The NeuroPoint alliance SRS & tumor QOD registries.

OBJECTIVE: Along with the increasing interest in real-world evidence in neuro-oncology, the deficiencies of prior population-based and quality registries became evident. The neuro-oncological quality registries of the NeuroPoint Alliance (NPA) focus on neuro-oncological surgery and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and aim to fill the gaps of neuro-oncological practice in quality surveillance and real-world research. METHODS: Herein, we discuss the historical background, design process, and features of the NPA SRS and Tumor QOD registries. The registries'current status and future directions are outlined. RESULTS: The NPA SRS and Tumor QOD registries were designed based on the principles of prospective multi-institutional data collection, central auditing for data quality, and focus on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Currently, the registries include over 4,500 and 2,500 patients each, with caseloads comprising predominantly of brain metastases and primary extra-axial tumors, respectively. The registries serve both as a quality surveillance and improvement tool - providing participating sites with adjusted quality reports - and as platforms for real-world research of observational and, potentially, interventional nature. Future directions of the NPA neuro-oncological registries include the functional communications of the two registries and the incorporation of imaging analyses in the workflow of quality assessment and research efforts. CONCLUSIONS: The NPA SRS and Tumor QOD registries are quality registries of unique granularity in terms of surgical variables and postoperative outcomes. They constitute increasingly valuable data sources for real-time quality surveillance of participating sites and real-world research.

Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis: 5-year follow-up from the prospective multicenter Quality Outcomes Database registry.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) has been used to treat degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and is associated with expedited recovery, reduced operative blood loss, and shorter hospitalizations compared to those with traditional open TLIF. However, the impact of MI-TLIF on long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is less clear. Here, the authors compare the outcomes of MI-TLIF to those of traditional open TLIF for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at 60 months postoperatively. METHODS: The authors utilized the prospective Quality Outcomes Database registry and queried for patients with grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis who had undergone single-segment surgery via an MI or open TLIF method. PROs were compared 60 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The secondary outcomes included the numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (NRS-BP), NRS for leg pain (NRS-LP), EQ-5D, North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction, and cumulative reoperation rate. Multivariable models were constructed to assess the impact of MI-TLIF on PROs, adjusting for variables reaching p < 0.20 on univariable analyses and respective baseline PRO values. RESULTS: The study included 297 patients, 72 (24.2%) of whom had undergone MI-TLIF and 225 (75.8%) of whom had undergone open TLIF. The 60-month follow-up rates were similar for the two cohorts (86.1% vs 75.6%, respectively; p = 0.06). Patients did not differ significantly at baseline for ODI, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, or EQ-5D (p > 0.05 for all). Perioperatively, MI-TLIF was associated with less blood loss (108.8 ± 85.6 vs 299.6 ± 242.2 ml, p < 0.001) and longer operations (228.2 ± 111.5 vs 189.6 ± 66.5 minutes, p < 0.001) but had similar lengths of hospitalizations (MI-TLIF 2.9 ± 1.8 vs open TLIF 3.3 ± 1.6 days, p = 0.08). Discharge disposition to home or home health was similar (MI-TLIF 93.1% vs open TLIF 91.1%, p = 0.60). Both cohorts improved significantly from baseline for the 60-month ODI, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, and EQ-5D (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). In adjusted analyses, MI-TLIF, compared to open TLIF, was associated with similar 60-month ODI, ODI change, odds of reaching ODI minimum clinically important difference, NRS-BP, NRS-BP change, NRS-LP, NRS-LP change, EQ-5D, EQ-5D change, and NASS satisfaction (adjusted p > 0.05 for all). The 60-month reoperation rates did not differ significantly (MI-TLIF 5.6% vs open TLIF 11.6%, p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: For symptomatic, single-level grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, MI-TLIF was associated with decreased blood loss perioperatively, but there was no difference in 60-month outcomes for disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, or satisfaction between MI and open TLIF. There was no difference in cumulative reoperation rates between the two procedures. These results suggest that in appropriately selected patients, either procedure may be employed depending on patient and surgeon preferences.

