spinal cord injury: neurological exam, classification and prognosis william mckinley md director sci...
TRANSCRIPT
Spinal Cord Injury: Neurological Exam, Classification and Prognosis
William McKinley MD
Director SCI Rehabilitation Medicine
Associate Professor
VCU Dept PM&R
Case Presentation
31 yo wm s/p MVATetraplegia
Questions… Neurological recovery? Functional Outcome? Ambulation?
Case Study
M LT PP C5 5 2 2 C6 3 2 1 C7 2 1 1 C8 1 1 1 T1 0 0 0 T2-L1 0 0 L2 0 0 0 L3 0 0 0 L4 0 0 0 L5 0 0 0 S1 0 0 0
Motor Level ?Sensory Level ?NLI ?ASIA ?Neuro/Functional
prognosis ?
Importance of Comprehensive Neurological Exam
Evidence-based valid, reliable, consistent
Better communication to patient, family, team
Allows for prognosis Neurological Functional (Rehabilitation goals)
Allows study of interventions(rehab, drugs)
International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury
ASIA (American Spinal Injury Association)Two main components (motor & sensory)
motor & sensory level, neurological level, ASIA impairment classification
• 1982 ASIA standards use “Frankel Classification”
• 1992 “ASIA Impairment Scale” replaces Frankel
• 1996 & 2000 ASIA revisions
72 hour exam - reliable prognostic time
Sensory Exam
28 sensory “points” (within derm’s) Test light touch & pin/pain **Importance of sacral pin testing
3 point scale (0,1,2) “optional”: proprioception & deep pressure to index
and great toe (“present vs absent”) deep anal sensation recorded “present vs absent”
Sensory Exam (cont)
Sensory level (SLI) = most caudal segment with normal (2/2) LT & Pin sensation
Sensory index score (SIS) = addition of sensory points (total possible 112)
Motor Exam10 “key” muscles (5 upper & 5 lower ext)
• C5-Elbow flexion L2-hip flexion
• C6-wrist extension L3-knee extension
• C7-elbow extension L4-ankle dorsiflexion
• C8-finger flexion L5-toe extension
• T1-finger abduction S1-ankle plantarflexion
Sacral exam: voluntary anal contraction (present/absent) “optional m’s: diaphragm (VC), abdominal (Beevors
test) , hip adductors
Motor Grading Scale
6 point scale (0-5) …..(avoid +/-’s)
0 = no active movement 1 = muscle contraction 2 = movement thru ROM w/o gravity 3 = movement thru ROM against gravity 4 = movement against some resistance 5 = movement against full resistance
Motor exam (cont)Motor level (MLI) = lowest normal level with
3/5 (& level above 5/5)
Each M has 2 root innervations, if 3/5 = full innervation by more rostral root level
(4/5 acceptable with pain, deconditioning) Motor Index Score (MIS) = total 100 pts
**Superiority of Motor level vs Sensory
Neurological Level of Injury (NLOI)Lowest level with normal sensory & motor
can record as MLI & SLI and on each side:• (ie: Right C5 sensory & C6 motor, Left C6 sensory & C7
motor)• motor level = sensory levels , 50%• If no key muscle for MLI, than NLI = SLI
Zone of partial preservation (ZPP) - preserved segments below NLOI
• used only in complete SCI Zone of Injury (ZOI) - 2-3 levels below NLOI
• recovery may be better or worse in ZOI
Case:
M LT PP C5 5 2 2 C6 3 2 1 C7 2 1 1 C8 0 0 0 T1 0 0 0 T2-L1 0 0 L2 0 0 0 L3 0 0 0 L4 0 0 0 L5 0 0 0 S1 0 0 0
Motor Level = C6
Sensory Level = C5
Neurological Level of Injury (NLOI) = C5
Zone of Injury = C6-8
Zone of Partial Preservation = C6-7
ASIA Impairment Scale
A = Complete - no S/M sacral functionB = Sensory incomplete -sacral sensory
sparingC = Motor incomplete -motor sparing
below ZOI (strength < 3/5 in most m’s)D = Motor incomplete - “ ”(>3/5)E = Normal - Normal S/M exam
Mechanisms for Neurological Recovery
1. Remyelination- neuropraxia (0-3 months)2. Hypertrophy of innervated muscles (3-6
months)3. Peripheral sprouting from intact nerves to
denervated muscle (3-6 months)4. Axonal regeneration (12-18 months)
Central Cord Syndrome
Upper extremities weaker than LE’sseen with older age (Spondylosis) asso with
hyperextension injuries
“favorable” prognostic factors: LE > UE (proximal > distal), Bladder/bowel age < 50yr (vs > 50 yr): ambulation 90% (vs 35%),
bladder 80% (vs 30%), dressing 80% (vs 15%)
Brown-Sequard Syndrome
Cord “hemi-section” incidence 2-4 %
ipsilateral motor & proprioceptive loss and contralateral pain/temperature loss P/T tracts cross at spinal cord level
“favorable” prognosis for ambulation (90%), ADL independence (70%), bladder (85%)
Anterior/Posterior Cord Syndrome ACS
Anterior spinal art. to ventral 2/3 of SC
loss of motor, pain (sparing of proprioception)
poor prognosis for neuro recovery
PCS Posterior spinal art.to
posterior columns loss of proprioception
(sparing of motor & pain)
poor prognosis for ambulation
Conus Medullaris/Cauda Equina Syndromes
Conus lies behind T-10-l-2
vertbrae S1-5 spinal cord bladder, bowel &
sexuality dysfunction more often complete poor prognosis
CES L/S nerve root injury spinal cord ends ot L1-2 more often asso with pain more often incomplete (+/-
recovery 12-18 mo) better prognosis
Neurologic vs Functional OutcomeNeurological Outcome - degree of motor & sensory
recovery after SCIFunctional Outcome - degree of mobility and self-
care performance
Key factors patient motivation availability of services avoidance of complications (pain, spasticity, contractures)
Functional Outcomes by Level of Injury
C1,2,3- power chair, ECU, ventilatorC5 - feeding C6 - tenodesis graspC7 ** independent w/ most ADL’s/mobility
- manual W/C, transfers, dressing
C8/T1 - bladder/bowel independenceL 2,3 - **Ambulation
Neuro-testing & Neurological Prognosis
MRI better than CT for cord & soft tissue visualization Cord transection (rare) and hemorrhage correlate
with poor prognosis Edema (1-2 levels only) correlates with
incomplete injury & better prognosis
SSEP (may assist when assoc LOC) no more reliable than neuro exam
Etiology and prognosis
Better spinal stenosis fall unilateral facet disloc.
