Venger B H, Simpson R K, Narayan R K
Department of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
J Neurosurg. 1989 Apr;70(4):514-8. doi: 10.3171/jns.1989.70.4.0514.
Associated injuries to the neck, chest, or abdomen are found in approximately one-quarter of all civilians with penetrating spinal cord or cauda equina injuries. While the value of and indications for general surgical exploration and repair of these injuries are fairly self-evident, the value of neurosurgical intervention in terms of neurological outcome and infection prophylaxis remains the subject of debate. To study this issue, 160 civilian patients with penetrating spinal injuries and neurological deficits were retrospectively reviewed. Associated injuries of the esophagus, trachea, bronchi, or bowel were seen in 107 individuals (67%); 33 (31%) of these patients had abdominal injuries, 25 (23%) had neck injuries, 23 (21%) had thoracic injuries, and 26 (24%) had injuries occurring at multiple sites. Of these 107 patients, 67 (63%) had complete neurological injuries and the remaining 40 (37%) demonstrated incomplete deficits. All 107 patients underwent surgical exploration and repair of their visceral injuries; in 19 of them a neurosurgical procedure was also performed for decompression of the neural elements and/or debridement of the wound. Regardless of the presence of associated visceral injuries, the mechanism of injury, and the extent of the neurological deficit, no statistically significant difference in neurological outcome was found in patients with or without neurosurgical intervention. Complications associated with neurological injury were reported in 17 (11%) of the total group of 160 patients. Four (21%) of the 19 patients who had neurosurgical intervention suffered a related complication, compared to only six (7%) of the 88 patients who were managed conservatively (p less than 0.05). Within the limitations of a retrospective review, the results of this study do not clearly support the value of routine neurosurgical intervention as an adjunct to general surgical repair in cases of spinal injury associated with penetrating visceral trauma.
在所有脊髓或马尾神经穿透伤的平民患者中,约四分之一存在颈部、胸部或腹部的合并伤。虽然对这些损伤进行普外科探查和修复的价值及指征相当明显,但神经外科干预在神经功能预后和预防感染方面的价值仍存在争议。为研究该问题,对160例有脊髓穿透伤和神经功能缺损的平民患者进行了回顾性分析。107例患者(67%)出现食管、气管、支气管或肠道的合并伤;其中33例(31%)有腹部损伤,25例(23%)有颈部损伤,23例(21%)有胸部损伤,26例(24%)有多处损伤。在这107例患者中,67例(63%)有完全性神经损伤,其余40例(37%)表现为不完全性缺损。所有107例患者均接受了内脏损伤的手术探查和修复;其中19例还进行了神经外科手术以减压神经组织和/或清创伤口。无论是否存在合并内脏损伤、损伤机制以及神经功能缺损的程度,接受或未接受神经外科干预的患者在神经功能预后方面均未发现统计学上的显著差异。160例患者中有17例(11%)报告了与神经损伤相关的并发症。19例接受神经外科干预的患者中有4例(21%)出现相关并发症,而88例保守治疗的患者中只有6例(7%)出现并发症(p<0.05)。在回顾性分析的局限性内,本研究结果并未明确支持在穿透性内脏创伤合并脊髓损伤的病例中,常规神经外科干预作为普外科修复辅助手段的价值。