Charcot spine: Two new case reports and a systematic review of 109 clinical cases from the literature

Barrey, Cédric; Massourides, H.; Cotton, François; Perrin, Gilles; Rode, G.

doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2009.11.008

Cited by 56 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

143

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This eventually results in dislocation and instability of the vertebral column 4 as seen in all of our presented patients. The most accepted pathophysiological hypothesis highlights the initial loss of proprioception and pain/temperature sensation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

“…Moreover, the loss of sympathetic innervation probably has an essential role in the ). Previously suggested diagnostic criteria are: 4,5 • Presence of an underlying disease, which impairs adequate proprioception and pain sensation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To be included patient had to fulfill certain diagnostic and radiologic criteria for Charcot spine as previously described. 4 Due to the retrospective character of the study, the complete absence regarding treatment interference and the clinical data sets being collected as part of institutional, national and international quality programs, a vote from the ethic committee was not indicated.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, a plethora of diseases such as diabetic neuropathy, tertiary syphilis, congenital absence of pain syndrome, syringomyelia as well as traumatic and non-traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) have been described to cause Charcot spinal arthropathy (CSA). [3][4][5][6] After being described first in 1978 as a sequel of traumatic SCI, 7 the majority of cases with CSA was attributed to be a long-term complication of SCI. 4,8 As life expectancy of this patient cohort increases and with more surgical spine procedures being performed, Charcot spine is likely to be seen more frequently by spine specialists in the future.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[3][4][5][6] After being described first in 1978 as a sequel of traumatic SCI, 7 the majority of cases with CSA was attributed to be a long-term complication of SCI. 4,8 As life expectancy of this patient cohort increases and with more surgical spine procedures being performed, Charcot spine is likely to be seen more frequently by spine specialists in the future. A better understanding of the pathophysiology, altered biomechanics and bone metabolism is needed to provide the best individual care for these patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Charcot spinal arthropathy: an increasing long-term sequel after spinal cord injury with no straightforward management

Grassner

Geuther

Mach

et al. 2015

Spinal Cord Ser Cases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charcot spinal arthropathy (CSA) is most likely increasing in patients suffering from consequences of spinal cord injury. We want to highlight initial symptoms, certain risk factors and perioperative complications of this condition. A single center retrospective case series in a specialized Center for Spinal Cord Injuries, BG Trauma Center Murnau, Germany highlighting the potential obstacles in the management of Charcot spine. We describe four female paraplegic patients (mean age: 50.75 years; range: 42-67), who developed Charcot spinal arthropathies. The mean age at the time of the accident was 21.5 years (3-35), the time lag after the accident before CSA was developed and finally diagnosed was on average 29.5 years (17-39) and the mean follow-up period was 39.5 months (6-73). Patient histories, initial symptoms, risk factors as well as the management and postoperative complications are provided. Charcot spine is an important potential sequel of spinal cord injury, which can lead to significant disability and spinal emergencies in affected individuals. More studies are needed to provide better recommendations for spine surgeons. Conservative treatment is an option. Posterior fixation alone does not seem to be sufficient.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%