Intercostal lung herniation; a rare complication after mini-transthoracic approach (TTA) for thoracic disc herniation. Two case reports and review of literature.

BACKGROUND: Lung herniation is a rare condition, most often due to thoracic injury, but has also been described as a complication following cardiothoracic surgery. Here, we report two cases of post-surgical lung herniation following a neurosurgical mini-transthoracic (mini-TTA) for treatment of thoracic herniated discs. With this report we aim to make surgeons aware of this rare complication, review existing literature on surgical repairs and describe our novel correction technique using video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and a combination of mesh covering the muscle defect internally and nitinol rib plates for rib approximation on the outside of the thoracic cavity. CASE DESCRIPTION: Patient A was an 85-year-old man who presented with a subcutaneous swelling at the site of surgery following a left sided mini-TTA. Computed tomography (CT) revealed pulmonary tissue herniation. He underwent VATS guided reconstruction. Using two Ventralex meshes covering the defect on the inside and a NiTi-rib H-plate for rib approximation. Patient B was a 73-year-old woman who developed pulmonary complaints with a soft mass at the surgery site after a left sided mini-TTA. She also underwent VATS guided reconstruction. A large Sempramesh composite mesh and two NiTi-Rib H-plates were used. Recovery was uncomplicated and follow-up revealed no recurrence in both cases. CONCLUSION: These cases should make surgeons aware of the possibility of post-surgical development of lung herniation and describe successful correction using a combination of mesh material and NiTi-Rib H-plates through a VATS technique.

The impact of mental health on outcome after anterior cervical discectomy: cohort study assessing the influence of mental health using predictive modelling.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are common mental disorders among patients with chronic pain. It is hypothesised that patients suffering from these disorders benefit less from cervical spine surgery than mentally healthy patients. Therefore, this study aimed to quantify the effect of mental health status on functional outcome after anterior cervical discectomy in a post hoc analysis on RCT data. METHODS: One hundred eight patients from the NECK trial, with radiculopathy due to a one-level herniated disc, underwent anterior cervical discectomy and were included into this analysis. Functional outcome was quantified using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and mental health status was measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) questionnaire. NDI differences were assessed using generalised estimated equations (GEE), crude means, a predictive linear mixed model (LMM) using baseline scores and over time with an explanatory LMM. RESULTS: At baseline, 24% and 32% of patients were respectively depressed and anxious and had statistically significant and clinically relevant higher NDI scores during follow-up. However, in those patients in which the HADS returned to normal during follow-up, NDI values decreased comparably to the non-depression or non-anxiety cases. Those patients that demonstrated persisting high HADS values had convincingly worse NDI scores. A predictive LMM showed that combining baseline NDI and HADS scores was highly predictive of NDI during follow-up. The R shiny application enabled the effective, visual communication of results from the predictive LMM. CONCLUSION: This study shows that mental health status and disability are strongly associated and provides insight into the size of the effect, as well as a way to use this relation to improve preoperative patient counselling. These findings give rise to the suggestion that incorporating mental health screening in the preoperative assessment of patients could help to adequately manage patients' expectations for functional recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register Number: NTR1289.

