#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#

A neurological view on spondylodiscitis


Authors: T. Andrašinová 1;  B. Adamová 1;  R. Chaloupka 2;  T. Andrašina 3
Authors place of work: Neurologická klinika LF MU a FN Brno 1;  Ortopedická klinika LF MU a FN Brno 2;  Klinika radiologie a nukleární medicíny LF MU a FN Brno 3
Published in the journal: Cesk Slov Neurol N 2018; 81(1): 86-92
Category: Krátké sdělení
doi: https://doi.org/10.14735/amcsnn201786

Summary

Spondylodiscitis is a term used to indicate infection of the intervertebral disc and osteomyelitis of the adjacent vertebrae. It is a relatively rare dis­ease in developed countries, representing 3– 5% of all skeletal infections. The inflammation is localized most often in the lumbar spine. Neurological deficits are present in 30– 50% of patients with spondylodiscitis. Frequent occurrence of chronic back pain in the general population as well as negative findings on plain radiography in the earlier stages of the disease oftentimes make the diagnosis difficult and delayed. A conservative therapeutic approach consists of antibiotic therapy which may be reduced to six weeks in uncomplicated cases according to new data. Compression of neural structures with neurological deficits, spinal instability, and failure of conservative treatment are all indications for surgical intervention. We are presenting a set of 11 patients with spondylodiscitis from which we selected 3 interesting case reports in order to demonstrate the various courses of the disease. Key words: spondylodiscitis – spine – inflammation – magnetic resonance imaging The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study. The Editorial Board declares that the manu­script met the ICMJE “uniform requirements” for biomedical papers.


Zdroje

1. Rutges JP, Kempen DH, van Dijk M et al. Outcome of conservative and surgical treatment of pyogenic spondylodiscitis: a systematic literature review. Eur Spine J 2016; 25(4): 983– 999. doi: 10.1007/ s00586-015-4318-y.

2. Sur A, Tsang K, Brown M et al. Management of adult spontaneous spondylodiscitis and its ris­­­­ing incidence. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2015; 97(6): 451– 455. doi: 10.1186/ s13256-016-1125-y.

3. Homagk L, Homagk N, Klauss JR et al. Spondylodiscitis severity code: scor­­­­ing system for the clas­sification and treatment of non-specific spondylodiscitis. Eur Spine J 2016; 25(4): 1012– 1020. doi: 10.1007/ s00586-015-3936-8.

4. Gouliouris T, Aliyu SH, Brown NM et al. Spondylodiscitis: update on dia­gnosis and management. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65(3): 11– 24. doi: 10.1093/ jac/ dkq303.

5. Saez-Arenil­las Martín A, Cerebrián Par­ra JL, Urda Martínez-Aedo AL et al. Management of infectious discitis. Outcome in one hundred and eight patients in a University Hospital. Int Orthop 2012; 36(2): 239– 244. doi: 10.1007/ s00264-011-1445-x.

6. Pola E, Autore G, Formica VM et al. New clas­sification for the treatment of pyogenic spondylodiscitis: validation study on a population of 250 patients with a fol­low-up of 2 years. Eur Spine J 2017; 26 (Suppl 4): 479– 488. doi: 10.1007/ s00586-017-5043-5.

7. Trecarichi EM, Di Meco E, Mazzotta V et al. Tuberculous spondylodiscitis: epidemiology, clinical features, treatment, and outcome. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2012; 16(2): 58– 72. doi: 10.1016/ j.spinee.2012.07.015.

8. Ramos A, Huddleston P, Patel R et al. Vertebral osteomyelitis due to candida species: a cohort study and review of the literature. Open J Orthop 2013; 3(2): 81– 89. doi: 10.4236/ ojo.2013.32016.

9. Ascione T, Balato G, Di Donato SL et al. Clinical and microbio­­logical outcomes in haematogenous spondylodiscitis treated conservatively. Eur Spine J 2017; 26 (Suppl 4): 489– 495. doi: 10.1007/ s00586-017-5036-4.

10. Linhardt O, Matus­sek J, Refior HJ et al. Long-term results of ventro-dorsal versus ventral instrumentation fusion in the treatment of spondylitis. Int Orthop 2007; 31(1): 113– 119. doi: 10.1007/ s00264-006-0140-9.

11. Si M, Yang ZP, Li ZF et al. Anterior versus posterior fixation for the treatment of lumbar pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis. Orthopedics 2013; 36(6): 831– 836. doi: 10.3928/ 01477447-20130523-33.

12. Berbari EF, Kanj SS, Kowalski TJ et al. Infectious Dis­­­eases Society of America. 2015 Infectious Dis­­eases Society of America (IDSA) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Dia­gnosis and Treatment of Native Vertebral Osteomyelitis in Adults. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 61(6): 26– 46. doi: 10.1093/ cid/ civ482.

13. Bernard L, Dinh A, Ghout I et al. Antibio­­tic treatment for 6 weeks versus 12 weeks in patients with pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, control­led trial. Lancet 2014; 385(9971): 875–882. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61233-2.

Štítky
Dětská neurologie Neurochirurgie Neurologie
Článek Editorial

Článek vyšel v časopise

Česká a slovenská neurologie a neurochirurgie

Číslo 1

2018 Číslo 1

Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
Přihlášení
Zapomenuté heslo

Zadejte e-mailovou adresu, se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.

Přihlášení

Nemáte účet?  Registrujte se

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#