Neurological recovery outcomes after surgery in patients with traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: a 1-year follow-up study

  • Ngô Đình Trung Bệnh viện Trung ương Quân đội 108
  • Lê Nam Khánh Bệnh viện Trung ương Quân đội 108
  • Dương Thị Nga Bệnh viện Trung ương Quân đội 108
  • Đồng Thị Trang Bệnh viện Trung ương Quân đội 108
  • Đỗ Văn Nam Bệnh viện Trung ương Quân đội 108
  • Nguyễn Hà Tùng Chi Đại học VinUniversity, Hà Nội
  • Trần Thuỳ Linh Đại học VinUniversity, Hà Nội
  • Trần Minh Trang Đại học VinUniversity, Hà Nội
  • Nguyễn Phương Giang Đại học VinUniversity, Hà Nội
  • Lê Trung Nam Đại học VinUniversity, Hà Nội

Main Article Content

Keywords

Cervical spinal cord injury, early decompression surgery, neurological function recovery

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the neurological function recovery outcomes and the impact of the early decompression surgery strategy on neurological function recovery in patients with cervical spinal cord injury. Methods: A descriptive, retrospective, single-center study on 106 patients with cervical spinal cord injuries who underwent surgical treatment at the 108 Military Central Hospital from January 2018 to January 2024. Results: After one year of follow-up, 50.9% of patients achieved neurological function recovery. However, issues such as sphincter dysfunction and neuropathic pain rema ined common, recorded in 50.9% and 59.4% of patients, respectively. Early decompression surgery within 24 hours of injury had a significant positive impact on the recovery of neurological function one year after injury. Conclusion: The strategy of early decompression surgery within 24 hours of trauma significantly improves neurological function in patients with cervical spinal cord injury, although some sequelae persist after one year.

Article Details

References

1. Fehlings MG, Vaccaro A, Wilson JR, Singh A, W. Cadotte D, Harrop JS et al (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. 2012;7(2):e32037.
2. Wilson JR, Singh A, Craven C, Verrier MC, Drew B, Ahn H et al (2012) Early versus late surgery for traumatic spinal cord injury: the results of a prospective Canadian cohort study. Spinal cord 50(11): 840-843.
3. Ko HY (2023) A practical guide to care of spinal cord injuries: clinical questions and answers. Springer Nature.
4. Firempong GK, Sheppard WL, Gelfand Y, Ellingson BM, Holly LT (2023) Spinal cord signal intensity predicts functional outcomes in the operative management of degenerative cervical myelopathy. Clinical spine surgery 36(10): 438-443.
5. Stenimahitis V, Gharios M, Fletcher-Sandersjöö A, El-Hajj VG, Singh A, Buwaider A et al (2024) Long-term outcome and predictors of neurological recovery in cervical spinal cord injury: A population-based cohort study. Scientific Reports 14(1):20945.
6. Ture SD, Ozkaya G, Sivrioglu K (2023) Relationship between neurogenic bowel dysfunction severity and functional status, depression, and quality of life in individuals with spinal cord injury. The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine 46(3): 424-432.
7. Liu CW, Huang CC, Yang YH, Chen SC, Weng MC, Huang MH (2009) Relationship between neurogenic bowel dysfunction and health-related quality of life in persons with spinal cord injury. Journal of rehabilitation medicine 41(1): 35-40.
8. Khan MI, Arsh A, Ali I, Afridi AK (2022) Frequency of neuropathic pain and its effects on rehabilitation outcomes, balance function and quality of life among people with traumatic spinal cord injury. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences 38:888.
9. Nees TA, Finnerup NB, Blesch A, Weidner N (2017) Neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: the impact of sensorimotor activity. Pain 158(3): 371-376.