[Resuscitation room diagnostics]. / Schockraumdiagnostik.

CLINICAL PROBLEM: The indication for resuscitation room care is an acute (potentially) life-threatening patient condition. Typical causes for this are polytrauma, acute neurological symptoms, acute chest and abdominal pain or the cause remains unclear at first. The care is always provided in a suitably composed interdisciplinary team. This requires cause-specific standards tailored to the care facility and requires a mutual understanding of the partners involved with regard to specialist interests and care processes. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: Whole-body CT is established for polytrauma imaging and usually each institution has already defined an institutional standard. For the other causes, first imaging with CT is just as common, but the protocols and procedures to be used are often not as clear as in the case of polytrauma. METHODICAL INNOVATION AND EVALUATION: For polytrauma service, ATLS and procedures according to ABCDE already serve as a largely standardized framework in the resuscitation room. For every other group of causes, comparable concepts should be developed and institutionally strive for objectification of continuous improvement. This refers not only to the resuscitation room stay but also to the interfaces before and after resuscitation room service. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: After the patient has arrived, it has to be determined whether the assessment of a vital risk is retained. If so, institutionally defined care standards must be followed for the various causes. This concerns the interface logistics, the definition of a team leader including associated tasks, the supply processes including the CT examination protocols as well as the close communication.

Clinical implications and radiographic characteristics of the relation between giant intracranial aneurysms of the posterior circulation and the brainstem.

BACKGROUND: Giant intracranial aneurysms of the posterior circulation (GPCirA) are rare entities compressing the brainstem and adjacent structures. Previous evidence has shown that the amount of brainstem shift away from the cranial base is not associated with neurological deficits. This raises the question whether other factors may be associated with neurological deficits. METHODS: All data were extracted from the Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Registry, an international multicenter prospective study on giant intracranial aneurysms. We grouped GPCirA according to the mass effect on the brainstem (lateral versus medial). Brainstem compression was evaluated with two indices: (a) brainstem compression ratio (BCR) or diameter of the compressed brainstem to the assumed normal diameter of the brainstem and (b) aneurysm to brainstem ratio (ABR) or diameter of the aneurysm to the diameter of the compressed brainstem. We examined associations between neurological deficits and GPCirA characteristics using binary regression analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-eight GPCirA were included. Twenty GPCirA showed medial (71.4%) and 8 lateral compression of the brainstem (28.6%). Baseline characteristics did not differ between the groups for patient age, aneurysm diameter, aneurysm volume, modified Rankin Scale (mRS), motor deficit (MD), or cranial nerve deficits (CND). Mean BCR was 53.0 in the medial and 54.0 in the lateral group (p = 0.92). The mean ABR was 2.9 in the medial and 2.3 in the lateral group (p = 0.96). In the entire cohort, neither BCR nor ABR nor GPCirA volumes were associated with the occurrence of CND or MD. In contrast, disability (mRS) was significantly associated with ABR (OR 1.94 (95% CI 1.01-3.70; p = 0.045) and GPCirA volumes (OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.01-1.44); p = 0.035), but not with BCR. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients with GPCirA, neither the degree of lateral projection nor the amount of brainstem compression predicted neurological deficits. Disability was associated only with aneurysm volume. When designing treatment strategies for GPCirA, aneurysm laterality or the amount of brainstem compression should be viewed as less relevant while the high risk of rupture of such giant lesions should be emphasized. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The registry is listed at clinicaltrials.gov under the registration no. NCT02066493.

Endplate changes after lumbar discectomy with and without implantation of an annular closure device.

