Navigating the Indeterminate Zone: Surgeons' Decision-Making Factors in Treating Vertebral Metastases with Spinal Instability Scores of 7-12.

BACKGROUND: The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) classification system is a validated and the most widely accepted instrument for defining instability in vertebral metastasis (VM), in which lesions scoring between 7 and 12 are defined as indeterminate and the treatment is controversial. This study aimed to determine which variables more frequently are considered by spine surgeons for choosing between the conservative and the surgical treatment of VMs among patients with an indeterminate SINS. METHODS: A single-round online survey was conducted with 10 spine surgeons with expertise in the management of VMs from our AO Spine Region. In this survey, each surgeon independently reviewed demographic and cancer-related variables of 36 real-life cases of patients with vertebral metastases scored between 7 and 12 in the SINS. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify significant SINS and non-SINS variables influencing the decision-making on surgical treatment. RESULTS: The most commonly variables considered important were the SINS element "mechanical pain", rated important for 44.4% of the cases, "lesion type" for 36.1%, and "degree of vertebral collapse" and the non-SINS factor "tumor histology" rated for 13.9% of cases. By far the factor most commonly rated unimportant was "posterior element compromise" (in 72.2% of cases). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons relied on mechanical pain and type of metastatic lesion for treatment choices. Vertebral collapse, spinal malalignment, and mobility were less influential. Spinal mobility was a predictor of surgical versus non-surgical treatment. The only variables not identified either by surgeons themselves or as a predictor of surgery selection was the presence/degree of posterolateral/posterior element involvement.

Unplanned Readmission Following Early Postoperative Complications After Fusion Surgery in Adult Spine Deformity: A Multicentric Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicentric retrospective study, Level of evidence III. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this multicentric study was to analyze the prevalence and risk factors of early postoperative complications in adult spinal deformity patients treated with fusion. Additionally, we studied the impact of complications on unplanned readmission and hospital length of stay. METHODS: Eight spine centers from 6 countries in Latin America were involved in this study. Patients with adult spinal deformity treated with fusion surgery from 2017 to 2019 were included. Baseline and surgical characteristics such as age, sex, comorbidities, smoking, number of levels fused, number of surgical approaches were analyzed. Postoperative complications at 30 days were recorded according to Clavien-Dindo and Glassman classifications. RESULTS: 172 patients (120 females/52 males, mean age 59.4 ± 17.6) were included in our study. 78 patients suffered complications (45%) at 30 days, 43% of these complications were considered major. Unplanned readmission was observed in 35 patients (20,3%). Risk factors for complications were: Smoking, previous comorbidities, number of levels fused, two or more surgical approaches and excessive bleeding. Hospital length of stay in patients without and with complications was of 7.8 ± 13.7 and 17 ± 31.1 days, respectively (P 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of early postoperative complications in adult spinal deformity patients treated with fusion was of 45% in our study with 20% of unplanned readmissions at 30 days. Presence of complications significantly increased hospital length of stay.

CT Scan in Subaxial Cervical Facet Injury: Is It Enough for Decision-Making?

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVES: Assessment of subaxial cervical facet injuries using the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System is based on CT scan findings. However, additional radiological evaluations are not directly considered. The aim of this study is to determine situations in which spine surgeons request additional radiological exams after a facet fracture. METHODS: A survey was sent to AO Spine members from Latin America. The evaluation considered demographic variables, routine use of the Classification, as well as the timepoint at which surgeons requested a cervical MRI, a vascular study, and/ or dynamic radiographs before treatment of facet fractures. RESULTS: There was 229 participants, mean age 42.9 ± 10.2 years; 93.4% were men. Orthopedic surgeons 57.6% with 10.7 ± 8.7 years of experience in spine surgery. A total of 86% used the Classification in daily practice. An additional study (MRI/vascular study/and dynamic radiographs) was requested in 53.3%/9.6%/43.7% in F1 facet injuries; 76.0%/20.1%/50.2% in F2; 89.1%/65.1%/28.4% in F3; and 94.8%/66.4%/16.6% in F4. An additional study was frequently required: F1 72.5%, F2 86.9%, F3 94.7%, and F4 96.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Spine surgeons generally requested additional radiological evaluations in facet injuries, and MRI was the most common. Dynamic radiographs had a higher prevalence for F1/F2 fractures; vascular studies were more common for F3/F4 especially among surgeons with fewer years of experience. Private hospitals had a lower spine trauma cases/year and requested more MRI and more dynamic radiographs in F1/F2. Neurosurgeons had more vascular studies and dynamic radiographs than orthopedic surgeons in all facet fractures.

Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Spine Surgery: An International Survey of Clinical Practices Among Expert Spine Surgeons.

STUDY DESIGN: Questionnaire-based survey. OBJECTIVES: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication in spine surgery but universal guidelines for SSI prevention are lacking. The objectives of this study are to depict a global status quo on implemented prevention strategies in spine surgery, common themes of practice and determine key areas for future research. METHODS: An 80-item survey was distributed among spine surgeons worldwide via email. The questionnaire was designed and approved by an International Consensus Group on spine SSI. Consensus was defined as more than 60% of participants agreeing to a specific prevention strategy. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-two surgeons participated in the survey. Screening for Staphylococcus aureus (SA) is not common, whereas preoperative decolonization is performed in almost half of all hospitals. Body mass index (BMI) was not important for surgery planning. In contrast, elevated HbA1c level and hypoalbuminemia were often considered as reasons to postpone surgery. Cefazoline is the common drug for antimicrobial prophylaxis. Alcohol-based chlorhexidine is mainly used for skin disinfection. Double-gloving, wound irrigation, and tissue-conserving surgical techniques are routine in the operating room (OR). Local antibiotic administration is not common. Wound closure techniques and postoperative wound dressing routines vary greatly between the participating institutions. CONCLUSIONS: With this study we provide an international overview on the heterogeneity of SSI prevention strategies in spine surgery. We demonstrated a large heterogeneity for pre-, peri- and postoperative measures to prevent SSI. Our data illustrated the need for developing universal guidelines and for testing areas of controversy in prospective clinical trials.

Percutaneous Versus Open Pedicle Screw Fixation for Pyogenic Spondylodiscitis of the Thoracic and Lumbar Spine: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aimed to compare percutaneous (PPS) versus open pedicle screw (OPS) fixation for treatment of thoracic and lumbar spondylodiscitis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Pyogenic spondylodiscitis of the thoracic and lumbar spine can produce instability, deformity, and/or neurological compromise. When medical treatment is unsuccessful, surgical treatment is indicated, with the conventional open approach the usual standard of care. However, percutaneous techniques can be advantageous in medically vulnerable patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed using the PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases, looking for comparative articles on pyogenic spondylodiscitis requiring surgical stabilization with pedicle screws. This systematic review is reported according to PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: From 215 articles initially identified, 7 retrospective studies were analyzed, encapsulating an overall sample of 722 patients: 405 male (56.1%) and 317 female (43.9%). The treatment modality was PPS fixation in 342 patients (47.4%) and OPS fixation in 380 (52.6%). For PPS, operating time was 29.75 minutes ( P <0.0001), blood loss 390.18 mL ( P <0.00001), postoperative pain 1.54 points ( P <0.00001), and length of stay 4.49 days ( P =0.001) less than with OPS fixation, and wound infection 7.2% ( P =0.003) less frequent. No difference in screw misplacement ( P =0.94) or loosening ( P =0.33) rates was observed. CONCLUSION: Employing PPS fixation to treat pyogenic spondylodiscitis of the thoracic and lumbar spine is associated with significantly reduced operating time, blood loss, postoperative pain, length of stay, and rates of wound infection than OPS fixation, with no difference between the 2 treatments in rates of screw misplacement or screw loosening.

Research Practices and Needs Among Spine Surgeons Worldwide.

OBJECTIVE: Resource allocation to research activities is challenging and there is limited evidence to justify decisions. Members of AO Spine were surveyed to understand the research practices and needs of spine surgeons worldwide. METHODS: An 84-item survey was distributed to the AO Spine community in September of 2020. Respondent demographics and insights regarding research registries, training and education, mentorship, grants and financial support, and future directions were collected. Responses were anonymous and compared among regions. RESULTS: A total of 333 spine surgeons representing all geographic regions responded; 52.3% were affiliated with an academic/university hospital, 91.0% conducted clinical research, and 60.9% had 5+ years of research experience. There was heterogeneity among research practices and needs across regions. North American respondents had more research experience (P = .023), began conducting research early on (P < .001), had an undergraduate science degree (P < .001), and were more likely to have access to a research coordinator or support staff (P = .042) compared to other regions. While all regions expressed having the same challenges in conducting research, Latin America, and Middle East/Northern Africa respondents were less encouraged to do research (P < .001). Despite regional differences, there was global support for research registries and research training and education. CONCLUSION: To advance spine care worldwide, spine societies should establish guidelines, conduct studies on pain management, and support predictive analytic modeling. Tailoring local/regional programs according to regional needs is advised. These results can assist spine societies in developing long-term research strategies and provide justified rationale to governments and funding agencies.