Developing nonlinear k-nearest neighbors classification algorithms to identify patients at high risk of increased length of hospital stay following spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Spondylolisthesis is a common operative disease in the United States, but robust predictive models for patient outcomes remain limited. The development of models that accurately predict postoperative outcomes would be useful to help identify patients at risk of complicated postoperative courses and determine appropriate healthcare and resource utilization for patients. As such, the purpose of this study was to develop k-nearest neighbors (KNN) classification algorithms to identify patients at increased risk for extended hospital length of stay (LOS) following neurosurgical intervention for spondylolisthesis. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) spondylolisthesis data set was queried for patients receiving either decompression alone or decompression plus fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Preoperative and perioperative variables were queried, and Mann-Whitney U-tests were performed to identify which variables would be included in the machine learning models. Two KNN models were implemented (k = 25) with a standard training set of 60%, validation set of 20%, and testing set of 20%, one with arthrodesis status (model 1) and the other without (model 2). Feature scaling was implemented during the preprocessing stage to standardize the independent features. RESULTS: Of 608 enrolled patients, 544 met prespecified inclusion criteria. The mean age of all patients was 61.9 ± 12.1 years (± SD), and 309 (56.8%) patients were female. The model 1 KNN had an overall accuracy of 98.1%, sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 84.6%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 97.9%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100%. Additionally, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted for model 1, showing an overall area under the curve (AUC) of 0.998. Model 2 had an overall accuracy of 99.1%, sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 92.3%, PPV of 99.0%, and NPV of 100%, with the same ROC AUC of 0.998. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these findings demonstrate that nonlinear KNN machine learning models have incredibly high predictive value for LOS. Important predictor variables include diabetes, osteoporosis, socioeconomic quartile, duration of surgery, estimated blood loss during surgery, patient educational status, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, BMI, insurance status, smoking status, sex, and age. These models may be considered for external validation by spine surgeons to aid in patient selection and management, resource utilization, and preoperative surgical planning.

Three-level ACDF versus 3-level laminectomy and fusion: are there differences in outcomes? An analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database cervical spondylotic myelopathy cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to compare 3-level anterior with posterior fusion surgical procedures for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). METHODS: The authors analyzed prospective data from the 14 highest enrolling sites of the Quality Outcomes Database CSM module. They compared 3-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical laminectomy and fusion (PCF) surgical procedures, excluding surgical procedures crossing the cervicothoracic junction. Rates of reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared at 24 months postoperatively. Multivariable analyses adjusted for potential confounders elucidated in univariable analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 199 patients met the inclusion criteria: 123 ACDF (61.8%) and 76 PCF (38.2%) patients. The 24-month follow-up rates were similar (ACDF 90.2% vs PCF 92.1%, p = 0.67). Preoperatively, ACDF patients were younger (60.8 ± 10.2 vs 65.0 ± 10.3 years, p < 0.01), and greater proportions were privately insured (56.1% vs 36.8%, p = 0.02), actively employed (39.8% vs 22.8%, p = 0.04), and independently ambulatory (14.6% vs 31.6%, p < 0.01). Otherwise, the cohorts had equivalent baseline modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), numeric rating scale (NRS)-arm pain, NRS-neck pain, and EQ-5D scores (p > 0.05). ACDF patients had reduced hospitalization length (1.6 vs 3.9 days, p < 0.01) and a greater proportion had nonroutine discharge (7.3% vs 22.8%, p < 0.01), but they had a higher rate of postoperative dysphagia (13.5% vs 3.5%, p = 0.049). Compared with baseline values, both groups demonstrated improvements in all outcomes at 24 months (p < 0.05). In multivariable analyses, after controlling for age, insurance payor, employment status, ambulation status, and other potential clinically relevant confounders, ACDF was associated with a greater proportion of patients with maximum satisfaction on the North American Spine Society Patient Satisfaction Index (NASS) (NASS score of 1) at 24 months (69.4% vs 53.7%, OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.17-5.09, adjusted p = 0.02). Otherwise, the cohorts shared similar 24-month outcomes in terms of reaching the MCID for mJOA, NDI, NRS-arm pain, NRS-neck pain, and EQ-5D score (adjusted p > 0.05). There were no differences in the 3-month readmission (ACDF 4.1% vs PCF 3.9%, p = 0.97) and 24-month reoperation (ACDF 13.5% vs PCF 18.6%, p = 0.36) rates. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort limited to 3-level fusion surgical procedures, ACDF was associated with reduced blood loss, shorter hospitalization length, and higher routine home discharge rates; however, PCF resulted in lower rates of postoperative dysphagia. The procedures yielded comparably significant improvements in functional status (mJOA score), neck and arm pain, neck pain-related disability, and quality of life at 3, 12, and 24 months. ACDF patients had significantly higher odds of maximum satisfaction (NASS score 1). Given comparable outcomes, patients should be counseled on each approach's complication profile to aid in surgical decision-making.