Cervical radiculopathy: is a prosthesis preferred over fusion surgery? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses on the comparison between fusion and prosthesis in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy mainly analyse studies including mixed patient populations: patients with radiculopathy with and without myelopathy. The outcome for patients with myelopathy is different compared to those without. Furthermore, apart from decompression of the spinal cord, restriction of motion is one of the cornerstones of the surgical treatment of spondylotic myelopathy. From this point of view, the results for arthroplasty might be suboptimal for this category of patients. Comparing clinical outcome in patients exclusively suffering from radiculopathy is therefore a more valid method to compare the true clinical effect of the prosthesis to that of fusion surgery. AIM: The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcome of cervical arthroplasty (ACDA) to the clinical outcome of fusion (ACDF) after anterior cervical discectomy in patients exclusively suffering from radiculopathy, and to evaluate differences with mixed patient populations. METHODS: A literature search was completed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE, CENTRAL and CINAHL using a sensitive search strategy. Studies were selected by predefined selection criteria (i.a.) patients exclusively suffering from cervical radiculopathy), and risk of bias was assessed using a validated Cochrane Checklist adjusted for this purpose. An additional overview of results was added from articles considering a mix of patients suffering from myelopathy with or without radiculopathy. RESULTS: Eight studies were included that exclusively compared intervertebral devices in radiculopathy patients. Additionally, 29 articles concerning patients with myelopathy with or without radiculopathy were studied in a separate results table. All articles showed intermediate to high risk of bias. There was neither a difference in decrease in mean NDI score between the prosthesis (20.6 points) and the fusion (20.3 points) group, nor was there a clinically important difference in neck pain (VAS). Comparing these data to the mixed population data demonstrated comparable mean values, except for the 2-year follow-up NDI values in the prosthesis group: mixed group patients that received a prosthesis reported a mean NDI score of 15.6, indicating better clinical outcome than the radiculopathy patients that received a prosthesis though not reaching clinical importance. CONCLUSIONS: ACDF and ACDA are comparably effective in treating cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc in radiculopathy patients. Comparing the 8 radiculopathy with the 29 mixed population studies demonstrated that no clinically relevant differences were present in clinical outcome between the two types of patients. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The association of cervical sagittal alignment with adjacent segment degeneration.

PURPOSE: Cervical spine surgery may affect sagittal alignment parameters and induce accelerated degeneration of the cervical spine. Cervical sagittal alignment parameters of surgical patients will be correlated with radiological adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) and with clinical outcome parameters. METHODS: Patients were analysed from two randomized, double-blinded trials comparing anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty (ACDA), with intervertebral cage (ACDF) and without intervertebral cage (ACD). C2-C7 lordosis, T1 slope, C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and the occipito-cervical angle (OCI) were determined as cervical sagittal alignment parameters. Radiological ASD was scored by the combination of decrease in disc height and anterior osteophyte formation. Neck disability index (NDI), SF-36 PCS and MCS were evaluated as clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The cervical sagittal alignment parameters were comparable between the three treatment groups, both at baseline and at 2-year follow-up. Irrespective of surgical method, C2-C7 lordosis was found to increase from 11° to 13°, but the other parameters remained stable during follow-up. Only the OCI was demonstrated to be associated with the presence and positive progression of radiological ASD, both at baseline and at 2-year follow-up. NDI, SF-36 PCS and MCS were demonstrated not to be correlated with cervical sagittal alignment. Likewise, a correlation with the value or change of the OCI was absent. CONCLUSION: OCI, an important factor to maintain horizontal gaze, was demonstrated to be associated with radiological ASD, suggesting that the occipito-cervical angle influences accelerated cervical degeneration. Since OCI did not change after surgery, degeneration of the cervical spine may be predicted by the value of OCI. NECK TRIAL: Dutch Trial Register Number NTR1289. PROCON TRIAL: Trial Register Number ISRCTN41681847. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Maintaining endotracheal tube cuff pressure at 20 mmHg during anterior cervical spine surgery to prevent dysphagia: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Anterior cervical spine surgery is associated with postoperative dysphagia, sore throat and dysphonia. It is unclear, whether this is caused by increased endotracheal tube (ETT) cuff pressure after retractor placement. This study aims to assess the effect of ETT cuff pressure adjustment on postoperative dysphagia, sore throat and dysphonia. METHODS: In this, single-centre, observer and patient-blinded randomized controlled trial patients treated with anterior cervical spine surgery were randomized to adjustment of the ETT cuff pressure to 20 mmHg after placement of the retractor versus no adjustment. Primary outcome was the incidence and severity of postoperative dysphagia. Secondary outcomes were sore throat and dysphonia. Outcomes were evaluated on day one and 2 months after the operation. RESULTS: Of 177 enrolled patients, 162 patients (92.5%) could be evaluated. The incidence of dysphagia was 75.9% on day one and 34.6% 2 months after surgery. Dysphagia in the intervention and control group was present in 77.8% versus 74.1% of patients on day one (odds ratio (OR) 1.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.6-2.5)) and 28.4% versus 40.7% of patients after 2 months (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.1), respectively. Severity of dysphagia, sore throat and dysphonia was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior cervical spine surgery is accompanied by a high incidence of postoperative dysphagia, lasting until at least 2 months after surgery in over a third of our patients. Adjusting ETT cuff pressure to 20 mmHg after retractor placement, as compared to controls, did not lower the risk for both short- and long-term dysphagia. Netherlands National Trial Registry Number: NTR 3542. These slides can be retrieved under electronic supplementary material.

