Contemporary Practice Patterns in the Treatment of Cervical Stenosis and Central Cord Syndrome: A Survey of the Cervical Spine Research Society

Hannah A Levy; Zachariah W Pinter; Erick R Kazarian; Sonal Sodha; John M Rhee; Michael G Fehlings; Brett A Freedman; Ahmad N Nassr; Brian A Karamian; Arjun S Sebastian; Bradford Currier

doi:10.1097/BSD.0000000000001663

Contemporary Practice Patterns in the Treatment of Cervical Stenosis and Central Cord Syndrome: A Survey of the Cervical Spine Research Society

Clin Spine Surg. 2024 Aug 5. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001663. Online ahead of print.

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
² Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rothman Institute, New York City, NY.
³ Rasouli Spine Surgery, Beverly Hills, CA.
⁴ Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
⁵ Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁶ Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.

PMID: 39101583
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001663

Abstract

Study design: Cross-sectional study.

Objective: To evaluate for areas of consensus and divergence of opinion within the spine community regarding the management of cervical spondylotic conditions and acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) and the influence of the patient's age, disease severity, and myelomalacia.

Summary of background data: There is ongoing disagreement regarding the indications for, and urgency of, operative intervention in patients with mild degenerative myelopathy, moderate to severe radiculopathy, isolated axial symptomatology with evidence of spinal cord compression, and ATCCS without myelomalacia.

Methods: A survey request was sent to 330 attendees of the Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS) 2021 Annual Meeting to assess practice patterns regarding the treatment of cervical stenosis, myelopathy, radiculopathy, and ATCCS in 16 unique clinical vignettes with associated MRIs. Operative versus nonoperative treatment consensus was defined by a management option selected by >80% of survey participants.

Results: Overall, 116 meeting attendees completed the survey. Consensus supported nonoperative management for elderly patients with axial neck pain and adults with axial neck pain without myelomalacia. Operative management was indicated for adult patients with mild myelopathy and myelomalacia, adult patients with severe radiculopathy, elderly patients with severe radiculopathy and myelomalacia, and elderly ATCCS patients with pre-existing myelopathic symptoms. Treatment discrepancy in favor of nonoperative management was found for adult patients with isolated axial symptomatology and myelomalacia. Treatment discrepancy favored operative management for elderly patients with mild myelopathy, adult patients with mild myelopathy without myelomalacia, elderly patients with severe radiculopathy without myelomalacia, and elderly ATCCS patients without preceding symptoms.

Conclusions: Although there is uncertainty regarding the treatment of mild myelopathy, operative intervention was favored for nonelderly patients with evidence of myelomalacia or radiculopathy and for elderly patients with ATCCS, especially if pre-injury myelopathic symptoms were present.

Level of evidence: Level V.