Positive impact of the pandemic: the effect of post-COVID-19 virtual visit implementation on departmental efficiency and patient satisfaction in a quaternary care center.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly changed clinical practice across US healthcare. Increased adoption of telemedicine has emerged as an alternative to in-person contact for patient-physician interactions. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of telemedicine on workflow and care delivery from January 2019 to December 2021 in a neurosurgical department at a quaternary care center. METHODS: Prospectively captured data on clinic appointment utilization, duration, and outcomes were queried. Visits were divided into in-person visits and telemedicine appointments, categorized as follow-up visits of previously surgically treated patients, internal consultations, new patient visits, and early postoperative returns after surgery. Appointment volume was compared pre- and postpandemic using March 2020 as the pandemic onset. Clinical efficiency was measured by time to appointment, rate of on-time appointments, proportion of appointments resulting in surgical intervention (surgical yield), and patient-reported satisfaction, the latter measured as the proportion of patients indicating "high likelihood to recommend practice." RESULTS: A total of 54,562 visits occurred, most commonly for follow-up for previously operated patients (51.8%), internal new patient referrals (24.5%), and external new patient referrals (19.8%). Total visit volume was stable pre- to postpandemic (1521.3 vs 1512, p = 0.917). However, in-person visits significantly decreased (1517/month vs 1220/month, p < 0.001), with a nadir in April 2020, while telemedicine appointment utilization increased significantly (0.3% vs 19.1% of all visits). Telemedicine utilization remained stable throughout the 1st calendar year following the pandemic. Telemedicine appointments were associated with shorter time to appointment than in-person visits both before and after the pandemic onset (0-5 days from appointment request: 60% vs 33% vs 29.8%, p < 0.001). Patients had on-time appointments in 87% of telemedicine encounters. Notably, telemedicine appointments resulted in surgery in 31.8% of internal consultations or new patient visits, a significantly lower rate than that for in-person visits (51.8%). After the widespread integration of telemedicine, patient satisfaction for all visits was higher than before the pandemic onset (85.9% vs 88.5%, p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine use significantly increased following the pandemic onset, compensating for observed decreases in face-to-face visits. Utilization rates have remained stable, suggesting effective integration, and delays between referrals and appointments were lower than for in-person visits. Importantly, telemedicine integration was not associated with a decrease in overall patient satisfaction, although telemedicine appointments had a lower surgical yield. These data suggest that telemedicine smoothened the impact of the pandemic on clinical workflow and helped to maintain continuity and quality of outpatient care.

The role of bevacizumab for treatment-refractory intracranial meningiomas: a single institution's experience and a systematic review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Meningiomas account for over 30% of all primary brain tumors. While surgery can be curative for these tumors, several factors may lead to a higher likelihood of recurrence. For recurrent meningiomas, bevacizumab may be considered as a therapeutic agent, but literature regarding its efficacy is sparse. Thus, we present a systematic review of the literature and case series of patients from our institution with treatment-refractory meningiomas who received bevacizumab. METHODS: Patients at our institution who were diagnosed with recurrent meningioma between January 2000 and September 2020 and received bevacizumab monotherapy were included in this study. Bevacizumab duration and dosages were noted, as well as progression-free survival (PFS) after the first bevacizumab injection. A systematic review of the literature was also performed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients at our institution with a median age of 55 years at initial diagnosis qualified for this study. When bevacizumab was administered, 2 patients had WHO grade I meningiomas, 10 patients had WHO grade II meningiomas, and 11 patients had WHO grade III meningiomas. Median PFS after the first bevacizumab injection was 7 months. Progression-free survival rate at 6 months was 57%. Two patients stopped bevacizumab due to hypertension and aphasia. Systematic review of the literature showed limited ability for bevacizumab to control tumor growth. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab is administered to patients with treatment-refractory meningiomas and, though its effectiveness is limited, outperforms other systemic therapies reported in the literature. Further studies are required to identify a successful patient profile for utilization of bevacizumab.

Bone morphogenetic protein in subaxial cervical arthrodesis: a meta-analysis of 5828 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Use of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)-an osteoinductive agent commonly used in lumbar arthrodesis-is off-label for cervical arthrodesis. This study aimed to identify the effect of BMP use on clinical and radiological outcomes in instrumented cervical arthrodesis. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies directly comparing outcomes between cervical arthrodeses with and without using BMP. Outcomes were analyzed separately for cases of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical fusion (PCF). RESULTS: A total of 20 studies with 5828 patients (1948 with BMP and 3880 without BMP) were included. In the ACDF cases, BMP use was associated with higher fusion rates (98.9% vs 93.6%, risk difference [RD] 8%; risk ratio [RR] 1.12, p = 0.02), lower reoperation rates (2.2% vs 3.1%, RD 3%; RR 0.48, p = 0.04), and higher risk of dysphagia (24.7% vs 8.1%, RD 11%; RR 1.93, p = 0.02). No significant differences in the Neck Disability Index, neck pain, or arm pain scores were associated with the use of BMP. On subgroup meta-analysis of ACDF cases, older age (≥ 50 years) and higher BMP dose (≥ 0.9 mg/level) were associated with significantly higher fusion rates and relatively lower risk for dysphagia, whereas arthrodesis of fewer segments (< 2 levels) showed significantly higher dysphagia rates without a significant increase in fusion rates. In the PCF cases, the use of BMP was not associated with significant differences in fusion (p = 0.38) or reoperation (p = 0.61) rates but was associated with significantly higher blood loss during surgery (mean difference 146.7 ml, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Use of BMP in ACDF offers higher rates of augmented fusion and lower rates of all-cause reoperation but with an increased risk of dysphagia. The benefit of fusion outweighs the risk of dysphagia with a higher BMP dose in older patients being operated on for < 2 levels. The use of BMP in PCF seems to have a less important effect on clinical and radiological outcomes.

