Casas MG, García CA, Márquez GEA

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 251-255
PDF size: 38.39 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The present study has the objectives of to establish a logical classification for the multiple vertebral fractures and to value the relationship between the classification and the neurological lesion and to report the associate lesions in this group of patient. A case review study was done with trauma raquimedular and diagnostic of multiple vertebral fracture that entered to the Service of Traumatic Column of the HTMS during the period of October from 1995 to October of the 2000. The proposed classification divides the multiple fractures as contiguous and not contiguous, followed by the number of affected bodies and the level. The statistical analysis was carried out using formulas of descriptive statistic, it stops later to tabulate and to graph the information. To value the relationship between the anatomical classification and the grade of neurological lesion the test rho of Sperman it was used. One thousand six hundred and seventy two patients were obtained, of which 56 completed the approaches. Twenty nine cases (51.8%) of the cases they corresponded to contiguous fractures and 27 cases (48.2%) not contiguous. Thirty nine patients (69.64%) they had neurological integrity, 11 patients 19.64%) they had complete lesion and 6 patients (10.72%) with incomplete lesion. The correlation between the classification of vertebral lesion and the presence of neurological lesion didn’t show significant differences among contiguous and not contiguous fractures. To establish the classification allows to locate the vertebral lesion according to a fracture pattern and the level, and later on to establish the probability that the individual has or not neurological affectation.

REFERENCES

1. Allen BL, Ferguson RL, Lehman, et al: A mechanistic classification of closed, indirect fractures and dislocations of the cervical spine. Spine 1982; 7(1): 1-27.

2. Crenshaw A: H. Campbell Cirugía Ortopédica. Octava Edición. México Editorial Panamericana 1996: 3329-3330.

3. Gupta A, Masri WS: Multilevel spinal injuries: Incidence, distribution and neurological patterns. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989; 71(4): 692.

4. Hadden WA, Gillespie WJ: Multiple level injuries of the cervical spine. Injury 1985; 16: 628-633.

5. Henderson RL, Reid DC, Saboe LA: Multiple noncontiguous spine fractures. Spine 1991; 16(2): 128-131.

6. Jorgensen DR, Joseph Jr. Multiple noncontiguous spine fractures at four levels in a neurologically intact patient. Trauma 1996; 41(4): 750-753.

7. Keenen TL, Antony J, Benson DR: Non-contiguous spinal fractures. Trauma 1990; 30(4): 489-491.

8. Korres DS, Katsaros A, Pantazopoulus T, et al: Double or multiple-level fractures of the spine. Injury 1981; 13(2): 147-152.

9. Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein SD, Harms J, Nazarian S: A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine J 1994; 3(4): 184-201.

10. McCullen G, Vaccaro AR, Garfin SR: Thoracic and lumbar trauma: rationale for selecting the appropriate fusion technique. Orthop Clin of North Am 1998; 29(4): 813-818.

11. Maynard FMJr, Bracken MB, Creasey G, et al: International standards for Neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1997; 35(5): 266-274.

12. Rabinovici R, Ovadia P, Mathiac G, Abdullah F: Abdominal injuries associated with lumbar spine fractures in blunt trauma. Injury 1999; 30: 471-474.

13. Reid DC, Henderson R, Saboe LA, Miller JD: Etiology and clinical course of missed spine fractures. Trauma 1987; 27(9): 980-986.

14. Saboe LA, Reid DC, Davis LA, Warren SA, Grace MG: Spine Trauma and associates injuries. Trauma 1991; 31(1): 43-48.