OBJECT:Spinal cord surgeries carry a high risk for significant neurological impairments. The initial techniques for spinal cord mapping emerged as an aid to identify the dorsal columns and helped select a safe myelotomy site in intramedullary tumor resection. Advancements in motor mapping of the cord have also been made recently, but exclusively with tumor surgery. We hereby present our experiences with dynamic mapping of the corticospinal tract (CST) in other types of spinal cord procedures that carry an increased risk of postoperative motor deficit, and thus could directly benefit from this technique.CASE REPORTS:Two patients with intractable unilateral lower extremity pain due to metastatic disease of the sacrum and a thoraco-lumbar chordoma, respectively underwent thoracic cordotomy to interrupt the nociceptive pathways. A third patient with progressive leg weakness underwent cord untethering and surgical repair of a large thoracic myelomeningocele. In all three cases, multimodality intraoperative neurophysiologic testing included somatosensory and motor evoked potentials monitoring as well as dynamic mapping of the CST.CONCLUSION:CST mapping allowed safe advancement of the cordotomy probe and exploration of the meningocele sac with untethering of the anterior-lateral aspect of the cord respectively, resulting in postoperative preservation or improvement of motor strength from the pre-operative baseline. Stimulus thresholds varied likely with the distance between the stimulating probe and the CST as well as with the baseline motor strength in the mapped myotomes.

OBJECTIVE:Intraspinal human spinal cord-derived neural stem cell (HSSC) transplantation is a potential therapy for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); however, previous trials lack controls. This post hoc analysis compared ambulatory limb-onset ALS participants in Phase 1 and 2 (Ph1/2) open-label intraspinal HSSC transplantation studies up to 3 years after transplant to matched participants in Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials (PRO-ACT) and ceftriaxone datasets to provide required analyses to inform future clinical trial designs.METHODS:Survival, ALSFRS-R, and a composite statistic (ALS/SURV) combining survival and ALS Functional Rating Scale revised (ALSFRS-R) functional status were assessed for matched participant subsets: PRO-ACT n = 1108, Ph1/2 n = 21 and ceftriaxone n = 177, Ph1/2 n = 20.RESULTS:Survival did not differ significantly between cohorts: Ph1/2 median survival 4.7 years, 95% CI (1.2, ∞) versus PRO-ACT 2.3 years (1.9, 2.5), P = 1.0; Ph1/2 3.0 years (1.2, 5.6) versus ceftriaxone 2.3 years (1.8, 2.8), P = 0.88. Mean ALSFRS-R at 24 months significantly differed between Ph1/2 and both comparison cohorts (Ph1/2 30.1 ± 8.6 vs. PRO-ACT 24.0 ± 10.2, P = 0.048; Ph1/2 30.7 ± 8.8 vs. ceftriaxone 19.2 ± 9.5, P = 0.0023). Using ALS/SURV, median PRO-ACT and ceftriaxone participants died by 24 months, whereas median Ph1/2 participant ALSFRS-Rs were 23 (P = 0.0038) and 19 (P = 0.14) in PRO-ACT and ceftriaxone comparisons at 24 months, respectively, supporting improved functional outcomes in the Ph1/2 study.INTERPRETATION:Comparison of Ph1/2 studies to historical datasets revealed significantly improved survival and function using ALS/SURV versus PRO-ACT controls. While results are encouraging, comparison against historical populations demonstrate limitations in noncontrolled studies. These findings support continued evaluation of HSSC transplantation in ALS, support the benefit of control populations, and enable necessary power calculations to design a randomized, sham surgery-controlled efficacy study.

Objective: To test the safety of spinal cord transplantation of human stem cells in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) with escalating doses and expansion of the trial to multiple clinical centers. Methods: This open-label trial included 15 participants at 3 academic centers divided into 5 treatment groups receiving increasing doses of stem cells by increasing numbers of cells/injection and increasing numbers of injections. All participants received bilateral injections into the cervical spinal cord (C3-C5). The final group received injections into both the lumbar (L2-L4) and cervical cord through 2 separate surgical procedures. Participants were assessed for adverse events and progression of disease, as measured by the ALS Functional Rating Scale–Revised, forced vital capacity, and quantitative measures of strength. Statistical analysis focused on the slopes of decline of these phase 2 trial participants alone or in combination with the phase 1 participants (previously reported), comparing these groups to 3 separate historical control groups. Results: Adverse events were mostly related to transient pain associated with surgery and to side effects of immunosuppressant medications. There was one incident of acute postoperative deterioration in neurologic function and another incident of a central pain syndrome. We could not discern differences in surgical outcomes between surgeons. Comparisons of the slopes of decline with the 3 separate historical control groups showed no differences in mean rates of progression. Conclusions: Intraspinal transplantation of human spinal cord–derived neural stem cells can be safely accomplished at high doses, including successive lumbar and cervical procedures. The procedure can be expanded safely to multiple surgical centers. Classification of evidence: This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with ALS, spinal cord transplantation of human stem cells can be safely accomplished and does not accelerate the progression of the disease. This study lacks the precision to exclude important benefit or safety issues.

