Reanalysis of Central Cervical Cord Injury Management

Abstract

Abstract Early investigators indicated that conservative management was superior to operative intervention in the treatment of central cord injuries. Their clinical data suggested that operative treatment, in fact, worsened the condition. Recent experience with this clinical entity, however, indicates that in selected patients operative intervention may be of value in improving the rate and degree of motor recovery. A retrospective study of all individuals admitted to our hospital (Delaware Valley Spinal Cord Injury Center) with central cervical spinal cord injury was done (28 patients). One-half had been treated with medical therapy alone (Group I); the others were treated both medically and surgically (Group II). Medical therapy consisted of intravenous mannitol, dexamethasone, and sodium bicarbonate given during the acute phase of the injury. Both groups were immobilized using either a halo or a Philadelphia collar. Criteria for entry into the surgical group were one or both of the following: (a) failure to improve progressively after an initial period of improvement, with persistent compression of neural tissue visualized on myelography and (b) unacceptable instability of the spinal bony elements. The patients were given neurological scores based on the motor power of the major muscle groups. The stability of the spine was scored using the Panjabi-White scale. The two groups were compared using Student's t-test and the two-factor analysis of variance. There was no significant difference in initial neurological scores between the groups. The surgical groups had a higher incidence of instability of the bony elements of the cervical spine, as judged by the Panjabi-White scale. At the time of discharge, Group II had significantly improved motor scores when compared with Group I. The results indicate that operative intervention did not produce neurological worsening and may be safely applied when patients with central cord injuries meet the criteria used in the study. Although the two groups are not comparable, operative intervention provided statistically better motor recovery than did conservative therapy (P < 0.05).