Telemedicine in Spine Surgery: Global Perspectives and Practices.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, anonymous, international survey. OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the rapid adoption of telemedicine in spine surgery. This study sought to determine the extent of adoption and global perspectives on telemedicine in spine surgery. METHODS: All members of AO Spine International were emailed an anonymous survey covering the participant's experiences with and perceptions of telemedicine. Descriptive statistics were used to depict responses. Responses were compared among regions. RESULTS: 485 spine surgeons participated in the survey. Telemedicine usage rose from <10.0% to >39.0% of all visits. A majority of providers (60.5%) performed at least one telemedicine visit. The format of "telemedicine" varied widely by region: European (50.0%) and African (45.2%) surgeons were more likely to use phone calls, whereas North (66.7%) and South American (77.0%) surgeons more commonly used video (P < 0.001). North American providers used telemedicine the most during COVID-19 (>60.0% of all visits). 81.9% of all providers "agreed/strongly agreed" telemedicine was easy to use. Respondents tended to "agree" that imaging review, the initial appointment, and postoperative care could be performed using telemedicine. Almost all (95.4%) surgeons preferred at least one in-person visit prior to the day of surgery. CONCLUSION: Our study noted significant geographical differences in the rate of telemedicine adoption and the platform of telemedicine utilized. The results suggest a significant increase in telemedicine utilization, particularly in North America. Spine surgeons found telemedicine feasible for imaging review, initial visits, and follow-up visits although the vast majority still preferred at least one in-person preoperative visit.

An independent inter- and intra-observer agreement assessment of the AOSpine upper cervical injury classification system.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The complex anatomy of the upper cervical spine resulted in numerous separate classification systems of upper cervical spine trauma. The AOSpine upper cervical classification system (UCCS) was recently described; however, an independent agreement assessment has not been performed. PURPOSE: To perform an independent evaluation of the AOSpine UCCS. STUDY DESIGN: Agreement study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Eighty-four patients with upper cervical spine injuries. OUTCOME MEASURES: Inter-observer agreement; intra-observer agreement. METHODS: Complete imaging studies of 84 patients with upper cervical spine injuries, including all morphological types of injuries defined by the AOSpine UCCS were selected and classified by six evaluators (from three different countries). The 84 cases were presented to the same raters randomly after a 4-week interval for repeat evaluation. The Kappa coefficient (κ) was used to determine inter- and intra-observer agreement. RESULTS: The interobserver agreement was almost perfect when considering the fracture site (I, II or III), with κ=0.82 (0.78-0.83), but the agreement according to the site and type level was moderate, κ=0.57 (0.55-0.65). The intra-observer agreement was almost perfect considering the injury, with κ=0.83 (0.78-0.86), while according to site and type was substantial, κ=0.69 (0.67-0.71). CONCLUSIONS: We observed only a moderate inter-observer agreement using this classification. We believe our results can be explained because this classification attempted to organize many different injury types into a single scheme.

Why are frailty indices not used systematically during preoperative spine consultations?

INTRODUCTION: Frailty indices are highly predictive of major medical and mechanical complications, lengths of hospital stay, and mortality rates after spine procedures. However, several barriers limit the extent to which spine surgeons employ these indices. The main purposes of the current study were to assess the use of frailty indices by Latin-American spine surgeons and identify the main barriers perceived to restrict their clinical application. METHODS: For this cross-sectional survey, a questionnaire evaluating the demographic characteristics of participating surgeons and their utilization of frailty indices were created in Google form and sent by e-mail to every registered member of AO Spine Latin America between October and November 2020. RESULTS: Of the 1047 surgeons sent the survey, 293 responded (response rate=28%). Half of the surgeons (51.7%) said they were unfamiliar with the terms ¨frailty´ and ¨frailty index", while 70.3% claimed not to use any frailty scale during their pre-operative assessments. The most frequently utilized index was the modified Frailty Index (mFI) (18%). The most important perceived barrier was the excessive amount of time required to calculate each patient's frailty score. Ninety-two percent of the spine surgeons felt sure that these scores could influence their therapeutic decisions, while 91% desired an easier-to-use risk-prevention scale. CONCLUSION: The main perceived barriers restricting the use of frailty indices were the time required to complete them, lack of index validation, and need for specific instruments to calculate the index score.

