Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine (C2-T1): systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 4,165 patients and 16,669 screws.

Lateral mass screw (LMS) and cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation are among the most popular techniques for posterior fusion of the cervical spine. Early research prioritized the LMS approach as the trajectory resulted in fewer neurovascular complications; however, with the incorporation of navigation assistance, the CPS approach should be re-evaluated. Our objective was to report the findings of a meta-analysis focused on comparing the LMS and CPS techniques in terms of rate of various complications with inclusion of all levels from C2 to T1. We conducted a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases with final inclusion criteria focused on identifying studies that reported outcomes and complications for either the CPS or LMS technique. These studies were then pooled, and statistical analyses were performed from the cumulative data. A total of 60 studies comprising 4165 participants and 16,669 screws placed within the C2-T1 levels were identified. Within these studies, the LMS group had a significantly increased odds for lateral mass fractures (odds ratio [OR] = 43.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.62-711.42), additional cervical surgeries (OR = 5.56, 95%CI = 2.95-10.48), and surgical site infections (SSI) (OR = 5.47, 95%CI = 1.65-18.16). No other significant differences between groups in terms of complications were identified. Within the subgroup analysis of navigation versus non-navigation-guided CPS placement, no significant differences were identified for individual complications, although collectively significantly fewer complications occurred with navigation (OR = 5.29, 95%CI = 2.03-13.78). The CPS group had significantly fewer lateral mass fractures, cervical revision surgeries, and SSIs. Furthermore, navigation-assisted CPS placement was associated with a significant reduction in complications overall.

Complications associated with subaxial placement of pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws in the cervical spine: systematic review and meta-analysis comprising 1768 patients and 8636 screws.

Lateral mass screw (LMS) fixation for the treatment of subaxial cervical spine instability or deformity has been traditionally associated with few neurovascular complications. However, cervical pedicle screw (CPS) fixation has recently increased in popularity, especially with navigation assistance, because of the higher pullout strength of the pedicle screws. To their knowledge, the authors conducted the first meta-analysis comparing the complication rates during and/or after CPS and LMS placement for different pathologies causing cervical spine instability. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase from inception to January 12, 2021 was performed to identify studies reporting CPS and/or LMS-related complications. Complications were categorized into intraoperative and early postoperative (within 30 days of surgery) and late postoperative (after 30 days from surgery) complications. All studies that met the prespecified inclusion criteria were pooled and cumulatively analyzed. A total of 24 studies were conducted during the time frame of the search and comprising 1768 participants and 8636 subaxially placed screws met the inclusion criteria. The CPS group experienced significantly more postoperative C5 palsy (odds ratio [OR] = 3.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27-9.53, p < 0.05). Otherwise, there were no significant differences between the LMS and CPS groups. There were no significant differences between the CPS and LMS groups in terms of neurovascular procedure-related complications other than significantly more C5 palsy in the CPS group.

Symptoms upon postural change and orthostatic hypotension in adolescents with concussion.

Objective: Concussion is associated with dysautonomia, altered blood pressure (BP) control, and may cause Orthostatic Hypotension (OH). We measured prevalence of OH using the 1-minute supine-to-standing OH Test in adolescents with concussion and controls.Participants: Adolescents within 10 days of injury (Concussion Group, n = 297, 15.0 ± 1.7 years, 59% male) were compared with controls (Control Group, n = 214, 15.0 ± 1.5 years, 58% male).Methods: BP, heart rate (HR), and complaints of lightheadedness/dizziness were measured after 2-minute supine and 1-minute standing. Control Group was assessed once. Concussion Group was assessed twice; (1) initial visit (mean 6.0 ± 3 days-since-injury) and (2) after clinical recovery (mean 46.3 ± 42 days-since-injury).Results: Initial visit; Concussion Group reported feeling lightheaded/dizzy on postural change more often than the Control Group (37% vs 4%, p < .001) but did not differ in meeting standard OH criteria (3% vs 5%, p = .32). Experiencing symptoms did not correlate with meeting OH criteria, but correlated with abnormal vestibulo-ocular reflex. After clinical recovery; Concussion Group did not differ in experiencing lightheaded/dizziness on postural change than controls (4%, p = .65).Conclusion: Adolescents commonly experience orthostatic intolerance after concussion without meeting the standard criteria for OH.