BACKGROUND: The implantation of a bone-anchored annular closure device (ACD) might be associated with the developed new endplate changes (EPC) after surgery. METHODS: A post hoc analysis has been done in patients from a prospective randomized multicenter study. All patients underwent limited lumbar discectomy with intraoperative randomization into the groups limited lumbar discectomy alone or additional ACD implantation. Low-dose lumbar computed tomography (CT) and clinical investigations were performed preoperatively and 12 months after the operation. RESULTS: A total of 554 patients were randomized. After exclusion of dropouts, the per-protocol population included 493 patients (251 in the control group and 242 in the ACD group); the follow-up rate was ≥ 90%. The number of patients showing EPC at baseline was similar in both groups. The number of patients showing EPC and the total EPC lesion area significantly increased in both groups over time, but significantly increased more in the EPC group for the superior and inferior endplate (all P < 0.0001). There was no association of pre-existing number and size of EPC with sex, age, or smoking habits. Correlation of clinical variables showed no relation with number, size, and increase of EPC area after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with primary lumbar disc herniation show EPC in the corresponding segments. There is a significant increase of lesion number and size within 12 months after discectomy. This increase is significantly more pronounced in the ACD group. Presence and growth of EPC is not correlated with low-back pain or ODI.

Quantifying unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms by measuring diameter and volume--a comparative analysis of 69 cases.

BACKGROUND: Intracranial aneurysms (IA) are usually quantified according to their largest diameter. However, volumetry has recently been increasingly conducted as well, especially in giant intracranial aneurysms (GIAs). Since so far the true value of GIA volumetry is unknown, we designed a trial to examine correlations between GIA diameter and volume with special focus on clinical implications. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging of 69 unruptured GIAs in 66 patients was retrospectively evaluated. The largest diameter and volume were measured. Also, potential associations to the patients' clinical conditions were examined. RESULTS: Comparing GIA sizes of our patient cohort produced different results depending on whether GIA diameter or volume was measured. Measuring the diameter identified posterior circulation GIAs as the largest ones (39.2 mm, IQR 37.3-48.3), while measuring the volume found GIAs of the MCA to be the largest ones (12.3 cm(3), IQR 7.2-27.8). A correlation of GIA diameter and volume was only found in anterior circulation GIAs, which were predominantly saccular in shape, but not in those of the posterior circulation, of which most were fusiform. Neither GIA diameter nor GIA volume but only GIA location was associated with neurological deficits. CONCLUSION: Diameter and volume measurements are not interchangeable modes of GIA quantification. Our data suggest that the idea of distinguishing different sizes of GIA may be clinically less relevant than examining their location, shape or mass effect.

Effectiveness of an Annular Closure Device to Prevent Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Secondary Analysis With 5 Years of Follow-up.

Importance: Patients with large annular defects following lumbar microdiscectomy for disc herniation are at increased risk for symptomatic recurrence and reoperation. Objective: To determine whether a bone-anchored annular closure device in addition to lumbar microdiscectomy resulted in lower reherniation and reoperation rates vs lumbar microdiscectomy alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial reports 5-year follow-up for enrolled patients between December 2010 and October 2014 at 21 clinical sites. Patients in this study had a large annular defect (6-10 mm width) following lumbar microdiscectomy for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Statistical analysis was performed from November to December 2020. Interventions: Lumbar microdiscectomy with additional bone-anchored annular closure device (device group) or lumbar microdiscectomy only (control group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and adverse events as well as changes in leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life when comparing the device and control groups over 5 years of follow-up. Results: Among 554 randomized participants (mean [SD] age: 43 [11] years; 327 [59%] were men), 550 were included in the modified intent-to-treat efficacy population (device group: n = 272; 270 [99%] were White); control group: n = 278; 273 [98%] were White) and 550 were included in the as-treated safety population (device group: n = 267; control group: n = 283). The risk of symptomatic reherniation (18.8% [SE, 2.5%] vs 31.6% [SE, 2.9%]; P < .001) and reoperation (16.0% [SE, 2.3%] vs 22.6% [SE, 2.6%]; P = .03) was lower in the device group. There were 53 reoperations in 40 patients in the device group and 82 reoperations in 58 patients in the control group. Scores for leg pain severity, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life significantly improved over 5 years of follow-up with no clinically relevant differences between groups. The frequency of serious adverse events was comparable between the treatment groups. Serious adverse events associated with the device or procedure were less frequent in the device group (12.0% vs 20.5%; difference, -8.5%; 95% CI, -14.6% to -2.3%; P = .008). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients who are at high risk of recurrent herniation following lumbar microdiscectomy owing to a large defect in the annulus fibrosus, this study's findings suggest that annular closure with a bone-anchored implant lowers the risk of symptomatic recurrence and reoperation over 5 years of follow-up. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01283438.