Complications in Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review of Clinically Used Cages.

Spinal fusion (SF) comprises surgical procedures for several pathologies that affect different spinal levels, and different cages are employed in SF surgery. Few clinical studies highlight the role of cages in complications beyond the outcomes. The aim of this systematic review is to collect the last 10 years' worth of clinical studies that include cages in SF surgery, focusing on complications. Three databases are employed, and 21 clinical studies are included. The most-performed SF procedure was anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), followed by lumbar SF. The polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage was the most-used, and it was usually associated with autograft or calcium phosphate ceramics (hydroxyapatite (HA) and tricalcium phosphate (ßTCP)). For lumbar SF procedures, the highest percentages of subsidence and pseudoarthrosis were observed with PEEK filled with bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2) and ßTCP. For ACDF procedures, PEEK filled with autograft showed the highest percentages of subsidence and pseudoarthrosis. Most studies highlighted the role of surgical techniques in patient complications. There are many interacting events that contextually affect the rate of clinical success or failure. Therefore, in future clinical studies, attention should focus on cages to improve knowledge of chemical, biological and topographical characteristics to improve bone growth and to counteract complications such as cage loosening or breaking and infections.

The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Spine Surgeons Worldwide: A One Year Prospective Comparative Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Survey. OBJECTIVE: In March of 2020, an original study by Louie et al investigated the impact of COVID-19 on 902 spine surgeons internationally. Since then, due to varying government responses and public health initiatives to the pandemic, individual countries and regions of the world have been affected differently. Therefore, this follow-up study aimed to assess how the COVID-19 impact on spine surgeons has changed 1 year later. METHODS: A repeat, multi-dimensional, 90-item survey written in English was distributed to spine surgeons worldwide via email to the AO Spine membership who agreed to receive surveys. Questions were categorized into the following domains: demographics, COVID-19 observations, preparedness, personal impact, patient care, and future perceptions. RESULTS: Basic respondent demographics, such as gender, age, home demographics, medical comorbidities, practice type, and years since training completion, were similar to those of the original 2020 survey. Significant differences between groups included reasons for COVID testing, opinions of media coverage, hospital unemployment, likelihood to be performing elective surgery, percentage of cases cancelled, percentage of personal income, sick leave, personal time allocation, stress coping mechanisms, and the belief that future guidelines were needed (P<.05). CONCLUSION: Compared to baseline results collected at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, significant differences in various domains related to COVID-19 perceptions, hospital preparedness, practice impact, personal impact, and future perceptions have developed. Follow-up assessment of spine surgeons has further indicated that telemedicine and virtual education are mainstays. Such findings may help to inform and manage expectations and responses to any future outbreaks.

Unstable Thoracolumbar Injuries: Factors Affecting the Decision for Short-Segment vs Long-Segment Posterior Fixation.

BACKGROUND: Factors influencing the length of spinal instrumentation have been mostly evaluated in burst fractures, receiving more attention than other unstable thoracolumbar injuries. We aimed to evaluate clinical factors affecting surgical decision-making and associated complications. METHODS: This was a multicentric retrospective cohort study. Outcomes of patients with AO Spine injury classification types B2, B3, and C operated through an open posterior-only approach were analyzed. Length of instrumentation was correlated with age, type of injury, comorbidities, level of injury, neurological status, and complications. RESULTS: Among 439 patients, 30.3% underwent short-segment fixation (SSF) and 69.7% underwent long-segment fixation (LSF). Type C injuries were treated with LSF in 89.4% of cases (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, age ≤39 years (OR: 2.06), AO spine type B2 (OR: 3.58), and type B3 (OR: 7.48) were statistically significant predictors for SSF, while hypertension (OR: 4.07), upper thoracic injury (OR: 9.48), midthoracic injury (OR: 6.06), and American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale A (OR: 3.14) were significantly associated with LSF. Patients with SSF had fewer overall complications (27.1% vs 50.9%, P < 0.001) and were less likely to develop pneumonia (6.0% vs 18.3%, P < 0.001) and urinary tract infections (6.8% vs 16.3%, P < 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Unstable thoracolumbar injuries were mostly treated by LSF. Length of instrumentation was affected by the type of spinal injury, location of the injury, and neurological status. SSF was associated with lower rates of early complications than LSF. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The decision on the length of fixation in the surgical treatment of unstable thoracolumbar injuries is affected by different factors, and it will impact the rate of postoperative complications.

