Reliability of a novel classification system for thoracolumbar injuries: the Thoracolumbar Injury Severity Score

Thoracic and Lumbar Spine Injury: Evidence-Based Diagnosis, Management, and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Traumatic thoracolumbar spine injuries are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Targeted for non-spine specialist trauma surgeons, this systematic scoping review aimed to examine literature for up-to-date evidence on presentation, management, and outcomes of thoracolumbar spine injuries in adult trauma patients.

METHODS

This review was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. We searched four bibliographic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies included experimental, observational, and evidence-synthesis articles evaluating patients with thoracic, lumbar, or thoracolumbar spine injury, published in English between January 1, 2010 and January 31, 2021. Studies which focused on animals, cadavers, cohorts with N <30, and pediatric cohorts (age <18 years old), as well as case studies, abstracts, and commentaries were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 2501 studies were screened, of which 326 unique studies were fully text reviewed and twelve aspects of injury management were identified and discussed: injury patterns, determination of injury status and imaging options, considerations in management, and patient quality of life. We found: (1) imaging is a necessary diagnostic tool, (2) no consensus exists for preferred injury characterization scoring systems, (3) operative management should be considered for unstable fractures, decompression, and deformity, and (4) certain patients experience significant burden following injury.

DISCUSSION

In this systematic scoping review, we present the most up-to-date information regarding the management of traumatic thoracolumbar spine injuries. This allows non-specialist trauma surgeons to become more familiar with thoracolumbar spine injuries in trauma patients and provides a framework for their management.

Surgical outcomes of anterior column reconstruction for spinal fractures caused by minor trauma-preoperative examination of the number of intervertebral bone bridges is key to obtaining good bone fusion

BACKGROUND

To achieve good bone fusion in anterior column reconstruction for vertebral fractures, not only bone mineral density (BMD) and bone metabolism markers but also lever arms due to bone bridging between vertebral bodies should be evaluated. However, until now, no lever arm index has been devised. Therefore, we believe that the maximum number of vertebral bodies that are bony and cross-linked with the contiguous adjacent vertebrae (maxVB) can be used as a measure for lever arms. The purpose of this study is to investigate the surgical outcomes of anterior column reconstruction for spinal fractures and to determine the effect of bone bridging between vertebral bodies on the rate of bone fusion using the maxVB as an indicator of the length of the lever arm.

METHODS

The clinical data of 81 patients who underwent anterior column reconstruction for spinal fracture between 2014 and 2022 were evaluated. The bone fusion rate, back pain score, between the maxVB = 0 and the maxVB ≥ 2 patients were adjusted for confounding factors (age, smoking history, diabetes mellitus history, BMD, osteoporosis drugs, surgical technique, number of fixed vertebrae, materials used for the anterior props, etc.) and analysed with multivariate or multiple regression analyses. The bone healing rate and incidence of postoperative back pain were compared among the three groups (maxVB = 0, 2≦maxVB≦8, maxVB ≧ 9) and divided by the maxVB after adjusting for confounding factors.

RESULTS

Patients with a maxVB ≥ 2 had a significantly higher bone fusion rate (p < 0.01) and postoperative back pain score (p < 0.01) than those with a maxVB = 0. Among the three groups, the bone fusion rate and back pain score were significantly higher in the 2≦maxVB≦8 group (p = 0.01, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Examination of the maxVB as an indicator of the use of a lever arm is beneficial for anterior column reconstruction for vertebral fractures. Patients with no intervertebral bone bridging or a high number of bone bridges are in more need of measures to promote bone fusion than patients with a moderate number of bone bridges are.

Understanding Decision Making as It Influences Treatment in Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures Without Neurological Deficit: Conceptual Framework and Methodology

STUDY DESIGN

This paper presents a description of a conceptual framework and methodology that is applicable to the manuscripts that comprise this focus issue.

OBJECTIVES

Our goal is to present a conceptual framework which is relied upon to better understand the processes through which surgeons make therapeutic decisions around how to treat thoracolumbar burst fractures (TL) fractures.

METHODS

We will describe the methodology used in the AO Spine TL A3/4 Study prospective observational study and how the radiographs collected for this study were utilized to study the relationships between various variables that factor into surgeon decision making.

RESULTS

With 22 expert spine trauma surgeons analyzing the acute CT scans of 183 patients with TL fractures we were able to perform pairwise analyses, look at reliability and correlations between responses and develop frequency tables, and regression models to assess the relationships and interactions between variables. We also used machine learning to develop decision trees.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper outlines the overall methodological elements that are common to the subsequent papers in this focus issue.

The AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System and Treatment Algorithm in Decision Making for Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures Without Neurologic Deficit

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the alignment of the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification system and treatment algorithm with contemporary surgical decision making.

METHODS

183 cases of thoracolumbar burst fractures were reviewed by 22 AO Spine Knowledge Forum Trauma experts. These experienced clinicians classified the fracture morphology, integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex and degree of comminution. Management recommendations were collected.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant stepwise increase in rates of operative management with escalating category of injury (P < .001). An excellent correlation existed between recommended expert management and the actual treatment of each injury category: A0/A1/A2 (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.70-1.69, P = .71), A3/4 (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.98-2.66, P = .58) and B1/B2/C (1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.14, P = .99). Thoracolumbar A4 fractures were more likely to be surgically stabilized than A3 fractures (68.2% vs 30.9%, P < .001). A modifier indicating indeterminate ligamentous injury increased the rate of operative management when comparing type B and C injuries to type A3/A4 injuries (OR 39.19, 95% CI 20.84-73.69, P < .01 vs OR 27.72, 95% CI 14.68-52.33, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification system introduces fracture morphology in a rational and hierarchical manner of escalating severity. Thoracolumbar A4 complete burst fractures were more likely to be operatively managed than A3 fractures. Flexion-distraction type B injuries and translational type C injuries were much more likely to have surgery recommended than type A fractures regardless of the M1 modifier. A suspected posterior ligamentous injury increased the likelihood of surgeons favoring surgical stabilization.

Evaluation of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity (TLICS) Score Over a Two-Year Period at a Level One Trauma Center

Introduction The use of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) and other classification systems for guiding the management of traumatic spinal injuries remains controversial. TLICS is one of the few classifications that provides treatment recommendations.We sought to analyze intervention modality selection based on the TLICS scoring system. Methods A retrospective review of patients presenting with traumatic thoracolumbar fractures at a level 1 trauma center over a two-year period was performed. Primary endpoints for comparison analysis included visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Cobb angles during follow-up. Results There were 272 patients with thoracolumbar fractures, of whom 212 had TLICS of ≤3, six with TLICS of 4, and 54 with TLICS of ≥5. Of the 272 total patients, 59 were treated via surgery and 213 via non-surgical conservative methods. The VAS scores significantly decreased from presentation to last follow-up in both surgically treated and conservative groups (p<0.0001). This remained consistent in subgroup analyses of TLICS ≤ 3, TLICS = 4, and TLICS ≥ 5 (p<0.0001). Burst fractures treated conservatively had larger fracture Cobb angles versus those treated via surgery at the last follow-up, although this was not significantly associated (p=0.07). The only significant relationship with Cobb angles was in distraction fractures of the TLICS > 4 conservative group, who had significantly lower Cobb angles at the last follow-up than the TLICS > 4 surgical group (p<0.04). The "surgeon's choice" for TLICS = 4 was surgical intervention (4/6 patients, 66.7%). Conclusion Using the TLICS score, thoracolumbar injuries in a level 1 trauma center are more commonly TLICS ≤ 3. For patients with TLICS = 4, the surgeon's choice was most commonly surgical repair. VAS scores decreased over time from presentation between surgically and conservatively managed patients (as well as within-group analyses). The data concerning Cobb angles were more ambiguous, as larger Cobb angles in burst fractures treated conservatively did not show statistically significant differences with surgery.

