AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Review Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2694-0248/035
Clinical Professor of Spinal Injuries - Keele University.
*Corresponding Author: Wagih El Masri, Clinical Professor of Spinal Injuries - Keele University.
Citation: Wagih El Masri (2022). Traumatic Spinal Cord Injuries: Effects, Controversies in Management and Neurological Outcomes. J. Clinical Orthopedics and Trauma Care, 4(3); DOI:10.31579/2694-0248/035
Copyright: © 2022 Wagih El Masri, This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 14 March 2022 | Accepted: 29 March 2022 | Published: 05 April 2022
Keywords: traumatic spinal cord injuries; hypotension; hypoxia; hypothermia
Prior to the second World War (WW) the great majority of patients with Traumatic spinal cord injuries (TSCI) died within two years of injury. Those who survived had an even more miserable short life than death because of a wide range of complications.
Prior to the second World War (WW) the great majority of patients with Traumatic spinal cord injuries (TSCI) died within two years of injury. Those who survived had an even more miserable short life than death because of a wide range of complications.
During the 2nd WW Guttmann, a neurosurgeon in the UK studied all the effects of cord damage including the pathogenesis of the various complications and how to prevent them. He demonstrated that provided the patient is adequately treated and all the medical and non-medical effects of cord damage are attended to from the very early hours or days of injury the majority of patients survived and lived healthy, long, enjoyable, dignified, productive and often competitive lives. [1] Guttmann condemned laminectomy because of poor outcomes and this was subsequently supported by other groups. [3,4]
Effects of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injuries
Traumatic spinal cord injuries (TSCI) are life-changing events that affect the patient’s medical, physical, psychological, social, financial, vocational, environmental condition all of which with dramatic effects on the patient, partner and family members relationships. [2,6]
The combination of consequent effects of cord damage such as: generalised physiological impairment, multi-system malfunction, multiple disabilities, impose immense challenges to patients, their careers as well as health care professionals who treat the patient and take responsibility of the outcomes.
Fortunately, the incidence of TSCI is small and ranges between 15-50 patient/million population per year.
The combination of a low incidence of patients with generalised multi-system physiological impairment and malfunction, sensory impairment or loss, unable to complain or display the usual clinical signs of pathology is a source of multiple challenges to clinicians who are not familiar with the condition. This can result in the development of a wide range of complications almost all of which are preventable.
What is often not generally appreciated is that the acutely injured spinal cord is also Physiologically Unstable and unable to defend itself from systemic complications that can easily develop in these patients as well as from further mechanical damage.
Complications such as severe hypotension, hypoxia, hypothermia, generalised sepsis, significant electrolyte imbalance can cause further physiological destabilisation of the injured cord, further neurological damage manifested as neurological deterioration, delays or prevention of neurological recovery. Irrespective on the neurological outcomes these complications frequently add to the level of disability and the psychological devastation of the patient and family members and increase the cost of treatment.
It is therefore evident that the management of the TSCI and its systemic effects encompass Orthopaedic, Trauma Care and require a wide range of disciplines and health care professionals from various backgrounds from the early hours or days of injury to achieve optimum outcomes.
The characteristics of the condition and the requirements of its management necessitated the development of Specialised Spinal Injury Centres in the UK that took responsibility for these patients from the early hours or days following injury until the end of life.
This also necessitated a specific accredited training in the field of TSCI and its allied specialities which ensures the clinician develops the competences necessary to take responsibility for the day-to-day management of the patient from the early hours or days of injury and on an ongoing basis as well as manage the Centre. This training was accredited by the Royal Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons.
This holistic model of service delivery prevented fragmentation of management of the patient between various disciplines and institutions, ensured continuity of care throughout the patient’s life, enabled the Spinal Injury Specialist and supporting team to maintain expertise, monitor the short- and long-term outcomes of management improve treatment and reduce cost significantly. The author had the privilege of obtaining such first
accreditation of training in the field of spinal injuries and general surgery in 1982.
Neurological Recovery following TSCI
Neurological Recovery is not uncommon following traumatic spinal cord injuries. This is provided no further mechanical or non-mechanical damage is inflicted on the injured cord. Early prediction of Neuro-functional recovery in the lower limbs is important to the patient, family members and the community. This is to ensure adequate level of care support, equipment as well as adaptation and alteration of the accommodation.
