Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T09:26:05.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

High-Dose Methylprednisolone for Acute Closed Spinal Cord Injury - Only a Treatment Option

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

H. Hugenholtz ,
D.E. Cass ,
M.F. Dvorak ,
D.H. Fewer ,
R.J. Fox ,
D.M.S. Izukawa ,
J. Lexchin ,
S. Tuli ,
N. Bharatwal  and
C. Short
H. Hugenholtz
Affiliation:
QEII Health Sciences, Halifax, NS, Canada
D.E. Cass
Affiliation:
St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
M.F. Dvorak
Affiliation:
Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
D.H. Fewer
Affiliation:
St. Boniface General, Hospital, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
R.J. Fox
Affiliation:
University Hospital, Edmonton, AB, Canada
D.M.S. Izukawa
Affiliation:
Trillium, Health Centre, Mississauga, ON, Canada
J. Lexchin
Affiliation:
Toronto Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
S. Tuli
Affiliation:
Sunnybrook Health, Science Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
N. Bharatwal
Affiliation:
Toronto Rehabilitation, Toronto, ON, Canada
C. Short
Affiliation:
Nova Scotia, Rehabilitation Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:

A systematic review of the evidence pertaining to methylprednisolone infusion following acute spinal cord injury was conducted in order to address the persistent confusion about the utility of this treatment.

Methods:

A committee of neurosurgical and orthopedic spine specialists, emergency physicians and physiatrists engaged in active clinical practice conducted an electronic database search for articles about acute spinal cord injuries and steroids, from January 1, 1966 to April 2001, that was supplemented by a manual search of reference lists, requests for unpublished additional information, translations of foreign language references and study protocols from the author of a Cochrane systematic review and Pharmacia Inc. The evidence was graded and recommendations were developed by consensus.

Results:

One hundred and fifty-seven citations that specifically addressed spinal cord injuries and methylprednisolone were retrieved and 64 reviewed. Recommendations were based on one Cochrane systematic review, six Level I clinical studies and seven Level II clinical studies that addressed changes in neurological function and complications following methylprednisolone therapy.

Conclusion:

There is insufficient evidence to support the use of high-dose methylprednisolone within eight hours following an acute closed spinal cord injury as a treatment standard or as a guideline for treatment. Methylprednisolone, prescribed as a bolus intravenous infusion of 30 mg per kilogram of body weight over fifteen minutes within eight hours of closed spinal cord injury, followed 45 minutes later by an infusion of 5.4 mg per kilogram of bodyweight per hour for 23 hours, is only a treatment option for which there is weak clinical evidence (Level I- to II-1). There is insufficient evidence to support extending methylprednisolone infusion beyond 23 hours if chosen as a treatment option.

Résumé:

RÉSUMÉ:Introduction:

Une revue systématique des données concernant l’infusion de méthylprednisolone suite à un traumatisme aigu de la moelle épinière a été effectuée afin de clarifier la confusion qui règne sur l’utilité de ce traitement

Méthodes:

Un comité formé de spécialistes en neurochirurgie et en chirurgie orthopédique de la colonne vertébrale, d’urgentologues et de physiatres en pratique clinique active a procédé à une recherche électronique de bases de données pour identifier des articles sur les traumatismes aigus de la moelle épinière et l’administration de stéroïdes, du 1er janvier 1966 à avril 2001. Une recherché manuelle de listes de références, la quête d’informations additionnelles non publiées, la traduction de références en langues étrangères et le protocole d’étude de l’auteur d’une Cochrane systematic review et de Pharmacia inc. ont été utilisés comme sources d’informations d’appoint. Les données ont été pondérées et des recommandations ont été développées par consensus.

Résultats:

Cent cinquante-sept citations qui traitaient spécifiquement de traumatisme de la moelle épinière et de méthylprednisolone ont été identifiées et soixante-quatre ont été revues. Les recommandations ont été basées sur une revue systématique Cochrane, six études cliniques de niveau I et sept études de niveau II qui traitaient de modifications de la function neurologique et de complications suite au traitement par la méthylprednisolone.