Correlation between presence of traumatic disco-ligamentous injuries as an MRI finding with the results of management of thoracolumbar and lumbar injuries

Introduction: Radiographic study plays an important role in diagnosis of acute vertebral injuries and helps in proper management of those patients. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the modality of choice for evaluation of ligamentous and other soft tissue structures, disc, spinal cord and occult osseous injuries. Due to high cost, it is necessary to detect the best use of this technique in the evaluation of thoracolumbar spinal injuries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the importance of MRI as indicators for vertebral ligamentous injuries and intervertebral disc injuries or herniation in management of thoracolumbar and lumbar fractures. Methods: Retrospective study using radiological measurements. Seventy-two patients with thoracolumbar and lumbar fractures were included. Radiographic parameters detected were percentage of compression, kyphosis angle, vertebral translation and scoliosis angle. Computed tomography was used to detect the degree of spinal canal narrowing, MRI was used to evaluate the condition of posterior ligamentous complex and intervertebral disc injury or herniation. American Spinal Injury Association score was recorded. Results: There were 83% AO spine type A, 6% AO spine type B and 11% AO spine type C. Correlation between fracture type and neurological status with the posterior ligamentous complex injury was found to be significant: ( P = 0.0143 and P = 0.0344, respectively). Degree of vertebral body compression, kyphosis and scoliosis angles, vertebral body translation and spinal canal narrowing were found to be insignificant in correlation with posterior ligamentous complex injuries. Correlation of the above-mentioned parameters with disc injury or herniation was found to be insignificant except for kyphotic angle that was found to be significant in correlation with posttraumatic disc herniation ( P = 0.0219). Conclusion: MRI finding is of great value in management plan of thoracolumbar and lumbar fractures. Injury of posterior ligamentous complex is significantly correlated with fracture severity and the neurological function. But the intervertebral disc injury or herniation was not correlated to them except that the disc herniation was significantly correlated to kyphosis angle.

Thoracolumbar Injury: The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Scoring System or Modified Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity (TLICS) scoring system with its modified (mTLICS) version based on their agreement with the surgeon's opinion regarding treatment for patients with thoracolumbar injuries. Moreover, the Posterior Ligamentous Complex health was compared between intraoperative examinations and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports.

METHODS

MRI was obtained from 114 patients suffering thoracolumbar spinal trauma; the TLICS and mTLICS scores were measured. Approaches 1 and 2 were designed in both scoring systems based on assuming a total score of 4 as surgery and conservative management indication, respectively. Kappa was used to estimate the agreements between each approach and the surgeon's opinion on treatment. The receiver operating curve calculated the appropriate cut-off scores for the above systems over which surgical management was preferred. A P < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

All the approaches showed moderate agreements with the surgeon's opinion on therapeutic management (TLICS: κ_approach1 = 0.557, κ_approach2 =0.508; mTLICS: κ_approach1 = 0.557, κ_approach2 = 0.551; P < 0.001 for each κ). A score >3.5 best illustrated the indication for surgery in both systems. The radiology report agreed stronger with intraoperatively observed ligamentous health when suspicious cases on MRI were reported as injured (κ_TLICS = 0.830, κ_mTLICS = 0.704) rather than healthy (κ_TLICS = 0.620, κ_mTLICS = 0.620).

CONCLUSIONS

The surgeon's treatment plan agreed moderately with suggestions of the TLICS and mTLICS systems; surgery was the preferred management for the patients with a score of 4. Moreover, radiologic suspicion of Posterior Ligamentous Complex injury seemed to indicate a damaged ligament rather than a healthy one.

Prospective Study to Identify the Clinical and Radiologic Factors Predictive of Pseudarthrosis Development in Patients with Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures

BACKGROUND

Although most osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs) heal conservatively, the most crucial undesirable outcome of conservative treatment is the failure to unite. There is paucity of literature on prevalence and risk factors of pseudarthrosis.

METHODS

A prospective study involving patients (aged ≥50 years) undergoing conservative treatment of osteoporotic thoracic/lumbar fractures without neurodeficits was performed. Patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months and classified into 3 groups based on fracture healing: group 1, healing without collapse; group 2, healing with collapse; and group 3, pseudarthrosis. An assessment of all clinicoradiologic parameters at the time of injury and at each follow-up was performed and compared among patients belonging to the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients (90 fractures) were studied. Sixty-six (73.3%), 16 (17.8%), and 28 (8.9%) fractures were classified under groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mean ages in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 67.9 ± 9.1, 70.4 ± 7.6 and 72.3 ± 7.9 years (P = 0.08). Sex distribution was 62:15 (female/male). Seventy-three fractures (81.1%) occurred at the thoracolumbar junction. Stiff spine, ambulatory status, comorbidities, bone mineral density, and injury level were not associated with pseudarthrosis/collapse (P > 0.05). Male sex was associated with pseudarthrosis (P = 0.03). Based on regression analysis, initial vertebral height loss (radiography; P = 0.028), segmental Cobb (radiography; P = 0.019), vertebral comminution (computed tomography; P = 0.032), posterior ligamentous complex injury (magnetic resonance imaging; P = 0.048), and marrow change pattern (T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, Kanchiku classification; P = 0.037) were correlated with poorer outcome. Patients with pseudarthrosis had higher visual analog scale score (P = 0.04; final follow-up).

CONCLUSIONS

Of OVFs, 8.9% developed pseudarthrosis. Male sex, severity of postinjury vertebral deformation (vertebral loss, kyphosis, comminution, and marrow changes) and presence of posterior ligamentous complex injury are risk factors for pseudarthrosis.

Thoracic and lumbar spine trauma classification systems fail to predict post-traumatic kyphotic deformity

Background

Post-traumatic kyphosis of the thoracic and lumbar spine can lead to pain and decreased function. MRI has been advocated to assess ligament integrity and risk of kyphosis.

Methods

All thoracic and lumbar spine MRI performed for evaluation of trauma over a 3-year period at a single institution were reviewed. Patients were included if there was an MRI showing a vertebral body fracture and follow-up radiographs. Two observers retrospectively reviewed all radiographs, CT and MRI scans, and classified injuries based on the Denis, TLICS, AO and load sharing classification systems. Change in kyphosis between injury and follow-up studies was measured. The initial radiology reports made at time of patient injury were compared to the retrospective interpretations.

Results

There were 67 separate injuries in 62 patients. Kyphosis measuring ≥ 10° developed despite an intact PLC in 6/14 nonoperative cases, and 3/7 surgically treated cases; when PLC was partially injured, it developed in 6/10 cases (8 treated nonoperatively, 2 treated operatively. Thirty injuries had complete disruption of PLC by MRI, 24 treated with fusion. Kyphosis ≥ 10° developed in 3/6 treated nonoperatively, and 8/24 treated with fusion. Development of kyphosis was independent of degree of vertebral body comminution. It developed equally in patients with Grade 2 and Grade 3 Denis injuries. It developed in patients with intact PLC when multiple vertebrae were involved and/or there was compressive injury to anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL). There was high interobserver variability in assessment of severity of ligamentous injury on MRI.

Conclusions

Classification systems of thoracic and lumbar spine injury and integrity of the PLC failed to predict the risk of development of post-traumatic kyphotic deformity.

