A Comparison of the Caprini Score With an Institutional Risk Assessment Tool for Prediction of Venous Thromboembolism After Total Joint Arthroplasty at an Urban Tertiary Care Health Safety Net Hospital.

Background: Patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Prediction tools such as the Caprini Risk Assessment Model (RAM) have been developed to identify patients at higher risk. However, studies have reported heterogeneous results when assessing its efficacy for TJA. Patients treated in an urban health safety net hospital have increased medical complexity, advanced degenerative joint disease, and severe disability prior to TJA increasing the risk of VTE. We hypothesize that use of a tool designed to account for these conditions-the Boston Medical Center (BMC) VTE score-will more accurately predict VTE in this patient population. Methods: A retrospective case-control study was performed including subjects 18 years of age and older who underwent primary or revision TJA in an urban academic health safety net hospital. Patients with hemiarthroplasties, simultaneous bilateral TJA, and TJA after acute trauma were excluded. A total of 80 subjects were included: 40 who developed VTE after TJA (VTE+) and 40 who did not develop VTE (controls). Subjects were matched by age, gender, and surgical procedure. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the mean BMC VTE score for VTE+ and controls (4.40 and 3.13, respectively, P = .036). Conversely, there was no statistical difference between the mean Caprini scores for VTE+ and controls (9.50 and 9.35, respectively, P = .797). Conclusions: In a health safety-net patient population, an institutional RAM-the BMC VTE score-was found to be more predictive of VTE than the modified Caprini RAM following TJA. The BMC-VTE score should be externally validated to confirm its reliability in VTE prediction in similar patient populations.

The Utilization of Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring for Lumbar Decompression and Fusion Surgery in New York State.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective database analysis. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate trends in the utilization of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) during elective lumbar surgery procedures and to investigate the association between the use of IONM and surgical outcomes. BACKGROUND: The routine use of IONM in elective lumbar spine procedures has recently been called into question due to longer operative time, higher cost, and other substitute advanced technologies. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was accessed to perform this retrospective study. The trends of IONM use for lumbar decompression and fusion procedures were investigated from 2007 to 2018. The association between IONM use and surgical outcomes was investigated from 2017 to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analyses, as well as propensity score matching (PS-matching), were conducted to assess IONM association in neurological deficits reduction. RESULTS: The utilization of IONM showed an increase in a linear fashion from 79 cases in 2007 to 6201 cases in 2018. A total of 34,592 (12,419 monitored and 22,173 unmonitored) patients were extracted, and 210 patients (0.6%) were reported for postoperative neurological deficits. Unadjusted comparisons demonstrated that the IONM group was associated with significantly fewer neurological complications. However, the multivariable analysis indicated that IONM was not a significant predictor of neurological injuries. After the PS-matching of 23,642 patients, the incidence of neurological deficits was not significantly different between IONM and non-IONM patients. CONCLUSION: The utilization of IONM for elective lumbar surgeries continues to gain popularity. Our results indicated that IONM use was not associated with a reduction in neurological deficits and will not support the routine use of IONM for all elective lumbar surgery.

Up to 10-year surveillance comparison of survivability in single-level cervical disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in New York.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) is an alternative treatment to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), which is the current gold standard, for degenerative cervical diseases such as cervical spondylotic myelopathy and cervical radiculopathy. CDR has several theoretical benefits over ACDF, including preservation of motion, earlier return to unrestricted activity, and potentially a lower risk of adjacent-segment disease. Recent literature has reported positive clinical results for CDR, but few studies have investigated the long-term risk of revision surgery of CDR versus ACDF. The purpose of this study was to identify and analyze the epidemiological, clinical, and operative risk factors that affect revision rates following single-level CDR and ACDF procedures. METHODS: A retrospective cohort was extracted from the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System using ICD-9 and CPT codes. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing primary, subaxial (C3-7), single-level ACDF or CDR for cervical radiculopathy and/or cervical spondylotic myelopathy between 2005 and 2013. Survivability was defined as the time between the index procedure and the presence of a subsequent discharge record for cervical spinal fusion or disc replacement. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square tests, t-tests, Cox proportional hazards models, and a Kaplan-Meier plot. RESULTS: A total of 7450 patients were included in this study (6615 ACDF and 835 CDR). When adjusted for patient demographics, the hazard ratios showed no significant differences in the incidence of revision risk between the two cohorts. The CDR cohort had a higher incidence of postoperative dysphagia (p < 0.05). Patients undergoing ACDF had a longer average hospital stay (2.8 vs 1.9 days, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in time to revision surgery (p = 0.486). CONCLUSIONS: CDR and ACDF have both been shown to be effective treatments for cervical spine disease. CDR patients had a shorter average inpatient hospital stay compared with ACDF patients but tended to experience dysphagia more frequently. There was a tendency toward increased survivability of CDR; however, this was not found to be statistically significant at any time point. The large size and heterogeneity of each cohort and the availability of > 10 years of surveillance data differentiate this study from other published literature. This investigation has limitations inherent to large data analysis studies, including the implementation and inaccuracy of diagnosis and procedural coding; however, this reflects real-world use of coding by practitioners.