Tension Parameters of Junctional Tethers in Proximal Junction Kyphosis: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study.

OBJECTIVE: Proximal junctional failure following surgical correction for adult spinal deformity significantly impacts quality of life and increases the economic burden of treating underlying spinal deformity. The objective of this cadaver study was to determine optimal tension parameters in junctional tethers for proximal junctional kyphosis prevention. METHODS: Cadaveric specimens were used to establish the optimal tension range in polyethylene tethering devices, such as the VersaTie (NuVasive) used in this study. Three specimens were instrumented to test tether tensions of 0, 75, and 150 Newtons (N) at L1-L2, T9-T10, and T3-T4. An optical tracking system was used to measure when specimens reached proximal junctional kyphosis, experienced instrumentation or tissue failure, or reached a cap of 2500 cycles. Radiographs were obtained before and after testing. RESULTS: At all levels, use of a tether at tension forces of 75 N and 150 N elicited a protective effect. The only level in which a higher tension on the tether resulted in more protection was at T3-T4. When averaged, the use of a tether at tension forces of 75 N and 150 N showed 1000 cycles of protection at L1-L2, 2000 cycles at T9-T10, and 1426 cycles at T3-T4. Radiographic analysis corroborated these findings. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a tether in a cadaveric model prevents the development of proximal junctional kyphosis across all tested levels and an increased tension force of 150 N is protective at the proximal thoracic spine. These data can be used to develop further models for a tether system that reproducibly applies a fixed tension force above the thoracolumbar rod construct.

Comparison of prone transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spine disease: A retrospective radiographic propensity score-matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This is the first study to compare the prone transpsoas (PTP) approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) through an analysis of radiographic and clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of data for patients who underwent the PTP approach or TLIF for degenerative lumbar spine disease was conducted. Propensity score matching was completed through the utilization of a linear regression model with the classification of surgery (PTP vs. TLIF) being used as the indicator (dependent variable) and the radiographic outcomes as covariates (independent variables). Both cohorts (PTP and TLIF) were propensity score matched according to preoperative radiographic parameters using a 1-to-1 ratio to the nearest neighbor. Eleven patients in the TLIF group were matched to an equal number of patients in the PTP group who had similar propensity scores to perform a thorough analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes. RESULTS: The PTP approach significantly improved the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt, and the pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis value when compared to TLIF (p < 0.05). Clinically, the PTP group improved significantly in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (p < 0.05). That approach also significantly minimized blood loss and hospital stay (p < 0.05). Furthermore, significantly more cages were placed anteriorly in the PTP group than in the TLIF group (p < 0.05). However, the PTP group had a significantly longer duration of radiation exposure (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The PTP approach resulted in greater improvement in postoperative radiographic measurements as well as patient-reported outcomes.

Effectiveness and Safety of Continuous Infusion Regional Anesthesia Pumps for Pain After Thoracopelvic Fusion Surgery for Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain after complex revision spine surgery, especially for the treatment of persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS), is frequently severe and can be debilitating, requiring the use of intravenous and oral opioids. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a continuous infusion regional anesthesia pump placed after thoracopelvic fusion for the treatment of PSPS. METHODS: We performed a retrospective comparative study of consecutive patients who had undergone thoracopelvic fusion for PSPS. The patients included in the present study had either had a continuous infusion regional anesthesia pump placed during surgery or had not (control). Demographics, use of preoperative and postoperative opioids, postoperative adverse events, length of hospital stay, and 90-day readmission were recorded. RESULTS: The patients in the pump group (n = 14) had used fewer opioids during their hospital stay compared with the control group (n = 12; P = 0.6). This difference was greater for postoperative days 1 and 2 (P = 0.3 and P = 0.2, respectively). No significant difference was found in opioid usage during the first 14 days after surgery (P = 0.8) or at the 3-month postoperative follow-up evaluation (P = 0.8). Furthermore, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative complications. The pump group had a 1.4-day shorter hospital stay (P = 0.7). The control group had more 90-day readmissions than did the pump group (P = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Despite showing a trend toward less usage of opioids during the first 2 days after surgery and a shorter hospital stay with no increased complications in the pump group, the study data failed to demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the two groups.