Surgery versus conservative management of stable thoracolumbar fracture: the PRESTO feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

There is informal consensus that simple compression fractures of the body of the thoracolumbar vertebrae between the 10th thoracic vertebra and the second lumbar vertebra without neurological complications can be managed conservatively and that obvious unstable fractures require surgical fixation. However, there is a zone of uncertainty about whether surgical or conservative management is best for stable fractures.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility of a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing surgical fixation with initial conservative management of stable thoracolumbar fractures without spinal cord injury.

DESIGN

External randomised feasibility study, qualitative study and national survey.

SETTING

Three NHS hospitals.

METHODS

A feasibility randomised controlled trial using block randomisation, stratified by centre and type of injury (high- or low-energy trauma) to allocate participants 1 : 1 to surgery or conservative treatment; a costing analysis; a national survey of spine surgeons; and a qualitative study with clinicians, recruiting staff and patients.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged ≥ 16 years with a high- or low-energy fracture of the body of a thoracolumbar vertebra between the 10th thoracic vertebra and the second lumbar vertebra, confirmed by radiography, computerised tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, with at least one of the following: kyphotic angle > 20° on weight-bearing radiographs or > 15° on a supine radiograph or on computerised tomography; reduction in vertebral body height of 25%; a fracture line propagating through the posterior wall of the vertebra; involvement of two contiguous vertebrae; or injury to the posterior longitudinal ligament or annulus in addition to the body fracture.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical fixation: open spinal surgery (with or without spinal fusion) or minimally invasive stabilisation surgery. Conservative management: mobilisation with or without a brace.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Recruitment rate (proportion of eligible participants randomised).

RESULTS

Twelve patients were randomised (surgery, n = 8; conservative, n = 4). The proportion of eligible patients recruited was 0.43 (95% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.63) over a combined total of 30.7 recruitment months. Of 211 patients screened, 28 (13.3%) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Patients in the qualitative study (n = 5) expressed strong preferences for surgical treatment, and identified provision of information about treatment and recovery and when and how they are approached for consent as important. Nineteen surgeons and site staff participated in the qualitative study. Key themes were the lack of clinical consensus regarding the implementation of the eligibility criteria in practice and what constitutes a stable fracture, alongside lack of equipoise regarding treatment. Based on the feasibility study eligibility criteria, 77% (50/65) and 70% (46/66) of surgeons participating in the survey were willing to randomise for high- and low-energy fractures, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Owing to the small number of participants, there is substantial uncertainty around the recruitment rate.

CONCLUSIONS

A definitive trial is unlikely to be feasible currently, mainly because of the small number of patients meeting the eligibility criteria. The recruitment and follow-up rates were slightly lower than anticipated; however, there is room to increase these based on information gathered and the support within the surgical community for a future trial.

FUTURE WORK

Development of consensus regarding the population of interest for a trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12094890.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 62. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma

Thoracolumbar spine trauma can result in potentially life-threatening consequences and requires careful management to ensure good outcomes. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the anatomy, diagnostic tools, non-operative, and operative treatments important when addressing thoracolumbar trauma.

Interrater and Intrarater Reliability of the Vertebral Bone Quality Score

BACKGROUND

Vertebral bone quality had a significant impact on postoperative outcomes in spinal fusion surgery. New magnetic resonance imaging-based measures, such as the Vertebral Bone Quality (VBQ) score, may allow for bone quality assessment without the radiation associated with conventional testing. In the present study, we sought to assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of VBQ scores calculated by medical professionals and trainees.

METHODS

Thirteen reviewers of various specialties and levels of training were recruited and asked to calculate VBQ scores for 30 patients at 2 time points separated by 2 months. Scored volumes were acquired from patients treated for both degenerative and oncologic indications. Intrarater and interrater agreement, quantified by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), was assessed using 2-way random effects modeling. Square-weight Cohen κ and Kendall Tau-b were used to determine whether raters assigned similar scores during both evaluations.

RESULTS

All raters showed moderate to excellent reliability for VBQ score (ICC 0.667-0.957; κ0.648-0.921) and excellent reliability for all constituent components used to calculate VBQ score (ICC all ≥0.97). Interrater reliability was also found to be good for VBQ score on both the first (ICC = 0.818) and second (ICC = 0.800) rounds of assessment; scores for the constituent component all had ICC values ≥0.97 for the constituent components.

CONCLUSIONS

The VBQ score appears to have both good intrarater and interrater reliability. In addition, there appeared to be no correlation between score reliability and level of training. External validation and further investigations of its ability to accurately model bone biomechanical properties are necessary.

Retrospective Evaluation of Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System and Thoracolumbar AO Spine Injury Scores for the Decision Treatment of Thoracolumbar Traumatic Fractures in 458 Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUND

Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System (TLICS) score and Thoracolumbar AO Spine Injury Score (TLAOSIS) are the scores preferred to classify and treat thoracolumbar fractures. Our study evaluates the reliability of both as guidelines for treatment.

METHODS

Single-center and retrospective case series of 458 patients. Clinical variables, radiology, and treatment were analyzed. We classified fractures according to the AO Spine Thoracolumbar System and retrospectively applied both scales in 2 groups (surgical and conservative). A concordance analysis and statistical measures comparing both were performed.

RESULTS

The patients were divided as follows: 257 patients (56.1%) in the conservative group and 201 patients (43.9%) in the surgical group. The concordance analysis between both scales was 89.7% (95% confidence interval, 86.5%-92.3%), and the Cohen kappa coefficient was 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 59%-76%). TLAOSIS had a higher tendency to classify patients in the gray zone (10.3% vs. 2.8%, P < 0.001), whereas TLICS had a more conservative nature (85.2% vs. 78.4%, P = 0.01). In the surgical group, the matching decision ratio was 29.9% for TLICS and 42.8% for TLAOSIS, but differences were found in TLICS being more conservative (70.1% vs. 57.2%, P = 0.01). In the conservative group, the matching decision ratio was 98.1% for both scales, being the main difference in the gray zone for TLAOSIS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both scales have a good concordance in general, with TLICS being more conservative overall. They had rather low coincidence when predicting surgery. Because TLAOSIS placed more patients in the gray zone, we think it might be slightly better for giving surgeons more license to decide a surgical approach on certain controversial types of fractures.

Surgical Management of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: Surgical Decision-making Using the AOSpine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification Score and Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score

The management of thoracolumbar burst fractures is controversial with no universally accepted treatment algorithm. Several classification and scoring systems have been developed to assist in surgical decision-making. The most widely accepted are the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) and AOSpine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification Score (TL AOSIS) with both systems designed to provide a simple objective scoring criteria to guide the surgical or nonsurgical management of complex injury patterns. When used in the evaluation and treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures, both of these systems result in safe and consistent patient care. However, there are important differences between the 2 systems, specifically in the evaluation of the complete burst fractures (AOSIS A4) and patients with transient neurological deficits (AOSIS N1). In these circumstances, the AOSpine system may more accurately capture and characterize injury severity, providing the most refined guidance for optimal treatment. With respect to surgical approach, these systems provide a framework for decision-making based on patient neurology and the status of the posterior tension band. Here we propose an operative treatment algorithm based on these fracture characteristics as well as the level of injury.

Reliability and Clinical Usefulness of Current Classifications in Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

A validated classification remains the key to an appropriate treatment algorithm of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. Considering the development of many classifications, it is remarkable that consensus about treatment is still lacking. We conducted a systematic review to investigate which classification can be used best for treatment decision making in thoracolumbar fractures.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane using the following search terms: classification (mesh), spinal fractures (mesh), and corresponding synonyms. All hits were viewed by 2 independent researchers. Papers were included if analyzing the reliability (kappa values) and clinical usefulness (specificity or sensitivity of an algorithm) of currently most used classifications (Magerl/AO, thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score [TLICS] or thoracolumbar injury severity score, and the new AO spine).

