A systematic search was conducted comparing the Hounsfield units (HU) value obtained from computed tomography and the T-score of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the prediction of the lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD). Current data evidences favorable results regarding the possibility of establishing a threshold value for osteoporosis diagnosis from CT measurements of HU.

Individual risk factors for the development of adjacent segment pathology (ASP) need to be investigated and identified to address possible modifiable factors in advance and improve outcomes and reduce medical costs. This study aimed to review the literature regarding patient-related risk factors and sagittal alignment parameters associated with ASP development. MethodsThe authors performed an extensive review of the literature addressing the objectives mentioned earlier. ResultsCertain patient factors such as age, gender, obesity, preexisting degeneration, osteoporosis, postmenopausal state, rheumatoid arthritis, and facet tropism may contribute to adjacent segment degeneration. Genetic influences, such as polymorphisms of the vitamin D receptor and collagen IX genes, can also be a potential cause for disc degeneration with consequent deterioration of the motion segment. The influence of sagittal imbalances, particularly after lumbar fusion, is a significant parameter to be taken into account as an independent risk factor for ASP development. ConclusionsPatient-specific risk factors, such as age, gender, obesity, preexisting degeneration, and genetic features increase the likelihood of developing ASP. On the other hand, sagittal alignment plays a significant role in the development of this condition.

Adjacent segment pathology (ASP) is a major cause of disability, and the recognition of the surgical risk factors associated with the development of this condition is essential for its prevention. Different surgical approaches, from decompression without fusion to non-instrumented and instrumented fusion, have distinct contributions to the development of ASP. Although motion-preservation procedures could reduce the prevalence of ASP, these are also associated with a higher percentage of complications. Several risk factors associated with previous surgery, namely the chosen surgical approach and anatomical dissection, the choice of interbody fusion, the increment and length of the fusion, and the restoration of sagittal alignment, may influence the development of ASP. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:966-972. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210050

Herbert von Luschka, a German anatomist, was the first to describe the developmental changes in the anatomical structures of the cervical spine. Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) represents a collection of pathological entities that cause compression of the cervical spinal cord, resulting in a clinical syndrome typified by spasticity, hyperreflexia, pathologic reflexes, finger/hand clumsiness, gait disturbance and sphincter dysfunction. In the cervical spine, certain patients are more likely to have myelopathy due to a congenitally narrowed cervical spine canal. Degenerative changes are more common at C5 and C6 or C6 and C7 due to the increased motion at these levels. Additional contributors to canal narrowing are infolding of the ligamentum flavum, olisthesis, osteophytes, and facet hypertrophy. Myelopathy will develop in approximately 100% of patients with canal stenosis greater than 60% (less than 6 mm sagittal disc cord space). Classically it has an insidious onset, progressing in a stepwise manner with functional decline. Without treatment, patients may progress toward significant paralysis and loss of function. Treatment requires surgery with either anterior or posterior decompression of the area of narrowing, and probable fusion. Factors of a poor prognosis include symptoms lasting for more than 18 months, increased range of motion in the cervical spine, and female gender. In this study, we give an overview of the state-of-the-art in DCM, with a focus on the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, differential diagnosis, imaging evaluation, natural history, treatment options and complications. Level of evidence III; Review article.

No abstract