Tubular discectomy versus conventional microdiscectomy for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The reference surgical procedure for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation is open microdiscectomy. Minimal invasive discectomy with tubular retractors is hypothesised to cause less tissue damage and result in lower blood loss, less postoperative pain and faster recovery. We previously reported our 1 and 2-year results, and found no better outcomes of tubular discectomy compared with open microdiscectomy. Until now, no studies on tubular discectomy have reported results with more than 2 years of follow-up. Studies with long-term follow-up are required to determine if clinical outcomes are sustained and to assess specific long-term outcomes such as reoperation rate and iatrogenic low back pain due to impaired spinal integrity. The aim of this study is to evaluate the 5-year results of tubular discectomy compared with conventional microdiscectomy. METHODS: The study was designed as a double-blind randomised controlled trial. 325 patients with a symptomatic lumbar disc herniation were randomly allocated to tubular discectomy (166 patients) or conventional microdiscectomy (159 patients). Repeated standardised follow-up measurements were performed at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 26, 38, 52, 78, 104, 156, 208 and 260 weeks after randomisation. Main outcomes are the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica (RDQ), Visual Analogue Scale for leg pain and low back pain, self-perceived recovery and reoperation incidence. RESULTS: There was no clinically significant difference between tubular discectomy and conventional microdiscectomy regarding the main clinical outcomes at any time point during the 5 years of follow-up. RDQ scores at 5 years were 4.3 (95% CI 3.3 to 5.2) in the tubular discectomy group and 3.4 (95% CI 2.4 to 4.5) in the conventional microdiscectomy group. The mean difference of 0.9 (95% CI -0.6 to 2.2) was not significant. Mean differences for leg pain and back pain were 0.2 (95% CI -5.5 to 6.0) and 0.4 (95% CI -5.9 to 6.7), respectively. 77% of patients allocated to conventional discectomy reported complete or near-complete recovery of symptoms compared with 74% of patients allocated to tubular discectomy (p=0.79). The reoperation rate was 18% in the tubular discectomy group and 13% in the conventional discectomy group (p=0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term functional and clinical outcome did not differ between patients allocated to tubular discectomy and conventional microdiscectomy. Primary and secondary outcome measures did not support the hypothesised advantages of tubular discectomy over conventional microdiscectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN51857546.

Porous silicon nitride spacers versus PEEK cages for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical and radiological results of a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Anterior cervical discectomy with fusion is a common procedure for treating radicular arm pain. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) plastic is a frequently used material in cages for interbody fusion. Silicon nitride is a new alternative with desirable bone compatibility and imaging characteristics. The aim of the present study is to compare silicon nitride implants with PEEK cages filled with autograft harvested from osteophytes. METHODS: The study is a prospective, randomized, blinded study of 100 patients with 2 years follow-up. The primary outcome measure was improvement in the Neck Disability Index. Other outcome measures included SF-36, VAS arm pain, VAS neck pain, assessment of recovery, operative characteristics, complications, fusion and subsidence based on dynamic X-ray and CT scan. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in NDI scores between the groups at 24 months follow-up. At 3 and 12 months the NDI scores were in favor of PEEK although the differences were not clinically relevant. On most follow-up moments there was no difference in VAS neck and VAS arm between both groups, and there was no statistically significant difference in patients' perceived recovery during follow-up. Fusion rate and subsidence were similar for the two study arms and about 90% of the implants were fused at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with silicon nitride and PEEK reported similar recovery rates during follow-up. There was no significant difference in clinical outcome at 24 months. Fusion rates improved over time and are comparable between both groups.

