Early complications of high-dose methylprednisolone in acute spinal cord injury patients
Introduction
Few conditions are as devastating as traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). This type of injury is a major cause of morbidity in young individuals and as a result has a major impact on society as a whole.11 During most of the last century, the management of acute SCI has traditionally concentrated on preventive measures as well as conservative care.
In 1990, Bracken et al.1 first reported the effectiveness of methylprednisolone (MP) treatment in recovery from SCI. After this study the use of intravenous high-dose MP in acute SCI became a standard aspect of care in these patients. A number of published critiques of the NASCIS II data and their presentation in support of the use of MP in the management of patients with acute SCI have been offered. Over the past 10 years, a lively debate has ensued in the literature over whether or not steroids should be used at all in SCI. Many authors have tried to further distil and objectify the results of the NASCIS studies, most with unfavourable conclusions.12, 20 Moreover, some authors have suggested that the use of high-dose MP in acute SCI is associated with an increase in complications.14, 19 Finally, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Joint Section of Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves recommended the use of MP only as an option, not as a guideline or standard.17 Despite these considerations, many physicians continue to prescribe methylprednisolone for acute SCI even today.2, 13
We aimed to review the outcome of patients admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) with SCI from 1994 to 2005, according to the use or not of MP (NASCIS II protocol).
Section snippets
Patients and methods
We retrospectively reviewed the whole cohort of patients admitted to our ICU between January 1994 and December 2005 due to SCI. Eligible patients were those who were older than 14 years and ICU hospitalisation within 8 h of vertebral trauma with spinal cord involvement. Patients were grouped according to the medical treatment received. Those patients who received MP according to NASCIS II protocol were considered as MP group, and patients who did not receive MP were considered as no-MP group. MP
Results
There were 59 patients in the MP group and 23 patients in the No-MP group. There was no significant difference in sex ratio or age between the groups (Table 1). All patients had a neurological deficit of varying degrees according to Frankel scale at ICU admission, and there was no difference between the groups (Table 2).
There were no differences between both groups in ICU mortality. Four patients died in MP group (6.7%) and 3 patients in No-MP group (13%) (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.08–3.64). There
Discussion
The hope that administration of a drug delivered after acute SCI might improve neurological function has long been held. Although other substances, as naloxone and GM-1 ganglioside, have been tested in laboratory and in clinical investigations, corticosteroids, particularly methylprednisolone, have been the most extensively studied drugs in animal and human studies.10, 17 The precise mechanism of action is not completely known, but corticosteroids have the potential to stabilise membrane
Conflict of interest
None.
References (22)
- et al.
Neuroprotection and acute spinal cord injury: a reappraisal
NeuroRx
(2004) - et al.
Long-term functional health status of severely injured patients
Injury
(2007) - et al.
A randomized, controlled trial of methylprednisolone or naloxone in the treatment of acute spinal-cord injury. Results of the Second National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study
N Engl J Med
(1990) - et al.
Questionnaire survey of spine surgeons on the use of methylprednisolone for acute spinal cord injury
Spine
(2006) - et al.
Current status of clinical trials for acute spinal cord injury
Injury
(2005) - et al.
The role and timing of early decompression for cervical spinal cord injury: update with a review of recent clinical evidence
Injury
(2005) - et al.
The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia
Paraplegia
(1969) - et al.
Failure of methylprednisolone to improve the outcome of spinal cord injuries
Am Surg
(1995) - et al.
Utilization and effectiveness of methylprednisolone in a population-based sample of spinal cord injured persons
Paraplegia
(1995) - et al.
Consequences of high-dose steroid therapy for acute spinal cord injury
J Trauma
(1997)
Post-traumatic inflammation following spinal cord injury
Spinal Cord
Cited by (80)
Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury
2020, World NeurosurgeryThe safety and efficacy of steroid treatment for acute spinal cord injury: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis
2020, HeliyonCitation Excerpt :Assessment of the quality of the randomized trials using the risk of bias assessment tool yielded three studies with low bias [4, 16, 18] and two studies with high bias (Table 1) [8, 17]. A total of four studies (2 RCTs and 2 OBSs) had short term follow-up [8, 17, 19, 24]. Assessment of study quality of the OBSs using the NOS score yielded an average of 6.86 ranging from 6 to 9.
Standardized human bone marrow-derived stem cells infusion improves survival and recovery in a rat model of spinal cord injury
2019, Journal of the Neurological SciencesSteroids in Acute Spinal Cord Injury: All But Gone Within 5 Years
2019, World Neurosurgery