Promises, Pitfalls, and Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Pediatrics.

Artificial intelligence (AI) broadly describes a branch of computer science focused on developing machines capable of performing tasks typically associated with human intelligence. Those who connect AI with the world of science fiction may meet its growing rise with hesitancy or outright skepticism. However, AI is becoming increasingly pervasive in our society, from algorithms helping to sift through airline fares to substituting words in emails and SMS text messages based on user choices. Data collection is ongoing and is being leveraged by software platforms to analyze patterns and make predictions across multiple industries. Health care is gradually becoming part of this technological transformation, as advancements in computational power and storage converge with the rapid expansion of digitized medical information. Given the growing and inevitable integration of AI into health care systems, it is our viewpoint that pediatricians urgently require training and orientation to the uses, promises, and pitfalls of AI in medicine. AI is unlikely to solve the full array of complex challenges confronting pediatricians today; however, if used responsibly, it holds great potential to improve many aspects of care for providers, children, and families. Our aim in this viewpoint is to provide clinicians with a targeted introduction to the field of AI in pediatrics, including key promises, pitfalls, and clinical applications, so they can play a more active role in shaping the future impact of AI in medicine.

Sagittal spinal alignment measurements and evaluation: Historical perspective.

Spinal alignment analysis play an important role in evaluating patients and planning surgical corrections for adult spinal deformity. The history of these parameters is relatively short with the first parameter, the Cobb angle, introduced in 1948 as part of an effort to improve scoliosis evaluation. New developments in the field were limited for nearly 30 years before better imaging technology encouraged new theories and later data about spinal alignment and the relationship between the spine and pelvis. These efforts would ultimately contribute to the creation of foundational spinal alignment parameters, including pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, and sacral slope. By the 1990s, spinal alignment had become a sustained area of investigation for spinal surgeons and researchers. Novel alignment parameters have since been introduced as our knowledge has evolved and has allowed for valuable research that demonstrates the clinical and surgical value of alignment measurement. This manuscript will explore the history of spinal alignment analysis over the decades.

Sacroplasty for Sacral Insufficiency Fractures: Narrative Literature Review on Patient Selection, Technical Approaches, and Outcomes.

Sacral insufficiency fractures commonly affect elderly women with osteoporosis and can cause debilitating lower back pain. First line management is often with conservative measures such as early mobilization, multimodal pain management, and osteoporosis management. If non-operative management fails, sacroplasty is a minimally invasive intervention that may be pursued. Candidates for sacroplasty are patients with persistent pain, inability to tolerate immobilization, or patients with low bone mineral density. Before undergoing sacroplasty, patients' bone health should be optimized with pharmacotherapy. Anabolic agents prior to or in conjunction with sacroplasty have been shown to improve patient outcomes. Sacroplasty can be safely performed through a number of techniques: short-axis, long-axis, coaxial, transiliac, interpedicular, and balloon-assisted. The procedure has been demonstrated to rapidly and durably reduce pain and improve mobility, with little risk of complications. This article aims to provide a narrative literature review of sacroplasty including, patient selection and optimization, the various technical approaches, and short and long-term outcomes.

Postoperative Delirium Following Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Associated Complications.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium (POD) is frequently reported in the elderly after major surgery. Several risk factors have been identified, including age, surgical complexity, and comorbidities. METHODS: Posterior lumbar fusion patients were identified using PearlDiver and filtered into two cohorts based on the presence or absence of POD within 7 days of surgery. Epidemiological analyses were performed to examine trends in POD by age and year. Comparative analyses were performed on patient demographics and baseline cognitive status. After matching by age, sex, and comorbidities, electrolyte disturbances and 90-day postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 476,482 no POD and 2591 POD patients, the mean age was 60.90 years, 57.6% were female, and the mean Charlson comorbidity index was 1.78. POD patients frequently had baseline cognitive impairment (P < 0.001). Incidence of POD decreased from 0.7% in 2010 to 0.4% in 2022 (P < 0.001) and increased with increasing patient age (P < 0.001). POD patients had higher length of stay (12 vs. 6 days, P < 0.001) and 90-day costs ($20,605 vs. $17,849, P < 0.001). After matching, POD patients had higher hypernatremia (5.8% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.001) and hypocalcemia (5.0% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.026). POD patients had higher 90-day postoperative complications (P < 0.05) than no POD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 0.5% of patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion between 2010 and 2022 developed delirium, although incidence rates have decreased over time. POD was common in elderly patients with electrolyte disturbances who underwent multilevel fusions. Patients suffering from POD had higher rates of 90-day postoperative complications. Ongoing efforts to deliver interventions to mitigate the consequences of POD among spine surgery patients are warranted.