Quality of life after different surgical procedures for the treatment of spinal metastases: results of a single-center prospective case series.

OBJECTIVE The performance of surgery for spinal metastases is rapidly increasing. Different surgical procedures, ranging from stabilization alone to stabilization combined with corpectomy, are thereby performed for various indications. Little is known about the impact of these different procedures on patient quality of life (QOL), but this factor is crucial when discussing the various therapeutic options with patients and their families. Thus, the authors of this study investigated the effect of various surgical procedures for spinal metastases on patient QOL. METHODS The authors prospectively followed a cohort of 113 patients with spinal metastases who were referred to their clinic for surgical evaluation between July 2012 and July 2014. Quality of life was assessed using the EQ-5D at intake and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after treatment. RESULTS Nineteen patients were treated conservatively, 41 underwent decompressive surgery with or without stabilization, 47 underwent a piecemeal corpectomy procedure with stabilization and expandable cage reconstruction, and 6 had a stabilization procedure without decompression. Among all surgical patients, the mean EQ-5D score was significantly increased from 0.44 pretreatment to 0.59 at 3 months after treatment (p < 0.001). Mean EQ-5D scores at 1 year after surgery further increased to 0.84 following decompression with stabilization, 0.74 after corpectomy with stabilization, and 0.94 after stabilization without decompression. Frankel scores also improved after surgery. There were no significant differences in improvements in EQ-5D scores and Frankel grades among the different surgical procedures. In addition, mortality and complication rates were similar. CONCLUSIONS Quality of life can improve significantly after various extensive and less extensive surgical procedures in patients with spinal metastases. The relatively invasive corpectomy procedure, as compared with alternative less invasive techniques, does not negatively affect outcome.

Laminoplasty and laminectomy for cervical sponydylotic myelopathy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy is frequently encountered in neurosurgical practice. The posterior surgical approach includes laminectomy and laminoplasty. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of posterior laminectomy compared with posterior laminoplasty for patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. METHODS: An extensive search of the literature in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library was performed by an experienced librarian. Risk of bias was assessed by two authors independently. The quality of the studies was graded, and the following outcome measures were retrieved: pre- and postoperative (m)JOA, pre- and postoperative ROM, postoperative VAS neck pain, and Ishira cervical curvature index. If possible data were pooled, otherwise a weighted mean was calculated for each study and a range mentioned. RESULTS: All studies were of very low quality. Due to inadequate description of the data in most articles, pooling of the data was not possible. Qualitative interpretation of the data learned that there were no clinically important differences, except for the higher rate of procedure-related complications with laminoplasty. CONCLUSION: Based on these results, a claim of superiority for laminoplasty or laminectomy was not justified. The higher number of procedure-related complications should be considered when laminoplasty is offered to a patient as a treatment option. A study of robust methodological design is warranted to provide objective data on the clinical effectiveness of both procedures.

Long-term follow-up of clinical and radiological outcome after cervical laminectomy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term clinical and radiological results of cervical laminectomy without adjuvant-instrumented fusion for degenerative spinal cord compression. METHODS: A retrospective follow-up study of patients in which clinical data (n = 207), questionnaires (n = 96) and fluoroscopy (n = 77) were reviewed. RESULTS: Postoperative perceived recovery was reported by 76 and 63 % of patients at 3 months and 9 years, respectively. Functional status remained unchanged. The incidence of kyphosis and segmental instability was 15 and 18 %, respectively, and occurred almost exclusively if preoperative lordosis was <20°. Neither kyphosis nor segmental instability correlated to perceived recovery and no predisposing variables were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical laminectomy without adjuvant-instrumented fusion should be considered as a treatment for compressive degenerative cervical myelopathy in patients with a lordotic cervical spine without congenital deformities. Additional reconstructive correction of the cervical spine is only proven appropriate in selected cases.

