STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. OBJECTIVE: The management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures (TLBF) remains challenging, and analyzing the levels of evidence (LOEs) for treatment practices can reform the decision-making process. However, no review has yet evaluated the operative management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures with particular attention placed on LOE from an established methodology. The objective of the present study was to characterize the literature evidence for TLBF, specifically for operative management. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the English literature over the past 20 years was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE). The inclusion criteria consisted of (1) traumatic burst fractures (2) in the thoracic or lumbar spine. Exclusion criteria included (1) osteoporotic burst fractures, (2) pathologic burst fractures, (3) cervical fractures, (4) biomechanical studies or those involving cadavers, and (5) computer-based studies. Studies were assigned an LOE and those meeting level 1 or 2 were included. RESULTS: From 1,138 abstracts, 272 studies met the criteria. Twenty-three studies (8.5%) met level 1 (n = 4, 1.5%) or 2 (n = 19, 7.0%) criteria. All 23 studies were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The literature contains a high LOE to support the operative management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures. For patients who are neurologically intact, a high LOE demonstrated similar functional outcomes, lower complication rates, and less costs with conservative management when compared with surgical management. There is a high LOE for short- or long-segment pedicle instrumentation without fusion and less invasive (percutaneous and paraspinal) approaches. Furthermore, the posterior approaches are associated with lower complications as opposed to the anterior or combined approaches.
OBJECT: Thoracolumbar spine injuries are commonly encountered in patients with trauma, accounting for almost 90% of all spinal fractures. Thoracolumbar burst fractures comprise a high percentage of these traumatic fractures (45%), and approximately half of the patients with this injury pattern are neurologically intact. However, a debate over complication rates associated with operative versus nonoperative management of various thoracolumbar fracture morphologies is ongoing, particularly concerning those patients presenting without a neurological deficit.
METHODS: A MEDLINE search for pertinent literature published between 1966 and December 2013 was conducted by 2 authors (G.G. and R.D.), who used 2 broad search terms to maximize the initial pool of manuscripts for screening. These terms were "operative lumbar spine adverse events" and "nonoperative lumbar spine adverse events."
RESULTS: In an advanced MEDLINE search of the term "operative lumbar spine adverse events" on January 8, 2014, 1459 results were obtained. In a search of "nonoperative lumbar spine adverse events," 150 results were obtained. After a review of all abstracts for relevance to traumatic thoracolumbar spinal injuries, 62 abstracts were reviewed for the "operative" group and 21 abstracts were reviewed for the "nonoperative" group. A total of 14 manuscripts that met inclusion criteria for the operative group and 5 manuscripts that met criteria for the nonoperative group were included. There were a total of 919 and 436 patients in the operative and nonoperative treatment groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups with respect to age, sex, and length of stay. The mean ages were 43.17 years in the operative and 34.68 years in the nonoperative groups. The majority of patients in both groups were Frankel Grade E (342 and 319 in operative and nonoperative groups, respectively). Among the studies that reported the data, the mean length of stay was 14 days in the operative group and 20.75 in the nonoperative group. The incidence of all complications in the operative and nonoperative groups was 300 (32.6%) and 21 (4.8%), respectively (p = 0.1065). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to the incidence of pulmonary, thromboembolic, cardiac, and gastrointestinal complications. However, the incidence of infections (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, wound infection, and sepsis) was significantly higher in the operative group (p = 0.000875). The incidence of instrumentation failure and need for revision surgery was 4.35% (40 of 919), a significant morbidity, and an event unique to the operative category (p = 0.00396).
CONCLUSIONS: Due to the limited number of high-quality studies, conclusions related to complication rates of operative and nonoperative management of thoracolumbar traumatic injuries cannot be definitively made. Further prospective, randomized studies of operative versus nonoperative management of thoracolumbar and lumbar spine trauma, with standardized definitions of complications and matched patient cohorts, will aid in properly defining the risk-benefit ratio of surgery for thoracolumbar spine fractures.
OBJECT: The overall evidence for nonoperative management of patients with traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures is unknown. There is no agreement on the optimal method of conservative treatment. Recent randomized controlled trials that have compared nonoperative to operative treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficits yielded conflicting results. By assessing the level of evidence on conservative management through validated methodologies, clinicians can assess the availability of critically appraised literature. The purpose of this study was to examine the level of evidence for the use of conservative management in traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of the English literature over the past 20 years was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE). The inclusion criteria consisted of burst fractures resulting from a traumatic mechanism, and fractures of the thoracic or lumbar spine. The exclusion criteria consisted of osteoporotic burst fractures, pathological burst fractures, and fractures located in the cervical spine. Of the studies meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria, any study in which nonoperative treatment was used was included in this review.
RESULTS: One thousand ninety-eight abstracts were reviewed and 447 papers met inclusion/exclusion criteria, of which 45 were included in this review. In total, there were 2 Level-I, 7 Level-II, 9 Level-III, 25 Level-IV, and 2 Level-V studies. Of the 45 studies, 16 investigated conservative management techniques, 20 studies compared operative to nonoperative treatments, and 9 papers investigated the prognosis of conservative management.
