Spinal Cord Injuries Clinical Presentation

  • Author: Donald Schreiber, MD, CM; Chief Editor: Rick Kulkarni, MD   more...
 
Updated: Dec 15, 2011
 

History and Physical Examination

As with all trauma patients, initial clinical evaluation of a patient with suspected spinal cord injury (SCI) begins with a primary survey. The primary survey focuses on life-threatening conditions. Assessment of airway, breathing, and circulation (ABCs) takes precedence. A spinal cord injury must be considered concurrently.[23, 24, 25]

Perform careful history taking, focusing on symptoms related to the vertebral column (most commonly pain) and any motor or sensory deficits. Ascertaining the mechanism of injury is also important in identifying the potential for spinal injury.

The axial skeleton should be examined to identify and provide initial treatment of potentially unstable spinal fractures from both a mechanical and a neurologic basis. The posterior cervical spine and paraspinal tissues should be evaluated for pain, swelling, bruising, or possible malalignment. Logrolling the patient to systematically examine each spinous process of the entire axial skeleton from the occiput to the sacrum can help identify and localize injury. The skeletal level of injury is the level of the greatest vertebral damage on radiograph.

Complete bilateral loss of sensation or motor function below a certain level indicates a complete spinal cord injury.

Pulmonary evaluation

The clinical assessment of pulmonary function in acute spinal cord injury begins with careful history taking regarding respiratory symptoms and a review of underlying cardiopulmonary comorbidity such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or heart failure.

Carefully evaluate respiratory rate, chest wall expansion, abdominal wall movement, cough, and chest wall and/or pulmonary injuries. Arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis and pulse oximetry are especially useful, because the bedside diagnosis of hypoxia or carbon dioxide retention may be difficult.

The degree of respiratory dysfunction is ultimately dependent on preexisting pulmonary comorbidity, the level of the spinal cord injury, and any associated chest wall or lung injury. Any or all of the following determinants of pulmonary function may be impaired in the setting of spinal cord injury:

  • Loss of ventilatory muscle function from denervation and/or associated chest wall injury
  • Lung injury, such as pneumothorax, hemothorax, or pulmonary contusion
  • Decreased central ventilatory drive that is associated with head injury or exogenous effects of alcohol and drugs

A direct relationship exists between the level of cord injury and the degree of respiratory dysfunction, as follows:

  • With high lesions (ie, C1 or C2), vital capacity is only 5-10% of normal, and cough is absent
  • With lesions at C3 through C6, vital capacity is 20% of normal, and cough is weak and ineffective
  • With high thoracic cord injuries (ie, T2 through T4), vital capacity is 30-50% of normal, and cough is weak
  • With lower cord injuries, respiratory function improves
  • With injuries at T11, respiratory dysfunction is minimal; vital capacity is essentially normal, and cough is strong.

Other findings of respiratory disfunction include the following:

  • Agitation, anxiety, or restlessness
  • Poor chest wall expansion
  • Decreased air entry
  • Rales, rhonchi
  • Pallor, cyanosis
  • Increased heart rate
  • Paradoxic movement of the chest wall
  • Increased accessory muscle use
  • Moist cough

Hemorrhage, hypotension, and hemorrhagic and neurogenic shock

Hemorrhagic shock may be difficult to diagnose, because the clinical findings may be affected by autonomic dysfunction. Disruption of autonomic pathways prevents tachycardia and peripheral vasoconstriction that normally characterizes hemorrhagic shock. This vital sign confusion may falsely reassure the emergency physician. In addition, occult internal injuries with associated hemorrhage may be missed.

In a study showing a high incidence of autonomic dysfunction, including orthostatic hypotension and impaired cardiovascular control, following spinal cord injury, it was recommended that an assessment of autonomic function be routinely used, along with American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) assessment, in the neurologic evaluation of patients with spinal cord injury.[26]

In all patients with spinal cord injury and hypotension, a diligent search for sources of hemorrhage must be made before hypotension is attributed to neurogenic shock. In acute spinal cord injury, shock may be neurogenic, hemorrhagic, or both.

