Factors Associated with Intradiscal Vacuum Phenomenon after Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fracture

Takeshi Sasagawa, Hiroyuki Hayashi, Yasutaka Takagi
{"title":"Factors Associated with Intradiscal Vacuum Phenomenon after Traumatic Thoracolumbar Fracture","authors":"Takeshi Sasagawa, Hiroyuki Hayashi, Yasutaka Takagi","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1775551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction Posttraumatic kyphosis of the thoracolumbar spine is a possible cause of deterioration of activities of daily living. Thus, postoperative kyphosis is an important issue in treating traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. The intradiscal vacuum phenomenon (IVP) after a traumatic thoracolumbar fracture is considered an important predictor of severe kyphosis after implant removal. However, the associated factors are not yet clear. Methods The study included data from 94 intervertebral discs on the cephalocaudal side of 47 fractured vertebrae of 45 patients for traumatic thoracolumbar fracture due to high-energy trauma. We assessed the demographics of patients (age, sex, cause of injury, location of injured vertebra, fracture type, cephalocaudal side), imaging finding (kyphosis angle of fractured vertebra at the injury, endplate fracture on computed tomography [CT], intervertebral injury on magnetic resonance image [MRI]), and IVP on CT conducted more than 6 months after surgery. We divided the intervertebral discs into an IVP group and a non-IVP group. To identify factors associated with an IVP, univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were conducted. Results IVP was observed in 27 (29%) of 94 intervertebral discs on CTs conducted at an average of 14.0 months postoperatively. In univariate analysis, the IVP group (n = 27) had a significantly more cephalic side of the injured vertebra, endplate fracture on CT, and disc injury on MRI compared with the non-IVP group (n = 67). A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with IVP. The cephalic side (odds ratio [OR] = 4.183, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.269–13.785) and endplate fracture on CT (OR = 9.564, 95% CI = 1.940–47.143) were identified as independent factors associated with IVP. Conclusions IVP was observed in 27 (29%) of 94 intervertebral discs. The cephalic side and endplate fracture on CT were identified as independent factors associated with IVP.","PeriodicalId":94300,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of neurosurgery","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1775551","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Posttraumatic kyphosis of the thoracolumbar spine is a possible cause of deterioration of activities of daily living. Thus, postoperative kyphosis is an important issue in treating traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. The intradiscal vacuum phenomenon (IVP) after a traumatic thoracolumbar fracture is considered an important predictor of severe kyphosis after implant removal. However, the associated factors are not yet clear. Methods The study included data from 94 intervertebral discs on the cephalocaudal side of 47 fractured vertebrae of 45 patients for traumatic thoracolumbar fracture due to high-energy trauma. We assessed the demographics of patients (age, sex, cause of injury, location of injured vertebra, fracture type, cephalocaudal side), imaging finding (kyphosis angle of fractured vertebra at the injury, endplate fracture on computed tomography [CT], intervertebral injury on magnetic resonance image [MRI]), and IVP on CT conducted more than 6 months after surgery. We divided the intervertebral discs into an IVP group and a non-IVP group. To identify factors associated with an IVP, univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were conducted. Results IVP was observed in 27 (29%) of 94 intervertebral discs on CTs conducted at an average of 14.0 months postoperatively. In univariate analysis, the IVP group (n = 27) had a significantly more cephalic side of the injured vertebra, endplate fracture on CT, and disc injury on MRI compared with the non-IVP group (n = 67). A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with IVP. The cephalic side (odds ratio [OR] = 4.183, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.269–13.785) and endplate fracture on CT (OR = 9.564, 95% CI = 1.940–47.143) were identified as independent factors associated with IVP. Conclusions IVP was observed in 27 (29%) of 94 intervertebral discs. The cephalic side and endplate fracture on CT were identified as independent factors associated with IVP.
外伤性胸腰椎骨折后椎间盘内真空现象的相关因素
摘要引言创伤后胸腰椎后凸是日常生活活动恶化的可能原因。因此,术后后凸是治疗创伤性胸腰椎骨折的重要问题。创伤性胸腰椎骨折后的椎间盘内真空现象(IVP)被认为是植入物取出后严重后凸的重要预测因素。然而,相关因素尚不清楚。方法对45例高能创伤性胸腰椎骨折患者的47个骨折椎体的头尾侧94个椎间盘进行分析。我们评估了患者的人口统计学特征(年龄、性别、损伤原因、损伤椎体位置、骨折类型、头尾侧)、影像学表现(损伤处骨折椎体的后凸角度、计算机断层扫描[CT]的终板骨折、磁共振成像[MRI]的椎间损伤)以及术后6个月以上的CT IVP。我们将椎间盘分为IVP组和非IVP组。为了确定与IVP相关的因素,进行了单因素分析和多因素logistic回归分析。结果术后平均14.0个月ct显示,94个椎间盘中有27个(29%)出现IVP。在单因素分析中,与非IVP组(n = 67)相比,IVP组(n = 27)损伤椎体的头侧、CT上的终板骨折和MRI上的椎间盘损伤明显更多。进行多因素logistic回归分析以确定与IVP相关的因素。头侧(优势比[OR] = 4.183, 95%可信区间[CI] = 1.269-13.785)和CT上终板骨折(OR = 9.564, 95% CI = 1.940-47.143)被确定为与IVP相关的独立因素。结论94个椎间盘中有27个(29%)出现IVP。CT上头侧和终板骨折被确定为与IVP相关的独立因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信