Table 1.
Characteristics of Studied Patients based on Degree of Neurological Improvement
| No outcome data (n=26) | No improvement (n=35) | 1 AIS point improvement (n=23) | >1 AIS point improvement (n=13) | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 43.0±16.1 | 42.5±19.0 | 50.2±22.3 | 52.2±18.8 | 0.434 | |
| Sex | 20 M, 6 F | 28 M, 7 F | 15 M, 8 F | 10 M, 3 F | 0.639 |
| ISS | 27.6±16.4 | 30.1±14.7 | 25.4±14.3 | 25.6±9.7 | 0.622 |
| AIS A | ? | 23 (65.7%) | 3 (13.0%) | 3 (23.1%) | <0.0001 |
| AIS B | ? | 1 (2.8%) | 1 (4.3%) | 3 (23.1%) | 0.093 |
| AIS C | ? | 3 (8.6%) | 6 (26.1%) | 4 (30.8%) | 0.131 |
| AIS D | ? | 5 (14.3) | 11 (47.8%) | 2 (15.4%) | 0.016 |
| AIS E | ? | 0 (0%) | 2 (8.7%) | 1 (7.7%) | 0.995 |
| Surgery | 4 (15.4%) | 33 (94.3%) | 19 (82.6%) | 13 (100%) | <0.0001 |
| Timing of surgery | 24.0 h±32.5 | 36.4 h±32.5 | 42.9 h±75.8 | 42.0 h±35.5 | 0.917 |
| Total hospital days | 47.3±48.1 | 26.8±37.0 | 17.9±13.9 | 56.2±49.9 | 0.074 |
| Total measurements | 17421.3±27133.5 | 15671.1±14970.9 | 12946.4±14874.4 | 21958.5±22254.0 | 0.200 |
| Penetrating | 0 (0%) | 8 (22.8%) | 2 (8.7%) | 0 (0%) | 0.006 |
| Cervical | 1 (20%) | 18 (54.5%) | 16 (72.7%) | 12 (92.3%) | 0.080 |
| Thoracic | 0 (0%) | 13 (39.3%) | 3 (13.6%) | 1 (7.7%) | 0.171 |
| Lumbar | 4 (80%) | 1 (3.0%) | 2 (9.1%) | 0 (0%) | 0.024 |
| Required two vasopressors | 1 (20%) | 11 (31.4%) | 5 (21.7%) | 3 (23.1%) | 0.927 |
AIS, ASIA Impairment Scale1–3; here, AIS A-E denote the post-resuscitation score; ISS=Injury Severity Score.4
Characteristics of analyzed patients are shown with grouping based on change in neurological function by time of discharge. For continuous data means are presented±standard deviation. For categorical data, frequencies are presented as well as percentage of patients for whom data were available. Three patients who exhibited neurological worsening were excluded because of small sample size (n=3). The p values reflect the results of univariate statistical analysis. Analysis of variance was performed for continuous data, and binomial logistic regression was used for categorical variables. Statistically significant values are italicized.
1. Marino, R.J., Barros, T., Biering-Sorensen, F., Burns, S.P., Donovan, W.H., Graves, D.E., Haak, M., Hudson, L.M., and Priebe, M.M. (2003). International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury. J. Spinal Cord Med. 26, Suppl 1, S50–S56.
2. Kirshblum, S.C., Burns, S.P., Biering-Sorensen, F., Donovan, W., Graves, D.E., Jha, A., Johansen, M., Jones, L., Krassioukov, A., Mulcahey, M.J., Schmidt-Read, M., and Waring, W. (2011). International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury (revised 2011). J. Spinal Cord Med. 34, 535–546.
3. Waring, W.P., 3rd, Biering-Sorensen, F., Burns, S., Donovan, W., Graves, D., Jha, A., Jones, L., Kirshblum, S., Marino, R., Mulcahey, M.J., Reeves, R., Scelza, W.M., Schmidt-Read, M., and Stein, A. (2010). 2009 review and revisions of the international standards for the neurological classification of spinal cord injury. J. Spinal Cord Med. 33, 346–352.
4. Baker, S.P., O'Neill, B., Haddon, W., Jr., and Long, W.B. (1974). The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J. Trauma 14, 187–196.