RESULTS

Twenty articles are included. The presented kappa values indicate moderate to substantial agreement for all 3 classifications. Regarding the clinical usefulness, > 90% agreement between actual treatment and classification recommendation is reported for most fractures. However, it appears that over 50% of the patients with a stable burst fracture (TLICS 2, AO-A3/A4) in daily practice are operated, so in these cases treatment decision is not primarily based on classification.

CONCLUSION

AO, TLICS, and new AO spine classifications have acceptable accuracy (kappa > 0.4), but are limited in clinical usefulness since the treatment recommendation is not always implemented in clinical practice. Differences in treatment decision making arise from several causes, such as surgeon and patient preferences and prognostic factors that are not included in classifications yet. The recently validated thoracolumbar AO spine injury score seems promising for use in clinical practice, because of inclusion of patient-specific modifiers. Future research should prove its definite value in treatment decision making.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Without the appropriate treatment, the impact of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures can be devastating. Therefore it is important to achieve consensus in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

Assessment of load-sharing thoracolumbar injury: A modified scoring system

BACKGROUND

Many classification systems of thoracolumbar spinal fractures have been proposed to enhance treatment protocols, but none have achieved universal adoption.

AIM

To develop a new patient scoring system for cases with thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score (TLICS) = 4, namely the load-sharing thoracolumbar injury score (LSTLIS).

METHODS

Based on thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score, this study proposes the use of the established load-sharing classification (LSC) to develop an improved classification system (LSTLIS). To prove the reliability and reproducibility of LSTLIS, a retrospective analysis for patients with thoracolumbar vertebral fractures has been conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 102 cases were enrolled in the study. The scoring trend of LSTLIS is roughly similar as the LSC scoring, however, the average deviation based on the former method is relatively smaller than that of the latter. Thus, the robustness of the LSTLIS scoring method is better than that of LSC. LSTLIS can further classify patients with TLICS = 4, so as to assess more accurately this particular circumstance, and the majority of LSTLIS recommendations are consistent with actual clinical decisions.

CONCLUSION

LSTLIS is a scoring system that combines LSC and TLICS to compensate for the lack of appropriate inclusion of anterior and middle column compression fractures with TLICS. Following preliminary clinical verification, LSTLIS has greater feasibility and reliability value, is more practical in comprehensively assessing certain clinical circumstances, and has better accuracy with clinically significant guidelines.

Functional Outcome of Surgical versus Conservative Therapy in Patients with Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fractures and Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score of 4; A Non-randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of surgical intervention to conservative treatment in patients with thoracolumbar fracture and thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score (TLICS) of 4.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with TLICS 4 were enrolled in this non-randomized clinical trial. Based on clinical symptoms and radiologic findings, patients were considered under surgical or conservative treatments. The JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) was assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12 months after treatment. A 20-point improvement from the baseline JOABPEQ scores was considered as clinical success in both the conservative and surgery groups. Additionally, residual canal, angulations and height loss were determined in all patients.

RESULTS

Eight patients received conservative and 17 surgical treatment. Both study groups were comparable regarding the baseline characteristics. Both study demonstrated treatment success, regarding functional recovery when compared to baseline (p<0.001). However, those undergoing surgical intervention had significantly better JOABPEQ score (p<0.001) and higher residual canal (p=0.042) when compared to those receiving conservative therapy. The success rate of treatment was comparable between the two study groups in 6- (p=0.998) and 12-month (p=0.852) intervals; however, surgical therapy had significantly higher success arte in 3-month interval (p=0.031).

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed that surgical treatment was preferred more in comparison to conservative treatment in patients with TLICS 4. Additionally, residual canal might be a modifying factor to decide the ideal therapeutic approach.

Interobserver reliability in the interpretation of three-dimensional gait analysis in children with gait disorders

AIM

To assess interobserver reliability in the interpretation of three-dimensional gait analysis (3DGA) of children with gait disorders within a single institution.

METHOD

Seven experienced interpreters in our institution participated in a quality-assurance program reviewing one unique patient's 3DGA data every 3 months. Between 2014 and 2017, 15 patients' data were interpreted (14 with spastic cerebral palsy, 1 with myelodysplasia). Interpreters were asked to select 'yes', 'no', or 'indeterminate' from a list of problems and treatment recommendations. Kappa and percent agreement calculations were performed to evaluate consistency.

RESULTS

Average percentage agreement in problem identification and treatment recommendation was greater than 84 percent and 90 percent for all interpreters respectively. Average kappa for the 10 most consistently identified problems and recommended treatments were 0.69 and 0.59 respectively. Interpreter consistency was moderate or better for the most commonly performed operations at our institution (0.44-0.59). Sagittal plane abnormalities of the hip and knee had the highest consistency.

INTERPRETATION

When institutional differences in data collection and regional variations in management philosophies are removed, interobserver consistency in 3DGA interpretation is moderate to substantial for many commonly selected items. Identification of areas with poor consistency may help address underlying causes and improve data processes.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

Consistency in three-dimensional gait analysis interpretation and treatment recommendation is high within a single institution. There is moderate or better consistency for most commonly identified problems and recommended treatments. Sagittal plane problem identification of the hip and knee have the highest consistency. Lower consistency is seen in areas with poor objective measures, such as dystonia and balance.

Does the Coexistence of Multiple Segmental Rib Fractures in Polytrauma Patients Presenting With "Major" Vertebral Fracture Affect Care and Acute Outcomes?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether operating on "major" vertebral fractures leads to premature abortion of surgery and/or other acute cardiopulmonary complications.

DESIGN

Retrospective review.

CLINICAL SETTING

Level 1 trauma center.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION

We retrospectively queried our institutional Trauma Rregistry for all cases presenting with concomitant rib fractures and surgically managed vertebral fractures.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The main outcomes included the surgical outcome (aborted vs. successfully performed), total and Intensive Care Unit length of stay (LOS), adverse discharge, mortality, and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

We found 57 cases with concomitant segmental rib fractures and surgically managed vertebral fractures. Seven patients (12%) received a rib fixation, of which 1 received before vertebral fixation and 6 after. Importantly, 4 vertebral fixation cases (7.02%) had to be aborted intraoperatively because of the inability to tolerate prone positioning for surgery. For case-control analysis, we performed propensity score matching to obtain matched controls, that is, cases of vertebral fixation but no rib fractures. On matched case-control analysis, patients with concomitant segmental rib fractures and vertebral fractures were found to have higher Intensive Care Unit LOS [median = 3 days (Inter-Quartile Range = 0-9) versus. 8.4 days, P = 0.003], whereas total LOS, frequency of complete, incomplete or functional spinal cord injury, discharge to rehab, and discharge to nursing home were found to be similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that segmental rib fractures with concomitant vertebral fractures undergoing surgical treatment represent a subset of patients that may be at increased risk of intraoperative cardio-pulmonary complications and rib fixation before prone spine surgery for cases in which the neurological status is stable is reasonable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Classification of Injury

QUESTION 1

Are there classification systems for fractures of the thoracolumbar spine that have been shown to be internally valid and reliable (ie, do these instruments provide consistent information between different care providers)?

RECOMMENDATION 1

A classification scheme that uses readily available clinical data (eg, computed tomography scans with or without magnetic resonance imaging) to convey injury morphology, such as Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Scale or the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System, should be used to improve characterization of traumatic thoracolumbar injuries and communication among treating physicians. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B.

QUESTION 2

In treating patients with thoracolumbar fractures, does employing a formally tested classification system for treatment decision-making affect clinical outcomes?

RECOMMENDATION 2

There is insufficient evidence to recommend a universal classification system or severity score that will readily guide treatment of all injury types and thereby affect outcomes. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_2.