Frankel et al. observed and documented the clinical prognostic indicators of neurological recovery in 612 patients admitted to Stoke Mandeville Hospital within 14 days of injury. They had all undergone simultaneous Active Physiological Conservative Management (APCM) of their injured spine as well as the multi-system physiological impairment and malfunction consequent to cord damage in the early stage of injury. They demonstrated that neurological recovery can be predicted form the presence or absence of sparing of long tracts as clinically manifested by sensory and sensory-motor sparing distal to the last normal level of injury. Some recovery also occurs in the adjacent spinal cord segments distal to the last normal level which is referred to as the Zone of Partial Preservation (ZPP).
Based on their observation they neurologically classified the patients on admission and on discharge and published their results in 1969 in what has been known as the Frankel Classification. [5]
The majority of patients presenting in the first two weeks of injury without manifestation of any clinical sparing of long sensory or sensory-motor long tract function distal to the ZPP (Frankel A, clinically complete injuries) are unlikely to recover below the level of injury but many will recover or improve motor power within the ZPP. A minority of these patients recover below the ZPP and are assumed to have anatomical sparing but not electrophysiological conduction during the stage of spinal shock.
Over 60% of patients who exhibit manifestation some long tract sensory sparing only (without motor sparing) below the ZPP (Frankel B), recover significant sensory and motor functions. Many of these patients become able to stand and walk.
Folman and El Masri in 1989[7] found that the preservation of pin prick sensation without motor power preservation below the ZPP in the first 72 hours following injury was predictive of motor recovery in over 70% of patients. This observation was subsequently confirmed by others [8,9] and the pin prick sensation was introduced in the assessment of presentations and outcomes.
Patients who present with initial sparing of sensory as well as motor long tracts are likely to recover even more irrespective of how weak the motor power at presemtation was.
Surprisingly, this recovery was achieved irrespective of the severity of the radiological presentations and without any intervention on the injured spine other than an attempt at closed postural reduction which often failed. The outcomes however were determined by the injured cord being well protected from further mechanical insults as well as further non-mechanical physiologically systemic complications that further destabilise the Spinal cord.
The Frankel findings were repeatedly confirmed by other groups of the international community and of spinal cord injury specialists in the field and the Frankel Neuro-functional Classification is still used by clinicians to exchange information about the neuro-functional presentation of patients on admission,discharge and long term outcomes[13-17,29,30,31,33,35,39,40,42,50]
Biomechanical Instability of the Injured Spinal Column
Biomechanical Instability (BI) causes concern because of the potential displacement of the fractured elements at the site of the injury which can damage further damage of neural tissue. The diagnosis of BI is usually based on radiological investigations at the time of the presentation of the patient. Unfortunately, the function of the soft tissues (muscles and ligaments) and the natural history of the repair process that follows are often not taken into account. It is perhaps worthwhile noting that most vertebral fractures heal within 6-12 weeks from injury. Ligamentous injuries however can take much longer to heal.
In the majority of patients, the Biomechanical Stability (BS) of the spine is usually restored once the healing of bone and/or ligament occurs. In other words, Biomechanical Instability is Time related. There is no evidence to suggest that surgical stabilisation enhances the speed of healing or achieves earlier BS. Surgical stabilisation should therefore be regarded as an option of Containment of the BI until natural healing occurs. Biomechanical stability can be at least equally well achieved with active Conservative treatment.
The advantages of natural healing is the achievement of the shortest fusion that allows maximum flexibility of the spine and minimal pain without further damage to vascular, soft tissue or bony structures.
Non-Surgical and Conservative Management
Unfortunately, the terms non –surgical treatment and conservative treatment are frequently liberally inter-changed.
Conservative treatment consists of a necessary period of bed rest until both the neurogenic and spinal shock have resolved. This period can range between four to six weeks. During this period the injured spine is contained non-surgically, attention to all the impaired systems of the body is given in order to prevent the range of complications, psychological and monitored peer support is provided and education of the patient about the condition is commenced [1,2,6,13-17]. This period is followed by a similar period of bracing during which the patient is mobile, in active rehabilitation and continuing his/her education.