Appropriate Telemedicine Utilization in Spine Surgery: Results From a Delphi Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Delphi expert panel consensus. OBJECTIVE: To obtain expert consensus on best practices for appropriate telemedicine utilization in spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Several studies have shown high patient satisfaction associated with telemedicine during the COVID-19 peak pandemic period as well as after easing of restrictions. As this technology will most likely continue to be employed, there is a need to define appropriate utilization. METHODS: An expert panel consisting of 27 spine surgeons from various countries was assembled in February 2021. A two-round consensus-based Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements on various aspects of telemedicine (separated as video visits or audio visits) including themes, such as patient location and impact of patient diagnosis, on assessment of new patients. Topics with ≥75% agreement were categorized as having achieved a consensus. RESULTS: The expert panel reviewed a total of 59 statements. Of these, 32 achieved consensus. The panel had consensus that video visits could be utilized regardless of patient location and that video visits are appropriate for evaluating as well as indicating for surgery multiple common spine pathologies, such as lumbar stenosis, lumbar radiculopathy, and cervical radiculopathy. Finally, the panel had consensus that video visits could be appropriate for a variety of visit types including early, midterm, longer term postoperative follow-up, follow-up for imaging review, and follow-up after an intervention (i.e., physical therapy, injection). CONCLUSION: Although telemedicine was initially introduced out of necessity, this technology most likely will remain due to evidence of high patient satisfaction and significant cost savings. This study was able to provide a framework for appropriate telemedicine utilization in spine surgery from a panel of experts. However, several questions remain for future research, such as whether or not an in-person consultation is necessary prior to surgery and which physical exam maneuvers are appropriate for telemedicine.Level of Evidence: 4.

Inter- and intra-observer agreement using the new AOSpine sacral fracture classification, with a comparison between spine and pelvic trauma surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Sacral fractures treatment frequently involves both spine and pelvic trauma surgeons; therefore, a consistent communication among surgical specialists is required. We independently assessed the new AOSpine sacral fracture classification's agreement from the perspective of spine and pelvic trauma surgeons. METHODS: Complete computerized tomography (CT) scans of 80 patients with sacral fractures were selected and classified using the new AOSpine sacral classification system by six spine surgeons and three pelvic trauma surgeons. After four weeks, the 80 cases were presented and reassessed by the same raters in a new random sequence. The Kappa coefficient (κ) was used to measure the inter-and intra-observer agreement. RESULTS: The inter-observer agreement considering the fracture severity types (A, B, or C) was substantial for spine surgeons (κ= 0.68 [0.63 - 0.72]) and pelvic trauma surgeons (κ= 0.74 (0.64 - 0.84). Regarding the subtypes, both groups achieved moderate agreement with κ= 0.52 (0.49 - 0.54) for spine surgeons and κ= 0.51 (0.45 - 0.57) for pelvic trauma surgeons. The intra-observer agreement considering the fracture types was substantial for spine surgeons (κ= 0.74 [0.63 - 0.75]) and almost perfect for pelvic trauma surgeons (κ= 0.84 [0.74 - 0.93]). Concerning the subtypes, both groups achieved substantial agreement with, κ= 0.61 (0.56 - 0.67) for spine surgeons and κ= 0.68 (0.62 - 0.74) for pelvic trauma surgeons. CONCLUSION: This classification allows an adequate communication for spine surgeons and pelvic trauma surgeons at the fracture severity type, but the agreement is only moderate at the subtype level. Future prospective studies are required to evaluate whether this classification allows for treatment recommendations and establishing prognosis in patients with sacral fractures.

An inter- and intra-rater agreement assessment of a novel classification of pyogenic spinal infections.