Clinical Implications of Vertebral Endplate Disruptions After Lumbar Discectomy: 3-Year Results from a Randomized Trial of a Bone-Anchored Annular Closure Device.

OBJECTIVE: Vertebral endplate disruptions (VEPD) are common findings on imaging after lumbar surgery. The objective of this study was to explore the clinical implications of VEPD development following lumbar discectomy with or without implant with a bone-anchored annular closure device (ACD). METHODS: This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial of patients with large postsurgical annular defects after limited lumbar discectomy who were randomized to additionally receive an ACD or no additional treatment. VEPD were identified on computed tomography and confirmed by an imaging core laboratory. Clinical outcomes included recurrent herniation, reoperation, Oswestry Disability Index, leg pain, and back pain. Patient follow-up in this study was 3 years. RESULTS: In the ACD group (n=272), the risk of reoperation was lower in patients with vs without VEPD (8% vs 24%, p<0.01), but no other clinical outcomes differed when stratified by VEPD prevalence or size. In the Control group (n=278), the risk of symptomatic reherniation was higher in patients with VEPD (41% vs 23%, p<0.01) and patients with the largest VEPD had the highest reoperation rates. Patient-reported outcomes were not associated with VEPD prevalence or size in the Control group. CONCLUSION: VEPD had no significant influence on patient-reported outcomes at 3 years after lumbar discectomy. VEPD increased the risk of recurrence in patients treated with lumbar discectomy only, but had no negative influence in patients treated with the ACD.

The Disability Cascade: A Preventable Consequence of the Loss of Disc Height following Lumbar Microdiscectomy.

Lumbar discectomy is a mainstay surgical treatment for herniation of the lumbar discs and is effective at treating radicular symptomology. Despite the overall success of the procedure; the potential for reherniation and reoperation is significant. To avoid this potential recurrence, surgeons often perform discectomy more aggressively, removing a larger volume of nuclear material in the hopes of minimizing the likelihood of reherniation. This approach, while beneficial in minimizing the chance of reherniation, is associated with a volumetric reduction of the nucleus within the disc space, making the disc more prone to collapse and thus inducing a significant post-operative loss of disc height. While potentially minor in isolation, the loss of disc height, in fact, impacts several aspects of overall patient well-being. We hypothesize that the loss of disc height following discectomy causes an increase in pain and subsequent disability, the combination of which ultimately impacts socioeconomic factors affecting both the patient and the healthcare system as a whole. In this report, we outline the evidence in support of this disability cascade and provide recommendations on methods for limiting its impact. Given the current focus on cost-effectiveness in healthcare decision-making, methods for limiting this potentially damaging sequence of events must be investigated.

Occlusion of a mural type vein of Galen malformation in a 10-month-old boy with three Woven EndoBridge (WEB 17) and two coils.

We report the case of a 10-month-old boy with an enlarged head circumference and severe motor developmental delay. MRI showed a vein of Galen malformation (VGAM) with a heavily dilated median prosencephalic vein. Digital subtraction angiography confirmed a mural type VGAM with three feeding arteries arising from the posterior cerebral arteries. Due to the short length of the feeding arteries and the high flow, occlusion of the feeding vessels with detachable coils was not possible because of repeated coil dislocation into the dilated vein. Embolization of the three feeding vessels was then performed with a Woven EndoBridge single layer device (WEB SL17). In two arteries complete occlusion was accomplished with the WEB alone and in one artery additional deployment of two coils was necessary. Follow-up imaging at day 1 after treatment as well as 3 and 9 months after embolization showed persistent occlusion.