One-Level versus Two-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) from L4-S1: Comparison of Complications, Alignment, and Patient Outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Compare outcomes in patients undergoing one-level or two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L4-S1. BACKGROUND: Although ALIF may deliver restoration of lumbar lordosis and improvement in clinical outcomes, it also carries risk of complications including major vascular injury. Whether one-level and two-level ALIF offers similar outcomes is not known. METHODS: Adults who underwent one-level L4-L5 or L5-S1 ALIF and two-level L4-S1 ALIF at a single academic institution were identified. Patient demographics, procedural characteristics, improvement in spinopelvic alignment, and one-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications were compared. Multivariate regression analyses, accounting for age, gender, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), were also performed. RESULTS: In total, 158 ALIF patients (111 one-level and 47 two-level) were included, with mean age of 51.4 years, 57.0% female, mean CCI of 1.2, and mean follow-up of 27.0 months. Surgical time (147.3 min vs. 124.6 min, P=0.002) and hospital length of stay (3.5 d vs. 2.9 d, P=0.036) were higher for two-level ALIF. One-year postoperatively, two-level ALIF patients had more caudal apex of lordosis (P=0.016) and 4.1 mm (P=0.002) and 2.0 mm (P=0.019) higher L4-L5 anterior and posterior disc heights, respectively. PROMs were not statistically different across groups (P>0.05). Finally, two-level ALIF patients were 10.9 times more likely to have in-hospital complications (P=0.040), such as intraoperative vascular injury (11.1% vs. 1.5%, P=0.040) or postoperative ileus (7.4% vs. 0.0%, P=0.027), than one-level ALIF patients. CONCLUSION: In this investigation with greater than one-year follow-up, two-level ALIF in the L4-S1 spine had higher procedural time, length of stay, and approach-related complications than one-level ALIF. Although there were minor improvements in alignment with two-level ALIF, PROMs were comparable with improvements from baseline to last follow-up. These findings may help surgeons carefully weigh the risks and benefits of one- versus two-level ALIF when determining surgical plans for patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Do Obese Patients Have Worse Outcomes in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgeries? A Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Meta-Analysis. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis evaluates the difference in surgical outcomes between obese and non-obese patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) corrective surgery. BACKGROUND: ASD encompasses a wide range of debilitating spinal abnormalities. Concurrently, obesity is on the rise globally and has been shown to influence the outcomes of ASD management. The relationship between obesity and surgical outcomes in ASD has been the focus of recent studies, yielding various results. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (page 1-20) through June of 2024. The surgical outcomes assessed included post-operative complications, revision rates, wound infections, thromboembolic events, implant-related complications, and non-home discharge. Surgical parameters such as operative time, length of stay (LOS), and estimated blood loss (EBL), as well as functional outcomes like the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and pain scores were analyzed. RESULTS: Nine studies met inclusion criteria. Non-obese patients exhibited a lower rate of implant-related complications (OR=0.25; 95% CI: 0.12-0.52, P=0.0002) and non-home discharge (OR=0.52; 95% CI: 0.32-0.84, P=0.007). Additionally, non-obese patients had reduced LOS (MD=-0.29; 95% CI: -0.53 - -0.05, P=0.02) and EBL (SMD=-0.68; 95% CI: -1.19 - -0.18, P=0.008). No statistically significant differences were observed for the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION: Non-obese patients undergoing ASD corrective surgery are associated with fewer implant-related complications, a lower EBL, shorter LOS, and a higher likelihood of being discharged home compared to their obese counterparts.