IPD without bony decompression versus conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: 2-year results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Interspinous process devices (IPDs) are implanted to treat patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication (INC) based on lumbar spinal stenosis. It is hypothesized that patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with IPD have a faster short-term recovery, an equal outcome after 2 years and less back pain compared with bony decompression. METHODS: A randomized design with variable block sizes was used, with allocations stratified according to center. Allocations were stored in prepared opaque, coded and sealed envelopes, and patients and research nurses were blind throughout the follow-up. Five neurosurgical centers (including one academic and four secondary level care centers) included participants. 211 participants were referred to the Leiden-The Hague Spine Prognostic Study Group. 159 participants with INC based on lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two levels with an indication for surgery were randomized into two groups. Patients and research nurses were blinded for the allocated treatment throughout the study period. 80 participants received an IPD and 79 participants underwent spinal bony decompression. The primary outcome at long-term (2-year) follow-up was the score for the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire. Repeated measurement analyses were applied to compare outcomes over time. RESULTS: At two years, the success rate according to the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire for the IPD group [69 % (95 % CI 57-78 %)] did not show a significant difference compared with standard bony decompression [60 % (95 % CI 48-71 %) p value 0.2]. Reoperations, because of absence of recovery, were indicated and performed in 23 cases (33 %) of the IPD group versus 6 (8 %) patients of the bony decompression group (p < 0.01). Furthermore, long-term VAS back pain was significantly higher [36 mm on a 100 mm scale (95 % CI 24-48)] in the IPD group compared to the bony decompression group [28 mm (95 % CI 23-34) p value 0.04]. CONCLUSIONS: This double-blinded study could not confirm the advantage of IPD without bony decompression over conventional 'simple' decompression, two years after surgery. Moreover, in the IPD treatment arm, the reoperation rate was higher and back pain was even slightly more intense compared to the decompression treatment arm.

Interspinous process device versus standard conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: randomised controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is interspinous process device implantation more effective in the short term (eight weeks) than conventional surgical decompression for patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis? SUMMARY ANSWER: The use of interspinous implants did not result in a better outcome than conventional decompression, but the reoperation rate was significantly higher. WHAT IS KNOWN AND WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Bony decompression and treatment with interspinous process devices are superior to conservative and non-surgical treatment for intermittent neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis. Interspinous implants surgery is not superior to bony decompression, and the reoperation rate is significantly higher.

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections followed by mechanical diagnosis and therapy to prevent surgery for lumbar disc herniation.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To report the clinical course of patients with MRI-confirmed lumbar disc herniation-related radicular noncentralizing pain who received transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TESIs) and mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MDT). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Noncentralizing symptoms in patients with lumbar disc herniation are associated with poor outcome. Commonly used treatments for these patients include TESIs and MDT. No study has evaluated the outcome of combining both strategies. METHODS: Consecutive candidates for herniated lumbar disc surgery with noncentralizing chronic pain were eligible. Patients received TESIs followed by MDT. The primary outcomes were pain severity in the leg, disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica), and global perceived effect (GPE). Outcomes were measured at baseline, discharge, and 12 months. Linear mixed-models and McNemar's tests were used to analyze outcome data. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients receive TESIs. After TESIs, symptoms were resolved completely in 11 patients (16%). In these patients, symptom resolution was maintained at 12 months. A second subgroup of 32 patients (46%) reported significantly less pain after TESIs and showed centralization with MDT reassessment (significant reductions in leg pain and disability [P < 0.001]) and a satisfaction rate of 90% at 12 months. A third subgroup of 11 patients (16%) reported significantly less pain after TESIs but still showed noncentralization with MDT reassessment (significant reductions in leg pain and disability [P < 0.05] and a satisfaction rate of 50% at 12 months). A fourth subgroup of 15 patients (22%) did not respond on TESIs and received an operative intervention. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that a course of TESIs followed by MDT may be able to avoid surgery in a substantial proportion of candidates for herniated lumbar disc surgery.

