No abstract

OBJECT Spacers placed between the lumbar spinous processes represent a promising surgical treatment alternative for a variety of spinal pathologies. They provide an unloading distractive force to the stenotic motion segment, restoring foraminal height, and have the potential to relieve symptoms of degenerative disc disease. The authors performed a retrospective, multicenter nonrandomized study consisting of 1108 patients to evaluate implant survival and failure modes after the implantation of 8 different interspinous process devices (IPDs). METHODS The medical records of patients who had undergone placement of an IPD were retrospectively evaluated, and demographic information, diagnosis, and preoperative pain levels were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative clinical assessments in the patients were based on the visual analog scale. A minimum of 3 years after IPD placement, information on long-term outcomes was obtained from additional follow-up or from patient medical and radiological records. RESULTS One thousand one hundred eight patients affected by symptomatic 1- or 2-level segmental lumbar spine degenerative disease underwent placement of an IPD. The complication rate was 7.8%. There were 27 fractures of the spinous process and 23 dura mater tears with CSF leakage. The ultimate failure rate requiring additional surgery was 9.6%. The reasons for revision, which always involved removal of the original implant, were acute worsening of low-back pain or lack of improvement (45 cases), recurrence of symptoms after an initial good outcome (42 cases), and implant dislocation (20 cases). CONCLUSIONS The IPD is not a substitute for a more invasive 3-column fusion procedure in cases of major instability and spondylolisthesis. Overdistraction, poor bone density, and poor patient selection may all be factors in the development of complications. Preoperatively, careful attention should be paid to bone density, appropriate implant size, and optimal patient selection.

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of craniotomy and membranectomy as initial treatment of organized chronic subdural hematoma (OCSH). We retrospectively reviewed a series of 34 consecutive patients suffering from OCSH, diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or contrast computer tomography (CCT) in order to establish the degree of organization and determine the intrahematomal architecture. The indication to perform a primary enlarged craniotomy as initial treatment for non-liquefied chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) with multilayer loculations was based on the hematoma MRI appearance-mostly hyperintense in both T 1 -and T 2 -weighted images with a hypointense web-or net-like structure within the hematoma cavity. The reason why some hematomas evolve towards a complex and organized architecture remains unclear; the most common aspect to come to light was the "long standing" of the CSDHs which, in our series, had an average interval of 10 weeks between head injury and initial scan. Recurrence was found to have occurred in 2 patients (6% of cases) in the form of acute subdural hematoma. One patient died as the result of an intraventricular and subarachnoid haemorrhage, while 2 patients (6%) suffered an haemorrhagic stroke ipsilateral to the OCSH. Eighty-nine percent of cases had a good recovery, while 11% remained unchanged or worsened. In select cases, based on the MRI appearance, primary enlarged craniotomy seems to be the treatment of choice for achieving a complete recovery and a reduced recurrence rate in OCSH.