Non-surgical management rarely include such a period of treatment in recumbence and the details of management of the systemic effects of cord damage are often lacking.
Moreover, it is difficult to contain the BI of the spine by non-surgical means when the patient is mobilised prior to complete bony healing and a kyphotic deformity tends to recur.
Although the macro BI of the injured spine can be contained by surgical stabilisation and the spinal cord is likely be safe during mobilisation prior to healing, instrumentation hardly contains and prevent micro-instability at the site of the injury which can be a source of short and long term pain and discomfort
RATIONALE, AND ARGUMENTS FOR APCM
The range of cellular, molecular, chemical and metabolic changes as well as the disruption of the blood brain barrier in response to trauma, the injured spinal cord is also physiologically unstable. This Physiological Instability renders the cord vulnerable to and unable to defend itself from complications such as Hypoxia, Anaemia, Hypotension, Septicaemia, significant Hypothermia or Electrolyte imbalance [6,10]. These complications can easily develop and cause further neurological damage with delay or prevention of recovery if the malfunctioning and physiologically impaired systems of the body are not well managed [6,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17]
In other words, the physiological instability of the injured spinal cord in patients whose multisystem malfunction is poorly managed is probably more threatening to the injured cord than the biomechanical instability (BI) of the spinal column. The latter can be easily managed by conservative containment until natural healing and Biomechanical Stability are achieved or indeed by surgery.
The controversy between Conservative and Operative management of the spine is currently almost two centuries old and still ongoing [18-50]
The Conservative school argues that none of the systemic complications of TSCI that can damage the spinal cord further, can be prevented by surgery without attention to the medical consequences of cord damage and prevention of systemic complications. Moreover, the added risks of further damage to neural tissues from anaesthetic or surgical mishaps and post-operative complications cannot be dismissed.
Interestingly bony healing seems to be time related and is not expedited by surgical stabilisation.
Permanent neurological deterioration with APCM is extremely rare.
Although up to 9% of closely and frequently monitored patients can exhibit temporary loss in the first 72 hrs from injury to probably coincide with the development of cord oedema; recovery of this loss to initial level and beyond is the rule and the great majority of patients make significant spontaneous neurological recovery.
Some of the added advantages of APCM are: the prevention of further disturbance to nerve endings, soft and bony tissue; the achievement of the shortest fusion that preserves the highest degree of flexibility of the spine and a low incidence of short-, medium- and long-term pain and more effective attendance to the systemic effects of cord damage is given during the period of recumbence.
The required total period of hospitalisation from injury to discharge to achieve the expected neurological recovery, optimum neurological and functional recovery as well as maximum level of independence within the limitations of the density and level of cord damage rarely exceeds three to four months for the patient with incomplete cord damage and six months for those with complete cord damage.
The APCM School asserts that any claim/s of a potentially useful intervention/s have to demonstrate evidence of added value to the neurological and all other relevant outcomes of APCM prior to its introduction as an option of treatment.
GOALS OF ACTIVE PHYSIOLOGICAL CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT (APCM) IN THE ACUTE STAGE
The goals of holistic APCM from the first hours or days after injury are to:
RATIONALE, AND ARGUMENTS FOR SURGICAL STABILISATION
The main indications for Surgical stabilisation are to prevent further mechanical damage to the cord and neurological deterioration and to enable patients to be mobilised early, commence and complete rehabilitation and shorten the period of hospitalisation.
There is undoubtedly an advantage in mobilising neurologically intact patients with spinal injuries considering that their spinal cord is physiologically unimpaired, they do not have a multisystem malfunction that requires attention to throughout the stages of spinal shock, return of reflexes and subsequent stages and they can be discharged to their own homes a few days walking a few days following injury.
The same does not apply to patients with acute cord damage, a multi-system physiological impairment and malfunction and a significant number of non-medical problems that require the cooperation of the patient and energy to engage in arduous physical rehabilitation as well as a great deal of support to return to the community with a disability.