Juvenile chronic arthritis and the craniovertebral junction in the paediatric patient: review of the literature and management considerations.

INTRODUCTION: Juvenile chronic arthritis (JCA) is a systemic disease of childhood affecting particularly joints. JCA is a heterogeneous group of inflammatory joint disorders with onset before the age of 16 years and is comprised of 7 subtype groups. The pathogenesis of JCA seen in the cervical spine is synovial inflammation, hyperaemia, and pannus formation at the occipitoatlantoaxial joints resulting in characteristic craniovertebral junction findings. Treatment of craniovertebral junction instability as a result of JCA is a challenge. The best treatment strategy may be difficult because of various radiological and clinical severities. A review of the literature and management considerations is presented. REVIEW: No randomised controlled trial or systematic review on this subject has been published. Only experts' opinions, case reports, and case series have been described. Thirty-four studies have been reviewed in this study. Involvement of the cervical spine in patients with JCA can lead to pain and functional disability. The subtypes that usually affect the cervical spine are the polyarticular type and systemic onset type and rarely the pauciarticular type. The most common cervical spine changes related to JCA are as follows: (1) apophyseal joint ankylosis at C2-C3, (2) atlantoaxial subluxation, (3) atlantoaxial impaction, (4) atlantoaxial rotatory fixation, and (5) growth disturbances of the cervical spine. The incidence of severe subluxations has decreased in the last decade as result of antirheumatoid drugs and biologicals. However, neurological compromise still occurs in JCA patients necessitating surgical treatment. CONCLUSION: Whenever the cervical spine is involved in rheumatoid arthritis patients without neurological deficits, conservative treatment is legitimate. Once patients develop neurological signs and symptoms, surgical treatment should be considered with particular focus to age, severity of the disease, and general health condition. Skilled anaesthesia is crucial and the surgical procedure should only be carried out in centres with experience in craniovertebral junction abnormalities.

Minimally invasive surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Assessing the benefits of surgical treatments for sciatica is critical for clinical and policy decision-making. To compare minimally invasive (MI) and conventional microdiscectomy (MD) for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials including patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. Conventional microdiscectomy was compared separately with: (1) Interlaminar MI discectomy (ILMI vs. MD); (2) Transforaminal MI discectomy (TFMI vs. MD). OUTCOMES: Back pain, leg pain, function, improvement, work status, operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, reoperations, analgesics and cost outcomes were extracted and risk of bias assessed. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using random effect meta-analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies, 16 RCTs and 13 non-randomised studies (n = 4,472), were included. Clinical outcomes were not different between the surgery types. There is low quality evidence that ILMI takes 11 min longer, results in 52 ml less blood loss and reduces mean length of hospital stay by 1.5 days. There were no differences in complications or reoperations. The main limitations were high risk of bias, low number of studies and small sample sizes comparing TF with MD. CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate to low quality evidence of no differences in clinical outcomes between MI surgery and conventional microdiscectomy for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. Studies comparing transforaminal MI with conventional surgery with sufficient sample size and methodological robustness are lacking.

The SNAP trial: a double blind multi-center randomized controlled trial of a silicon nitride versus a PEEK cage in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages have been widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disorders, and show good clinical results. Still, complications such as subsidence and migration of the cage are frequently seen. A lack of osteointegration and fibrous tissues surrounding PEEK cages are held responsible. Ceramic implants made of silicon nitride show better biocompatible and osteoconductive qualities, and therefore are expected to lower complication rates and allow for better fusion.Purpose of this study is to show that fusion with the silicon nitride cage produces non-inferior results in outcome of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at all follow-up time points as compared to the same procedure with PEEK cages. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is designed as a double blind multi-center randomized controlled trial with repeated measures analysis. 100 patients (18-75 years) presenting with symptomatic lumbar degenerative disorders unresponsive to at least 6 months of conservative treatment are included. Patients will be randomly assigned to a PEEK cage or a silicon nitride cage, and will undergo a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation. Primary outcome measure is the functional improvement measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. Secondary outcome parameters are the VAS leg, VAS back, SF-36, Likert scale, neurological outcome and radiographic assessment of fusion. After 1 year the fusion rate will be measured by radiograms and CT. Follow-up will be continued for 2 years. Patients and clinical observers who will perform the follow-up visits will be blinded for type of cage used during follow-up. Analyses of radiograms and CT will be performed independently by two experienced radiologists. DISCUSSION: In this study a PEEK cage will be compared with a silicon nitride cage in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders. To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial in which the silicon nitride cage is compared with the PEEK cage in patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01557829.

