TY - JOUR
T1 - Validation of the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System Treatment Algorithm
T2 - Should it be used to Guide Fracture Management?
AU - Lambrechts, Mark J.
AU - Schroeder, Gregory D.
AU - Tran, Khoa
AU - Li, Sandy
AU - Huang, Angela
AU - Chu, Justin
AU - Karamian, Brian A.
AU - Canseco, Jose A.
AU - Hilibrand, Alan S.
AU - Oner, Cumhur
AU - Dvorak, Marcel
AU - Schnake, Klaus
AU - Kepler, Christopher K.
AU - Vaccaro, Alexander R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/7/15
Y1 - 2023/7/15
N2 - Study Design. Retrospective Cohort Study. Objective. To determine how historical management of thoracolumbar spine injuries compares to the recently proposed AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System treatment algorithm. Summary of Background Data. Classifications of the thoracolumbar spine are not uncommon. The frequent advent of new classifications is typically due to previous classifications being primarily descriptive or unreliable. Thus, AO Spine created a classification with an associated treatment algorithm to guide injury classification and management. Methods. Thoracolumbar spine injuries were retrospectively identified from a prospectively collected spine trauma database at a single, urban, academic medical center during the years 2006 to 2021. Each injury was classified and assigned points based on the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System injury severity score. Patients were grouped into scores of 3 or less (preferred initial conservative treatment) and greater than 6 (preferred initial surgical intervention). Either operative or non-operative treatment was considered appropriate for injury severity scores of 4 or 5. Results. A total of 815 patients (TL AOSIS 0-3: 486, TL AOSIS 4-5: 150, TL AOSIS 6+: 179) met inclusion status. Injury severity scores of 0-3 were more likely to undergo non-operative management compared to scores of 4-5 or 6+ (99.0% vs. 74.7% vs. 13.4%, P<0.001). Thus, guideline congruent treatment was 99.0%, 100%, and 86.6%, respectively (P<0.001). Most injuries determined to be a 4 or 5 were treated non-operatively (74.7%). Based on the treatment algorithm, 97.5% of patients who received operative treatment and 96.1% who received non-operative treatment were managed in accordance with the algorithm. Of the 29 patients who did not receive algorithm congruent treatment, 5 (17.2%) were treated surgically. Conclusions. A retrospective review of thoracolumbar spine injuries at our urban academic medical center identified that patients are historically treated in accordance with the proposed AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System treatment algorithm.
AB - Study Design. Retrospective Cohort Study. Objective. To determine how historical management of thoracolumbar spine injuries compares to the recently proposed AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System treatment algorithm. Summary of Background Data. Classifications of the thoracolumbar spine are not uncommon. The frequent advent of new classifications is typically due to previous classifications being primarily descriptive or unreliable. Thus, AO Spine created a classification with an associated treatment algorithm to guide injury classification and management. Methods. Thoracolumbar spine injuries were retrospectively identified from a prospectively collected spine trauma database at a single, urban, academic medical center during the years 2006 to 2021. Each injury was classified and assigned points based on the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System injury severity score. Patients were grouped into scores of 3 or less (preferred initial conservative treatment) and greater than 6 (preferred initial surgical intervention). Either operative or non-operative treatment was considered appropriate for injury severity scores of 4 or 5. Results. A total of 815 patients (TL AOSIS 0-3: 486, TL AOSIS 4-5: 150, TL AOSIS 6+: 179) met inclusion status. Injury severity scores of 0-3 were more likely to undergo non-operative management compared to scores of 4-5 or 6+ (99.0% vs. 74.7% vs. 13.4%, P<0.001). Thus, guideline congruent treatment was 99.0%, 100%, and 86.6%, respectively (P<0.001). Most injuries determined to be a 4 or 5 were treated non-operatively (74.7%). Based on the treatment algorithm, 97.5% of patients who received operative treatment and 96.1% who received non-operative treatment were managed in accordance with the algorithm. Of the 29 patients who did not receive algorithm congruent treatment, 5 (17.2%) were treated surgically. Conclusions. A retrospective review of thoracolumbar spine injuries at our urban academic medical center identified that patients are historically treated in accordance with the proposed AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System treatment algorithm.
KW - AO Spine
KW - cervical spine
KW - injury classification
KW - injury severity
KW - treatment algorithm
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85164040154&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004693
DO - 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004693
M3 - Article
C2 - 37141491
AN - SCOPUS:85164040154
SN - 0362-2436
VL - 48
SP - 994
EP - 1002
JO - Spine
JF - Spine
IS - 14
ER -