Conclusions:

Il n’y a pas suffisamment de données pour appuyer l’utilisation de la méthylprednisolone à haute dose en dedans de huit heures après un traumatisme aigu fermé de la moelle épinière comme traitement standard ou comme ligne directrice de traitement. La méthylprednisolone prescrite en infusion intraveineuse en bolus de 30 mg par kilogramme de poids corporel sur une période de quinze minutes en dedans de huit heures d’un traumatisme fermé de la moelle, suivie 45 minutes plus tard d’une infusion de 5,4 mg par kilogramme de poids à l’heure pendant 23 heures est seulement une option thérapeutique en faveur de laquelle il n’y a que des données cliniques faibles (Niveau I à II-1). Il n’y a pas suffisamment de données pour recommander de prolonger l’infusion de éthylprednisolone au delà de vingt-trois heures si on choisit cette option thérapeutique.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , August 2002 , pp. 227 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 2002

References

1. Bracken, MB, Shepard, MJ, Collins, WF, et al. A randomized,controlled trial of methylprednisolone or naloxone in the treatment of acute spinal-cord injury. Results of the Second National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. N Engl J Med 1990;322(20):1405–1411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Vandertop, WP, Notermans, NC, Algra, A. Methylprednisolone intraumatic spinal cord injuries: not proven to be beneficial to the patient at the present time. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1998;142(19):1061–1064.Google Scholar
3. Coleman, WP, Benzel, D, Cahill, DW, et al. A critical appraisal of thereporting of the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Studies (II and III) of methylprednisolone in acute spinal cord injury. J Spinal Disord 2000;13(3):185–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Hurlbert, RJ. Methylprednisolone for acute spinal cord injury: aninappropriate standard of care. J Neurosurg 2000;93(Suppl 1):1–7.Google Scholar
5. Hurlbert, RJ. The role of steroids in acute spinal cord injury. Anevidence-based analysis. Spine 2001;26(24S):S39-S46.Google Scholar
6. Nesathurai, S. Steroids and spinal cord injury: revisiting theNASCIS 2 and NASCIS 3 trials. J Trauma 1998;45(6):1088–1093.Google Scholar
7. Rosner, MJ. Methylprednisolone for spinal cord injury. J Neurosurg 1992;77(2):324–325; discussion 325-327.Google ScholarPubMed
8. Short, DJ, El Masry, WS, Jones, PW. High-dose methylprednisolonein the management of acute spinal cord injury “ a systematic review from a clinical perspective. Spinal Cord 2000;38(5):273–286.Google Scholar
9. Short, D. Use of steroids for acute spinal cord injury must bereassessed. BMJ 2000;321(7270):1224.Google Scholar
10. Wilkinson, HA. Spinalcord injury. J Neurosurg 2001;94(1Suppl):180–181.Google Scholar
11. Guidelines for the management of acute cervical spine and spinalcord injuries. Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. Neurosurgery 2002;50(3)Suppl:S63-S72.Google Scholar
12. Cook, DJ, Guyatt, GH, Laupacis, A, Sackett, DL. Rules of evidenceand clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 1992;104(2)Suppl:305S-311S.Google Scholar
13. Guyatt, GH, Sackett, DL, Cook, DJ. User’s guides to the Medical Literature. JAMA 1993;270:2598–2601.Google Scholar
14. Woolf, SH, Battista, RN, Anderson, GM, Logan, AG, Wang, E. Assessing the clinical effectiveness of preventive maneuvers: analytic principles and systematic methods in reviewing evidence and developing clinical practice recommendations. A report by the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. JClin Epidemiol 1990;43(9):891–905.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Pointillart, V, Petitjean, ME, Wiart, L, et al. Pharmacological therapyof spinal cord injury during the acute phase. Spinal Cord 2000;38(2):71–76.Google Scholar
16. Petitjean, ME, Pointillart, V, Dixmerias, F, et al. Medical treatment ofspinal cord injury in the acute stage. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1998;17(2):114–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Kiwerski, JE. Application of dexamethasone in the treatment ofacute spinal cord injury. Injury 1993;24(7):457–460.Google Scholar