Management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a survey among Dutch spine surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Various surgical and non-surgical treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are widely adopted in clinical practice, but high quality randomised controlled trials to support these are often lacking, especially in terms of their relative benefit and risk compared with other treatment options. Therefore, an evaluation of agreement among clinicians regarding the indications and the choice for particular treatments seems appropriate. METHODS: One hundred and six Dutch neurosurgeons and orthopaedic spine surgeons completed a questionnaire, which evaluated treatment options for LSS and expectations regarding the effectiveness of surgical and non-surgical treatments. RESULTS: Responders accounted for 6,971 decompression operations and 831 spinal fusion procedures for LSS annually. Typical neurogenic claudication, severe pain/disability, and a pronounced constriction of the spinal canal were considered the most important indications for surgical treatment by the majority of responders. Non-surgical treatment was generally regarded as ineffective and believed to be less effective than surgical treatment. Interlaminar decompression was the preferred technique by 68% of neurosurgeons and 52% orthopaedic surgeons for the treatment of LSS. Concomitant fusion was applied in 12% of all surgery for LSS. Most surgeons considered spondylolisthesis as an indication and spinal instability as a definite indication for additional fusion. CONCLUSIONS: The current survey demonstrates a wide variety of preferred treatments of symptomatic LSS by Dutch spine surgeons. To minimise variety, national and international protocols based on high-quality randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews are necessary to give surgeons more tools to support everyday decision-making.

Accurate placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws using a handheld iOS-based navigation device: a prospective intra-patient agreement study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate pedicle screw placement is a challenge with reported misplacement rates of 10% and higher. A handheld navigation device (HND) may provide accuracy equal to CT-based navigation (CT-Nav) but without the cost and complexity. OBJECTIVE: To study the accuracy of a handheld navigation device for pedicle screw placement. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective cross-sectional study with consistently applied reference standard enrolled 20 patients undergoing 92 pedicle screw placements. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent pedicle screw placement between May 2022 and September 2022. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pedicle screw placement accuracy per Gertzbein-Robbins. METHODS: Once the screw pilot hole was established, the proposed trajectory of the HND was compared with that proposed by CT-Nav. Postoperatively, screw accuracy was graded according to Gertzbein-Robbins by a blinded radiologist based on CT scans. Accuracy was compared between the two systems and published control for fluoroscopy assisted and CT-Nav placement using Bayesian posterior distribution. RESULTS: The trajectory proposed by the HND and CT-Nav were in agreement in 98.9% (95% Exact CI; 94.09%-99.97%). The HND accuracy was 98.9% with 91 screws rated "A" and 1 rated "C". Non-inferiority to fluoroscopic placement was achieved because the one-sided normal-approximation 95% CI Lower Bound (LB) of 95.3% is greater than the Performance Goal (PG) of 83.4%. Post-hoc analysis demonstrated that the probability of superiority of the HND relative to the historical accuracy rate of 91.5% for fluoroscopy assisted procedures is >0.999 and that the HND's accuracy rate is within 4.5% of CT-Nav of 95.5% is >0.999. No adverse events or intra-operative complications associated with HND were observed. There was 1 (1.1%) intra-operative repositioning and no re-operations for any reason. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy rate of the HND was 98.9%, and the proposed trajectory matched with CT-Nav in 98.9% of the time. This is superior to the historical published accuracy rate for fluoroscopy-assisted procedures and equivalent to the historical published accuracy rate for CT-Nav. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch trial register NL74268.058.20.