The following are clinical "pearls" useful in distinguishing hemorrhagic shock from neurogenic shock:

  • Neurogenic shock occurs only in the presence of acute spinal cord injury above T6; hypotension and/or shock with acute spinal cord injury at or below T6 is caused by hemorrhage
  • Hypotension with a spinal fracture alone, without any neurologic deficit or apparent spinal cord injury, is invariably due to hemorrhage
  • Patients with a spinal cord injury above T6 may not have the classic physical findings associated with hemorrhage (eg, tachycardia, peripheral vasoconstriction); this vital sign confusion attributed to autonomic dysfunction is common in spinal cord injury
  • The presence of vital sign confusion in acute spinal cord injury and a high incidence of associated injuries requires a diligent search for occult sources of hemorrhage

Cord syndromes and nerve root injury

A careful neurologic assessment, including motor function, sensory evaluation, deep tendon reflexes, and perineal evaluation, is critical and required to establish the presence or absence of spinal cord injury and to classify the lesion according to a specific cord syndrome.

The presence or absence of sacral sparing is a key prognostic indicator. Sacral-sparing is evidence of the physiologic continuity of spinal cord long tract fibers (with the sacral fibers located more at the periphery of the cord). Indication of the presence of sacral fibers is of significance in defining the completeness of the injury and the potential for some motor recovery. This finding tends to be repeated and better defined after the period of spinal shock.

Determine the level of injury and try to differentiate nerve root injury from spinal cord injury, but recognize that both may be present. Differentiating a nerve root injury from spinal cord injury can be difficult. The presence of neurologic deficits that indicate multilevel involvement suggests spinal cord injury rather than a nerve root injury. In the absence of spinal shock, motor weakness with intact reflexes indicates spinal cord injury, whereas motor weakness with absent reflexes indicates a nerve root lesion.

ASIA has established pertinent definitions (see the following image). The neurologic level of injury is the lowest (most caudal) level with normal sensory and motor function. For example, a patient with C5 quadriplegia has, by definition, abnormal motor and sensory function from C6 down.

American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) method fAmerican Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) method for classifying spinal cord injury (SCI) by neurologic level.

Sensory function testing

Assessment of sensory function helps to identify the different pathways for light touch, proprioception, vibration, and pain. Use a pinprick to evaluate pain sensation.

Sensory level is the most caudal dermatome with a normal score of 2/2 for pinprick and light touch.

Sensory index scoring is the total score from adding each dermatomal score with a possible total score of 112 each for pinprick and light touch.

Sensory testing is performed at the following levels:

  • C2: Occipital protuberance
  • C3: Supraclavicular fossa
  • C4: Top of the acromioclavicular joint
  • C5: Lateral side of antecubital fossa
  • C6: Thumb
  • C7: Middle finger
  • C8: Little finger
  • T1: Medial side of antecubital fossa
  • T2: Apex of axilla
  • T3: Third intercostal space
  • T4: Fourth intercostal space at nipple line
  • T5: Fifth intercostal space (midway between T4 and T6)
  • T6: Sixth intercostal space at the level of the xiphisternum
  • T7: Seventh intercostal space (midway between T6 and T8)
  • T8: Eighth intercostal space (midway between T6 and T10)
  • T9: Ninth intercostal space (midway between T8 and T10)
  • T10: 10th intercostal space or umbilicus
  • T11: 11th intercostal space (midway between T10 and T12)
  • T12: Midpoint of inguinal ligament
  • L1: Half the distance between T12 and L2
  • L2: Midanterior thigh
  • L3: Medial femoral condyle
  • L4: Medial malleolus
  • L5: Dorsum of the foot at third metatarsophalangeal joint
  • S1: Lateral heel
  • S2: Popliteal fossa in the midline
  • S3: Ischial tuberosity
  • S4-5: Perianal area (taken as 1 level)

Sensory scoring is for light touch and pinprick, as follows:

  • 0: Absent; a score of zero is given if the patient cannot differentiate between the point of a sharp pin and the dull edge
  • 1: Impaired or hyperesthesia
  • 2: Intact

Motor strength testing

Muscle strength always should be graded according to the maximum strength attained, no matter how briefly that strength is maintained during the examination. The muscles are tested with the patient supine.

Motor level is determined by the most caudal key muscles that have muscle strength of 3 or above while the segment above is normal (= 5).

Motor index scoring uses the 0-5 scoring of each key muscle, with total points being 25 per extremity and with the total possible score being 100.