Inter- and Intra-rater Reliability of the Hart-ISSG Proximal Junctional Failure Severity Scale

STUDY DESIGN

Reliability/external validation study.

OBJECTIVE

Investigate inter- and intrarater reliability of the Hart-International Spine Study Group (ISSG) Proximal Junctional Failure Severity Scale (PJFSS) and its correlation with operative revision in patients with proximal junctional failure (PJF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The Hart-ISSG PJFSS is a validated classification system for PJF. Reliability of the PJFSS has not been assessed.

METHODS

Sixteen detailed clinical scenarios were assessed using the ISSG PJFSS classification in six categories: neurologic status, axial pain, instrumentation issue, proximal kyphotic angle, level of upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV), and severity of UIV/UIV+1 fracture. Eleven spine surgeons evaluated each case in all six categories during two different assessments, and provided recommendations regarding operative revision or observation for each case. Inter- and intrarater reliability were calculated based on intraclass correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

All intraclass correlation coefficients demonstrated "almost perfect"' (0.817-0.988) inter-rater agreement for both assessments, except UIV/UIV+1 fracture severity during the second assessment, which demonstrated "substantial" agreement' (0.692). Five of six categories had "almost perfect" mean intrarater reliability (0.805-0.981), while "instrumentation issue" demonstrated "substantial" mean agreement (0.757). Inter-rater reliability for recommendation of surgical intervention was "almost perfect" during both assessments (0.911 and 0.922, respectively). Mean PJFSS scores between the two assessments were significantly higher for cases recommended for operative revision (8.43 ± 0.90) versus cases recommended for observation (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The ISSG PJFSS is a reliable and repeatable classification system for assessing patients with PJF. Higher PJFSS scales correlate with recommendation for operative revision, extending prior external validation of the PJFSS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS OF THORACOLUMBAR SPINE FRACTURES

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the reproducibility and the interobserver coefficient of concordance between the AO/Magerl and AOSpine classifications for thoracolumbar spine fractures. Methods: Retrospective study of radiographic data analysis. Data were collected from 31 radiographic studies of patients with thoracolumbar spine fracture and distributed to a team involving spinal surgeons and residents. The fractures were classified according to the AO/Magerl and AOSpine classifications. Statistical analysis was performed using the Cohen Kappa test to assess the coefficient of concordance. Results: The Kappa value for interobserver concordance of AO/Magerl classification was κ = 0.70 and standard deviation was 0.16. For the AOSpine classification, we observed κ = 0.76, both with significance level α = 0.05 and P<0.001. Conclusions: We conclude that the interobserver concordance of the new AOSpine classification is similar to the AO/Magerl classification. This conclusion reinforces the reproducibility of the new AOSpine classification. Level of evidence: IV,Type of Study: Case series.

Temporary Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Stabilization Without Fusion of Adolescent Thoracolumbar Spine Fractures

BACKGROUND

Pediatric spine trauma often results from high-energy mechanisms. Despite differences in healing potential, comorbidities, and length of remaining life, treatment is frequently based on adult criteria; ligamentous injuries are fused and bony injuries are treated accordingly. In this study, we present short-term results of a select group of adolescent patients treated using percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation without fusion.

METHODS

An IRB-approved retrospective review was performed at a level 1 pediatric trauma center for thoracolumbar spine fractures treated by percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation. Patients were excluded if arthrodesis was performed or if instrumentation was not removed. Demographics, injury mechanism, associated injuries, fracture classification, surgical data, radiographic measures, and complications were collected. Radiographs were analyzed for sagittal and coronal wedge angles and vertebral body height ratio and statistical comparisons performed on preoperative and postoperative values.

RESULTS

Between 2005 and 2013, 46 patients were treated surgically. Fourteen patients (5 male, 9 female) met inclusion criteria. Injury mechanisms included 8 motor vehicle collisions, 4 falls, and 2 all-terrain vehicle/motorcycle collisions. There were 8 Magerl type A injuries, 4 type B injuries, and 2 type C injuries. There was 1 incomplete spinal cord injury. Implants were removed between 5 and 12 months in 12 patients and after 12 months in 2 patients. Statistical analysis revealed significant postoperative improvement in all radiographic measures (P<0.05). There were no neurological complications, 1 superficial wound dehiscence, and 2 instrumentation failures (treated with standard removal). At last follow-up, 11 patients returned to unrestricted activities including sports. Average follow-up was 9 months after implant removal and 19.3 months after index procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescent thoracolumbar fractures present unique challenges and treatment opportunities different from the adult patient. We present a nonconsecutive series of 14 patients temporarily stabilized with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for injuries including 3-column fracture dislocations and purely ligamentous injuries. Temporary fusionless instrumentation can provide successful management of select thoracolumbar spine injuries in pediatric trauma patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-Retrospective case series.

RELIABILITY OF THE AO CLASSIFICATION OF THORACOLUMBAR FRACTURES COMPARED TO TLICS AND MAGERL

ABSTRACT Objective: To test the reliability of the new AO/2013 classification compared with AO/Magerl and TLICS. Methods: Four spine surgeons retrospectively and blindly evaluated imaging and clinical data from 98 patients with thoracolumbar fractures. Results: Using the Kappa coefficient, we obtained the best reproducibility for the AO/2013 classification compared to the other two, represented by Kappa coefficient of 0.690. We could also obtain, with good reproducibility among the evaluators (Kappa 0.690), the most common subtypes of AO/2013 classification with indication for surgery. Conclusion: We believe that the new AO/2013 classification has proven to be a good communication tool among spine surgeons with good reproducibility, but more studies should be conducted in several centers in order to be consolidated and so that the prognosis between the types of injury is better understood.

Multicenter retrospective evaluation of the validity of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score system in children

OBJECTIVE The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) system was developed to streamline injury assessment and guide surgical decision making. To the best of the authors' knowledge, external validation in the pediatric age group has not been undertaken prior to this report. METHODS This study evaluated the use of the TLICS in a large retrospective series of children and adolescents treated at 4 pediatric medical centers (Texas Children's Hospital, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Riley Children's Hospital, and Doernbecher Children's Hospital). A total of 147 patients treated for traumatic thoracic or lumbar spine trauma between February 1, 2002, and September 1, 2015, were included in this study. Clinical and radiographic data were evaluated. Injuries were classified using American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) status, Denis classification, and TLICS. RESULTS A total of 102 patients (69%) were treated conservatively, and 45 patients (31%) were treated surgically. All patients but one in the conservative group were classified as ASIA E. In this group, 86/102 patients (84%) had Denis type compression injuries. The TLICS in the conservative group ranged from 1 to 10 (mean 1.6). Overall, 93% of patients matched TLICS conservative treatment recommendations (score ≤ 3). No patients crossed over to the surgical group in delayed fashion. In the surgical group, 26/45 (58%) were ASIA E, whereas 19/45 (42%) had neurological deficits (ASIA A, B, C, or D). One of 45 (2%) patients was classified with Denis type compression injuries; 25/45 (56%) were classified with Denis type burst injuries; 14/45 (31%) were classified with Denis type seat belt injuries; and 5/45 (11%) were classified with Denis type fracture-dislocation injuries. The TLICS ranged from 2 to 10 (mean 6.4). Eighty-two percent of patients matched TLICS surgical treatment recommendations (score ≥ 5). No patients crossed over to the conservative management group. Eight patients (8/147, 5%) had a calculated TLICS of 4, which meant they were candidates for surgery or conservative therapy by TLICS criteria. Excluding these patients, the degree of agreement between TLICS and surgeon decision was deemed to be very good (κ = 0.878). CONCLUSIONS The TLICS results and recommendations matched treatment in 96% of conservative group cases. In the surgical group, TLICS recommendations matched treatment in 93% of cases. The TLICS recommendations and surgeon decision making displayed very good concordance. The TLICS appears to be effective in the classification of thoracic and lumbar spine injuries and in guiding treatment in the pediatric age group.

