Thoracolumbar burst fracture: Structural changes and clinical outcome of treatment

3Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the correlation between structural changes in burst fractures of thoracic and lumbar spine with clinical outcome of the treatment. Methods: A retrospective study in 25 patients with fractures of thoracic and lumbar spine burst fractures without neurological deficit. Eleven patients underwent conservative treatment and for the remaining the treatment was surgical. All patients were followed up for at least 24 months. The cases were evaluated by a protocol that included: posttraumatic measurement of kyphosis, vertebral body collapse and narrowing of the spinal canal, the visual analog scale of pain, and the quality of life questionnaire SF-36 at the follow-up. For statistical analysis, the significance level was 5% and the software SPSS 18.0 was used. Results: No statistically significant difference was observed when comparing the clinical outcomes of one treatment over another. Similarly, there was no statistically significant correlation between kyphosis and post-traumatic narrowing of the spinal canal with clinical worsening in the follow-up, regardless of the treatment used. We found a positive correlation (p<0.05) between initial collapse and SF-36 domains in both groups (operated and non-operated). Conclusion: There was no significant superiority of one treatment over the other, and no correlation was found between kyphosis and spinal canal narrowing in burst fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine without neurological deficit. However, there was correlation between initial collapse and clinical outcome in some domains of the SF-36 questionnaire.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tisot, R. A., Vieira, J. S. L., Tisot, O. F., Dos Santos, R. T., Badotti, A. A., Berardi, A., & Da Silva Collares, D. (2016). Thoracolumbar burst fracture: Structural changes and clinical outcome of treatment. Coluna/ Columna, 15(1), 68–72. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1808-185120161501150411

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free