Lower extremities motor score (LEMS) uses the ASIA key muscles in both lower extremities, with a total possible score of 50 (ie, maximum score of 5 for each key muscle [L2, L3, L4, L5, and S1] per extremity). A LEMS of 20 or less indicates that the patient is likely to be a limited ambulator. A LEMS of 30 or more suggests that the individual is likely to be a community ambulator.

ASIA recommends use of the following scale of findings for the assessment of motor strength in spinal cord injury:

  • 0: No contraction or movement
  • 1: Minimal movement
  • 2: Active movement, but not against gravity
  • 3: Active movement against gravity
  • 4: Active movement against resistance
  • 5: Active movement against full resistance

Neurologic level and extent of injury

Neurologic level of injury is the most caudal level at which motor and sensory levels are intact, with motor level as defined above and sensory level defined by a sensory score of 2.

Zone of partial preservation is all segments below the neurologic level of injury with preservation of motor or sensory findings. This index is used only when the injury is complete.

The key muscles that need to be tested to establish neurologic level are as follows:

  • C5: Elbow flexors (biceps, brachialis)
  • C6: Wrist extensors (extensor carpi radialis longus and brevis)
  • C7: Elbow extensors (triceps)
  • C8: Long finger flexors (flexor digitorum profundus)
  • T1: Small finger abductors (abductor digiti minimi)
  • L2: Hip flexors (iliopsoas)
  • L3: Knee extensors (quadriceps)
  • L4: Ankle dorsiflexors (tibialis anterior)
  • L5: Long toe extensors (extensor hallucis longus)
  • S1: Ankle plantar flexors (gastrocnemius, soleus)

Perform a rectal examination to check motor function or sensation at the anal mucocutaneous junction. The presence of either is considered sacral-sparing.

The sacral roots may be evaluated by documenting the following:

  • Perineal sensation to light touch and pinprick
  • Bulbocavernous reflex, S3 or S4
  • Anal wink, S5
  • Rectal tone
  • Urine retention or incontinence
  • Priapism

The extent of injury is defined by the ASIA Impairment Scale (modified from the Frankel classification), using the following categories[2, 3] :

  • A = Complete: No sensory or motor function is preserved in sacral segments S4-S5[27]
  • B = Incomplete: Sensory, but not motor, function is preserved below the neurologic level and extends through sacral segments S4-S5
  • C = Incomplete: Motor function is preserved below the neurologic level, and most key muscles below the neurologic level have muscle grade less than 3
  • D = Incomplete: Motor function is preserved below the neurologic level, and most key muscles below the neurologic level have muscle grade greater than or equal to 3
  • E = Normal: Sensory and motor functions are normal

Thus, definitions of complete and incomplete spinal cord injury, as based on the above ASIA definition, with sacral-sparing, are as follows[2, 3, 27] :

  • Complete: Absence of sensory and motor functions in the lowest sacral segments
  • Incomplete: Preservation of sensory or motor function below the level of injury, including the lowest sacral segments

With the ASIA classification system, the terms paraparesis and quadriparesis have become obsolete. Instead, the ASIA classification uses the description of the neurologic level of injury in defining the type of spinal cord injury (eg, "C8 ASIA A with zone of partial preservation of pinprick to T2").

 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Donald Schreiber, MD, CM  Associate Professor of Surgery (Emergency Medicine), Stanford University School of Medicine

Donald Schreiber, MD, CM is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Emergency Physicians

Disclosure: Abbott Point of Care Inc Research Grant and Speakers Bureau Speaking and teaching; Nanosphere Inc Grant/research funds Research; Singulex Inc Grant/research funds Research; Abbott Diagnostics Inc Grant/research funds None

Chief Editor

Rick Kulkarni, MD  Attending Physician, Department of Emergency Medicine, Cambridge Health Alliance, Division of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School

Rick Kulkarni, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Academy of Emergency Medicine, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Medical Association, American Medical Informatics Association, Phi Beta Kappa, and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

Disclosure: WebMD Salary Employment

Additional Contributors

Denise I Campagnolo, MD, MS Director of Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Research and Staff Physiatrist, Barrow Neurology Clinics, St Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center; Investigator for Barrow Neurology Clinics; Director, NARCOMS Project for Consortium of MS Centers

Denise I Campagnolo, MD, MS is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Paraplegia Society, Association of Academic Physiatrists, and Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers

