The precision, accuracy and validity of detecting posterior ligamentous complex injuries of the thoracic and lumbar spine: a critical appraisal of the literature
- 763 Downloads
The diagnostic assessment and prognostic value of the posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) remains a controversial topic in the management of patients with thoracolumbar spinal injury. The purpose of this review was to critically appraise the literature and present an overview of the: (1) precision, (2) accuracy, and (3) validity of detecting PLC injuries in patients with thoracic and lumbar spine trauma.
Studies evaluating the precision, accuracy and/or validity of detecting and managing PLC injuries in patients with thoracic and/or lumbar spine injuries were searched through the Medline database (1966 to September 2011). References were retrieved and evaluated individually and independently by two authors.
Twenty-one eligible studies were identified. Few studies reported the use of countermeasures for sampling and measurement bias. In nine agreement studies, the PLC was assessed in various ways, ranging from use of booklets to a complete set of diagnostic imaging. Inter-rater and intra-rater kappa values ranged from 0.188 to 0.915 and 0.455 to 0.840, respectively. In nine accuracy studies, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging was most often (n = 6) compared with intra-operative findings. In general, MR imaging tended to demonstrate relatively high negative predictive values and relatively low positive predictive values for PLC injuries.
A wide variety of methods have been applied in the evaluation of precision and accuracy of PLC injury detection, leaving spinal surgeons with a multitude of variable results. There is scant clinical evidence demonstrating the true prognostic value of detected PLC injuries in patients with thoracic and lumbar spine injuries. We recommend the conduct of longitudinal clinical follow-up studies on those cases assessed for precision and/or accuracy of PLC injuries.
KeywordsPosterior ligamentous complex Thoracic spine Lumbar spine Thoracolumbar spine Spinal injuries Systematic review
We would like to thank Dr. Priyesh Dhoke and Dr. Hamish Deverall for their insightful discussions during the writing of this manuscript.
Conflict of interest
No funds were received in support of this study. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript. The authors have no financial interest in the subject of this article. The manuscript submitted does not contain information about medical device(s).
- 3.Holdsworth FW (1963) Fractures, dislocations, and fracture-dislocations of the spine. J Bone Jt Surg Br 45-B(1):6–20Google Scholar
- 4.Vaccaro AR, Lehman RA Jr, Hurlbert RJ, Anderson PA, Harris M, Hedlund R et al (2005) A new classification of thoracolumbar injuries: the importance of injury morphology, the integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex, and neurologic status. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(20):2325–2333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Daly LE, Bourke GJ (2007) Interpretation and uses of medical statistics, 5th edn. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK, pp 381–392Google Scholar
- 7.Chapter 8: Using nonexperimental research. In: Bordens KS, Abbott BB (eds) (2011) Research design and methods: a process approach, 8th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
- 12.Hulley SB, Cummings SR, Browner WS, Grady DG, Newman TB (2006) Designing clinical research, 3rd edn. Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, pp 37–49Google Scholar
- 18.Harrop JS, Vaccaro AR, Hurlbert RJ, Wilsey JT, Baron EM, Shaffrey CI et al (2006) Intrarater and interrater reliability and validity in the assessment of the mechanism of injury and integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex: a novel injury severity scoring system for thoracolumbar injuries. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2005. J Neurosurg Spine. 4(2):118–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Patel AA, Vaccaro AR, Albert TJ, Hilibrand AS, Harrop JS, Anderson DG et al (2007) The adoption of a new classification system: time-dependent variation in interobserver reliability of the Thoracolumbar Injury Severity Score classification system. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(3):E105–E110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Phillips B, Ball C, Sackett D, Badenoch D, Straus S, Haynes B et al (2009) Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine—Levels of Evidence (March 2009). Available from http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1025. Cited July 2012