Patients with paralysis, general physiological impairment and multisystem malfunction do not benefit from early mobilisation. Early mobilisation before recovery from the neurogenic and spinal shock can be deleterious in more than one way to patients. [6,14,15,50]
To-date there is no evidence that surgical stabilisation and early mobilisation result in achieving equal neurological and other outcomes or shorten period of rehabilitation and hospitalisation compared with of patients with similar levels and densities of cord damage and who have achieved equal optimum results. Furthermore, there are real potential risks to the injured spine with early mobilisation during the stage of neurogenic and spinal shock.
Hazards of early mobilisation in the stage of neurogenic and spinal shock:
Early mobilisation during the stage of spinal and neurogenic shock results in profound hypotension which can reduce cord perfusion.
Individuals with spinal cord injury exhibit reduced lung volumes and flow rates as a result of respiratory muscle weakness. These features have been investigated in relation to the combined effects of injury level and posture. Values of forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) were repeatedly and consistently shown to be larger in recumbence compared to the seated posture. [52,55]
Early mobilisation of patients with spinal neural tissue injury is associated with a reduction of vital capacity and a potential drop of oxygen saturation.
During the stage of neurogenic and spinal shock, early mobilisation of the tetraplegic and high paraplegic results in further marked impairment in the patient’s ability to cough. Additionally, it is more difficult to implement postural drainage and provide assisted coughing to get rid of bronchial secretions against gravity when the patient is sitting in a wheelchair than when the patient is recumbent.
Individually, or in combination, these respiratory and vascular pathophysiological mechanisms can potentially cause further impairment of cord functions.
Furthermore, it is more difficult to carry out intermittent catheterisation, bowel evacuation or manage episodes of urinary or bowel incontinence of a patient of a wheelchair than in recumbency.
During the stage of neurogenic and spinal shock, when the vasomotor controls are deficient skin perfusion is markedly diminished below the level of injury and the skin over the ischial sacral and coccygeal bony prominences is at its peak of vulnerability from pressure sores over these prominences while sitting in a wheelchair as opposed to the patient’s weight being spread across all the bony prominences of the body
To date there are no comparative studies between surgical and non-surgical management and no evidence to demonstrate added value of surgical intervention over APCM in: saving days spent in Intensive Care Unit, achieving uneventful early mobilisation, reduction of total bed days in recumbence throughout the first admission, superiority of neurological outcome, reduction of the time from injury to completion of equivalent end points of rehabilitation, reduction of the period of total hospitalisation from injury to first discharge, reduction of the incidence of ischial and sacral pressure sores, respiratory infections, urinary infections and other urinary complications, reduction of the incidence of chronic back pain, maintenance of the flexibility of the spine, frequency of readmission or total period of hospitalisation during the first five years following first discharge to treat complications. [6,14,15,50]
Possible Mechanisms that can Potentially Damage the Spinal Cord Further in During the per-operative period in Patients with SCIs:
Hypotensive or Hypoxic during anaesthesia
Clamping of a major spinal feeder to achieve haemostasis
Increase CSF pressure and Reduction of Cord Perfusion Pressure during Decompression
Clumsy porter, sleepy assistant, inexperienced surgeon
Post-operative epidural or subdural bleed
Early post-operative failure of implant prior to achieving Biomechanical Stability
Post-operative sepsis
Early mobilisation during the spinal and neurogenic shock
The influence of CT & MRI
Following the development of CT and MRI, the last decade in particular has witnessed an aggressive promotion of early surgical intervention within a window of opportunity (WOO) of 24 hours of injury. This WOO is based on the laboratory animal findings that if decompression is carried out within four hours from injury in animals whose spinal cord has sustained subthreshold force of impact to damage the spinal cord completely better recovery is demonstrated than with decompression after 4 hours from injury. The same was not demonstrated in animals who sustained higher forces of impact. The WOO of 24 hours in humans was determined by a post hoc analysis of outcomes in humans. Assumptions by extrapolation were subsequently made that surgical decompression within 24 hrs of injury must therefore give better result than APCM.