Disclosure: Teva Neuroscience Honoraria Speaking and teaching; Serono-Pfizer Honoraria Speaking and teaching; Genzyme Corporation Grant/research funds investigator; Biogen Idec Grant/research funds investigator; Genentech, Inc Grant/research funds investigator; Eli Lilly & Company Grant/research funds investigator; Novartis investigator; MSDx LLC Grant/research funds investigator; BioMS Technology Corp Grant/research funds investigator; Avanir Pharmaceuticals Grant/research funds investigator

Segun T Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA, FAAPMR, FAANEM, CIME, DipMI(RCSed) Former Clinical Instructor, Mount Sinai Medical School; Current Director, Pain and Injuries Rehabilitation Services, PMRehab Pain and Sports Medicine Associates

Segun T Dawodu, MD, JD, MBA, FAAPMR, FAANEM, CIME, DipMI(RCSed) is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American College of Sports Medicine, American Medical Association, American Medical Informatics Association, Association of Academic Physiatrists, International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, and Royal College of Surgeons of England

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Daniel J Dire, MD, FACEP, FAAP, FAAEM Clinical Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Texas Medical School at Houston; Clinical Professor, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Sciences Center San Antonio

Daniel J Dire, MD, FACEP, FAAP, FAAEM is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Clinical Toxicology, American Academy of Emergency Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Emergency Physicians, and Association of Military Surgeons of the US

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Milton J Klein, DO, MBA Consulting Physiatrist, Heritage Valley Health System-Sewickley Hospital and Ohio Valley General Hospital

Milton J Klein, DO, MBA is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Disability Evaluating Physicians, American Academy of Medical Acupuncture, American Academy of Osteopathy, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Medical Association, American Osteopathic Association, American Osteopathic College of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Pain Society, and Pennsylvania Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Richard Salcido, MD Chairman, Erdman Professor of Rehabilitation, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

Richard Salcido, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Pain Medicine, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American College of Physician Executives, American Medical Association, and American Paraplegia Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Tom Scaletta, MD Chair, Department of Emergency Medicine, Edward Hospital; Past-President, American Academy of Emergency Medicine

Tom Scaletta, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Emergency Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine

Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

References
  1. Westgren N, Levi R. Quality of life and traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Nov 1998;79(11):1433-9. [Medline].

  2. American Spinal Injury Association. International Standards for Neurological Classifications of Spinal Cord Injury. revised ed. Chicago, Ill: American Spinal Injury Association; 2000:1-23.

  3. Ditunno JF Jr, Young W, Donovan WH, Creasey G. The international standards booklet for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury. American Spinal Injury Association. Paraplegia. Feb 1994;32(2):70-80. [Medline].

  4. Kriss VM, Kriss TC. SCIWORA (spinal cord injury without radiographic abnormality) in infants and children. Clin Pediatr (Phila). Mar 1996;35(3):119-24. [Medline].

  5. Pang D. Spinal cord injury without radiographic abnormality in children, 2 decades later. Neurosurgery. Dec 2004;55(6):1325-42; discussion 1342-3. [Medline].

  6. Yucesoy K, Yuksel KZ. SCIWORA in MRI era. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. May 2008;110(5):429-33. [Medline].

  7. Rhee P, Kuncir EJ, Johnson L, Brown C, Velmahos G, Martin M, et al. Cervical spine injury is highly dependent on the mechanism of injury following blunt and penetrating assault. J Trauma. Nov 2006;61(5):1166-70. [Medline].

  8. National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center (NSCIS). Spinal cord injury facts and figures at a glance. February 2011;Accessed August 30, 2011. Available at https://www.nscisc.uab.edu/public_content/pdf/Facts%202011%20Feb%20Final.pdf.

  9. Krause JS, Sternberg M, Lottes S, Maides J. Mortality after spinal cord injury: an 11-year prospective study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Aug 1997;78(8):815-21. [Medline].

  10. DeVivo MJ. Epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury. In: Kirshblum S, Campagnolo DI, DeLisa JA, eds. Spinal Cord Medicine. Baltimore, Md: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002:69-81.

  11. Go BK, DeVivo MJ, Richards JS. The epidemiology of spinal cord injury. In: Stover SL, DeLisa JA, Whiteneck GG, eds. Spinal Cord Injury. Gaithersburg, Md: Aspen; 1995:21-55.

  12. Avery JD, Avery JA. Malignant spinal cord compression: a hospice emergency. Home Healthc Nurse. Sep 2008;26(8):457-61; quiz 462-3. [Medline].

