Advertisement

Bracing for Patients With Spinal Tumors

  • Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski
  • Robert F. McLain
  • Edward C. Benzel
Part of the Current Clinical Oncology book series (CCO)

Abstract

The literature regarding the use of braces in patients with spinal tumors is sparse. In fact, most references on spinal bracing relate to (1) idiopathic adolescent scoliosis (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), (2) osteoporotic compression fractures (710), and (3) thoracolumbar spine fractures (11, 12, 13, 14). The role of bracing is much less well defined for the operative and non-operative treatment of spinal tumors. However, they are commonly used in the immediate postoperative period after tumor resection and surgical stabilization to protect both the patient and the integrity of the spinal construct. Although long-term bracing may be successfully used as the sole way of treating spinal instability resulting from tumor, the role of long-term bracing for patients with spinal tumors appears limited. In this setting, with or without the additional use of neoadjuvant chemo- and radiation therapy, biological capacity to achieve spinal fusion may be limited or absent. High pseudoarthrosis rates should, therefore, be expected. If life expectancy is limited to less than 6 mo, braces are frequently applied in one form or another for the purpose of palliation, particularly if surgical treatment is not contemplated or feasible, but spinal instability is of concern.

Keywords

Cervical Spine Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Thoracic Spine Spinal Tumor Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Castro FP, Jr. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, bracing, and the Hueter-Volkmann principle. Spine J 2003; 3:180–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Climent JM, Sanchez J. Impact of the type of brace on the quality of life of Adolescents with Spine Deformities. Spine 1999; 24:1903–1908.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Korovessis P, Kyrkos C, Piperos G, Soucacos PN. Effects of thoracolumbosacral orthosis on spinal deformities, trunk asymmetry, and frontal lower rib cage in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2000; 25:2064–2071.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Noonan KJ, Weinstein SL, Jacobson WC, Dolan LA. Use of the Milwaukee brace for progressive idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg. Am 1996; 78:557–567.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rigo M, Reiter C, Weiss HR. Effect of conservative management on the prevalence of surgery in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. PediatrRehabil 2003; 6:209–214.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Skaggs DL, Bassett GS. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an update. AmFamPhysician 1996; 53:2327–2335.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benzel EC, Larson SJ. Postoperative stabilization of the posttraumatic thoracic and lumbar spine: a review of concepts and orthotic techniques. JSpinal Disord 1989; 2:47–51.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cantor JB, Lebwohl NH, Garvey T, Eismont FJ. Nonoperative management of stable thoracolumbar burst fractures with early ambulation and bracing. Spine 1993; 18:971–976.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chow GH, Nelson BJ, Gebhard JS, Brugman JL, Brown CW, Donaldson DH. Functional outcome of thoracolumbar burst fractures managed with hyperextension casting or bracing and early mobilization. Spine 1996; 21:2170–2175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Melchiorre PJ. Acute hospitalization and discharge outcome of neurologically intact trauma patients sustaining thoracolumbar vertebral fractures managed conservatively with thoracolumbosacral orthoses and physical therapy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80:221–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bajaj S, Saag KG. Osteoporosis: evaluation and treatment. CurrWomens Health Rep 2003; 3:418–424.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lin JT, Lane JM. Nonmedical management of osteoporosis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002; 14:441–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lukert BP. Vertebral compression fractures: how to manage pain, avoid disability. Geriatrics 1994; 49:22–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schroeder S, Rossler H, Ziehe P, Higuchi F. Bracing and supporting of the lumbar spine. Prosthet Orthot Int 1982; 6:139–146.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Benzel EC. Spinal bracing. In: Benzel EC, ed. Biomechanics of the Spine. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2001:331–341.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anderson PA, Budorick TE, Easton KB, Henley MB, Salciccioli GG. Failure of halo vest to prevent in vivo motion in patients with injured cervical spines. Spine 1991; 16:S501–S505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Askins V, Eismont FJ. Efficacy of five cervical orthoses in restricting cervical motion. A comparison study. Spine 1997; 22:1193–1198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Axelsson P, Johnsson R, Stromqvist B. Effect of lumbar orthosis on intervertebral mobility. A roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. Spine 1992; 17:678–681.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Axelsson P, Johnsson R, Stromqvist B. Lumbar orthosis with unilateral hip immobilization. Effect on intervertebral mobility determined by roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. Spine 1993; 18:876–879.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Benzel EC, Larson SJ, Kerk JJ, et al. The thermoplastic Minerva body jacket: a clinical comparison with other cervical spine splinting techniques. JSpinal Disord 1992; 5:311–319.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Morris JM, Lucas DB. Biomechanics of Spinal Bracing. ArizMed 1964; 21:170–176.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Benzel EC, Hadden TA, Saulsbery CM. A comparison of the Minerva and halo jackets for stabilization of the cervical spine. J Neurosurg 1989; 70:411–414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hart DL, Johnson RM, Simmons EF, Owen J. Review of cervical orthoses. Phys Ther 1978; 58:857–860.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hartman JT, Palumbo F, Hill BJ. Cineradiography of the braced normal cervical spine. A comparative study of five commonly used cervical orthoses. Clin Orthop 1975; 97–102.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Johnson RM, Owen JR, Hart DL, Callahan RA. Cervical orthoses: a guide to their selection and use. Clin Orthop 1981; 34–45.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kauppi M, Neva MH, Kautiainen H. Headmaster collar restricts rheumatoid atlantoaxial subluxation. Spine 1999; 24:526–528.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tomonaga T, Krag MH, Novotny JE. Clinical, radiographic, and kinematic results from an adjustable four-pad halovest. Spine 1997; 22:1199–1208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Whitehill R, Richman JA, Glaser JA. Failure of immobilization of the cervical spine by the halo vest. A report of five cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1986; 68:326–332.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bucholz RD, Cheung KC. Halo vest versus spinal fusion for cervical injury: evidence from an outcome study. J Neurosurg 1989; 70:884–892.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Muller EJ, Wick M, Russe O, Muhr G. Management of odontoid fractures in the elderly. Eur Spine J 1999; 8:360–365.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schroder J, Liljenqvist U, Greiner C, Wassmann H. Complications of halo treatment for cervical spine injuries in patients with ankylosing spondylitis-report of three cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2003; 123:112–114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koch RA, Nickel VL. The halo vest: an evaluation of motion and forces across the neck. Spine 1978; 3:103–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sypert GW. External spinal orthotics. Neurosurgery 1987; 20:642–649.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Johnsson R, Stromqvist B, Axelsson P, Selvik G. Influence of spinal immobilization on consolidation of posterolateral lumbosacral fusion. A roentgen stereophotogrammetric and radiographic analysis. Spine 1992; 17:16–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lin JT. Bony pathology in the cancer patient. J Womens Health (Larchmt.) 2002; 11:691–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Millington PJ, Ellingsen JM, Hauswirth BE, Fabian PJ. Thermoplastic Minerva body jacket-a practical alternative to current methods of cervical spine stabilization. A clinical report. Phys Ther 1987; 67:223–225.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Berk RN, Coulson DB. The body cast syndrome. Radiology 1970; 94:303–305.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press, Inc., Totowa, NJ 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski
    • 1
  • Robert F. McLain
    • 2
  • Edward C. Benzel
    • 1
  1. 1.The Cleveland Clinic Spine InstituteThe Cleveland Clinic FoundationCleveland
  2. 2.Lerner College of Medicine and The Cleveland Clinic Spine Institute, Departmentof Orthopaedic SurgeryThe Cleveland Clinic FoundationCleveland

Personalised recommendations