Lumbar decompression surgery for cauda equina syndrome - comparison of complication rates between daytime and overnight operating.

PURPOSE: To investigate the incidence of complications from lumbar decompression ± discectomy surgery for cauda equina syndrome (CES), assessing whether time of day is associated with a change in the incidence of complications. METHODS: Electronic clinical and operative notes for all lumbar decompression operations undertaken at our institution for CES over a 2-year time period were retrospectively reviewed. "Overnight" surgery was defined as any surgery occurring between 18:00 and 08:00 on any day. Clinicopathological characteristics, surgical technique, and peri/post-operative complications were recorded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 81 lumbar decompression operations were performed in the 2-year period and analysed. A total of 29 (36%) operations occurred overnight. Complete CES (CESR) was seen in 13 cases (16%) in total, 7 of whom underwent surgery during the day. Exactly 27 complications occurred in 24 (30%) patients. The most frequently occurring complication was a dural tear (n = 21, 26%), followed by post-operative haematoma, infection, and residual disc. Complication rates in the CESR cohort (54%) were significantly greater than in the CES incomplete (CESI) cohort (25%) (p = 0.04). On multivariable analysis, overnight surgery was independently associated with a significantly increased complication rate (OR 2.83, CI 1.02-7.89). CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar decompressions performed overnight for CES were more than twice as likely to suffer a complication, in comparison to those performed within daytime hours. Our study suggests that out-of-hours operating, particularly at night, must be clinically justified and should not be influenced by day-time operating capacity.

Hard collar immobilisation following elective surgery on the cervical spine: a cross-sectional survey of UK spinal surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Although mostly used in the management of spinal trauma, hard collar immobilisation is also used as an adjunct to recovery after elective cervical spine surgery. Many surgeons believe that bracing reduces the risk of non-union and pain and provides a subjective sense of security for patients. There is little if any, evidence for this practice and immobilisation can be a direct cause of adverse events. The primary aim of this study was to provide an updated assessment of post-operative bracing practice in UK spinal surgeons, including the indications, rationale and perspectives on compliance and complications. METHODS: Neurosurgeons and spinal orthopaedic surgeons completed a web-based survey distributed by email to members of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) and the British Association of Spinal Surgeons (BASS). Professional information captured included level of experience and whether surgeons had a specialist interest in spinal surgery. Questions first focused on the frequency and duration of hard collar immobilisation for common decompressive procedures. Later questions captured surgeon rationale, perceptions of patient compliance, complications, and collar removal. RESULTS: A total of 86 surgeons completed the survey, of whom 83% were spinal specialists. In total, 33 (38%) surgeons recommend a hard collar following at least one of the elective procedures listed. Collars were most commonly recommended following cervical corpectomy (30%). The support of fusion and bone healing was the most common rationale (82%), with post-operative pain (45%) and limiting patient activity (39%) also considered. Most surgeons (69%) believed that their patients were compliant. All listed types of complications were reported, with impaired activities of daily living (41%) and impaired sleep (34%) the most frequently cited. CONCLUSIONS: Current post-operative use of hard collars is much lower in the United Kingdom than previously reported in the United States. Surgeon decision-making is inconsistent and may benefit from greater standardisation. Future work is needed to help develop guidelines as a move away from arbitrary to evidence-based practice.