  13. Vitale MG, Goss JM, Matsumoto H, Roye DP Jr. Epidemiology of pediatric spinal cord injury in the United States: years 1997 and 2000. J Pediatr Orthop. Nov-Dec 2006;26(6):745-9. [Medline].

  14. Krause JS. Years to employment after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Sep 2003;84(9):1282-9. [Medline].

  15. Morse LR, Stolzmann K, Nguyen HP, Jain NB, Zayac C, Gagnon DR, et al. Association between mobility mode and C-reactive protein levels in men with chronic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Apr 2008;89(4):726-31. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  16. Furlan JC, Fehlings MG. Cardiovascular complications after acute spinal cord injury: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25(5):E13. [Medline].

  17. Turner AP, Bombardier CH, Rimmele CT. A typology of alcohol use patterns among persons with recent traumatic brain injury or spinal cord injury: implications for treatment matching. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Mar 2003;84(3):358-64. [Medline].

  18. Frisbie JH, Tun CG. Drinking and spinal cord injury. J Am Paraplegia Soc. Oct 1984;7(4):71-3. [Medline].

  19. Strauss DJ, Devivo MJ, Paculdo DR, Shavelle RM. Trends in life expectancy after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Aug 2006;87(8):1079-85. [Medline].

  20. Budh CN, Osteråker AL. Life satisfaction in individuals with a spinal cord injury and pain. Clin Rehabil. Jan 2007;21(1):89-96. [Medline].

  21. Widerström-Noga E, Biering-Sørensen F, Bryce T, Cardenas DD, Finnerup NB, Jensen MP, et al. The international spinal cord injury pain basic data set. Spinal Cord. Dec 2008;46(12):818-23. [Medline].

  22. van Middendorp JJ, Hosman AJ, Donders AR, Pouw MH, Ditunno JF Jr, Curt A, et al. A clinical prediction rule for ambulation outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet. Mar 19 2011;377(9770):1004-10. [Medline].

  23. Harris MB, Sethi RK. The initial assessment and management of the multiple-trauma patient with an associated spine injury. Spine. May 15 2006;31(11 Suppl):S9-15; discussion S36. [Medline].

  24. Ho CH, Wuermser LA, Priebe MM, Chiodo AE, Scelza WM, Kirshblum SC. Spinal cord injury medicine. 1. Epidemiology and classification. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Mar 2007;88(3 Suppl 1):S49-54. [Medline].

  25. Wuermser LA, Ho CH, Chiodo AE, Priebe MM, Kirshblum SC, Scelza WM. Spinal cord injury medicine. 2. Acute care management of traumatic and nontraumatic injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Mar 2007;88(3 Suppl 1):S55-61. [Medline].

  26. Claydon VE, Krassioukov AV. Orthostatic hypotension and autonomic pathways after spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. Dec 2006;23(12):1713-25. [Medline].

  27. Waters RL, Adkins RH, Yakura JS. Definition of complete spinal cord injury. Paraplegia. Nov 1991;29(9):573-81. [Medline].

  28. Brown CV, Antevil JL, Sise MJ, Sack DI. Spiral computed tomography for the diagnosis of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine fractures: its time has come. J Trauma. May 2005;58(5):890-5; discussion 895-6. [Medline].

  29. Grogan EL, Morris JA Jr, Dittus RS, et al. Cervical spine evaluation in urban trauma centers: lowering institutional costs and complications through helical CT scan. J Am Coll Surg. Feb 2005;200(2):160-5. [Medline].

  30. Keenen TL, Antony J, Benson DR. Non-contiguous spinal fractures. J Trauma. Apr 1990;30(4):489-91. [Medline].

  31. Powell JN, Waddell JP, Tucker WS, Transfeldt EE. Multiple-level noncontiguous spinal fractures. J Trauma. Aug 1989;29(8):1146-50; discussion 1150-1. [Medline].

  32. Hoffman JR, Mower WR, Wolfson AB, Todd KH, Zucker MI. Validity of a set of clinical criteria to rule out injury to the cervical spine in patients with blunt trauma. National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study Group. N Engl J Med. Jul 13 2000;343(2):94-9. [Medline].

  33. Stiell IG, Clement CM, McKnight RD, et al. The Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS low-risk criteria in patients with trauma. N Engl J Med. Dec 25 2003;349(26):2510-8. [Medline].