Objective:To test the safety of spinal cord transplantation of human stem cells in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) with escalating doses and expansion of the trial to multiple clinical centers.Methods:This open-label trial included 15 participants at 3 academic centers divided into 5 treatment groups receiving increasing doses of stem cells by increasing numbers of cells/injection and increasing numbers of injections. All participants received bilateral injections into the cervical spinal cord (C3-C5). The final group received injections into both the lumbar (L2-L4) and cervical cord through 2 separate surgical procedures. Participants were assessed for adverse events and progression of disease, as measured by the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised, forced vital capacity, and quantitative measures of strength. Statistical analysis focused on the slopes of decline of these phase 2 trial participants alone or in combination with the phase 1 participants (previously reported), comparing these groups to 3 separate historical control groups.Results:Adverse events were mostly related to transient pain associated with surgery and to side effects of immunosuppressant medications. There was one incident of acute postoperative deterioration in neurologic function and another incident of a central pain syndrome. We could not discern differences in surgical outcomes between surgeons. Comparisons of the slopes of decline with the 3 separate historical control groups showed no differences in mean rates of progression.Conclusions:Intraspinal transplantation of human spinal cord-derived neural stem cells can be safely accomplished at high doses, including successive lumbar and cervical procedures. The procedure can be expanded safely to multiple surgical centers.Classification of evidence:This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with ALS, spinal cord transplantation of human stem cells can be safely accomplished and does not accelerate the progression of the disease. This study lacks the precision to exclude important benefit or safety issues.

PURPOSETo develop a mouse model of neurotrophic keratopathy by approaching the trigeminal nerve through the brain and to evaluate changes in corneal cell apoptosis and proliferation.METHODSSix- to 8-week-old male C57BL/6 mice underwent trigeminal stereotactic electrolysis (TSE) to destroy the ophthalmic branch of the trigeminal nerve. Clinical follow-up using biomicroscopy of the cornea was performed at days 2, 4, 5, and 7. To confirm the effectiveness of the procedure, we examined the gross nerve pathology, blink reflex, and immunohistochemistry of the corneal nerves. TUNEL-positive apoptotic and Ki-67-positive proliferating corneal cells were evaluated to detect changes from the contralateral normal eye.RESULTSTSE was confirmed by gross histology of the trigeminal nerve and was considered effective if the corneal blink reflex was completely abolished. TSE totally abolished the blink reflex in 70% of mice and significantly reduced it in the remaining 30%. Animals with absent blink reflex were used for subsequent experiments. In these mice, a progressive corneal degeneration developed, with thinning of the corneal epithelium and eventually perforation after 7 days. In all mice, 48 hours after TSE, corneal nerves were not recognizable histologically. Seven days after TSE, an increase in cellular apoptosis in all the corneal layers and a reduction in proliferation in basal epithelial cells were detected consistently in all mice.CONCLUSIONSTSE was able, in most cases, to induce a disease state that reflected clinical neurotrophic keratitis without damaging the periocular structures. Moreover, corneal denervation led to increased apoptosis and reduced proliferation of epithelial cells, formally implicating intact nerve function in regulating epithelial survival and turnover.

Surgical intervention for neck and back pain in elderly patients without significant comorbidities can significantly improve a patient's symptoms and quality of life when more conservative therapies fail. Current spine literature strongly supports the paradigm of treating elderly patients with stable, chronic neck or back pain with conservative therapies first in order to optimize the risks and benefits of all available treatment options. If less-invasive methods fail to achieve satisfactory outcomes, more aggressive surgical options can, at that time, typically be implemented with excellent results in elderly patients without significant comorbidities. Clinical scenarios threatening to result in spine instability or nerve root or spinal cord compression require immediate intervention, especially in elderly patients, who, in general, have a higher risk of developing such conditions either through falls or trauma or acquired degenerative disease processes or malignancies. When an elderly patient enters a physician's office and asks "doctor, I've had pain for years, but it's getting worse. At my age, is it really worth having surgery?" The answer is a qualified "yes," if conservative treatments have failed and if the patient is otherwise in reasonably good health. Because the vast majority of these patients first interact with the medical system through their primary care doctors and neurologists, early recognition of situations requiring immediate attention, and those requiring referrals to spine specialists, can greatly expedite the appropriate use of scarce healthcare resources. Furthermore, knowledge of the various treatment options available to elderly patients complaining of the very common symptoms of neck or back pain can significantly improve patient care, especially in this new century when older patients will increasingly become a larger and more active force in all aspects of our society.