Postoperative direct health care costs of lumbar discectomy are reduced with the use of a novel annular closure device in high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Lumbar discectomy is largely successful surgical procedure; however, reherniation rates in patients with large annular defects are as high as 27%. The expense associated with a revision surgery places significant burden on the healthcare system. PURPOSE: To compare the direct health care costs through 5 years follow-up of conventional discectomy (Control) with those of discectomy supplemented by an adjunctive annular closure device (ACD) in high-risk patients with large annular defects. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cost-effectiveness study. METHODS: All-cause index level reoperations were reviewed from a multicenter, randomized controlled superiority trial that allocated 554 high-risk discectomy patients with large annular defects to either control or ACD. Medicare and private insurer (Humana) direct costs were derived from a commercially available payer database to estimate costs in the US healthcare system, including those associated with facility, surgeon, imaging, follow-up visits, physical therapy, and injections. A 50:50 split between Medicare and commercial insurers was assumed for the base case analysis. The analysis was also performed on a 80:20 commercial:Medicare payer basis. For the base case scenario, a 2-year time horizon and outpatient cost setting was established for the index procedure. Repeat discectomy was assumed to be performed on a 60:40 outpatient-to-inpatient basis. Complications requiring surgery, revisions, and/or fusion were assumed to be managed in the inpatient setting. Total costs of reoperation and per-patient costs of reoperation were compared between groups for both forms of insurers. One author received consulting fees of <$50,000 for the completion of this study, and the other eight authors did not have any financial associations with the current work. Funding for this study was provided by Intrinsic Therapeutics, but all analyses, interpretation, and writing were performed independently by the authors. RESULTS: At two years follow-up, use of the ACD reduced the rate of symptomatic reherniations in a large defect population to 13% compared with 25% in the control group (p<.001). This reduction in symptomatic reherniations in the ACD group translated to a savings of $2,802 per patient in direct health care costs compared with Control at 2 years and $5,315 per patient by 5 years based on 50% private and 50% public (Medicare) payer split. Under the scenario of 80:20 private:public insurance reimbursement, the estimated direct cost savings were $3,215 and $6,099 per patient at 2- and 5-years postoperatively, respectively, with the use of the ACD. CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic reherniation and reoperation rates were nearly double among control patients compared with ACD-treated patients, which translated to markedly greater per-patient healthcare costs in the control group, where the ACD was not used.

Comparison of treatments for lumbar disc herniation: Systematic review with network meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review with network meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To compare patient outcomes of lumbar discectomy with bone-anchored annular closure (LD + AC), lumbar discectomy (LD), and continuing conservative care (CC) for treatment of lumbar disc herniation refractory to initial conservative management. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Several treatment options are available to patients with refractory symptoms of lumbar disc herniation, but their comparative efficacy is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to compare efficacy of LD + AC, LD, and CC for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Outcomes included leg pain, back pain, disability (each reported on a 0-100 scale), reherniation, and reoperation. Data were analyzed using random effects network meta-analysis. RESULTS: This review included 14 comparative studies (8 randomized) involving 3947 patients-11 studies of LD versus CC (3232 patients), 3 studies of LD + AC versus LD (715 patients), and no studies of LD + AC versus CC. LD was more effective than CC in reducing leg pain (mean difference [MD] -10, P < .001) and back pain (MD -7, P < .001). LD + AC was more effective than LD in reducing risk of reherniation (odds ratio 0.38, P < .001) and reoperation (odds ratio 0.33, P < .001). There was indirect evidence that LD + AC was more effective than CC in reducing leg pain (MD -25, P = .003), back pain (MD -20, P = .02), and disability (MD -13, P = .02) although the treatment effect was smaller in randomized trials. CONCLUSIONS: Results of a network meta-analysis show LD is more effective than CC in alleviating symptoms of lumbar disc herniation refractory to initial conservative management. Further, LD + AC lowers risk of reherniation and reoperation versus LD and may improve patient symptoms more than CC.

Clinical performance of a bone-anchored annular closure device in older adults.