Reliability assessment of AOSpine thoracolumbar spine injury classification system and Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) for thoracolumbar spine injuries: results of a multicentre study

PURPOSE

The aim of this multicentre study was to determine whether the recently introduced AOSpine Classification and Injury Severity System has better interrater and intrarater reliability than the already existing Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) for thoracolumbar spine injuries.

METHODS

Clinical and radiological data of 50 consecutive patients admitted at a single centre with a diagnosis of an acute traumatic thoracolumbar spine injury were distributed to eleven attending spine surgeons from six different institutions in the form of PowerPoint presentation, who classified them according to both classifications. After time span of 6 weeks, cases were randomly rearranged and sent again to same surgeons for re-classification. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability for each component of TLICS and new AOSpine classification were evaluated using Fleiss Kappa coefficient (k value) and Spearman rank order correlation.

RESULTS

Moderate interrater and intrarater reliability was seen for grading fracture type and integrity of posterior ligamentous complex (Fracture type: k = 0.43 ± 0.01 and 0.59 ± 0.16, respectively, PLC: k = 0.47 ± 0.01 and 0.55 ± 0.15, respectively), and fair to moderate reliability (k = 0.29 ± 0.01 interobserver and 0.44+/0.10 intraobserver, respectively) for total score according to TLICS. Moderate interrater (k = 0.59 ± 0.01) and substantial intrarater reliability (k = 0.68 ± 0.13) was seen for grading fracture type regardless of subtype according to AOSpine classification. Near perfect interrater and intrarater agreement was seen concerning neurological status for both the classification systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Recently proposed AOSpine classification has better reliability for identifying fracture morphology than the existing TLICS. Additional studies are clearly necessary concerning the application of these classification systems across multiple physicians at different level of training and trauma centers to evaluate not only their reliability and reproducibility, but also the other attributes, especially the clinical significance of a good classification system.

Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Injury Severity Score System: A Literature Review of Its Safety

Study Design Systematic literature review. Objective The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score System (TLICS) is widely used to help guide the treatment of thoracolumbar spine trauma. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of the TLICS in clinical practice. Methods Using the Medline database without time restriction, we performed a systematic review using the keyword "Thoracolumbar Injury Classification," searching for articles utilizing the TLICS. We classified the results according to their level of evidence and main conclusions. Results Nine articles met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. One article evaluated the safety of the TLICS based on its clinical application (level II). The eight remaining articles were based on retrospective application of the score, comparing the proposed treatment suggested by the TLICS with the treatment patients actually received (level III). The TLICS was safe in surgical and nonsurgical treatment with regards to neurologic status. Some studies reported that the retrospective application of the TLICS had inconsistencies with the treatment of burst fractures without neurologic deficits. Conclusions This literature review suggested that the TLICS use was safe especially with regards to preservation or improvement of neurologic function. Further well-designed multicenter prospective studies of the TLICS application in the decision making process would improve the evidence of its safety. Special attention to the TLICS application in the treatment of stable burst fractures is necessary.

Validation and Reliability Analysis of the Spinal Deformity Study Group Classification for L5-S1 Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

An intra- and interobserver reliability study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the intra- and interobserver reliability of the Spinal Deformity Study Group (SDSG) system for classifying adolescent and adult L5-S1 spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Reliability of the SDSG classification has only been previously validated in adolescent patients as performed by the SDSG study group investigators.

METHODS

A total of 80 patients with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis were included in this study. Only dysplastic and isthmic spondylolisthesis were included in this study. Long-cassette standing lateral radiographs of the spine and pelvis were obtained. All 80 cases were classified according to the SDSG classification by four observers. After a 2-week interval, the same classification was independently repeated by each observer with the cases in a different randomly assigned order. The Fleiss' κ coefficient was calculated to test the intra- and interobserver reliabilities of the SDSG classification.

RESULTS

The present study included all six types of SDSG classification. Overall intra- and interobserver agreements were 86.6% (κ: 0.830) and 73.3% (κ: 0.648), respectively. The intra- and interobserver agreements and repeatability associated with slip grade were 89.7% (κ: 0.824) and 87.7% (κ: 0.721), respectively. Regarding sacropelvic and spinal balance, intra- and interobserver agreements and repeatability were 83.7% (κ: 0.735) and 77.5% (κ: 0.602) for low-grade slips, and 90.75% (κ: 0.883) and 90.4% (κ: 0.851) for high-grade slips, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Substantial intra- and interobserver reliability was found for the SDSG classification in L5-S1 lumbar spondylolisthesis. SDSG classification system is a simple and clear classification scheme incorporating spinopelvic parameters, which provides significant clinical utility.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Is there a regional difference in morphology interpretation of A3 and A4 fractures among different cultures?

OBJECT The aim of this study was to determine if the ability of a surgeon to correctly classify A3 (burst fractures with a single endplate involved) and A4 (burst fractures with both endplates involved) fractures is affected by either the region or the experience of the surgeon. METHODS A survey was sent to 100 AOSpine members from all 6 AO regions of the world (North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East) who had no prior knowledge of the new AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System. Respondents were asked to classify 25 cases, including 6 thoracolumbar burst fractures (A3 or A4). This study focuses on the effect of region and experience on surgeons' ability to properly classify these 2 controversial fracture variants. RESULTS All 100 surveyed surgeons completed the survey, and no significant regional (p > 0.50) or experiential (p > 0.21) variability in the ability to correctly classify burst fractures was identified; however, surgeons from all regions and with all levels of experience were more likely to correctly classify A3 fractures than A4 fractures (p < 0.01). Further analysis demonstrated that no region predisposed surgeons to increasing their assessment of severity of burst fractures. CONCLUSIONS A3 and A4 fractures are the most difficult 2 fractures to correctly classify, but this is not affected by the region or experience of the surgeon; therefore, regional variations in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures (A3 and A4) is not due to differing radiographic interpretation of the fractures.

A Worldwide Analysis of the Reliability and Perceived Importance of an Injury to the Posterior Ligamentous Complex in AO Type A Fractures

Study Design Survey of spine surgeons. Objective To determine the reliability with which international spine surgeons identify a posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) injury in a patient with a compression-type vertebral body fracture (type A). Methods A survey was sent to all AOSpine members from the six AO regions of the world. The survey consisted of 10 cases of type A fractures (2 subtype A1, 2 subtype A2, 3 subtype A3, and 3 subtype A4 fractures) with appropriate imaging (plain radiographs, computed tomography, and/or magnetic resonance imaging), and the respondent was asked to identify fractures with a PLC disruption, as well as to indicate if the integrity of the PLC would affect their treatment recommendation. Results Five hundred twenty-nine spine surgeons from all six AO regions of the world completed the survey. The overall interobserver reliability in determining the integrity of the PLC was slight (kappa = 0.11). No substantial regional or experiential difference was identified in determining PLC integrity or its absence; however, a regional difference was identified (p < 0.001) in how PLC integrity influenced the treatment of type A fractures. Conclusion The results of this survey indicate that there is only slight international reliability in determining the integrity of the PLC in type A fractures. Although the biomechanical importance of the PLC is not in doubt, the inability to reliably determine the integrity of the PLC may limit the utility of the M1 modifier in the AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System.