Worse GSW flexion/rotation bilateral facet disloc.
Medical Intervention & Prognosis
Methylprednisilone - greater motor recovery noted if given < 8 hrs (for 24 hrs)
Gangliosides - no difference at 1 yr
Surgery (decompression/stabilization) - no neurological differences, but decreased LOS
Neurological Recovery
Incomplete injuries have better prognosis sparing of motor/sensory WITHIN or BELOW
the zone of injury (ZOI).
Key factors: incomplete > complete **motor & PIN sparing are “key” early recovery is better
ASIA Classification & Outcome
Admit ASIA (at 72hr) ASIA D (at 1 year)
A 0-5%
B-1 20-25%
B-2 (sacral pin prick) 40-50%
C 60-75%
Neurological Outcomes in ZOI
Most pts with complete injury recover one motor level
Recovery to 3/5 at one yr: 25-50% of 0/5 m’s 75-100% of 1-2/5 m’s
Most occurs during first 6 months with greatest rate of change in first 3 months
Ambulation
Benefits: overcome barriers, self esteem, cardiopulmonary exercise
Prognostic Factors Age & Energy expenditure (3-9 X in para) NLOI
• Below T-11Para - good prognosis• L 2-3 para (pelvic control, hip flexion & knee ext with hip/knee
proprioception)– “community ambulators”
Community Ambulation and Lower extremity motor strength (LEMS at 1 month)
0 1-9 10-19 20-29
Tetra-C 0% NA NA NA
Tatra-I 21% 63% 100%
Para-C 45% 100%
Para-I 33% 70% 100% 100%
Case Study #1
M LT PP C5 5 2 2 C6 3 2 1 C7 2 1 1 C8 1 1 1 T1 0 0 0 T2-L1 0 0 L2 0 0 0 L3 0 0 0 L4 0 0 0 L5 0 0 0 S1 0 0 0
Motor Level = C6Sensory Level = C5NLI = C5ASIA = ANeuro/Functional
prognosis ZOI = good below ZOI = none Ambulation = none
Case Study #2
M LT PP C5 5 2 2 C6 3 2 1 C7 0 1 0 C8 0 0 0 T1 0 0 0 T2-L1 0 0 L2 0 0 0 L3 0 0 0 L4 0 0 0 L5 0 1 0 S1 0 1 0
Motor Level = C6Sensory Level = C5NLI = C5ASIA = B-1 (no pin)Neuro/Functional
prognosis ZOI = poor below ZOI = poor Ambulation = poor
Case Study #3
M LT PP C5 5 2 2 C6 3 2 1 C7 0 2 1 C8 0 1 1 T1 0 0 0 T-L 0 0 L2 0 0 0 L3 0 0 0 L4 0 0 0 L5 0 1 1 S1 0 1 1
Motor Level = C6Sensory Level = C5NLI = C5ASIA = B-2 (pin*)Neuro/Functional
prognosis ZOI = good below ZOI = good Ambulation = good
Case Study #4
M LT PP C5 5 2 2 C6 3 2 1 C7 0 0 0 C8 0 0 0 T1 0 0 0 L2 1 0 0 L3 0 0 0 L4 0 0 0 L5 0 1 1 S1 1 1 1
Motor Level = C6Sensory Level = C5NLI = C5ASIA = CNeuro/Functional
prognosis ZOI = Poor below ZOI = good
Ambulation = good
Future Considerations for Enhance Recovery
Basic science/clinical research Neuropharmacologic agents (4-AP) Nerve transplantation, stem cells BWS (body weight support)
• training of central pattern generator in inc SCI FES - (UE grasp, ambulation, bladder)
Conclusions
Accurate neuro exam is imperative
Incompleteness in key for prognosis
Earlier recovery (1-3 months) is better
ZOI & below ZOI may have different prognosis