Degenerative Thoracic Myelopathy: A Scoping Review of Epidemiology, Genetics, and Pathogenesis.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature Review. OBJECTIVE: Myelopathy affecting the thoracic spinal cord can arise secondary to several aetiologies which have similar presentation and management. Consequently, there are many uncertainties in this area, including optimal terminology and definitions. Recent collaborative cervical spinal research has led to the proposal and subsequent community adoption of the name degenerative cervical myelopathy(DCM), which has facilitated the establishment of internationally-agreed research priorities for DCM. We put forward the case for the introduction of the term degenerative thoracic myelopathy(DTM) and degenerative spinal myelopathy(DSM) as an umbrella term for both DCM and DTM. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was performed to identify degenerative thoracic myelopathy literature in Embase and MEDLINE. RESULTS: Conditions encompassed within DTM include thoracic spondylotic myelopathy, ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, ossification of the ligamentum flavum, calcification of ligaments, hypertrophy of ligaments, degenerative disc disease, thoracic osteoarthritis, intervertebral disc herniation, and posterior osteophytosis. The classic presentation includes girdle pain, gait disturbance, leg weakness, sensory disturbance, and bladder or bowel dysfunction, often with associated back pain. Surgical management is typically favoured with post-surgical outcomes dependent on many factors, including the causative pathology, and presence of additional stenosis. CONCLUSION: The clinical entities encompassed by the term DTM are interrelated, can manifest concurrently, and present similarly. Building on the consensus adoption of DCM in the cervical spine and the recent proposal of degenerative cervical radiculopathy(DCR), extending this common nomenclature framework to the terms degenerative spinal myelopathy and degenerative thoracic myelopathy will help improve recognition and communication.

A single centre service evaluation of degenerative cervical and thoracic myelopathy.

BACKGROUND: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) and degenerative thoracic myelopathy (DTM) present with leg, bladder and bowel symptoms. If imaging confirms spinal cord compression both conditions are usually managed surgically. Surgical timing is important in patient management as it affects post-operative recovery and long-term outcomes. This service evaluation aims to explore whether that patients with DTM are more likely to be treated urgently than those with DCM and to examine whether any differences in management are justified. METHODS: A retrospective service evaluation was registered and approved by the Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (CUH) Clinical Audit Department (Clinical Project ID4455 PRN10455). All patients who had undergone surgery for DTM at CUH from January 2015 until April 2022 were included. Comparison was made to a cohort of DCM patients who underwent surgery at CUH from June 2016 to January 2019. Data analysis was conducted in R. RESULTS: A total of 130 DCM patients and 78 DTM patients were included. Our DCM and DTM patient cohorts had comparable demographics, but DTM patients had fewer spinal levels affected. Despite equivalent disease severity, DTM patients had a shorter time to diagnosis, shorter wait for surgery and were more likely to be operated on as an emergency case. CONCLUSIONS: Despite comparable demographics and pathophysiology, DTM was diagnosed and managed more quickly than DCM. Better defined diagnostic pathways for degenerative spinal myelopathy may hold opportunities to optimise diagnosis and management, ensuring consistent high quality, efficient and equitable care.

Current surgical practice for multi-level degenerative cervical myelopathy: Findings from an international survey of spinal surgeons.

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) results from compression of the cervical spine cord as a result of age related changes in the cervical spine, and affects up to 2% of adults, leading to progressive disability. Surgical decompression is the mainstay of treatment, but there remains significant variation in surgical approaches used. This survey was conducted in order to define current practice amongst spine surgeons worldwide, as a possible prelude to further studies comparing surgical approaches. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed and piloted by the investigators using SurveyMonkey. Collected data was categorical and is presented using summary statistics. Where applicable, statistical comparisons were made using a Chi-Squared test. The level of significance for all statistical analyses was defined as p < 0.05. All analysis, including graphs was performed using R (R Studio). RESULTS: 127 surgeons, from 30 countries completed the survey; principally UK (66, 52%) and North America (15, 12%). Respondents were predominantly Neurosurgeons by training (108, 85%) of whom 84 (75%) reported Spinal Surgery as the principal part of their practice. The majority indicated they selected their surgical procedure for multi-level DCM on a case by case basis (62, 49%). Overall, a posterior approach was more popular for multi-level DCM (74, 58%). Region, speciality or annual multi-level case load did not influence this significantly. However, there was a trend for North American surgeons to be more likely to favour a posterior approach. CONCLUSIONS: A posterior approach was favoured and more commonly used to treat multi-level DCM, in an international cohort of surgeons. Posterior techniques including laminectomy, laminectomy and fusion or laminoplasty appeared to be equally popular.