AO Spine Thoracolumbar and Sacral Injury Classification for the Radiologist

Objective: To compare the treatment recommendations of the thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system and the thoracolumbar Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen spine injury score in case of thoracolumbar spine injury. Method: The cross-sectional study was conducted at the Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Institute of Trauma, Karachi, from July to December 2023, and comprised patients aged at least 18 irrespective of gender, who had traumatic thoracic and lumbar vertebral spine fractures. Data regarding age, gender, mode of trauma, findings of neurological examination and imaging was collected. All cases were independently scored by an experienced spine surgeon, and a radiologist provided standardised imaging interpretation. The scorers were blinded to clinical outcomes and treatment decisions. Inter-rater agreement between thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system and the thoracolumbar Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen spine injury score was assessed using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Data was analysed using SPSS 23. Results: Of the 335 patients with mean age 32.24±13.32 years, 279(83.3%) were males. The most common mode of trauma was fall from height 189(56.4%), and the most common site of fracture was L1 vertebrae 109(32.5%). Based on the thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system, the most common fracture morphology was burst fracture 257(76.7%). The most common fracture type based on the thoracolumbar Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen spine injury score was Type A compression injuries 300(89.6%). The thoracolumbar Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen spine injury score had more patients in the grey zone 30(9%) compared to thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system 22(6.6%). Treatment recommendations were the same in both the classification systems for 306(91.3%) patients (Cohen's kappa = 0.812, p<0.001). Conclusion: There was no significant difference between the treatment recommendations suggested by the thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system and the thoracolumbar Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen spine injury score. The differences in grey zone classification highlighted the complexity of thoracolumbar injury assessment. Key Words: TLICSS, TLAOSIS, Thoracolumbar spine, Fracture.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the epidemiology of thoracolumbar spine injuries when travelling by speedboat to our coastal tertiary trauma center, and to identify injury patterns and mechanism of injury of these specific injuries and to determine the link of the position when seated on board with the risk of thoracolumbar injury in this type of transportation.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A retrospective review of a consecutive series of 80 patients sustaining thoracolumbar spine injuries after travelling by speed boat was conducted. The enrolled patients were treated at a Level II trauma center over a 2-year period from July 1, 2016 to May 31, 2018. All the victims were unrestrained passengers on board a speedboat travelling at high speed without any safety regulation except a life jacket. Initially, a full evaluation with advance trauma life support protocol on arrival was performed. Plain radiographs, computed thermography or MRI study was obtained individually. Number, level and type of thoracolumbar injury were recorded and reported based on CT scan and Thoracolumbar Injury Classification by AO group. The link to the position when seated on board with the incidence of thoracolumbar spine injury was then analyzed and compared relatively.RESULTS:There were a total of 80 patients in our study, 48 (60%) were men and 32 (40%) were women with a mean age of 47.50 years (Min 20, Max 71). All the spinal fractures were a single level injury. The injury occurred only at the thoracolumbar area, these involved 6 cases (7.5%) of T11 vertebra, 20 cases (25%) of T12 vertebra, 44 cases (55%) of L1 vertebra and 10 cases (12.5%) of L2 vertebra respectively. No cervical or sacral region injury was observed nor other associated injuries such as traumatic brain injury, intra-abdominal organ injury or long bone fracture. A spinal cord/nerve root injury occurred in the lumbar region in 1 patient (1.25%). All of the 80 injuries were type A injury (compression type), classified by AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification, and included 32 levels (40%) of subtype A1, 18 levels (22.5%) of subtype A2, 8 levels (10%) of subtype A3 and 22 levels (27.5%) of subtype A4. 50 cases (62.5%) were treated non-operatively with bracing while 30 cases (37.5) were treated operatively with computer navigation spinal surgery using pedicle screws and rods construction before the patient was discharged or repatriated. Patients who sat in the front row seat were significantly at higher risk for thoracolumbar spine injury (p < 0.05; odds ratio = 41.83; 95%CI: 15.24, 114.8). No patient who sat at the rear reported having had this kind of injury.CONCLUSIONS:Our data shows a high incidence of this unique compressive type of thoracolumbar spine injury in patients who sit in the front row seat while travelling on board a speed boat.As a result of an increasing recognition of these regional-specific injuries, practitioners who take responsibility for trauma patients on the coastal area should be aware of the high prevalence of these injuries. Proper universal spinal precautions must be followed to optimize treatment outcomes. Current safety regulations including speed limits, proper safety restraining techniques, bracing position on board and marine rescuers should be reviewed or changed to minimize the number of injuries and degree of damage.