Background: Lumbar discectomy is a common surgical procedure in middle-aged adults. However, outcomes of lumbar discectomy among older adults are unclear. Methods: Lumbar discectomy patients with an annular defect ≥6 mm width were randomized to receive additional implantation with a bone-anchored annular closure device (ACD, n=272) or no additional implantation (controls, n=278). Over 3 years follow-up, main outcomes were symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and the percentage of patients who achieved the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) without a reoperation for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score, and SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) score. Results were compared between older (≥60 years) and younger (<60 years) patients. We additionally analyzed data from two postmarket ACD registries to determine consistency of outcomes between the randomized trial and postmarket, real-world results. Results: Among all patients, older patients suffered from crippling or bed-bound preoperative disability more frequently than younger patients (57.9% vs 39.1%, p=0.03). Among controls, female sex, higher preoperative ODI, and current smoking status, but not age, were associated with greater risk of reherniation and reoperation. Compared to controls, the ACD group had lower risk of symptomatic reherniation (HR=0.45, p<0.001) and reoperation (HR=0.54, p=0.008), with risk reductions comparable in older vs younger patients. The percentage of patients achieving the MCID without a reoperation was higher in the ACD group for leg pain (81% vs 72%, p=0.04), ODI (82% vs 73%, p=0.03), PCS (85% vs 75%, p=0.01), and MCS (59% vs 46%, p=0.007), and this benefit was comparable in older versus younger patients. Comparable benefits in older patients were observed in the postmarket ACD registries. Conclusion: Outcomes with lumbar discectomy and additional bone-anchored ACD are superior to lumbar discectomy alone. Older patients derived similar benefits with additional bone-anchored ACD implantation as younger patients.

Giant intracranial aneurysms: natural history and 1-year case fatality after endovascular or surgical treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical evidence on giant intracranial aneurysms (GIAs), intracranial aneurysms with a diameter of at least 25 mm, is limited. The authors aimed to investigate the natural history, case fatality, and treatment outcomes of ruptured and unruptured GIAs. METHODS: In this international observational registry study, patients with a ruptured or unruptured GIA received conservative management (CM), surgical management (SM), or endovascular management (EM). The authors investigated rupture rates and case fatality. RESULTS: The retrospective cohort comprised 219 patients with GIAs (21.9% ruptured GIAs and 78.1% unruptured GIAs) whose index hospitalization occurred between January 2006 and November 2016. The index hospitalization in the prospective cohort (362 patients with GIAs [17.1% ruptured and 82.9% unruptured]) occurred between December 2008 and February 2017. In the retrospective cohort, the risk ratio for death at a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (SD 2.2 years) after CM, compared with EM and SM, was 1.63 (95% CI 1.23-2.16) in ruptured GIAs and 3.96 (95% CI 2.57-6.11) in unruptured GIAs. In the prospective cohort, the 1-year case fatality in ruptured GIAs/unruptured GIAs was 100%/22.0% during CM, 36.0%/3.0% after SM, and 39.0%/12.0% after EM. Corresponding 1-year rupture rates in unruptured GIAs were 25.0% during CM, 1.2% after SM, and 2.5% after EM. In unruptured GIAs, the HR for death within the 1st year in patients with posterior circulation GIAs was 6.7 (95% CI 1.5-30.4, p < 0.01), with patients with a GIA at the supraclinoid internal carotid artery as reference. Different sizes of unruptured GIAs were not associated with 1-year case fatality. CONCLUSIONS: Rupture rates for unruptured GIAs were high, and the natural history and treatment outcomes for ruptured GIAs were poor. Patients undergoing SM or EM showed lower case fatality and rupture rates than those undergoing CM. This difference in outcome may in part be influenced by patients in the CM group having been found poor candidates for SM or EM.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02066493 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Effectiveness of an annular closure device in a "real-world" population: stratification of registry data using screening criteria from a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Increased focus has been put on the use of "'real-world" data to support randomized clinical trial (RCT) evidence for clinical decision-making. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of an annular closure device (ACD) after stratifying a consecutive series of "real-world" patients by the screening criteria of an ongoing RCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center registry analysis of 164 subjects who underwent limited discectomy combined with ACD for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation. Patients were stratified into two groups using the selection criteria of a pivotal RCT on the same device: Trial (met inclusion; n=44) or non-Trial (did not meet inclusion; n=120). Patient-reported outcomes, including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and adverse events were collected from baseline to last follow-up (mean: Trial - 15.6 months; non-Trial - 14.6 months). Statistical analyses were performed with significance set at p<0.05. RESULTS: Patient-reported outcomes were not significantly different between groups at last (p≥0.15) and clinical success (≥15-point improvement in ODI score; ≥20-point improvement in VAS scores) was achieved in both the groups. Three non-Trial (2.5%) and three Trial (6.8%) patients experienced symptomatic reherniation (p=0.34). Rates of reoperation, ACD mesh dislocation/separation, and other radiographic findings were similar between groups (p=1.00). CONCLUSION: Outcomes with the ACD appeared advantageous in both the groups, particularly in comparison with historical reherniation rates reported in the same high-risk, large annular defect population. Stratification of this "real-world" series on the basis of RCT screening criteria did not result in significant between-group differences. These findings suggest that the efficacy of the ACD extends beyond the strictly defined patient population being studied in the RCT of this device. Furthermore, reducing the reherniation rate following lumbar discectomy has positive clinical and economic implications.

