Object The authors analyzed headache relief after anterior cervical discectomy. Headache may be relieved after anterior cervical discectomy, but the mechanism is unknown. If headaches were directly referred from upper cervical pathology, more headache relief would be expected from surgery performed at higher cervical levels. If spinal kinesthetics were the mechanism, then headache relief may differ between arthroplasty and fusion. Headache relief after anterior cervical discectomy was quantified by the operated disc level and by the method of operation (arthroplasty vs arthrodesis). Methods The authors performed a post hoc analysis of an artificial disc trial. Data on headache pain were extracted from the Neck Disability Index (NDI) questionnaire. Results A total of 260 patients underwent single-level arthroplasty or arthodesis. Preoperatively, 52% reported NDI headache scores of 3 or greater, compared with only 13%–17% postoperatively. The model-based mean NDI headache score at baseline was 2.5 (95% CI 2.3–2.7) and was reduced by 1.3 points after surgery (95% CI 1.2–1.4, p < 0.001). Higher cervical levels were associated with a greater degree of preoperative headache, but there was no association with headache relief. There was no significant difference in headache relief between arthroplasty and arthrodesis. Conclusions Most patients with symptomatic cervical spondylosis have headache as a preoperative symptom (88%). Anterior cervical discectomy with both arthroplasty and arthrodesis is associated with a durable decrease in headache. Headache relief is not related to the level of operation. The mechanism for headache reduction remains unclear.

No abstract

No abstract

345 Background: Multiple studies exist that validate the prognostic value of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging. However, none have established a survival benefit to the treatment recommendations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the adherence to the BCLC guidelines at a rural tertiary care center, and to determine the effect of following the treatment recommendations on overall survival. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted for 97 patients newly diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from 2000 to 2012. The treatment choice was compared with the BCLC guidelines and percentage adherence calculated. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log rank test was used to test the difference between the two groups. Cox regression tests were used to determine independent effects of stage, treatment aggressiveness, and guideline adherence on survival. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of 97 patients, 75% (n=73) were male. Median overall survival was 12.9 months. In 59.8% (n=58) of the patients, treatment was adherent to stage specific guidelines proposed by the BCLC classification. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the adherent and non-adherent groups (11.2 vs 14.1 months, p<0.98). However on stage specific survival analysis, we noted a significant survival benefit for adherence to the guidelines for early stage HCC (27.9 vs 14.1 months, p<0.05), but a decrease in survival for adherence in the end stage (20 days vs 9.3 months, p<0.01). On univariate analysis, more aggressive treatment was associated with increased survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 0.87; p = 0.018). Multivariate analysis revealed that adherence did not independently affect survival when stage and aggressiveness of treatment were included in the model (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.76 to 2.2, p = 0.34). Conclusions: Although the BCLC guidelines serve as a practical guide to the management of patients with HCC, they are not universally practiced. These results indicate that survival of patients with hepatocellular cancer is determined by stage and aggressiveness of treatment, not adherence to BCLC guidelines.

No abstract