2022
DOI: 10.1089/neu.2021.0351
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prognostic Factors for Cervical Spinal Cord Injury without Major Bone Injury in Elderly Patients

Abstract: In the current aging society, there has been a marked increase in the incidence of cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) without major bone injury. This multi-center study aimed to identify predictors of neurological improvement in elderly patients with CSCI without major bone injury. The participants were 591 patients aged ≥65 years with CSCI without major bone injury and a minimum follow-up period of three months. Neurologic status was defined using the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…vs. 44.2%, p<0.001) than those in the non-OPLL group [14] (Table5). Before matching, patients in the OPLL group displayed a lower baseline AIS grade (p=0.032) and baseline AMS (58.2±32.8 vs. 65.2±29.2, p=0.009) than those in the non-OPLL group [15] . There were no signi cant differences in the in-hospital complications and mortality between the groups (28.0% vs. 22.9%, p=0.166; 2.4% vs. 2.0%, p=0.770) (Table 6).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…vs. 44.2%, p<0.001) than those in the non-OPLL group [14] (Table5). Before matching, patients in the OPLL group displayed a lower baseline AIS grade (p=0.032) and baseline AMS (58.2±32.8 vs. 65.2±29.2, p=0.009) than those in the non-OPLL group [15] . There were no signi cant differences in the in-hospital complications and mortality between the groups (28.0% vs. 22.9%, p=0.166; 2.4% vs. 2.0%, p=0.770) (Table 6).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…3352-1) and each center. The current study is a report presentation collected from the similar data as other studies [14,15] .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Patients in the OPLL group demonstrated younger age (74.4 ± 6.6 vs. 75.9 ± 6.7, p = 0.008), higher men-to-women ratio (78.7% vs. 68.2%, p = 0.006), higher BMI (22.8 ± 4.2 vs. 22.0 ± 4.0, p = 0.020), higher rate of smoking history (39.8% vs. 27.1%, p = 0.001), and a higher proportion of surgical treatment (61.6% vs. 44.2%, p < 0.001) than those in the non-OPLL group 14 (Table 5 ). Patients in the OPLL group displayed a lower baseline AIS grade (p = 0.032) and baseline AMS (58.2 ± 32.8 vs. 65.2 ± 29.2, p = 0.009) than those in the non-OPLL group before matching 15 . There were no significant differences in the in-hospital complications and mortality between the groups (28.0% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.166; 2.4% vs. 2.0%, p = 0.770) (Table 6 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…3352-1) and each center approved the study protocol. The current study is a report presentation collected from similar data as other studies 14 , 15 and was conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study analyzed multi-center registry data retrospectively collected by the Japan Association of Spine Surgeons with Ambition (JASA) [ 16 ]. Registrars reviewed the medical records and retrospectively registered cases into the JASA database based on the following inclusion and exclusion criteria: Inclusion criteria: patients aged ≥65 years with traumatic cervical SCI and/or traumatic cervical fracture; patients treated conservatively or surgically between 2010 and 2020 at an institution registered in the JASA and those who were followed for at least three months after the injury; Exclusion criteria: patients with cervical metastasis; and those with any missing data; Registrars did not exclude patients on the basis of specific medications, surgical procedures, surgical instruments, and/or reasons other than the inclusion/exclusion criteria indicated above.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%