With the advent of artificial intelligence and Big Data - projects, the necessity for a transition from analog medicine to modern-day solutions such as cloud computing becomes unavoidable. Even though this need is now common knowledge, the process is not always easy to start. Legislative changes, for example at the level of the European Union, are helping the respective healthcare systems to take the necessary steps. This article provides an overview of how a German university hospital is dealing with European data protection laws on the integration of cloud computing into everyday clinical practice. By describing our model approach, we aim to identify opportunities and possible pitfalls to sustainably influence digitization in Germany.

Traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI), commonly caused by high energy trauma in young active patients, is frequently accompanied by traumatic brain injury (TBI). Although combined trauma results in inferior clinical outcomes and a higher mortality rate, the understanding of the pathophysiological interaction of co-occurring TSCI and TBI remains limited. This review provides a detailed overview of the local and systemic alterations due to TSCI and TBI, which severely affect the autonomic and sensory nervous system, immune response, the blood–brain and spinal cord barrier, local perfusion, endocrine homeostasis, posttraumatic metabolism, and circadian rhythm. Because currently developed mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based therapeutic strategies for TSCI provide only mild benefit, this review raises awareness of the impact of TSCI–TBI interaction on TSCI pathophysiology and MSC treatment. Therefore, we propose that unravelling the underlying pathophysiology of TSCI with concomitant TBI will reveal promising pharmacological targets and therapeutic strategies for regenerative therapies, further improving MSC therapy.

Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) are common congenital variances with a prevalence found in the population up to 35.6%. The literature demonstrates an influence of LSTV on bony pelvic anatomy. The influence on the anatomical acetabular orientation, which is important for cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty, has not yet been described for patients with LSTV. A total of 53 patients with LSTV were identified from a CT Database including 819 subjects. Fifty patients with LSTV could be included and were matched for age and sex against a control group. We examined the influence of LSTV, classified according to Castellvi, on acetabular orientation and pelvic tilt in the supine position. Functional acetabular anteversion and inclination, assessed against the table plane, were compared against anatomical acetabular anteversion and inclination, assessed against the anterior pelvic plane. The anatomical acetabular inclination correlated with the pelvic tilt (r = 0.363, p < 0.001). The anatomical acetabular inclination was significantly larger than the functional acetabular inclination in the supine position (p < 0.001). Castellvi grading of LSTV correlated negatively with pelvic tilt (ρ = −0.387, p = 0.006). Castellvi grading correlated significantly with functional acetabular anteversion (ρ = 0.324, p = 0.022) and anatomical acetabular anteversion (ρ = 0.306, p = 0.022). A higher Castellvi grading was accompanied by a reduced pelvic tilt in the supine position. The functional acetabular anteversion and anatomical acetabular anteversion increased in parallel to the higher Castellvi grading. Therefore, LSTV and Castellvi grading might be assessed on pre-operative X-rays prior to hip arthroplasty and surgeons might consider adjusting cup positioning accordingly.

Purpose: Changes in the cross-sectional area (CSA) and functional cross-sectional area (FCSA) of the lumbar multifidus (MF) and erector spinae muscles (ES) are factors that can contribute to low back pain. For the assessment of muscle CSA and composition there are various software and threshold methods used for tissue segmentation in quantitative analysis. However, there is currently no gold standard for software as well as muscle segmentation. This study aims to analyze the measurement error between different image processing software and different threshold methods for muscle segmentation. Methods: Magnetic resonance images (MRI) of 60 patients were evaluated. Muscle CSA and FCSA measurements were acquired from axial T2-weighted MRI of the MF and ES at L4/L5 and L5/S1. CSA, FCSA, and FCSA/CSA ratio were measured independently by two observers. The MRI images were measured using two different software programs (ImageJ and Amira) and with two threshold methods (Circle/Overlap method) for each software to evaluate FCSA and FCSA/CSA ratio. Results: Inter-software comparisons revealed high inter-rater reliability. However, poor inter-rater reliability were obtained with different threshold methods. CSA, FCSA, and FCSA/CSA showed excellent inter-software agreement of 0.75–0.99 regardless of the threshold segmentation method. The inter-rater reliability between the two observers ranged between 0.75 and 0.99. Comparison of the two segmentation methods revealed agreement between 0.19 and 0.84. FCSA and FCSA/CSA measured via the Overlap method were significantly higher than those measured via the Circle method (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The present study showed a high degree of reliability with very good agreement between the two software programs. However, study results based on different threshold methods should not be directly compared.

Introduction: Fractures of the thoracolumbar spine in children are rare. Consequently, classification systems providing detailed treatment recommendations as already established in adults are still lacking in the paediatric population. We aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score system (TLICS) and the AOSpine injury score in paediatric patients presenting with a traumatic fracture of the thoracolumbar spine. Materials and methods: Patients younger than 18 years presenting with a traumatic thoracolumbar fracture at a large academic trauma centre between 2010 and 2020 were included retrospectively. Demographic and clinical data were retrieved from electronic medical reports. The AOSpine injury score and TLICS were calculated using plain radiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or computed tomography. Results: Sixty patients with 167 fractures were included. Surgical treatment was performed in 14 patients. The mean AOSpine injury score was 1.49 ± 2.0, the mean TLICS was 1.32 ± 1.65. A significant correlation between the classification systems was found (Spearman r = 0.975, p < 0.001). Interrater reliability analysis revealed Kappa values of 0.868 for the TLICS and 0.860 for the AOSpine injury score (p < 0.001). Contingency table analysis showed a sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity of 0.94 for the AOSpine injury score and a sensitivity of 0.90 and specificity of 0.90 for the TLICS in predicting the performed treatment. Conclusions: Our results confirm that the TLICS is a valid classification system for determining treatment decisions in paediatric patients and show slightly higher accuracy of the AOSpine injury score as well as high interrater reliabilities for both classification systems.

The Schober test is considered reliable in evaluating lumbar mobility and its impairment. Especially in patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP) identification of functional restriction is important. We aimed to investigate whether the 5 cm Schober cut-off provides a valid distinction between unrestricted and restricted mobility in participants with and without cLBP (18–65 years). cLBP is defined as LBP persisting for ≥ 12 weeks. We analyzed agreement between the Schober test with two measurement devices (Epionics SPINE^®; Idiag M360^®) and the influence of lumbar lordosis (LL) on their agreement. Also, the sensitivity and specificity of the Schober test was evaluated. For 187 participants (49.6%) Epionics SPINE^® RoF and Schober test matched (either ≥ 5 cm; > 40.8° RoF or ≤ 5 cm; < 40.8° RoF), for 190 participants (50.4%) the two measurements did not. Idiag M360^® RoF of 190 participants (50.4%) showed corresponding results (either ≥ 5 cm; > 46.0° RoF or ≤ 5 cm; < 46.0° RoF). Non-agreement was seen in 187 participants (49.6%). LL differed significantly in the Epionics SPINE^® cohort (p < 0.001). Regarding the Epionics SPINE^® cohort, Schober test showed a sensitivity of 79.6% with a specificity of 36.1%. For the Idiag M360^® cohort, Schober test showed a sensitivity of 68.2% and a specificity of 46.6%. Our results do not establish a consistent matching between Schober test and the device measurements. Therefore, Schober test may not be valid to predict impairment of lumbar mobility. We recommend Schober test as an add-on in monitoring of an individual relative to its case.