Epidemiology of the causes of complaints after discectomy collected from a French insurance company.

INTRODUCTION: Lumbar discectomy is a frequent procedure performed by surgeons from specialties at risk of patient complaints. The objective of the study was to analyze the causes of litigations following lumbar discectomy to be able to reduce their frequency. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This observational, retrospective study was carried out at a French insurance company (Branchet). All files opened between the 1st of January 2003 and the 31st of December 2020, following lumbar discectomy without instrumentation and without any other associated code, undertaken by a surgeon insured by Branchet, were analyzed. The data was extracted from the database by a consultant from the insurance company and analyzed by an orthopedic surgeon. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-four records met all inclusion criteria and were complete and available for analysis. Infection was the leading cause of litigation, responsible for 27% of complaints. Residual postoperative pain was the second cause of complaint with 26% of cases, of which 93% had persistent pain. Neurological deficits were the third cause of complaint with 25% of cases among which 76% were related to the appearance of a deficit and 20% related to the persistence of an existing deficit. Early recurrence of herniated disc also appeared as a cause of complaint, accounting for 7% of cases. CONCLUSION: Surgical site infection, persistence of pain, and the appearance or persistence of neurological disorders are the primary causes of complaints leading to investigation in the aftermath of lumbar discectomy. It seems essential to us that this information be brought to the attention of surgeons to enable them to better adapt their explanations in the delivery of preoperative information. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Burden of complications after giant cell tumor surgery. A single-center retrospective study of 192 cases.

BACKGROUND: Surgical complications are frequent with giant cell tumor of bone; recurrence is the best known and most widely studies; other causes of failure have been less well investigated. We therefore performed a retrospective study to identify and assess the main reasons for surgical revision. HYPOTHESIS: Recurrence is the main cause of surgical revision in giant cell tumor of bone, but other complications, such as mechanical issues or infection, are underestimated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective study included 192 patients (included from 2000 to 2016) undergoing first giant cell tumor of bone surgery in a bone tumor reference center. Surgery consisted in curettage for 152 patients (79%) and resection for 40 (21%). The 3 main reconstruction techniques were filling (136 patients; 71%), prosthesis (18 patients; 9%), and fusion (14 patients: 7%). Filling used cement in 9 cases (7%) and bone graft in 127 (93%). Cumulative incidence functions were calculated. RESULTS: There were 171 revision procedures in 92 patients: 43 for mechanical reasons, 30 for infection, 86 for tumor recurrence, 12 for other causes. Cumulative incidence of revision at 10years was 36% (95% CI: 27-44) for recurrence, 26% (95% CI: 17-36) for mechanical causes, and 13% (95% CI: 9-19) for infection, for overall cumulative incidence of revision of 61% (95% CI: 50-69). DISCUSSION: Risk of all-cause surgical revision in giant cell tumor of bone was 61% at 10years, with recurrence accounting for only half of cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Screw Loosening in Posterior Spine Fusion: Prevalence and Risk Factors.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Screw loosening in spinal fusion is poorly defined. Accordingly, its prevalence rates range from 1% to 60%, and its risk factors remain undefined. The goal of this study was to assess the prevalence of screw loosening, according to precise definitions, and to identify factors associated with it. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records for 166 patients who underwent a posterior spinal fusion in our institution between 2011 and 2016. We recorded demographic data, osteoporosis, pelvic balance, surgery-related information, and postoperative radiographic data at a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used. Significance was defined by P < .05. RESULTS: When loosening was defined by partial pull-out, its prevalence was 9.6% (95% CI 5.6-15); thoracic localization, the use of CrCo (chromium-cobalt) rods, osteoporosis, PI/LL (pelvic incidence/lumbar lordosis) mismatch (preoperative), and frontal imbalance (preoperative) were significant risk factors. When loosening was defined by osteolysis (radiolucent rim) >1 mm around at least 1 screw, its prevalence was 40.4% (95% CI 33-48) and age, scoliosis as indication for fusion, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) 2 or 3, the use of CrCo rods, more than 5 levels fused, no circumferential arthrodesis, postoperative bracing, and sacrum or ilium as the inferior level of instrumentation were also significant risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: A clear definition of screw loosening seems essential for a useful analysis of the literature. Osteoporosis, sagittal imbalance, and rigid material appear to be risk factors, regardless of the definition.