PURPOSE: Pola et al. described a clinical-radiological classification of pyogenic spinal infections (PSI) based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features including vertebral destruction, soft tissue involvement, and epidural abscess, along with the neurological status. We performed an inter- and intra-observer agreement evaluation of this classification. METHODS: Complete MRI studies of 80 patients with PSI were selected and classified using the scheme described by Pola et al. by seven evaluators. After a four-week interval, all cases were presented to the same assessors in a random sequence for repeat assessment. We used the weighted kappa statistics (wκ) to establish the inter- and intra-observer agreement. RESULTS: The inter-observer agreement was substantial considering the main categories (wκ = 0.77; 0.71-0.82), but moderate considering the subtypes (wκ = 0.51; 0.45-0.58). The intra-observer agreement was substantial considering the main types (wκ = 0.65; 0.59-0.71), and moderate considering the subtypes (wκ = 0.58; 0.54-0.63). CONCLUSION: The agreement at the main type level indicates that this classification allows adequate communication and may be used in clinical practice; at the subtypes level, the agreement is only moderate.

Factors Affecting the Decision to Initiate Anticoagulation After Spine Surgery: Findings From the AOSpine Anticoagulation Global Initiative.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, international survey. OBJECTIVES: To identify factors influencing pharmacologic anticoagulation initiation after spine surgery based on the AOSpine Anticoagulation Global Survey. METHODS: This survey was distributed to the international membership of AOSpine (n = 3805). A Likert-type scale described grade practice-specific factors on a scale from low (1) to high (5) importance, and patient-specific factors a scale from low (0) to high (3) importance. Analysis was performed to determine which factors were significant in the decision making surrounding the initiation of pharmacologic anticoagulation. RESULTS: A total of 316 spine surgeons from 64 countries completed the survey. In terms of practice-specific factors considered to initiate treatment, expert opinion was graded the highest (mean grade ± SD = 3.2 ± 1.3), followed by fellowship training (3.2 ± 1.3). Conversely, previous studies (2.7 ± 1.2) and unspecified guidelines were considered least important (2.6 ± 1.6). Patient body mass index (2.0 ± 1.0) and postoperative mobilization (2.3 ± 1.0) were deemed most important and graded highly overall. Those who rated estimated blood loss with greater importance in anticoagulation initiation decision making were more likely to administer thromboprophylaxis at later times (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68-0.71), while those who rated drain output with greater importance were likely to administer thromboprophylaxis at earlier times (HR = 1.32-1.43). CONCLUSION: Among our global cohort of spine surgeons, certain patient factors (ie, patient mobilization and body mass index) and practice-specific factors (ie, expert opinion and fellowship training) were considered to be most important when considering anticoagulation start times.

Spine Surgery and COVID-19: The Influence of Practice Type on Preparedness, Response, and Economic Impact.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate preparation, response, and economic impact of COVID-19 on private, public, academic, and privademic spine surgeons. METHODS: AO Spine COVID-19 and Spine Surgeon Global Impact Survey includes domains on surgeon demographics, location of practice, type of practice, COVID-19 perceptions, institutional preparedness and response, personal and practice impact, and future perceptions. The survey was distributed by AO Spine via email to members (n = 3805). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify differences between practice settings. RESULTS: A total of 902 surgeons completed the survey. In all, 45.4% of respondents worked in an academic setting, 22.9% in privademics, 16.1% in private practice, and 15.6% in public hospitals. Academic practice setting was independently associated with performing elective and emergent spine surgeries at the time of survey distribution. A majority of surgeons reported a >75% decrease in case volume. Private practice and privademic surgeons reported losing income at a higher rate compared with academic or public surgeons. Practice setting was associated with personal protective equipment availability and economic issues as a source of stress. CONCLUSIONS: The current study indicates that practice setting affected both preparedness and response to COVID-19. Surgeons in private and privademic practices reported increased worry about the economic implications of the current crisis compared with surgeons in academic and public hospitals. COVID-19 decreased overall clinical productivity, revenue, and income. Government response to the current pandemic and preparation for future pandemics needs to be adaptable to surgeons in all practice settings.