MRI Inter-Reader and Intra-Reader Reliabilities for Assessing Injury Morphology and Posterior Ligamentous Complex Integrity of the Spine According to the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System and Severity Score

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) inter-reader and intra-reader reliabilities using the thoracolumbar injury classification system and severity score (TLICS) and to analyze the effects of reader experience on reliability and the possible reasons for discordant interpretations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six radiologists (two senior, two junior radiologists, and two residents) independently scored 100 MRI examinations of thoracolumbar spine injuries to assess injury morphology and posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) integrity according to the TLICS. Inter-reader and intra-reader agreements were determined and analyzed according to the number of years of radiologist experience.

RESULTS

Inter-reader agreement between the six readers was moderate (k = 0.538 for the first and 0.537 for the second review) for injury morphology and fair to moderate (k = 0.440 for the first and 0.389 for the second review) for PLC integrity. No significant difference in inter-reader agreement was observed according to the number of years of radiologist experience. Intra-reader agreements showed a wide range (k = 0.538-0.822 for injury morphology and 0.423-0.616 for PLC integrity). Agreement was achieved in 44 for the first and 45 for the second review about injury morphology, as well as in 41 for the first and 38 for the second review of PLC integrity. A positive correlation was detected between injury morphology score and PLC integrity.

CONCLUSION

The reliability of MRI for assessing thoracolumbar spinal injuries according to the TLICS was moderate for injury morphology and fair to moderate for PLC integrity, which may not be influenced by radiologist' experience.

Interobserver evaluation of TLICS system to treat thoracolumbar fractures

<sec><title>OBJECTIVE:</title><p> To evaluate the interobserver agreement regarding the TLICS Classification (Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score). Furthermore, evaluate the reliability, analyzing the correlation between the treatment indicated by TLICS system (surgical or conservative) and the treatment indicated by each evaluator surgeon.</p></sec><sec><title>METHODS:</title><p> Imaging tests and clinical data of 22 patients with thoracolumbar fractures were analyzed by eight spine surgeons, and two main analyzes were performed: the first compared the interobserver agreement related to TLICS and the second compared the agreement between the treatment indicated by TLICS classification (surgical or conservative) and treatment indicated by each surgeon - based on his personal experience and the preferred classification.</p></sec><sec><title>RESULTS:</title><p> Using the parameters of Landis and Koch for interpretation of Kappa value, the interobserver agreement of TLICS classification was considered moderate in our study (K=0.6). The agreement between the indications of treatment (surgical or conservative) dictated by the classification and the indication of each surgeon was considered excellent, with kappa value of 0.89.</p></sec><sec><title>CONCLUSION:</title><p> We believe that the classification is a good tool for the evaluation and the treatment indication in thoracolumbar fractures.</p></sec>

Evaluation of TLICS for thoracolumbar fractures

PURPOSE

Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TILCS), facilitates the communication between physicians, and guides to treatment decision with better outcome. A composite injury severity score is calculated from these characteristics stratifying patients into operative and non-operative treatment. Aim of this study is to identify the effectiveness of TLICS scoring for thoracolumbar vertebral fractures without neurological deficits and the efficacy of conservative treatment in patients with TILCS 4.

METHODS

58 patients with thoracolumbar fracture were included. 38 patients with TLICS 1-3 (group A) and 20 patients with TLICS 4 (group B) treated conservatively, were evaluated with traditional two-plain radiographic examination, CT-scan and MRI. The pain and functional scales were used in the clinical evaluation. Local kyphosis angle, sagittal index and height loss percentage were measured in the radiologic evaluation. Mean follow-up period was 28 months. Post-fracture and follow-up values were compared. Functional scores and clinical outcomes of the groups were compared.

RESULTS

The mean pain (1 = worse pain, reverse-VAS) and functional scores at the final follow-up were 8.2 and 86 points, respectively (group A), 6.4 and 76 points (group B). The mean period for returning to work was 3.2 (group A) and 3.8 months (group B). Comparing the two groups did not demonstrate any statistical difference of their clinical and functional outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The study's results demonstrate that conservative treatment for TLICS 4 thoracolumbar fractures can be safely applied. The conservative treatment of cases scoring TLICS 4 is equally effective to those scoring ≤3.

Applicability of thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score to criteria of korean health insurance review and assessment service in treatment decision of thoracolumbar injury

Objective

For improving the drawbacks of previous thoracolumbar spine trauma classification, the Spine Trauma Study Group was developed new classification, Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS). The simplicity of this scoring system makes it useful clinical application. However, considering criteria of Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA), the usefulness of TLICS system is still controversial in the treatment decision of thoracolumbar spine injury.

Methods

Total 100 patients, who admitted to our hospital due to acute traumatic thoracolumbar injury, were enrolled. In 45, surgical treatment was performed and surgical treatment was decided following the criteria of HIRA in all patients. With assessing of TLICS score and Denis's classification, the treatment guidelines of TLICS and Denis's classification were applied to the criteria of Korean HIRA.

Results

According to the Denis's three-column spine system, numbers of patients with 2 or 3 column injuries were 94. Only 45 of 94 patients (47.9%) with middle column injury fulfilled the criteria of HIRA. According to TLICS system, operation required fractures (score>4) were 31 and all patients except one fulfilled the criteria of HIRA. Conservative treatment required fractures (score<4) were 52 and borderline fracture (score=4) were 17.

Conclusion

The TLICS system is very useful system for decision of surgical indication in acute traumatic thoracolumbar injury. However, the decision of treatment in TLICS score 4 should be carefully considered. Furthermore, definite criteria of posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) injury may be necessary because the differentiation of PLC injury between TLICS score 2 and 3 is very difficult.

Relationships between posterior ligamentous complex injury and radiographic parameters in patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to determine whether radiographic findings associated with thoracolumbar burst fractures could also indicate the presence of posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) injuries, which were identified through short-tau inversion-recovery (STIR)-weighted MRI.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Sixty-four patients were surgically treated for thoracolumbar burst fractures between April 2007 and February 2014 at our institution. Twenty-four patients were excluded from this study because of the lack of STIR-weighted MRIs, and therefore 40 patients were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups based upon the integrity of the PLC, which was evaluated using STIR-weighted MRI: a P group with a PLC injury and a C group without such injury. The following radiographic parameters were evaluated: loss of vertebral body height (LOVBH), local kyphosis (LK), vertebral body translation, canal compromise (sagittal transverse ratio, STR), interlaminar distance (ISD), supraspinous distance (SSD) and interspinous distance (ISD). Frankel scale score and total severity score (load sharing and thoracolumbar injury classification systems, respectively) were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Preoperative STIR-weighted MRI showed that 25 patients had a PLC injury (P group: 15 men and 10 women), and 15 patients did not have a PLC injury (C group: 8 men and 7 women). More patients in the P group had an LK>20°: 14 patients in the P group and 1 patient in the C group (p<0.01). The % SSD differed between the P and C groups (118.8%±53.4% and 88.0%±24.3%, respectively; p<0.05). Multivariate logistic analysis showed that an LK>20° was a risk factor for PLC injury in patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures (odds ratio, 55.5 [95% confidence interval, 1.30-2360.1]; p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that while LOVBH, vertebral body translation, and canal compromise do not correlate significantly with the presence of a PLC injury in patients with thoracolumbar fractures, an LK>20° and increased % SSD are associated with a PLC injury.

Do we have an ideal classification system for thoracolumbar and subaxial cervical spine injuries: what is the expert's perspective?

STUDY DESIGN

Online questionnaire survey.