A change of the outcome assessment tool from the Frankel neuro-functional Classification to a numerical tool the ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) ) seems to have facilitated the support for the assumptions if not assertions that the spinal cord should be decompressed within 24 hours of injury to obtain best results. Unfortunately, these claims have been perpetuated when the validity and reliability of an accurate motor power assessment and documentation so soon after the injury in suddenly paralysed invariably anxious patients, in pain, under heavy analgesia, sedation and often with associated injuries have yet to be determined for a meaningful subsequent numerical assessment of gain.
Moreover, the definition of the various classes in the AIS depends on the presence or absence of sensation in the S4/S5 dermatomes. This is irrespective of the presence or absence of long tract sensory sparing above the S4/S5 dermatomes level in injuries of a cervical or dorsal or upper sacral injury. Furthermore, the definition of the various classes of the new assessment tool have been updated and redefined at least eight times to ensure uniformity of design or demonstration and interpretation of outcomes. Crucially to date no comparison of early or late decompression with the outcomes on APCM have been made.
The Role of the Robert Jones & Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic Hospital (RJAH)
By the mid-eighties increasingly popular claims of benefits from surgical intervention were being made based on the radiological findings revealed by CT & MRI scanning.
We had to choose between continuing to manage patients by APCM (a method of known & predictable outcomes) while testing the significance of the radiological changes or to change to a surgical method of management of the spine relying on CT and MRI findings
The institution had the advantage of having on site excellent internationally acknowledged spinal surgeons and a team of health care professionals trained in the management of patients with TSCI treated conservatively and surgically when indicated. We were encouraged by the published findings by Bedbrook in 1982[38] and Tator et al’s in 1986 [28] of a lack of difference in neurological outcomes between patients conservatively treated and surgically treated [28] patients and early publication on remodelling of the spinal canal [43]
Considering the lack of evidence of any superiority of outcome from either APCM or Surgery, the predictable spontaneous neurological recovery following APCM from the Frankel class of the patient on presentation and considering the fact that the radiological findings would on the balance of probabilities have been present but not accurately demonstrated by Xrays; we decided it would be paramount to study the significance of the radiological features seen on the CT and MRI scans. We decided to initially treat 51 patients admitted within one week of injury with APCM; closely monitor and correlate the neurological progress with the radiological features irrespective of the degree of malalignment and biomechanical instability, canal encroachment and cord compression. Being able to monitor our patients annually or on alternate years for life enabled us to also familiarise ourselves for the medium and long outcomes of these patients.
We have been monitoring published some of our first case reports in 1992 [6,29] and subsequently over the years in [13,14,15,16,17,29,30,31,32] demonstrating a complete lack of correlation between the degree of canal encroachment neurological presentation and neurological recovery. Similar results were confirmed by other groups [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42] Furthermore early reports of resorption of osseous material and remodelling of the spinal canal had already been published [43]
INDICATIONS FOR SURGERY AT THE (RJAH):
All patients with TSCI are offered an informed choice between APCM & Surgical management with full knowledge of the benefits, limitations, hazards and outcomes of both methods of treatment.
To date, other than a fit for purpose model of service delivery that simultaneously and holistically attends to the spinal cord injury and all its systemic effects, there is no evidence of equality or superiority of outcomes with any method of treatment of the injured spine.
On the balance of probabilities what seems to determine the neurological outcome is the force of the impact that damages the spinal cord at the time of the accident, the adequacy of protection of the spinal cord from mechanical and non-mechanical damage. The success of protection is determined by the quality of the simultaneous management of the injured spine together with the multi-system malfunction to prevent complications.
Further damage to the injured neural tissues by mechanical and systemic non-mechanical insults during the early stages of injury remain the main cause of neurological deterioration, delays or lack of expected recovery following TSCIs.
The author strongly recommends that if surgery is to be considered, this should be carried out by knowledgeable and experienced surgeons and anaesthetists, in a set up capable of adequately coping with both the multi-system physiological impairment and malfunction as well as the surgical, Para-surgical and post-operative requirements of patients.
The author asserts that the two-century old controversy in the management of the injured spine is likely to be perpetuated unless adequately designed prospective studies are carried out in centres where the patient’s spinal cord injury and all its systemic effects can be equally well managed from the early hours of injury and patients can be adequately matched for level and density of the cord damage.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