CONCLUSIONS: There are 9 high-level studies (Levels I-II) that have investigated the conservative management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures. In neurologically intact patients, there is no superior conservative management technique over another as supported by a high level of evidence. The conservative technique can be based on patient and surgeon preference, comfort, and access to resources. A high level of evidence demonstrated similar functional outcomes with conservative management when compared with open surgical operative management in patients who were neurologically intact. The presence of a neurological deficit is not an absolute contraindication for conservative treatment as supported by a high level of evidence. However, the majority of the literature excluded patients with neurological deficits. More evidence is needed to further classify the appropriate burst fractures for conservative management to decrease variables that may impact the prognosis.
BACKGROUND: Spinal burst fractures result from the failure of both the anterior and the middle columns of the spine under axial compression loads. Conservative management is through bed rest and immobilisation once the acute symptoms have settled. Surgical treatment involves either anterior or posterior stabilisation of the fracture, sometimes with decompression involving the removal of bone fragments that have intruded into the vertebral canal. This is an update of a review first published in 2006.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of surgical with non-surgical treatment for thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficit.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (October 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1946 to October 2012), EMBASE (1980 to October 2012) and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (1978 to October 2012). We also searched trial registers and reference lists of articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing surgical with non-surgical treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficit.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. Only limited pooling of data was done.
MAIN RESULTS: We included two trials that compared surgical with non-surgical treatment for patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficit. These recruited a total of 87 participants and reported outcomes for 79 participants at follow-up of two years or more. Both trials were judged at unclear risk of selection bias and at high risk of performance and detection biases, resulting from lack of blinding.
The two trials reported contrasting results for pain and function-related outcomes at final follow-up, and numbers returning to work. One trial found less pain (mean difference (MD) -15.09 mm, 95% CI -27.81 to -2.37; 100 mm visual analogue scale), and better function based on the Roland and Morris disability questionnaire results (MD -5.87, 95% CI -10.10 to -1.64; 24 points = maximum disability) in the surgical group. Based on the same outcome measures, the other trial found the surgical group had more pain (MD 13.60 mm, 95% CI -0.31 to 27.51) and worse function (MD 4.31, 95% CI 0.54 to 8.08). Neither trial reported a statistically significant difference in return to work. There were greater numbers of participants with complications in the surgical group of both trials (21/41 versus 6/38; RR 2.85, 95% CI 0.83 to 9.75; 2 trials), and only participants of this group had subsequent surgery, involving implant removal either for complications or as a matter of course. One trial reported that surgery was over four times more costly than non-surgical treatment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The contradictory evidence provided by two small and potentially biased randomised controlled trials is insufficient to conclude whether surgical or non-surgical treatment yields superior pain and functional outcomes for people with thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurological deficit. It is likely, however, that surgery is associated with more early complications and the need for subsequent surgery, as well as greater initial healthcare costs.
OBJECT: Despite extensive published research on thoracolumbar burst fractures, controversy still surrounds which is the most appropriate treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the scientific literature on operative and nonoperative treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures and no neurological deficit.
METHODS: In their search of the literature, the authors identified all possible relevant studies concerning thoracolumbar burst fracture without neurological deficit. Two independent observers performed study selection, methodological quality assessment, and data extraction in a blinded and objective manner for all papers identified during the search. In a synthesis of the literature, the authors obtained evidence for both operative and nonoperative treatments.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of evidence demonstrating the superiority of one approach over the other as measured using generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life scales. There is no scientific evidence linking posttraumatic kyphosis to clinical outcomes. The authors found that there is a strong need for improved clinical research methodology to be applied to this patient population.
The management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures (TLBF) remains challenging, and analyzing the levels of evidence (LOEs) for treatment practices can reform the decision-making process. However, no review has yet evaluated the operative management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures with particular attention placed on LOE from an established methodology. The objective of the present study was to characterize the literature evidence for TLBF, specifically for operative management.
METHODS:
A comprehensive search of the English literature over the past 20 years was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE). The inclusion criteria consisted of (1) traumatic burst fractures (2) in the thoracic or lumbar spine. Exclusion criteria included (1) osteoporotic burst fractures, (2) pathologic burst fractures, (3) cervical fractures, (4) biomechanical studies or those involving cadavers, and (5) computer-based studies. Studies were assigned an LOE and those meeting level 1 or 2 were included.
RESULTS:
From 1,138 abstracts, 272 studies met the criteria. Twenty-three studies (8.5%) met level 1 (n = 4, 1.5%) or 2 (n = 19, 7.0%) criteria. All 23 studies were reported.
CONCLUSIONS:
The literature contains a high LOE to support the operative management of traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures. For patients who are neurologically intact, a high LOE demonstrated similar functional outcomes, lower complication rates, and less costs with conservative management when compared with surgical management. There is a high LOE for short- or long-segment pedicle instrumentation without fusion and less invasive (percutaneous and paraspinal) approaches. Furthermore, the posterior approaches are associated with lower complications as opposed to the anterior or combined approaches.