Morphology and Clinical Relevance of Vertebral Endplate Changes Following Limited Lumbar Discectomy With or Without Bone-anchored Annular Closure.

STUDY DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the morphology and clinical relevance of vertebral endplate changes (VEPC) following limited lumbar discectomy with or without implantation of a bone-anchored annular closure device (ACD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Implantation of an ACD following limited lumbar discectomy has shown promise in reducing the risk of recurrent herniation in patients with large annular defects. However, the interaction between the ACD and the lumbar endplate over time is not well understood. METHODS: Patients undergoing limited lumbar discectomy with large postsurgical annular defects were randomized intraoperatively to receive additional ACD implantation or limited lumbar discectomy only (Controls). VEPC morphology, area, and volume were assessed with low-dose computed tomography preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years follow-up. RESULTS: Of 554 randomized patients, the as-treated population consisted of 550 patients (267 ACD, 283 Controls). VEPC were preoperatively identified in 18% of patients in the ACD group and in 15% of Controls. At 2 years, VEPC frequency increased to 85% with ACD and 33% in Controls. Device- or procedure-related serious adverse event (8% vs. 17%, P = 0.001) and secondary surgical intervention (5% vs. 13%, P < 0.001) favored the ACD group over Controls. In the ACD group, clinical outcomes were comparable in patients with and without VEPC at 2 years follow-up. In the Control group, patients with VEPC at 2 years had higher risk of symptomatic reherniation versus patients without VEPC (35% vs. 19%, P < 0.01) CONCLUSION.: In patients with large annular defects following limited lumbar discectomy, additional implantation with a bone-anchored ACD reduces risk of postoperative complications despite a greater frequency of VEPC. VEPC were associated with higher risk of symptomatic reherniation in patients treated with limited lumbar discectomy, but not in those who received additional ACD implantation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Giant intracranial aneurysms of the posterior circulation and their relation to the brainstem: analysis of risk factors for neurological deficits.

