Case Report | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2637-8892/018
Department of Psychological Medicine, USA.
*Corresponding Author: Samuel Langhorne, Department of Psychological Medicine, USA.
Citation: Samuel Langhorne (2017) Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy: Multiple neurolgic problems. J Psychology and Mental Health. 1(3); DOI: 10.31579/2637-8892/018
Copyright: © 2017 Samuel Langhorne. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 07 September 2017 | Accepted: 15 September 2017 | Published: 27 September 2017
Keywords: spinal cord compression; hardware
A 57 year old female with history of diabetes mellitus, diabetic peripheral neuropathy and scoliosis with four previous spinal fusions (T4 to pelvis) presented with worsening ambulating for the past one month. She was previously at baseline ambulating with a walker.
A 57 year old female with history of diabetes mellitus, diabetic peripheral neuropathy and scoliosis with four previous spinal fusions (T4 to pelvis) presented with worsening ambulating for the past one month. She was previously at baseline ambulating with a walker. Her physical exam demonstrated normal cranial nerve functions. Motor exam revealed full strength in bilateral upper extremities, 3+/5 MRC strength in bilateral hip flexors, 5-/5 MRC in bilateral hip abductors, adductors, knee flexors/extensors, and ankle dorsiflexors/plantar flexors, with increased muscle tone in the lower extremities. Sensory exam revealed decreased sensation to pinprick below T6 level. Deep tendon reflexes were 2+ symmetric in upper extremities as well as at the knees and 4+ at ankles with non-sustained clonus. A positive Babinski’s sign was elicited bilaterally. A CT thoracic spine revealed the pedicle screws traversing the disc space at the T3-4 level, with the deformity associated with moderate to severe central stenosis (Figure 1).
Due to the severe spinal cord compression at the T3 to T4 level, she underwent another surgery – T4 to T12 segmental spinal instrumentation removal, a T4 vertebral column resection and a T3 to T10 fusion. She tolerated the procedure well and the strength in her lower extremities improved before discharge in one week. A follow up visit at three months after the surgery showed stable strength in her lower extremities. A repeat CT thoracic spinerevealed the resolved cord compression at T3-4 level (Figure 2).
Spinal cord compression due to external fixation abnormalities is a rare but important potential adverse event in patients who have had previous fusion surgeries. Major spinal surgery is associated with a high incidence of intra- and postoperative complications. Although instrumentation failure is reportedly lower, the potential for permanent and/or long term sequelae is concerning [1,2]. To our knowledge the extent to which our patient’s hardware traversed the disc space is previously unreported.
Dear Editorial Team, Clinical Medical Reviews and Reports. My experience with the journal was highly positive. The peer-review process was rigorous, constructive, and completed in a timely manner. The reviewers provided valuable comments that helped improve the quality and clarity of our manuscript. The editorial office was professional, responsive, and supportive throughout all stages of the publication process. Communication was clear and efficient, and any questions were addressed promptly. Overall, I found the journal to maintain high scientific standards and an excellent publication workflow. I would be pleased to consider submitting future work to this journal. Best wishes from, Elena Popa.
It was my pleasure to submit my testimonial concerning the Reviewer Board of our Scientific Journal “Brain and Neurological Disorders”. The Reviewers focused on some modifications and their contribution was helpful. The ladies of our Editorial Office were also supported my efforts. It was my honor to have such a co-operation and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
Dear Grace Pierce, Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports, Thank you for the speedy and efficient peer review process. I appreciate the fact that your peer reviewers do not take months to respond like with some other journals. I would also like to thank the editorial office for responding quickly to my questions. It is an excellent journal. I plan to submit more manuscripts in the future. Best wishes from, Robert W. McGee
Dear Grace Pierce, Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports, Working with you and your team on our recent publication in JCRR has been a truly wonderful and enjoyable experience. The responses were prompt, and the reviewers were patient, constructive, and highly professional. One reviewer in particular gave me the feeling that a professor was carefully reading and commenting on my coursework, which was deeply touching. The entire process was straightforward and hassle‑free, with no tedious online forms to complete. I highly recommend this journal. Best wishes from, DR Aibing Rao, Head of R&D
I Appreciate the Opportunity to Share my Experience with the Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. The peer review process was timely and constructive, and the feedback provided helped improve the quality of our manuscript. The editorial office was professional, responsive, and supportive throughout the process, ensuring smooth communication and efficient handling of the submission. Overall, it was a positive experience collaborating with your team.
Dear Mercy Grace, Editorial Coordinator of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, We would like to express our gratitude for your help at all stages of publishing and editing the article. The editors of the magazine answer all the necessary questions and help at every stage. We will definitely continue to cooperate and publish other works in the Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences! Best wishes from, Alla Konstantinovna Politova,
