This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kostuik, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Evans, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kostuik, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Evans, D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Vol 68, Issue 3 386-391, Copyright © 1986 by Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc


JOURNAL CONTENTS

Cauda equina syndrome and lumbar disc herniation

JP Kostuik, I Harrington, D Alexander, W Rand and D Evans

In a retrospective chart review of the cases of thirty-one patients with cauda equina syndrome secondary to a central disc lesion, we identified two modes of presentation. The first was an acute mode (ten patients) in which there were abrupt, more severe symptoms and signs and a slightly poorer prognosis after decompression, especially for the return of bladder function. The second mode of presentation (twenty-one patients) was a slower onset, characterized by prior symptoms for varying time-intervals before the more gradual onset of the cauda equina syndrome. All patients had urinary retention preoperatively. Bladder function was the most seriously affected function preoperatively and remained so postoperatively. The prognosis for return of motor function was good, since twenty-seven of the thirty patients who were operated on regained normal motor function. Preoperatively all patients had sciatica, which was bilateral in fourteen and unilateral in seventeen. The average time to surgical decompression after the patient was seen ranged from 1.1 days for the more acute lesions to 3.3 days for the second group. There was no correlation of these times with return of function. Therefore, even though early surgery is recommended, decompression does not have to be performed in less than six hours if recovery is to occur, as has been suggested in the past.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. PsychiatryHome page
J Ng and N Kitchen
Neurosurgery and pregnancy
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, July 1, 2008; 79(7): 745 - 752.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Emerg. Med. J.Home page
EMQ EMQ answers
Emerg. Med. J., April 1, 2008; 25(4): 245 - 245.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Bone Joint Surg BrHome page
J. N. Awad, K. M. Kebaish, J. Donigan, D. B. Cohen, and J. P. Kostuik
Analysis of the risk factors for the development of post-operative spinal epidural haematoma
J Bone Joint Surg Br, September 1, 2005; 87-B(9): 1248 - 1252.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JBJSHome page
E. N. HANLEY and S. M. DAVID
Current Concepts Review - Lumbar Arthrodesis for the Treatment of Back Pain
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 1999; 81(5): 716 - 30.
[Full Text]


Home page
JAMAHome page
J. N. Weinstein
A 45-Year-Old Man With Low Back Pain and a Numb Left Foot
JAMA, August 26, 1998; 280(8): 730 - 736.
[Full Text] [PDF]