Clinical Utility of An Intervertebral Motion Metric for Deciding on the Addition of Instrumented Fusion in Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective single-arm clinical study. OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical utility of an intervertebral motion metric by determining the proportion of patients for whom it changed their surgical treatment plan from decompression only to decompression with fusion or vice versa. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) from degenerative spondylolisthesis is commonly treated with decompression only or decompression with additional instrumented fusion. An objective diagnostic tool capable of establishing abnormal motion between lumbar vertebrae to guide decision-making between surgical procedures is needed. To this end a metric, based on the vertebral sagittal plane translation-per-degree-of-rotation (TPDR) calculated from flexion-extension radiographs, was developed. METHODS: First, spine surgeons documented their intended surgical plan. Subsequently, the participants' flexion-extension radiographs were taken. From these the TPDR was calculated and reported as a Sagittal Plane Shear Index (SPSI). The SPSI metric of the spinal level intended to treat was used to decide if the intended surgical plan needed to be changed or not. RESULTS: SPSI was determined for 75 participants. Of these, 51 (68%) had an intended surgical plan of decompression only and 24 (32%) decompression with fusion. In 63% of participants the SPSI was in support of their intended surgical plan. For 29% of participants the surgeon changed the surgical plan after the SPSI metric became available to them. A suggested change in surgical plan was overruled in 8% of participants. The final surgical plan was decompression only for 59 (79%) and decompression with fusion for 16 (21%) participants. CONCLUSION: The 29% change in intended surgical plans suggested that SPSI was considered by spine surgeons as an adjunct metric in deciding whether to perform decompression only or or to add instrumented fusion. This change exceeded the a priori defined 15% considered necessary to show potential clinical utility of SPSI.

Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Compared with Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy: Two-Year Results of the FACET Randomized Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: Posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) is a valid alternative to anterior discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) as a surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy, but the quality of evidence has been limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of these treatments after 2 years of follow-up. We hypothesized that posterior surgery would be noninferior to anterior surgery. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial assessed patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy in 9 Dutch hospitals with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The primary outcomes measured reduction of cervical radicular pain and were the success ratio based on the Odom criteria, and arm pain and decrease in arm pain, evaluated with the visual analog scale, with a 10% noninferiority margin, which represents the maximum acceptable difference between the new treatment (posterior surgery) and the standard treatment (anterior surgery), beyond which the new treatment would be considered clinically unacceptable. The secondary outcomes were neck pain, Neck Disability Index, Work Ability Index, quality of life, complications (including reoperations), and treatment satisfaction. Generalized linear mixed effects modeling was used for analyses. The study was registered at the Overview of Medical Research in the Netherlands (OMON), formerly the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5536). RESULTS: From January 2016 to May 2020, 265 patients were randomized (132 to the posterior surgery group and 133 to the anterior surgery group). Among these, 25 did not have the allocated intervention; 11 of these 25 patients had symptom improvement, and the rest of the patients did not have the intervention due to various reasons. At the 2-year follow-up, of 243 patients, primary outcome data were available for 236 patients (97%). Predicted proportions of a successful outcome were 0.81 after posterior surgery and 0.74 after anterior surgery (difference in rate, -0.06 [1-sided 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.02]), indicating the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The between-group difference in arm pain was -2.7 (1-sided 95% CI, 7.4) and the between-group difference in the decrease in arm pain was 1.5 (1-sided 95% CI, 8.2), both confirming the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The secondary outcomes demonstrated small between-group differences. Serious surgery-related adverse events occurred in 9 patients (8%) who underwent posterior surgery, including 9 reoperations, and 11 patients (9%) who underwent anterior surgery, including 7 reoperations (difference in reoperation rate, -0.02 [2-sided 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.05]). CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrated that, after a 2-year follow-up, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery with regard to the success rate and arm pain reduction in patients with cervical radiculopathy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.