18. Gabler, C, Maier, R. Clinical experiences and results of high-dosagemethylprednisolone therapy in spinal cord trauma 1991 to 1993. Unfallchirurg 1995;21(1):20–29.Google Scholar
19. Epstein, N, Hood, DC, Ransohoff, J. Gastrointestinal bleeding inpatients with spinal cord trauma. Effects of steroids, cimetidine, and mini-dose heparin. J Neurosurg 1981;54(1):16–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Prendergast, MR, Saxe, JM, Ledgerwood, AM, Lucas, CE, Lucas, WF. Massive steroids do not reduce the zone of injury after penetrating spinal cord injury. J Trauma 1994;37(4):576–579; discussion 579-580.Google Scholar
21. Levy, ML, Gans, W, Wijesinghe, HS, et al. Use of methylprednisoloneas an adjunct in the management of patients with penetrating spinal cord injury: outcome analysis. Neurosurgery 1996;39(6):1141–1148; discussion 1148-1149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Heary, RF, Vaccaro, AR, Mesa, JJ, et al. Steroids and gunshot woundsto the spine. Neurosurgery 1997;41(3):576–583; discussion 583¬584.Google ScholarPubMed
23. Bracken, MB. Pharmacological intervention for acute spinal cordinjury (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2001. Oxford: Update Software.Google Scholar
24. Bracken, MB. Methylprednisolone and acute spinal cord injury. Anupdate of randomized evidence. Spine 2001;26(24S):S47-S54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Bracken, MB, Collins, WF, Freeman, DF, et al. Efficacy ofmethylprednisolone in acute spinal cord injury. JAMA 1984; 251(1):45–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Bracken, MB, Shepard, MJ, Hellenbrand, KG, et al. Methylprednisolone and neurological function 1 year after spinal cord injury. Results of the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. J Neurosurg 1985;63(5):704–713.Google Scholar
27. Bracken, MB, Shepard, MJ, Collins, WF Jr, et al. Methylprednisoloneor naloxone treatment after acute spinal cord injury: 1-year follow-up data. Results of the second National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. J Neurosurg 1992;76(1):23–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Bracken, MB, Shepard, MJ, Holford, TR, et al. Administration ofmethylprednisolone for 24 or 48 hours or tirilazad mesylate for 48 hours in the treatment of acute spinal cord injury. Results of the Third National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Randomized Controlled Trial. National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. JAMA 1997;277(20):1597–1604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29. Bracken, MB, Shepard, MJ, Holford, TR, et al. Methylprednisolone ortirilazad mesylate administration after acute spinal cord injury: 1-year follow up. Results of the third National Acute Spinal Cord Injury randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg 1998;89(5):699–706.Google Scholar
30. Matsumoto, T, Tamaki, T, Kawakami, M, et al. Early complications ofhigh-dose methylprednisolone sodium succinate treatment in the follow-upofacute cervical spinal cord injury. Spine 2001;26(4):426–430.Google Scholar
31. Shepard, MJ, Bracken, MB. The effect of methylprednisolone,naloxone, and spinal cord trauma on four liver enzymes: observations from NASCIS 2. National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. Paraplegia 1994;32(4):236–245.Google Scholar
32. Otani, K, Abe, H, Kadoya, S, et al. Beneficialeffect ofmethylprednisolone sodium succinate in the treatment of acute spinal cord injury. Sekitsui Sekizui J 1996;7:633–647.Google Scholar
33. Poynton, AR, O’Farrell, DA, Shannon, F, et al. An evaluation of thefactors affecting neurological recovery following spinal cordinjury. Injury 1997;28(8):545–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Wing, PC, Nance, P, Connell, DG, Gagnon, F. Risk of avascularnecrosis following short-term megadose methylprednisolone treatment. Spinal Cord 1998;36(9):633–636.Google Scholar
35. Gerhart, KA, Johnson, RL, Menconi, J, Hoffman, RE, Lammertse, DP. Utilization and effectiveness of methylprednisolone in a population-based sample of spinal cord injured persons. Paraplegia 1995;33(6):316–321.Google Scholar
