Letter to the Editor: Should We Really Avoid the Supine Position in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury Who Undergo Laminectomy?

Fubing Liu,Bing Wang,Yunchao Li,Guohua Lv,Xiaoxing Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.10.spine161149

2017-01-01

Abstract:TO THE EDITOR: We have read with great interest the paper by Phang et al.2 (Phang I, Zoumprouli A, Saadoun S, et al: Safety profile and probe placement accuracy of intraspinal pressure monitoring for traumatic spinal cord injury: Injured Spinal Cord Pressure Evaluation study. J Neurosurg Spine 25:398–405, September 2016). The article is well written, and the authors have demonstrated the accuracy and safety of intradural pressure monitoring. However, they also postulated that the supine position should be avoided in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) who undergo laminectomy, which seems to be inconsistent with the clinical practice. In our clinical practice, patient positioning postlaminectomy should be changed every 2 to 3 hours, often from supine to lateral and vice versa, to prevent the development of pressure ulcers. The authors did not investigate the relationships between patient positioning and neurological outcome in this paper. Still, there is no evidence to date that the patients in the supine position postlaminectomy would experience worse functional recovery than in the lateral position. Actually, although the difference of intraspinal pressure (∆ISP) was up to 18 mm Hg after thoracic laminectomies, and up to 8 mm Hg after cervical laminectomies, the average difference was approximately 2 mm Hg and 1 mm Hg, respectively. It seems that the authors were exaggerating the difference of ISP in the supine versus lateral position. In another retrospective study of traumatic brain injury, Aries et al.1 found that patients with a median cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) close to the optimum CPP (CPPopt) were more likely to have a favorable outcome than those in whom the median CPP was widely different from CPPopt. Similarly, in traumatic SCI, either too high or too low spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP) is detrimental to the neurological recovery. Because the SCPP is computed as the mean arterial pressure minus ISP, the increase of ISP with subsequent decrease of SCPP to some extent in the supine position would not necessarily result in worse functional outcome. Although this article is retrospective and the number of patients is limited, it opened a new window for us to look into the ISP in relation to different patient positioning. Future studies are needed to further explore the relationships between patient positioning, ISP, and neurological outcome.