Purpose The management of cervical facet dislocation injuries remains controversial. The main purpose of this investigation was to identify whether a surgeon's geographic location or years in practice influences their preferred management of traumatic cervical facet dislocation injuries. Methods A survey was sent to 272 AO Spine members across all geographic regions and with a variety of practice experience. The survey included clinical case scenarios of cervical facet dislocation injuries and asked responders to select preferences among various diagnostic and management options. Results A total of 189 complete responses were received. Over 50% of responding surgeons in each region elected to initiate management of cervical facet dislocation injuries with an MRI, with 6 case exceptions. Overall, there was considerable agreement between American and European responders regarding management of these injuries, with only 3 cases exhibiting a significant difference. Additionally, results also exhibited considerable management agreement between those with ≤ 10 and > 10 years of practice experience, with only 2 case exceptions noted. Conclusion More than half of responders, regardless of geographical location or practice experience, identified MRI as a screening imaging modality when managing cervical facet dislocation injuries, regardless of the status of the spinal cord and prior to any additional intervention. Additionally, a majority of surgeons would elect an anterior approach for the surgical management of these injuries. The study found overall agreement in management preferences of cervical facet dislocation injuries around the globe.

Purpose To validate the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System with participants of various experience levels, subspecialties, and geographic regions. Methods A live webinar was organized in 2020 for validation of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System. The validation consisted of 41 unique subaxial cervical spine injuries with associated computed tomography scans and key images. Intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System were calculated for injury morphology, injury subtype, and facet injury. The reliability and reproducibility of the classification system were categorized as slight (ƙ = 0–0.20), fair (ƙ = 0.21–0.40), moderate (ƙ = 0.41–0.60), substantial (ƙ = 0.61–0.80), or excellent (ƙ = > 0.80) as determined by the Landis and Koch classification. Results A total of 203 AO Spine members participated in the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System validation. The percent of participants accurately classifying each injury was over 90% for fracture morphology and fracture subtype on both assessments. The interobserver reliability for fracture morphology was excellent (ƙ = 0.87), while fracture subtype (ƙ = 0.80) and facet injury were substantial (ƙ = 0.74). The intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology and subtype were excellent (ƙ = 0.85, 0.88, respectively), while reproducibility for facet injuries was substantial (ƙ = 0.76). Conclusion The AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System demonstrated excellent interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology, substantial reliability and reproducibility for facet injuries, and excellent reproducibility with substantial reliability for injury subtype.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this paper was to determine the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on surgeon experience (< 5 years, 5–10 years, 10–20 years, and > 20 years) and surgical subspecialty (orthopedic spine surgery, neurosurgery, and "other" surgery). METHODS A total of 11,601 assessments of upper cervical spine injuries were evaluated based on the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System. Reliability and reproducibility scores were obtained twice, with a 3-week time interval. Descriptive statistics were utilized to examine the percentage of accurately classified injuries, and Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was used to screen for potentially relevant differences between study participants. Kappa coefficients (κ) determined the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS The intraobserver reproducibility was substantial for surgeon experience level (< 5 years: 0.74 vs 5–10 years: 0.69 vs 10–20 years: 0.69 vs > 20 years: 0.70) and surgical subspecialty (orthopedic spine: 0.71 vs neurosurgery: 0.69 vs other: 0.68). Furthermore, the interobserver reliability was substantial for all surgical experience groups on assessment 1 (< 5 years: 0.67 vs 5–10 years: 0.62 vs 10–20 years: 0.61 vs > 20 years: 0.62), and only surgeons with > 20 years of experience did not have substantial reliability on assessment 2 (< 5 years: 0.62 vs 5–10 years: 0.61 vs 10–20 years: 0.61 vs > 20 years: 0.59). Orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons had substantial intraobserver reproducibility on both assessment 1 (0.64 vs 0.63) and assessment 2 (0.62 vs 0.63), while other surgeons had moderate reliability on assessment 1 (0.43) and fair reliability on assessment 2 (0.36). CONCLUSIONS The international reliability and reproducibility scores for the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System demonstrated substantial intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability regardless of surgical experience and spine subspecialty. These results support the global application of this classification system.

Introdução: O condrossarcoma é uma neoplasia maligna de matriz cartilaginosa que constitui cerca de 9% dos tumores malignos primário do osso. Trata-se de um tumor de natureza indolente e crescimento lento, podendo ser assintomático por muitos anos antes do diagnóstico. É observado mais comumente em adultos homens após a terceira década de vida, raramente encontrado na adolescência e crianças, sem predileção de raça. Objetivo: Relatar um caso raro de condrossarcoma em um paciente jovem de 23 anos, localizado no quarto metatarso do pé esquerdo. Conclusão: Neste relato demonstrou-se a importância do diagnóstico precoce de lesões malignas, bem como a sua dificuldade, mostrando um caso de condrossarcoma em uma localização, faixa etária e apresentação radiológica bastante raros.

RESUMOObjetivo: Estabelecer se há correlação entre o momento da cirurgia e a ocorrência de complicações intra e pós-operatórias no tratamento das fraturas trocanterianas do fêmur no idoso. Método: Estudo retrospectivo avaliando o histórico de 281 pacientes operados entre 2000 e 2009 no Hospital das Clinicas da FMRP-USP. As variáveis avaliadas foram: sexo, idade, data, mecanismo do trauma, momento da admissão, tipo da fratura, complicações pré e pós-operatórias, tempo entre o trauma e a cirurgia, horário e duração da cirurgia, implante utilizado, Tip Apex Distance (TAD), tempo de hospitalização, re-operações. De acordo com o horário da cirurgia os casos foram divididos em dois grupos: Horário Comercial (7:00 -17:00) x Horário Plantão (17:01 -6:59). Resultados: Houve um predomínio de cirurgias no horário comercial, na proporção aproximada de 5:1. O intervalo de tempo médio entre a data do trauma e a cirurgia foi de três dias. Não houve diferença estatística entre os grupos (hora comercial x plantão) relacionada ao TAD médio, tipo da fratura, implante, complicações sistêmicas e mortalidade em um ano. O tempo médio entre o trauma e a cirurgia foi três dias. Conclusões: Para pacientes que são admitidos ou operados com mais de 24 horas decorridas do trauma, o horário da cirurgia não se mostrou uma variável relevante, no que diz respeito à ocorrência de complicações per operatórias. Em nossa realidade, é preferível realizar a fixação destas fraturas em horário comercial, dispondo de completa infra-estrutura de recursos humanos e técnicos.