OBJECTIVE

To obtain the opinion of experts on whether the currently available classification systems for thoracolumbar and subaxial cervical spine injuries meet their expectations with regard to the desired objectives of a good classification system and practical implementability.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted during August-September 2013 using a specially designed questionnaire. Members of Spine Trauma Study Group of International Spinal Cord Society and other spinal injury experts were approached, and responses were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-two spine experts responded. Majority (87.50%, n=35) were involved with education and research. For subaxial cervical spine injuries, Allen Ferguson classification was more commonly used (37.50%, n=15) and thought to be practically implementable in day-to-day practice (30.77%). For thoracolumbar injuries, while Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) was more commonly used (47.50%, n=19), the response of experts for practical implementability in day-to-day practice was more evenly distributed among TLICS, AO (Association for Osteosynthesis) and Dennis classifications (30.77, 23.08 and 25.64%, respectively). Experts felt that the classification systems did not serve all the desired objectives. The reliability for residents was especially a concern.

CONCLUSION

We may still be far from an ideal classification system. Many experts continue to prefer or would consider shifting back to traditional and simpler systems. There is a need for developing classification systems that would be better implementable practically in day-to-day clinical practice, better guide treatment, be more reliable, incorporate other modifiers influencing treatment and be more comprehensive in that order of priority.

Radiation exposure as a consequence of spinal immobilization and extrication

BACKGROUND

Extrication and spinal immobilization in the trauma patient with unknown injuries is a common practice of emergency medical services. High-speed crashes occurring in open-wheel racing seldom result in extrication or spinal immobilization.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety of self-extrication in IndyCar® (Indianapolis, IN) by comparing drivers self extricated with full spinal immobilization and subsequent radiation exposure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected de-identified IndyCar® crash and drivers' medical records was performed at treating Level I trauma centers. One hundred thirty-five crash incidents involving drivers evaluated by a medical team were included. Any driver with severe multiple trauma was excluded due to distracting injuries. Drivers underwent standard protocol for postcrash injury. Diagnostic and treatment outcomes including spinal and neurologic injury, need for surgery, and radiation exposure were collected for review.

RESULTS

Self-extrication occurred in 121 (90%) crashes, and overall cumulative radiation exposure ranged from 100 to 250 mSv, or 0.82-2.06 mSv per driver. Extrication with full spinal immobilization occurred in 14 (10%) drivers, with overall cumulative radiation exposure ranging from 140 to 350 mSv, or 10-25 mSv per driver. A total of 29 injuries were identified, nine of which (31%) were spinal. In these, six were emergency medical services extricated and three self extricated. None were unstable spinal fractures resulting in surgical care, surgical disease, or neurologic deficit.

CONCLUSION

In our IndyCar® racing experience, a protocol-led self-extrication system resulted in neither a mismanagement of an unstable spinal fracture nor neurological deficit, and reduced radiation exposure.

Clinical results of patients with thoracolumbar spine trauma treated according to the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score

OBJECT

The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) was developed to improve injury classification and guide surgical decision making, yet validation remains necessary. This study evaluates the neurological outcome of patients with thoracolumbar spine trauma (TLST) treated according to the TLICS.

METHODS

The TLICS was prospectively applied to a consecutive series of patients treated for TLST between 2009 and 2012. Patients with a TLICS of 4 points or more were surgically treated, whereas patients with a TLICS of 3 points or fewer were conservatively managed. The primary outcome was the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS).

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients were treated. In 37 patients, the TLICS was 3 points or fewer and the patients were treated nonsurgically (Group 1). The remaining 28 patients with a TLICS of 4 or more points underwent surgical treatment (Group 2). In Group 1, 28 patients underwent some follow-up at the authors' institution; all of these patients were neurologically intact with compression or burst fractures (TLICS of 1 or 2 points; median 2). The average age in this group was 44.5 years, and follow-up ranged from 1 to 36 months (mean 6.7 months, median 3 months). Two patients (both with a TLICS of 2 points) underwent late surgery for axial back pain and mild focal kyphosis, without significant clinical improvement. In Group 2, follow-up ranged from 1 to 18 months (mean 4.4 months, median 3 months) and the TLICS ranged from 4 to 10 points (median 7 points). In this group, preoperatively, 9 (32%) patients had AIS Grade E injuries, 6 (21%) had AIS Grade C, 1 (4%) had AIS Grade B, and 12 (43%) had AIS Grade A injuries. At the final follow-up, the AIS grade was E in 11 patients (39%), D in 5 (18%), and A in 12 (43%). No patient had neurological worsening during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The TLICS can be used to guide treatment that is safe with regard to the neurological status of patients treated for TLST.

Measuring the impact of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score among 458 consecutively treated patients

CONTEXT

The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) was proposed to improve injury classification and guide surgical decision-making of thoracolumbar spinal trauma (TLST), but its impact on the care of patients has not been quantified.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Analysis of 458 patients treated for TLST trauma from 2000 through 2010 at a single center. Outcome measures Neurological status - ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS), failure of conservative treatment, and surgical complications.

METHODS

Clinical and radiological data were evaluated. Patients were grouped according to the period before (2000-2006) and after (2007-2010) utilization of the TLICS.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2006, 148 patients were initially treated conservatively (C) and 66 were surgically (S) treated. In the C group, the TLICS ranged from 1 to 7 (median 1; mean 1.57). In the S group, the TLICS ranged from 2 to 10 (median 2; mean 4.14). The TLICS matched treatment in 97.9% of conservatively treated patients. From 2007 to 2010, 162 patients were initially treated C and 82 were treated S. In the C group, the TLICS ranged from 1 to 4 (median 1; mean 1.48). In the S group, the TLICS ranged from 2-10 (median 4; mean 4.4). The TLICS matched treatment in 98.8% of C-treated patients. Overall, failure of C treatment occurred in nine patients; most failures (7/9) and all three missed distractive injuries occurred prior to use of the TLICS.

CONCLUSIONS

After introduction of the TLICS, there was a trend towards more successful conservative treatment with fewer conversions to surgical treatment.

Retrospective evaluation of the validity of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System in 458 consecutively treated patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System (TLICS) system has been developed to improve injury classification and guide surgical decision-making, yet validation of this new system remains sparse.

PURPOSE

This study evaluates the use of the TLICS in a large, consecutive series of patients.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a retrospective case series.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 458 patients treated for thoracic or lumbar spine trauma between 2000 and 2010 at a single, tertiary medical center were included in this study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) status and crossover from conservative to surgical treatment were measured.

METHODS

Clinical and radiological data were evaluated, classifying the injuries by ASIA status, the Magerl/AO classification, and the TLICS system.

RESULTS

A total of 310 patients (67.6%) was treated conservatively (group 1) and 148 patients (32.3%) were surgically (group 2) treated. All patients in group 1 were ASIA E, except one (ASIA C). In this group, 305 patients (98%) had an AO type A fracture. The TLICS score ranged from 1 to 7 (mean 1.53, median 1). A total of 307/310 (99%) patients matched TLICS treatment recommendation (TLICS≤4), except three with distractive injuries (TLICS 7) initially misdiagnosed. Nine patients (2.9%) were converted to surgical management. In group 2, 105 (70.9%) were ASIA E, whereas 43 (29%) had neurological deficits (ASIA A-D). One hundred and three patients (69.5%) were classified as AO type A, 36 (24.3%) as type B, and 9 (6%) as type C. The TLICS score ranged from 2 to 10 (mean 4.29, median of 2). Sixty-nine patients (46.6%) matched the TLICS recommendation; all discordant patients (53.4%) were treated for stable burst fractures (TLICS=2). No neurological complications occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The TLICS recommendation matched treatment in 307/310 patients (99%) in the conservative group. However, in the surgical group, 53.4% of patients did not match TLICS recommendations, all were burst fractures without neurological injury (TLICS=2). The TLICS system can be used to effectively classify thoracolumbar injuries and guide conservative treatment. Inconsistencies, however, remain in the treatment thoracolumbar burst fractures.