Sankhyan Madhav, Amin Sajni, Botterbush Kathleen S, Urquiaga Jorge F, Dwyer Emma, Place Howard M, Mercier Philippe J, El Tecle Najib, Mattei Tobias A
Division of Neurological Surgery, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, 1008 S. Spring Avenue, 3rd Floor, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Mississippi Medical Center, 2500 N. State St. Jackson, MS 39216-4505, United States.
N Am Spine Soc J. 2025 Jun 21;23:100755. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2025.100755. eCollection 2025 Sep.
The appropriate management of spinal gunshot wounds (GSWs) remains controversial. This systematic review presents an overview of the available scientific evidence in the literature regarding efficacy and complication rates of surgical management and antibiotic prophylaxis for spinal GSWs.
A systematic review of PubMed/Medline was conducted, with a screening of articles for low-velocity civilian spinal GSWs. Collected information included patient demographics, injury description, management decision, outcomes of surgical versus conservative management, and the incidence of intra and extraspinal infections with prophylactic antibiotic use. Improvement was defined as the recovery of 1 or more ASIA levels. Statistical analysis involved chi-squared analysis and meta-analysis where feasible.
Thirty-four retrospective cohort studies were included. About 11% of patients were treated surgically whereas 89% were treated conservatively. Of the surgically managed patients, 88% received decompression, and only 11% received stabilization. Surgically managed patients had similar rates of neurological improvement in comparison to conservative treatment (95% CI -0.99, 13.45; p = .06), but 7% higher complication rate which was statistically significant (95% CI 0.66, 13.10; p = .02). Intraspinal infection rates were similar between the prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis groups (95% CI 1.12, 3.23; p = .35). However, the prophylaxis cohort had a higher rate of extraspinal infections (95% CI 34.82, 50.14; p < .01).
An understanding of the factors which impact decision-making in spinal GSWs is of paramount importance. We found no statistically significant difference in neurological recovery between surgically and conservatively treated patients, although surgical patients had a statistically higher rate of complications. The possible deleterious effects of antibiotic prophylaxis on extraspinal infections warrants further research regarding confounding factors and which antibiotics regimens may be implicated.
脊柱枪伤(GSWs)的恰当处理仍存在争议。本系统评价概述了文献中关于脊柱枪伤手术治疗效果和并发症发生率以及抗生素预防的现有科学证据。
对PubMed/Medline进行系统评价,筛选关于低速平民脊柱枪伤的文章。收集的信息包括患者人口统计学资料、损伤描述、治疗决策、手术与保守治疗的结果以及预防性使用抗生素时脊柱内和脊柱外感染的发生率。改善定义为美国脊髓损伤协会(ASIA)分级提高1级或更多。可行时进行统计分析,包括卡方分析和荟萃分析。
纳入34项回顾性队列研究。约11%的患者接受手术治疗,89%接受保守治疗。在接受手术治疗的患者中,88%接受了减压,仅11%接受了内固定。与保守治疗相比,手术治疗的患者神经功能改善率相似(95%可信区间 -0.99,13.45;p = 0.06),但并发症发生率高7%,具有统计学意义(95%可信区间0.66,13.10;p = 0.02)。预防性使用抗生素组与未使用抗生素组的脊柱内感染率相似(95%可信区间1.12,3.23;p = 0.35)。然而,预防性使用抗生素组的脊柱外感染率更高(95%可信区间34.82,50.14;p < 0.01)。
了解影响脊柱枪伤治疗决策的因素至关重要。我们发现手术治疗和保守治疗的患者在神经功能恢复方面无统计学显著差异,尽管手术患者的并发症发生率在统计学上更高。抗生素预防对脊柱外感染可能的有害影响值得进一步研究混杂因素以及哪些抗生素方案可能与之相关。