  34. Stiell IG, Wells GA, Vandemheen KL. The Canadian C-spine rule for radiography in alert and stable trauma patients. JAMA. Oct 17 2001;286(15):1841-8. [Medline].

  35. Acheson MB, Livingston RR, Richardson ML, Stimac GK. High-resolution CT scanning in the evaluation of cervical spine fractures: comparison with plain film examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Jun 1987;148(6):1179-85. [Medline].

  36. Congress of Neurologic Surgeons. Blood pressure management after acute spinal cord injury. Neurosurgery. Mar 2002;50(3 Suppl):S58-62. [Medline].

  37. Bracken MB, Shepard MJ, Hellenbrand KG, et al. Methylprednisolone and neurological function 1 year after spinal cord injury. Results of the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. J Neurosurg. Nov 1985;63(5):704-13. [Medline].

  38. Bracken MB, Shepard MJ, Holford TR, et al. Administration of methylprednisolone for 24 or 48 hours or tirilazad mesylate for 48 hours in the treatment of acute spinal cord injury. Results of the Third National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Randomized Controlled Trial. National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. JAMA. May 28 1997;277(20):1597-604. [Medline].

  39. Bracken MB. Steroids for acute spinal cord injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;CD001046. [Medline].

  40. Nesathurai S. Steroids and spinal cord injury: revisiting the NASCIS 2 and NASCIS 3 trials. J Trauma. Dec 1998;45(6):1088-93. [Medline].

  41. Hurlbert RJ, Hamilton MG. Methylprednisolone for acute spinal cord injury: 5-year practice reversal. Can J Neurol Sci. Mar 2008;35(1):41-5. [Medline].

  42. Sansam KA. Controversies in the management of traumatic spinal cord injury. Clin Med. Mar-Apr 2006;6(2):202-4. [Medline].

  43. Hadley MN, Walters BC, Grabb PA, et al. Pharmacological therapy after acute spinal cord injury. Neurosurgery. 2002;50 Suppl:63-72.

  44. Eck JC, Nachtigall D, Humphreys SC, Hodges SD. Questionnaire survey of spine surgeons on the use of methylprednisolone for acute spinal cord injury. Spine. Apr 20 2006;31(9):E250-3. [Medline].

  45. Geisler FH, Dorsey FC, Coleman WP. Recovery of motor function after spinal-cord injury--a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with GM-1 ganglioside. N Engl J Med. Jun 27 1991;324(26):1829-38. [Medline].

  46. Bagnall AM, Jones L, Duffy S, Riemsma RP. Spinal fixation surgery for acute traumatic spinal cord injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Jan 23 2008;CD004725. [Medline].

  47. Gaebler C, Maier R, Kutscha-Lissberg F, Mrkonjic L, Vecsei V. Results of spinal cord decompression and thoracolumbar pedicle stabilisation in relation to the time of operation. Spinal Cord. Jan 1999;37(1):33-9. [Medline].

  48. Mirza SK, Krengel WF 3rd, Chapman JR, Anderson PA, Bailey JC, Grady MS. Early versus delayed surgery for acute cervical spinal cord injury. Clin Orthop Relat Res. Feb 1999;(359):104-14. [Medline].

  49. Vaccaro AR, Daugherty RJ, Sheehan TP, et al. Neurologic outcome of early versus late surgery for cervical spinal cord injury. Spine. Nov 15 1997;22(22):2609-13. [Medline].

  50. Annual Report for the Model Spinal Cord Injury Care Systems [database online]. Birmingham, Alabama, USA: National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center; December 2007.

  51. Fehlings MG, Perrin RG. The role and timing of early decompression for cervical spinal cord injury: update with a review of recent clinical evidence. Injury. Jul 2005;36 Suppl 2:B13-26. [Medline].

  52. Fisher CG, Noonan VK, Dvorak MF. Changing face of spine trauma care in North America. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). May 15 2006;31(11 Suppl):S2-8; discussion S36. [Medline].

  53. Hurlbert RJ. Strategies of medical intervention in the management of acute spinal cord injury. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). May 15 2006;31(11 Suppl):S16-21; discussion S36. [Medline].

Previous
Next
 
American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) method for classifying spinal cord injury (SCI) by neurologic level.
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2012 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.