OBJECTIVE: Giant posterior circulation aneurysms (GPCirAs) usually cause substantial mass effect on the brainstem, which may lead to neurological deficits. So far, there has been no systematic investigation of factors associated with such deficits in GPCirA. The authors aim to examine the risk factors for cranial nerve deficit (CND), motor deficit, and disability in patients with GPCirA. METHODS: Using MR images obtained in 30 patients with unruptured GPCirA, the authors examined GPCirA volume, presence of hydrocephalus or partial thrombosis (PT) of the aneurysm, and the degree of brainstem displacement measured by the distance between the McRae line and the tip of the GPCirA (∆MT). They evaluated associations between these factors and neurological deficits. RESULTS: Thirty GPCirAs in 30 patients were included. The prevalence of CNDs was 50%. Patients with CNDs significantly differed from those without CNDs in terms of age (mean 51.0 years [SD 15.0 years] vs 69.0 years [SD 21.0 years], p = 0.01) and in ∆MT (median 50.7 mm [IQR 39.2-53.9 mm] vs 39.0 mm [IQR 32.3-45.9 mm], p = 0.02). The prevalence of motor deficits was 33.3%. Patients with motor deficits showed a larger ∆MT (median 50.5 mm [IQR 40.8-54.6 mm]) compared with those without (∆MT: median 39.1 mm [IQR 32.8-50.5 mm], p = 0.04). GPCirA volume was larger in patients with poor modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores (median 14.9 cm3 [IQR 8.6-18.7 cm3]) than in those with mRS scores of 0-2 (median 6.8 cm3 [IQR 4.4-11.7 cm3], p = 0.03). After adjusting for patient age and the occurrence of hydrocephalus or PT, the authors found that higher degrees of disability were significantly associated with aneurysm volume (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.0-1.3; p = 0.04), but not with ∆MT. The occurrence of CND or motor deficit was not associated with any of the examined variables. There was no correlation between GPCirA volume and ∆MT (rs = 0.01, p = 0.96). The prevalence of neurological deficits did not differ between GPCirA at the basilar apex, the basilar trunk, the vertebrobasilar junction, or the vertebral artery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the neurological condition of the patients was associated only with GPCirA volume and not with the degree of brainstem displacement, the occurrence of PT or hydrocephalus, or the exact location of the GPCirA. These findings highlight the clinical relevance of GPCirA volume and suggest that factors such as brainstem displacement or PT should play less of a role when finding arguments for or against treatment of GPCirA.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02066493 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Annular closure in lumbar microdiscectomy for prevention of reherniation: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Patients with large annular defects after lumbar discectomy for disc herniation are at high risk of symptomatic recurrence and reoperation. PURPOSE: The present study aimed to determine whether a bone-anchored annular closure device, in addition to lumbar microdiscectomy, resulted in lower reherniation and reoperation rates plus increased overall success compared with lumbar microdiscectomy alone. DESIGN: This is a multicenter, randomized superiority study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with symptoms of lumbar disc herniation for at least 6 weeks with a large annular defect (6-10 mm width) after lumbar microdiscectomy were included in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: The co-primary end points determined a priori were recurrent herniation and a composite end point consisting of patient-reported, radiographic, and clinical outcomes. Study success required superiority of annular closure on both end points at 2-year follow-up. METHODS: Patients received lumbar microdiscectomy with additional bone-anchored annular closure device (n=276 participants) or lumbar microdiscectomy only (control; n=278 participants). This research was supported by Intrinsic Therapeutics. Two authors received study-specific support morethan $10,000 per year, 8 authors received study-specific support less than $10,000 per year, and 11 authors received no study-specific support. RESULTS: Among 554 randomized participants, 550 (annular closure device: n=272; control: n=278) were included in the modified intent-to-treat efficacy analysis and 550 (annular closure device: n=267; control: n=283) were included in the as-treated safety analysis. Both co-primary end points of the study were met, with recurrent herniation (50% vs. 70%, P<.001) and composite end point success (27% vs. 18%, P=.02) favoring annular closure device. The frequency of symptomatic reherniation was lower with annular closure device (12% vs. 25%, P<.001). There were 29 reoperations in 24 patients in the annular closure device group and 61 reoperations in 45 control patients. The frequency of reoperations to address recurrent herniation was 5% with annular closure device and 13% in controls (P=.001). End plate changes were more prevalent in the annular closure device group (84% vs. 30%, P<.001). Scores for back pain, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life at regular visits were comparable between groups over 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients at high risk of herniation recurrence after lumbar microdiscectomy, annular closure with a bone-anchored implant lowers the risk of symptomatic recurrence and reoperation. Additional study to determine outcomes beyond 2 years with a bone-anchored annular closure device is warranted.

Performance of an Annular Closure Device in a 'Real-World', Heterogeneous, At-Risk, Lumbar Discectomy Population.

