 vertebrae) whereas C8 exists between the C7 and T1 vertebra; as there is no C8 vertebra. The C1 nerve root does not have a sensory component that is tested on the International Standards Examination.
The thoracic spine has 12 distinct nerve roots and the lumbar spine consists of 5 distinct nerve roots that are each named accordingly as they exit below the level of the respective vertebrae. The sacrum consists of 5 embryonic sections that have fused into one bony structure with 5 distinct nerve roots that exit via the sacral foramina. The spinal cord itself ends at approximately the L1-2 vertebral level. The distal most part of the spinal cord is called the conus medullaris. The cauda equina is a cluster of paired (right and left) lumbosacral nerve roots that originate in the region of the conus medullaris and travel down through the thecal sac and exit via the intervertebral foramen below their respective vertebral levels. There may be 0, 1, or 2 coccygeal nerves but they do not have a role with the International Standards examination in accordance with the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI).
Each root receives sensory information from skin areas called dermatomes. Similarly each root innervates a group of muscles called a myotome. While a dermatome usually represents a discrete and contiguous skin area, most roots innervate more than one muscle, and most muscles are innervated by more than one root.
Spinal cord injury (SCI) affects conduction of sensory and motor signals across the site(s) of lesion(s), as well as the autonomic nervous system. By systematically examining the dermatomes and myotomes, as described within this booklet, one can determine the cord segments affected by the SCI. From the International Standards examination several measures of neurological damage are generated, e.g., Sensory and Motor Levels (on right and left sides), NLI, Sensory Scores (Pin Prick and Light Touch), Motor Scores (upper and lower limb), and ZPP. This booklet also describes the ASIA (American Spinal Injury Association) Impairment Scale (AIS) to classify the severity (i.e. completeness) of injury.
This booklet begins with basic definitions of common terms used herein. The section that follows describes the recommended International Standards examination, including both sensory and motor components. Subsequent sections cover sensory and motor scores, the AIS classification, and clinical syndromes associated with SCI. For ease of reference, a worksheet (Appendix 1) of the recommended examination is included, with a summary of steps used to classify the injury (Appendix 2). A full-size version for photocopying and use in patient records has been included as an enclosure and may also be downloaded from the ASIA website (www.asia-spinalinjury.org). Additional details regarding the examination and e-Learning training materials can also be obtained from the website15.
TL;DR: The present study aims to comprehensively review the available literature and evidence for different lumbar inter body fusion (LIF) techniques, and proposes a set of recommendations and guidelines for the indications for interbody fusion options.
Abstract: Degenerative disc and facet joint disease of the lumbar spine is common in the ageing population, and is one of the most frequent causes of disability Lumbar spondylosis may result in mechanical back pain, radicular and claudicant symptoms, reduced mobility and poor quality of life Surgical interbody fusion of degenerative levels is an effective treatment option to stablize the painful motion segment, and may provide indirect decompression of the neural elements, restore lordosis and correct deformity The surgical options for interbody fusion of the lumbar spine include: posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF), oblique lumbar interbody fusion/anterior to psoas (OLIF/ATP), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) The indications may include: discogenic/facetogenic low back pain, neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy due to foraminal stenosis, lumbar degenerative spinal deformity including symptomatic spondylolisthesis and degenerative scoliosis In general, traditional posterior approaches are frequently used with acceptable fusion rates and low complication rates, however they are limited by thecal sac and nerve root retraction, along with iatrogenic injury to the paraspinal musculature and disruption of the posterior tension band Minimally invasive (MIS) posterior approaches have evolved in an attempt to reduce approach related complications Anterior approaches avoid the spinal canal, cauda equina and nerve roots, however have issues with approach related abdominal and vascular complications In addition, lateral and OLIF techniques have potential risks to the lumbar plexus and psoas muscle The present study aims firstly to comprehensively review the available literature and evidence for different lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) techniques Secondly, we propose a set of recommendations and guidelines for the indications for interbody fusion options Thirdly, this article provides a description of each approach, and illustrates the potential benefits and disadvantages of each technique with reference to indication and spine level performed
TL;DR: The results demonstrate that nucleus pulposus may induce nerve tissue injury by mechanisms other than mechanical compression and may be based on direct biochemical effects of nucleus pulPOSus components on nerve fiber structure and function and microvascular changes including inflammatory reactions in the nerve roots.
Abstract: Epidural application of autologous nucleus pulposus in pigs, without mechanical nerve root compression, induced a pronounced reduction in nerve conduction velocity in the cauda equina nerve roots after 1-7 days, compared to epidural application of retroperitoneal fat in control experiments. Histologically, the nerve fiber injury was more pronounced after application of nucleus pulposus than after control tissue application. The results demonstrate that nucleus pulposus may induce nerve tissue injury by mechanisms other than mechanical compression. Such mechanisms may be based on direct biochemical effects of nucleus pulposus components on nerve fiber structure and function and microvascular changes including inflammatory reactions in the nerve roots.
TL;DR: Leptomeningeal invasion by systemic cancer was diagnosed clinically or pathologically in 50 patients over four years, usually inexorably progressive, but in some instances responded to radiation and intrathecal chemotherapy.
Abstract: Leptomeningeal invasion by systemic cancer was diagnosed clinically or pathologically in 50 patients over four years. All had neurological symptoms referable to tumor seeding the meninges. Clinical diagnosis was suggested by the simultaneous occurrence of symptoms or signs in more than one area of the neuraxis. Neurological signs were much more prominent than symptoms. Clinical diagnosis was confirmed by the presence of malignant cells in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), multiple examinations of CSF sometimes being necessary. The disease was usually inexorably progressive, but in some instances responded to radiation and intrathecal chemotherapy. At autopsy there were leptomeningeal thickening, occasionally tumor nodules along the cauda equina and, in some patients, hydrocephalus. Sometimes, despite prominent clinical signs, there were no gross pathologic abnormalities. Microscopic changes were multifocal rather than diffuse, making extensive sampling of leptomeninges necessary to establish the pathologic diagnosis.
TL;DR: The Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Computer-Aided Analysis of 2,504 Operations as mentioned in this paper was the first publication of the LBSH model in the Nordic Orthopaedic Journal.
Abstract: (1972). The Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Computer-Aided Analysis of 2,504 Operations. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica: Vol. 43, No. sup142, pp. 1-99.