Segmental Sagittal Alignment in Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Review of Evidence-Based Evaluation of Preoperative Measurement, Surgical Planning, Intraoperative Execution, and Postoperative Evaluation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Maintaining and restoring global and regional sagittal alignment is a well-established priority that improves patient outcomes in patients with adult spinal deformity. However, the benefit of restoring segmental (level-by-level) alignment in lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions is not widely agreed on. The purpose of this review was to summarize intraoperative techniques to achieve segmental fixation and the impact of segmental lordosis on patient-reported and surgical outcomes. METHODS: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were queried for the literature reporting lumbar alignment for degenerative lumbar spinal pathology. Reports were assessed for data regarding the impact of intraoperative surgical factors on postoperative segmental sagittal alignment and patient-reported outcome measures. Included studies were further categorized into groups related to patient positioning, fusion and fixation, and interbody device (technique, material, angle, and augmentation). RESULTS: A total of 885 studies were screened, of which 43 met inclusion criteria examining segmental rather than regional or global alignment. Of these, 3 examined patient positioning, 8 examined fusion and fixation, 3 examined case parameters, 26 examined or compared different interbody fusion techniques, 5 examined postoperative patient-reported outcomes, and 3 examined the occurrence of adjacent segment disease. The data support a link between segmental alignment and patient positioning, surgical technique, and adjacent segment disease but have insufficient evidence to support a relationship with patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, or pseudoarthrosis. CONCLUSION: This review explores segmental correction's impact on short-segment lumbar fusion outcomes, finding the extent of correction to depend on patient positioning and choice of interbody cage. Notably, inadequate restoration of lumbar lordosis is associated with adjacent segment degeneration. Nevertheless, conclusive evidence linking segmental alignment to patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, or pseudoarthrosis remains limited, underscoring the need for future research.

Impact of Gender on Peri-Operative Characteristics and Outcomes of Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Current Concepts Review.

The success of spine surgery is variable among patients. Finding reliable predictors of successful outcomes will not only maximize patient benefit, but also increase the cost effectiveness of surgery. Recent research has demonstrated the importance of patient specific factors in predicting patient outcomes, including gender. While many studies show that female patients present with worse pain and function preoperatively, there is conflicting data on whether male and female patients reap the same benefits from lumbar spine surgery. In this manuscript we review the current research on gender and sex differences in preoperative characteristics and post-operative outcomes and comment on the need for more studies to better elucidate the mechanism driving the conflicting evidence.

Impact of Segmental Lordosis Restoration During Degenerative Spinal Fusion on Two-Year Adjacent Segment Disease and Revision Rates.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Assess the impact of inadequate correction of L4-S1 lordosis during transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) on adjacent segment disease and revision rates. BACKGROUND: Restoring alignment is an important consideration in spinal fusions. Failure to correct to level-specific alignment goals could promote the development of adjacent segment disease. As such, it is crucial to investigate the role of sagittal segmental alignment on clinical outcomes following short segment lumbar fusion. METHODS: Patients who underwent 1- to 3-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and had two-year outcomes data were included in this retrospective cohort study. Segmental lumbar lordosis was assessed in all patients with L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1 constructs. Demographics, radiographic spinopelvic alignment, and complications were compared in a sub-group of patients fused at L4-S1 with adequate (i.e., within 35-45°) and inadequate (i.e., <35°) L4-S1 lordosis. RESULTS: Among the 168 included patients, mean age was 61.7 years, 56.0% were female, and mean follow-up was 32.3 months. Segmental lumbar lordosis did not change significantly after TLIF of L3-L4, L4-L5, or L5-S1 (P>0.05). Two-year postoperatively, 32.7% developed adjacent segment disease and 19.6% underwent revisions. After stratification by adequate (N=15) or inadequate (N=54) restoration of L4-S1 lordosis following initial TLIF surgery, adequately-restored patients had higher preoperative L4-S1 lordosis (Adequately-Restored=39.3° vs Inadequately-Restored=29.5°, P<0.001) and lower two-year postoperative adjacent segment disease (6.7% vs. 33.3%, P=0.032) and revision (5.7% vs. 25.9%, P=0.l33) rates. Adjacent segment disease patients had higher implant-related complications (Adjacent Segment Disease=36.8% vs No Adjacent Segment Disease=8.0%, P=0.008) and subsequent revisions (61.1% vs. 8.7%, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Adjacent segment disease and revisions after degenerative lumbar spinal fusion are common. In this cohort, suboptimal restoration of L4-S1 lordosis was associated with higher rates of adjacent segment disease and subsequent revisions, thus highlighting the importance of restoring sagittal alignment in degenerative spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.