MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.4103/2152-7806.193729

Медицинская библиотека · Surgical neurology international · 2016

Penetrating thoracic spinal cord injury with ice pick extending into the aorta. A technical note and review of the literature.

Nasser Rani, Nakhla Jonathan, Sharif Saadat, Kinon Merritt, Yassari Reza

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Penetrating spinal cord injuries pose a great challenge to both patients and the treating physicians. Although the overall incidence of penetrating spinal cord injury is the highest in the military, the ubiquity of guns in our society continues to make penetrating spinal cord injury prevalent in the civilian population. These types of injuries are particularly complicated because, beyond the trauma to the neural elements and supporting structures, other organs can be affected and a team approach is required for successful treatment.

CASE DESCRIPTION: In this report, the authors present a unique case of an ice pick penetrating posteriorly through the spinal canal into the aorta. The described surgical management involved careful consideration and planning to prevent worsening vascular and neurological compromise. Among the challenges faced are neurological compromise, vascular injury, spinal instability, and cerebrospinal fluid leak.

CONCLUSION

To the author's knowledge, this challenging case represents the first description of a successful removal of a penetrating thoracic spinal foreign body that terminated within the lumen of the thoracic aorta.

Для цитирования: Nasser Rani, Nakhla Jonathan, Sharif Saadat, Kinon Merritt, Yassari Reza. Penetrating thoracic spinal cord injury with ice pick extending into the aorta. A technical note and review of the literature.. Surgical neurology international. 2016. DOI: 10.4103/2152-7806.193729.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.