The main goal of this comprehensive paper is to clarify the way of thoracolumbar spine The main goal of this summary paper is to describe the way of thoracolumbar spine injury classification development and to provide adetailed description of two of the most commonly used classifications - the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Scale (TLICS) and the AOSpine Classification for Traumatic Fracture of the Thoracolumbar Spine, including their comparison and clarification of the merits introduced by the second one. The paper also formulates arecommendation of asimple algorithm enabling even less experienced clinicians to distinguish between an injury indicated for conservative treatment and one that requires surgery.

Retrospective review of patient cohort. Our goal was to assess the validity of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity (TLICS) score system by comparing the TLICS system to prior management of thoracolumbar injuries at our institution between January 1, 2006 to March 31, 2011. TLICS was introduced in 2005 to classify and assign treatment recommendations for injuries based on 3 axes: mechanism of injury, integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex, and neurological status. We retrospectively obtained and analyzed patient data regarding thoracolumbar junction injuries at a major academic medical center servicing level I trauma. In addition, we compared the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) class at time of injury to last follow-up to determine if there was any change in neurological status after intervention. We also compared sex, injury severity score (ISS), length of hospitalization, and age between nonoperatively and operatively treated patients. Included in our study were 201 patients (70% male and 30% female). We found the TLICS system agreed with prior thoracolumbar junction injury management at our institution 98% of the time in nonoperatively treated patients and 78% of the time in operatively treated patients. Age, sex, and ISS were not statistically significant factors in patients who were treated operatively versus nonoperatively, however, there was a trend towards higher ISS in operatively treated patients. Average TLICS score between nonoperative and operative groups was 1.56 and 4.8, respectively, and was a statistically significant difference. There was no statistically significant difference in ASIA class improvement between operative and nonoperative treatment, however, this is likely because of having only 20 patients in this subcohort. Of note, about 50% of the 17 operatively treated patients had improvement in ASIA class. Our data suggest that TLICS is a valuable tool in a spine surgeon's armamentarium in treating thoracolumbar junction injuries. Some surgeons might be more likely to operate on thoracolumbar junction injuries that should be treated nonoperatively according to the TLICS score. As with all classification schemes, the TLICS system should be used in conjunction with sound clinical judgment.

Several classification schemes have been proposed for thoracolumbar spinal injuries over the years, with the goal of facilitating communication and streamlining selection of optimal treatment strategies. None of these have achieved universal acceptance. An ideal classification system is expected to categorize injuries in a way that permits identification of any injury, uses concise and descriptive terminology, reflects the mechanism of injury and biomechanical forces involved, guides choice of treatment, has easily recognizable clinical and radiological characteristics, describes and grades the severity of neurological injury, grades both osseous and ligamentous injury, and predicts the natural history and treatment end results (1).

Narrative review. To describe the evolution of acute traumatic thoracolumbar (TL) injury classification systems; to promote standardization of concepts and vocabulary with respect to TL injuries. Over the past century, numerous TL classification systems have been proposed and implemented, each influenced by the thought, imaging modalities, and surgical techniques available at the time. While much progress has been made in our understanding and management of these injuries, concepts, and terms are often intermixed, leading to potential confusion and miscommunication. We present a narrative review of the current state of the literature regarding classification systems for TL trauma. The evolution of TL classification systems has broadly been characterized by a transition away from descriptive categorizations of fracture patterns to schema incorporating morphology, stability, and neurological function. In addition to these features, more recent systems have demonstrated the importance of predictive/prognostic capability, reliability, validity, and generalizability. The Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Osteosynthesenfragen Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System/Thoracolumbar Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Osteosynthesenfragen Spine Injury Score represents the most modern and recently updated system, retiring past concepts and terminology in favor of clear, internationally agreed upon descriptors. Advancements in our understanding of blunt TL trauma injuries have led to changes in management. Such advances are reflected in modern, dedicated classification systems. Over time, various key factors have been acknowledged and incorporated. In an effort to promote standardization of thought and language, past ideas and terminology should be retired.

Thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score: a new paradigm for the treatment of thoracolumbar spine trauma

Objective To evaluate the thoracolumbar injury severity score [ thoracolumbar injury classifica-tion and severity score（TLICS）]and repeatability,and analyze its clinical significance in the treatment of injury of thoracolumbar.Methods The clinical and imaging data of our hospital （thoracolumbar X ray,CT examination,MRI examination） of intact thoracolumbar fractures in 90 patients were retrospectively analyzed ,respectively,TLICS score were made for their site of spinal injury morphology ,neural function and the posterior ligament complex three .Three months after reviewed ,TLICS was analyzed by using Cohen weighted kappa coefficient score .Its repeatability was ana-lyzed.Results According to the TLICS system ,spinal injury body ,nerve function and the integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex were evaluated , respectively, the repeatability coefficient of Kappa , the calculated total to 0.47 non operation group,operation group,the total score was 0.46,with a moderate consistency.The neural function evaluation of the highest high consistency ,consistency .No significant differences between the two groups of repetitive Kappa coefficient（statistical values =0.674 5,P〉0.05）.According to the TLICS system of statistical accuracy ,the diagnostic sensitivity,specificity ratios was 95.8%,86.4%,97.6%,respectively.Conclusion The reliability of TLICS system for thoracolumbar treatment and recovery is higher ,relative comprehensive evaluation ,which can effec-tively guide the clinical treatment . Key words: Spinal injuries; Repeatability,results; Kappa coefficient; Thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system

Prospective clinical assessment of the interobserver reliability of the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLISS) in a series of consecutive patients. To evaluate the time-dependent changes in interobserver reliability of the TLISS system. Reliability of an injury classification system is fundamental to its usefulness. A system that can be taught and implemented effectively will be highly reliable. Vaccaro et al recently introduced a novel thoracolumbar injury classification and treatment recommendation system called the "Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score." An improvement over previous traumatic thoracolumbar systems, it has been designed to be both descriptive as well as prognostic. To define better the benefits of this system, the purpose of our study was to assess the time-dependent changes associated with implementation of the TLISS system at 1 institution. Seventy-one consecutive patients presenting with acute thoracolumbar injury were prospectively assessed at a single training institution. Plain radiographs, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging were independently reviewed, and each case was classified according to the TLISS system. Seven months later, 25 consecutive patients presenting with acute thoracolumbar injuries were prospectively assessed at the same institution. TLISS classification criteria were again applied after reviewing plain radiographs, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. The unweighted Cohen kappa coefficient and Spearman correlation values were calculated to assess interobserver reliability at each assessment time. Interobserved reliability at the time of the first assessment was then compared with interobserver reliability from the second assessment. Statistically significant (P < 0.05) improvements in interobserver reliability were observed. Both the unweighted Cohen kappa coefficient and Spearman correlation values increased across all comparable fields: TLISS subscores (mechanism of injury, posterior ligamentous complex), total TLISS, and TLISS management scores. The significant improvements observed in interobserver reliability of the TLISS system suggest that the classification system can be taught effectively and be readily incorporated into daily practice. The strong correlation values obtained at the second assessment time suggest that the TLISS system may be reproducibly used to describe thoracolumbar injuries.

Online questionnaire survey. To obtain the opinion of experts on whether the currently available classification systems for thoracolumbar and subaxial cervical spine injuries meet their expectations with regard to the desired objectives of a good classification system and practical implementability. An online survey was conducted during August-September 2013 using a specially designed questionnaire. Members of Spine Trauma Study Group of International Spinal Cord Society and other spinal injury experts were approached, and responses were analyzed. Forty-two spine experts responded. Majority (87.50%, n=35) were involved with education and research. For subaxial cervical spine injuries, Allen Ferguson classification was more commonly used (37.50%, n=15) and thought to be practically implementable in day-to-day practice (30.77%). For thoracolumbar injuries, while Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) was more commonly used (47.50%, n=19), the response of experts for practical implementability in day-to-day practice was more evenly distributed among TLICS, AO (Association for Osteosynthesis) and Dennis classifications (30.77, 23.08 and 25.64%, respectively). Experts felt that the classification systems did not serve all the desired objectives. The reliability for residents was especially a concern. We may still be far from an ideal classification system. Many experts continue to prefer or would consider shifting back to traditional and simpler systems. There is a need for developing classification systems that would be better implementable practically in day-to-day clinical practice, better guide treatment, be more reliable, incorporate other modifiers influencing treatment and be more comprehensive in that order of priority.