An independent inter- and intra-observer agreement assessment of the Eno classification of sacroiliac joint degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Recently, a scoring system to grade sacroiliac joint (SIJ) degeneration using computed tomography (CT) scans was described. No independent evaluation has determined the inter- and intra-observer agreement using this scheme. PURPOSE: To perform an independent inter- and intra-observer agreement assessment using the Eno classification and determining gas in the SIJ. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We studied 64 patients aged ≥60 years who were evaluated with abdominal and pelvic computed tomography scans. Six physicians (three orthopaedic spine surgeons and three musculoskeletal radiologists) assessed axial images to grade SIJ degeneration into grade 0 (normal), grade 1 (mild degeneration), grade 2 (significant degeneration), and grade 3 (ankylosis). We also evaluated the agreement assessing the presence of gas in the SIJ. After a four-week interval, all cases were presented in a random sequence for repeat assessment. We determined the agreement using the kappa (κ) or weighted kappa coefficient (wκ). RESULTS: The inter-observer agreement was moderate (wκ = 0.50 [0.44-0.56]), without differences among surgeons (wκ = 0.53 [0.45-0.61]) and radiologists (wκ = 0.49 [0.42-0.57]). The agreement evaluating the presence of gas was also moderate (κ = 0.45 [0.35-0.54]), but radiologists obtained better agreement (κ = 0.61 [0.48-0.72]) than surgeons (κ = 0.29 [0.18-0.39]). The intra-observer agreement using the classification was substantial (wκ = 0.79 [0.76-0.82]), without differences comparing surgeons (wκ = 0.75 [0.70-0.80]) and radiologists (wκ = 0.83 [0.79-0.87]). The intra-rater agreement evaluating gas was substantial (κ = 0.77 [0.72-0.82]), without differences between surgeons (κ = 0.71 [0.63-0.78]) and radiologists (κ = 0.84 [0.78-0.90]). CONCLUSION: Given the only moderate agreement obtained using the Eno classification, it does not seem adequate to be used in clinical practice or in research.

Accuracy and reliability of the AO Spine subaxial cervical spine classification system grading subaxial cervical facet injury morphology.

PURPOSE: A classification system was recently developed by the international association AO Spine for assessing subaxial cervical spine fractures. Significant variability exists between users of the facet component, which consists of four morphological types (F1-F4). The primary aims of this study were to assess the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of this new system's facet injury morphological classifications. METHODS: A survey consisting of 16 computed tomography (CT) scans of patients with cervical facet fractures was distributed to spine surgeon members of AO Spine Latin America. To provide a gold standard diagnosis for comparison, all 16 injuries had been classified previously by six co-authors and only were included after total consensus was achieved. Demographic and surgical practice characteristics of all respondents were analyzed, and diagnostic accuracy calculated. Inter- and intra-observer agreement rates were calculated across two survey rounds, conducted one month apart. RESULTS: A total of 135 surgeons completed both surveys, among whom the mean age was 41.6 years (range 26-71), 130 (96.3%) were men, and 83 (61.5%) were orthopedic surgeons. The mean time in practice as a spine surgeon was 9.7 years (1-30). The overall diagnostic accuracy of all responses was 65.4%. Inter-observer and intra-observer agreement rates for F1/F2/F3/F4 were 55.4%/47.6%/64.0%/94.7% and 60.0%/49.1%/58.0%/93.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study evaluates the AO Spine Classification System specifically for facet injuries involving the subaxial cervical spine in a large sample of spine surgeons. There was significant variability in diagnostic accuracy for F1 through F3-type fractures, whereas almost universal agreement was achieved for F4-type injuries.

An independent inter- and intraobserver agreement assessment of the AOSpine sacral fracture classification system.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The AOSpine sacral classification scheme was recently described. It demonstrated substantial interobserver and excellent intraobserver agreement in the study describing it; however, an independent assessment has not been performed. PURPOSE: To perform an independent inter- and intraobserver agreement evaluation of the AOSpine sacral fracture classification system. STUDY DESIGN: Agreement study. METHODS: Complete computerized tomography (CT) scans, including axial images, with coronal and sagittal reconstructions of 80 patients with sacral fractures were selected and classified using the morphologic grading of the AOSpine sacral classification system by six evaluators (from three different countries). Neurological modifiers and case-specific modifiers were not assessed. After a four-week interval, the 80 cases were presented to the same raters in a random sequence for repeat assessment. We used the Kappa coefficient (κ) to establish the inter- and intraobserver agreement. RESULTS: The interobserver agreement was substantial when considering the fracture severity types (A, B, or C), with κ=0.68 (0.63-0.72), but moderate when considering the subtypes: κ=0.52 (0.49-0.54). The intraobserver agreement was substantial considering the fracture types, with κ=0.69 (0.63-0.75), and considering subtypes, κ=0.61 (0.56-0.67). CONCLUSION: The sacral classification system allows adequate interobserver agreement at the type level, but only moderate at the subtypes level. Future prospective studies should evaluate whether this classification system allows surgeons to decide the best treatment and to establish prognosis in patients with sacral fractures.