Study design/setting Retrospective analysis of single-center registry outcomes data. Objective Assess the utility of an annular closure device (ACD) as an adjunct to limited discectomy for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Background Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (rLDH) following limited discectomy persists at clinically significant rates, especially in large annular defect (at least 6 mm width) patients. While the etiology of reherniation is often multifactorial, inadequate annular occlusion remains one of the foremost considerations. Accordingly, annular closure has emerged as a promising technique and is the focus of this analysis. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of 171 patients who underwent limited lumbar discectomy with an ACD for LDH. Standardized patient assessment was performed preoperatively, three months postoperatively, and 12 months postoperatively, in addition to self-presented visits. No minimum last follow-up was required for inclusion. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS Leg/Back) pain scores were collected at all visits. Plain radiographs were obtained at all visits, with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans performed annually and/or when patients presented as symptomatic. ACD-related complications due to partial or complete mesh detachment from the titanium anchor were reported. All secondary surgical interventions were also reported. The Wilcoxon Rank-sum test was used to compare outcomes and events between sub-groups (p < 0.05). Results Mean last follow-up for all patients was 15 months. Large annular defects were present in 154 patients (90%). Symptomatic reherniations were observed in six patients (3.5%; five were present in the large annular defect subpopulation). All patients demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in clinical outcome scores at both follow-up intervals. ACD mesh detachment was observed in 15 patients (8.8%; two underwent a subsequent surgical intervention). No symptomatic reherniations were observed in secondary herniation patients compared to six (4.1%) in the primary herniation group (p = 0.60). Conclusions Annular closure with the ACD results in clinically meaningful improvements in both primary and secondary LDH patients, with decreased rates of reherniation in high-risk patients compared to previous discectomy reports.

Intraspinal Lumbar Juxtaarticular Cyst Treatment Through CT-Guided Percutaneus Induced Rupture Results in a Favorable Patient Outcome.

Juxta-articular cysts are synovial cysts originating from the facet joints or the flava ligaments. If they grow intra-spinally they can compress nervous structures and cause a variety of symptoms. Micro-neurosurgery is usually the treatment of choice. Alternatively to surgical treatment the cyst can be approached and treated with a CT guided percutaneous injection inducing rupture. After fulfilling strict selection criteria twenty patients (25% of all treated lumbar synovial cyst patients), were treated minimally invasive by this method from 2010-2016. The facet joint was punctured under CT guidance and a mixture of a local anesthetic and contrast liquid was injected until the cyst was blasted. The mean follow-up period was 1.1 years (range 2 weeks - 5 years). Fifteen of twenty procedures were successful and cyst rupture was confirmed by CT-scans. Twelve of these fifteen patients experienced a significant improvement of their symptoms and needed no further intervention or surgical procedure up until now, three patients showed no clinical improvement and were treated surgically within one week after cyst rupture. In five patients it was technically not possible to rupture the cyst. These patients were treated microsurgically by cyst resection and dynamic stabilization or fusion procedures. The percutaneus rupture of juxtaarticular cysts has fewer risks and is cost effective compared to microsurgical resection. It may be an alternative to surgical treatment for a selected group of patients. However there are some limitations to the procedure though, such as difficult patient selection, unpredictable outcome or technical problems due to highly degenerated facet joints.

Cost Comparison of Surgical and Endovascular Treatment of Unruptured Giant Intracranial Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Giant intracranial aneurysms (GIAs), which are defined as intracranial aneurysms (IAs) with a diameter of ≥25 mm, are most likely associated with the highest treatment costs of all IAs. However, the treatment costs of unruptured GIAs have so far not been reported. OBJECTIVE: To examine direct costs of endovascular and surgical treatment of unruptured GIAs. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 55 patients with unruptured GIAs treated surgically (37 patients) or endovascularly (18 patients) between April 2004 and March 2014. We analyzed the costs of all hospital stays, interventions, and imaging with a median follow-up of 46 months. RESULTS: There was no difference in the costs of hospital stay between surgical and endovascular treatment groups ($10,565 vs. $14,992; P = .37). Imaging costs were significantly higher in the surgical group than in the endovascular treatment group ($2890 vs. $1612; P < .01), as were the costs of the intervention room and personnel involved in the intervention ($5566 vs. $1520; P < .01). Implants used per patient were more expensive in the endovascular group than in the surgical treatment group ($20,885 vs. $167). The total direct treatment costs were higher in the endovascular group ($52,325) than in the surgical treatment group ($20,619; P < .01). Treatment costs were associated with the type of treatment and GIA location but not with patient age, sex, or GIA size. CONCLUSION: Endovascular GIA treatment produced higher direct costs than surgical GIA treatment mainly due to higher implant costs. Reducing endovascular implant costs may be the most effective tool to decrease direct costs of GIA treatment.