36. Frankel, HL, Hancock, DO, Hyslop, G. The value of posturalreduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. Part I. Paraplegia 1969;7:179–192.Google Scholar
37. George, ER, Scholten, DJ, Buechler, CM, et al. Failure ofmethylprednisolone to improve the outcome of spinal cord injuries. Am Surg 1995;61(8):659–663; discussion 663-664.Google Scholar
38. Galandiuk, S, Raque, G, Appel, S, Polk, HC Jr. The two-edged swordof large-dose steroids for spinal cord trauma. Ann Surg 1993;218(4):419–425; discussion 425-427.Google Scholar
39. Gerndt, SJ, Rodriguez, JL, Pawlik, JW, et al. Consequences of high-dose steroid therapy for acute spinal cord injury. J Trauma 1997;42(2):279–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40. Sauerland, S, Nagelschmidt, M, Mallmann, P, Neugebauer, EAM. Risks and benefits of preoperative high-dose methylprednisolone insurgicalpatients. A systematicreview. Drug Safety 2000;23(5):449–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41. Bedbrook, G. Recovery of spinal cord function. Paraplegia 1980;18:315–323.Google ScholarPubMed
42. Gerhart, KA. Spinal cord injury outcomes in a population-basedsample. J Trauma 1991;31(11):1529–1535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43. Waters, RL, Adkins, RH, Yakura, JS, Sie, I. Motor and sensoryrecovery following complete tetraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993;74(3):242–247.Google Scholar
44. Burns, SP, Golding, DG, Rolle, WA Jr, Graziani, V, Ditunno, JF Jr. Recovery of ambulation in motor-incomplete tetraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997;78(11):1169–1172.Google Scholar
45. Marino, RJ, Ditunno, JF, Donovan, WH, Maynard, F Jr. Neurologicrecovery after traumatic spinal cord injury: data from the Model Spinal Cord Injury Sytems. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80(11):1391–1396.Google Scholar
46. Ditunno, JF Jr, Cohen, ME, Formal, C, Whiteneck, GG. Functionaloutcomes. In: Stover, SL, DeLisa, JA, Whiteneck, GG (Eds). Spinal Cord Injury. Clinical Outcomes from the Model Systems. Gaithersburg, Maryland: Aspen, 1995;170–184.Google Scholar
47. Ditunno, JF Jr, Stover, SL, Freed, MM, Ahn, JH. Motor recovery of theupper extremities in traumatic quadriplegia: a multicenter study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992;73(5):431–436.Google Scholar
48. Ditunno, JF Jr. Predicting recovery after spinal cord injury: arehabilitation imperative. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:361–364.Google Scholar
49. Frankel, HL, Hancock, DO, Hyslop, G. The value of postural reductionin the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. Part I. Paraplegia 1969;7:179–192.Google Scholar
50. American Spinal Injury Association: Standards for NeurologicalClassification of Spinal Cord Patients. Chicago. American Spinal Injury Association 1992.Google Scholar
51. Outcomes following traumatic spinal cord injury: clinical practiceguidelines for health care professionals. Clinical Practice Guidelines, Spinal Cord Medicine 1999 July. Paralyzed Victims of America.Google Scholar
52. Young, W, Bracken, MB. The Second National Acute Spinal CordInjury Study. J Neurotrauma 1992;9(Suppl 1):S397-S405.Google Scholar
53. Bracken, MB. Treatment of acutespinalcord injury withmethylprednisolone: results of a multicenter, randomized clinical trial. J Neurotrauma 1991;8(Suppl 1):S47-50; discussion S51-S52.Google Scholar
54. Bracken, MB. Pharmacological treatment of acute spinal cord injury:current status and future prospects. Paraplegia 1992;30(2):102–107.Google Scholar
55. Bracken, MB. Pharmacological treatment of acute spinal cord injury:current status and future projects. J Emerg Med 1993; 11 Suppl 1:43–48.Google Scholar
56. Bracken, MB, Holford, TR. Effects of timing of methylprednisoloneor naloxone administration on recovery of segmental and long-tractneurologicalfunction in NASCIS 2. J Neurosurg 1993;79(4):500–507.Google Scholar
57. Bracken, MB, Aldrich, EF, Herr, DL, et al. Clinical measurement,statistical analysis, and risk-benefit: controversies from trials of spinal injury. J Trauma 2000;48(3):558–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Bracken, MB. Methylprednisolone and spinal cord injury. J Neurosurg 2000;93(Suppl 1):175–179.Google Scholar