37 - Thoracic and Lumbar Spine Injuries

BackgroundThe thoracic segment represents the most common area fractured in the whole spine. Complete neurological deficits are commonly associated with thoracic injuries possibly due to a relatively small canal diameter as compared to the cervical or lumbar spine. Magnetic resonance is the gold standard of imaging, especially in patients suffering from neurological deficits as well as in soft tissue assessment mainly the disc, ligaments, and neural elements. The thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system (TLICS) and the thoracolumbar AO Spine injury score (TLAOSIS), are two scoring systems designed to help surgeons in management plans of thoraco-lumbar injuries. The aim of our study is to compare these two main thoracolumbar injury classification systems in deciding the management strategies in thoraco-lumbar injuries. This study is a retrospective study that included 70 patients (42 males and 28 females) who suffered acute traumatic vertebral fractures. All patients underwent MRI including T1WI, T2W and STIR sequences. The MRI was viewed by two independent radiologists of 5- and 10-years’ experience and compared to surgical decisions.ResultsOut of 70 patients included in our study, the TL AOSIS matched treatment recommendation in 62 patients (88.6%), and the TLICS matched in 60 patients (85.7%). The TL AOSIS achieved sensitivity 95%, specificity 80%, while the TLICS achieved sensitivity 72.2%, specificity 100%.ConclusionBoth TL AOSIS and TLICS have very close results in their reliability for guiding treatment strategy, yet TL AOSIS matched treatment recommendation more than TLICS, with sensitivity more than TLICS, while TLICS had more specificity.

The goal of the current study is to establish a surgical algorithm to accompany the AOSpine thoracolumbar spine injury classification system. A survey was sent to AOSpine members from the six AO regions of the world, and surgeons were asked if a patient should undergo an initial trial of conservative management or if surgical management was warranted. The survey consisted of controversial injury patterns. Using the results of the survey, a surgical algorithm was developed. The AOSpine Trauma Knowledge forum defined that the injuries in which less than 30% of surgeons would recommend surgical intervention should undergo a trial of non-operative care, and injuries in which 70% of surgeons would recommend surgery should undergo surgical intervention. Using these thresholds, it was determined that injuries with a thoracolumbar AOSpine injury score (TL AOSIS) of three or less should undergo a trial of conservative treatment, and injuries with a TL AOSIS of more than five should undergo surgical intervention. Operative or non-operative treatment is acceptable for injuries with a TL AOSIS of four or five. The current algorithm uses a meaningful injury classification and worldwide surgeon input to determine the initial treatment recommendation for thoracolumbar injuries. This allows for a globally accepted surgical algorithm for the treatment of thoracolumbar trauma.

Background:Despite numerous attempts at classifying thoracolumbar spinal injuries, there remains no consensus on a single unifying algorithm of management. The ideal system should provide diagnostic and prognostic information, exhibit adequate reliability and validity and be easily applicable to clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to assess the reliability and validity of two novel classification systems for thoracolumbar fractures – the Thoracolumbar Injury Severity Score (TLISS) and the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) – and also to discuss potential efforts towards research in the future.Matereials and Methods:Seventy-one patients with thoracolumbar fractures were prospectively assessed by surgeons with different levels of training and experience (attending orthopedic surgeon, attending neurosurgeon, spine fellows, senior level and junior level residents) at a single institution. Plain radiographs, CT and MRI imaging were used to classify these injuries using the TLISS system. Seven months later, 25 consecutive injuries were prospectively assessed with the TLISS and TLICS systems. Unweighted Cohen's kappa coefficients and Spearman's correlation values were calculated to assess inter-observer reliability and validity at each point in time.Results:For both the TLISS and TLICS algorithms, the inter-rater kappa statistics for all of the subgroups demonstrated moderate-to-substantial reliability (0.45-0.74), although there were no significant differences among the shared subgroups. The kappa score of the TLISS system was greater than that of the TLICS system for injury mechanism/ morphology. Correlation values were also greater across all subgroups (P ≤0.01). Statistically significant improvements in TLISS inter-observer reliability were observed across all TLISS fields (P <0.05). The TLISS and TLICS schemes both demonstrated excellent validity.Conclusion:The TLISS and TLICS scales both exhibited substantial reliability and validity. However, the TLISS system displayed greater inter-observer correlation than did the TLICS and demonstrated significant improvements in reliability over time.

Is the Thoracolumbar AOSpine Injury Score Superior to the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score for Guiding the Treatment Strategy of Thoracolumbar Spine Injuries?