Utilization Trends of Intraoperative Neuromonitoring for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in New York State.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate trends in the utilization of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) during anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures in NY state using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System and to determine if utilization of IONM resulted in a reduction in postoperative neurological deficits. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: IONM has been available to spinal surgeons for several decades. It has become increasingly prevalent in all facets of spinal surgery including elective ACDF procedures. The utility of IONM for preventing a neurological deficit in elective spine procedures has recently been called into question. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database were accessed to perform a retrospective cohort study comparing monitored versus unmonitored ACDF procedures between 2007 and 2018 as defined by the International Classification of Disease-9 and 10 Procedural Coding System (ICD-9 PCS, ICD-10 PCS) codes. Patient demographics, medical history, surgical intervention, pertinent in-hospital events, and urban versus rural medical centers (as defined by the United States Office of Management and Budget) were recorded. Propensity-score-matched comparisons were used to identify factors related to the utilization of IONM and risk factors for neurological deficits after elective ACDF. RESULTS: A total of 70,838 [15,092 monitored (21.3%) and 55,746 (78.7%) unmonitored] patients' data were extracted. The utilization of IONM since 2007 has increased in a linear manner from 0.9% of cases in 2007 to 36.7% by 2018. Overall, baseline characteristics of patients who were monitored during cases differed significantly from unmonitored patients in age, race/ethnicity, insurance type, presence of myelopathy or radiculopathy, and Charlson Comorbidity Index; however, only race/ethnicity was statistically significant when analyzed using propensity-score-matched. When comparing urban and rural medical centers, there is a significant lag in the adoption of the technology with no monitored cases in rural centers until 2012 with significant fluctuations in utilization compared with steadily increasing utilization among urban centers. From 2017 to 2018, reporting of neurological deficits after surgery resembled literature-established norms. Pooled analysis of these years revealed that the incidence of neurological complications occurred more frequently in monitored cases than in unmonitored (3.0% vs. 1.4%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The utility of IONM for elective ACDF remains uncertain; however, it continues to gain popularity for routine cases. For medical centers that lack similar resources to centers in more densely populated regions of NY state, reliable access to this technology is not a certainty. In our analysis of intraoperative neurological complications, it seems that IONM is not protective against neurological injury.

Treatment of paediatric Lisfranc injuries: A systematic review and introduction of a novel treatment algorithm.

Background: Pediatric Lisfranc injuries (PLI) are rare injuries that have few studies published about their occurrence and treatment in pediatric population. Due to this lack of information, the diagnostic criteria and surgical or non-surgical methods for treatment have not been clearly established within the pediatric orthopedic literature. The objective of this study was to review the published literature related to treatment options and develop a concise stepwise treatment algorithm for pediatric patients presenting with Lisfranc injuries. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed to find studies discussing the treatment of PLI with reported long-term outcomes. Data collection accounted for the mechanism of injury, diagnostic imaging modality used, injury type, fracture classification using the Myerson system, treatment method used, and postoperative complications. Results: An initial PubMed search revealed 290 articles, but only 10 studies fulfilled the criteria for in-depth review. A total of 114 patients were included in this review from the selected case reports and case series studies. Primary treatment methods were as follows: 44% (50/114) with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) using Kirschner wires (K-wires) and/or screws, 3% (3/114) with closed reduction percutaneous fixation (CRPF), 4% (4/114) with suture-button constructs, 20% (23/114) with cast immobilization, and 29% (33/114) were described as not requiring reduction. Conclusion: There were two main limitations to this study. First, there are few published studies with longitudinal outcomes of PLI treatment. Second, some case series did not disclose which procedure a patient with post-treatment complications underwent. Therefore, an overall statistical analysis of success and failure rates with associated complications of each procedure could not be conducted. In conclusion, we found that a stepwise approach to evaluating conservative and surgical treatment options based on the presentation of the PLI should be utilized to optimize long-term outcomes.