Optimal Implant Sizing Using Machine Learning Is Associated With Increased Range of Motion After Cervical Disk Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) offers the advantage of motion preservation in the treatment of focal cervical pathology. At present, implant sizing is performed using subjective tactile feedback and imaging of trial cages. This study aims to construct interpretable machine learning (IML) models to accurately predict postoperative range of motion (ROM) and identify the optimal implant sizes that maximize ROM in patients undergoing CDA. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent CDA for single-level disease from 2012 to 2020 were identified. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were collected, including symptoms, examination findings, subsidence, and reoperation. Affected disk height, healthy rostral disk height, and implant height were collected at sequential time points. Linear regression and IML models, including bagged regression tree, bagged multivariate adaptive regression spline, and k-nearest neighbors, were used to predict ROM change. Model performance was assessed by calculating the root mean square error (RMSE) between predicted and actual changes in ROM in the validation cohort. Variable importance was assessed using RMSE loss. Area under the curve analyses were performed to identify the ideal implant size cutoffs in predicting improved ROM. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included. The average RMSE between predicted and actual ROM was 7.6° (range: 5.8-10.1) in the k-nearest neighbors model, 7.8° (range: 6.5-10.0) in the bagged regression tree model, 7.8° (range: 6.2-10.0) in the bagged multivariate adaptive regression spline model, and 15.8° (range: 14.3-17.5°) in a linear regression model. In the highest-performing IML model, graft size was the most important predictor with RMSE loss of 6.2, followed by age (RMSE loss = 5.9) and preoperative caudal disk height (RMSE loss = 5.8). Implant size at 110% of the normal adjacent disk height was the optimal cutoff associated with improved ROM. CONCLUSION: IML models can reliably predict change in ROM after CDA within an average of 7.6 degrees of error. Implants sized comparably with the healthy adjacent disk may maximize ROM.

Interbody cages versus structural bone grafts in lumbar arthrodesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The role of interbodies in lumbar arthrodesis has been insufficiently supported by evidence, impacting clinical decision-making and occasionally insurance coverage. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes between lumbar arthrodesis with a synthetic interbody spacer (cage) versus structural bone graft alone (autograft or allograft) in patients with degenerative spine disease. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies directly comparing outcomes of lumbar interbody arthrodesis with and without interbody cage use. The outcomes of individual studies were synthesized in meta-analyses using random-effects models. RESULTS: Twenty studies with 1508 patients (769 with an interbody cage and 739 without an interbody cage) were included. Interbody cage placement was associated with a significantly greater increase in disc height after surgery (4.0 mm vs 3.4 mm, p < 0.01). There was a significantly greater reduction of back pain (visual analog scale [VAS] score) in cases in which an interbody cage was used (5.4 vs 4.7, p = 0.03). Fusion rates were 5.5% higher in the cage group (96.3% vs 90.8%) and reached statistical significance (p = 0.03). No statistically significant differences were identified between the two groups regarding all-cause reoperation rates, complication rates, or improvement in Oswestry Disability Index score or leg pain (VAS score). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that implantation of an interbody cage is associated with higher rates of fusion, more effective maintenance of disc height, and greater improvement of back pain. This study underlines the clinical value of interbody cages in lumbar arthrodesis for patients with degenerative spine disease.

Traumatic vertebral artery injury: Denver grade, bilaterality, and stroke risk. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Vertebral artery injury (VAI), a complication of blunt trauma, may cause posterior circulation stroke. An association of disease severity, classified in Denver grades, with stroke risk has not been shown. Using a literature-based analysis, the authors estimated the incidence of VAI following blunt trauma with the aim to investigate the impact of Denver grade and bilateral VAI on stroke occurrence. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on VAI following blunt trauma was conducted, and data on its incidence, the severity per Denver grade, and stroke occurrence were collected. The incidence of VAI and stroke occurrence were analyzed cumulatively and between Denver grades. A meta-analysis with random-effects models was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-six studies including 2563 patients were identified. The overall incidence of VAI was 0.49% among blunt trauma cases and 14.5% among patients screened via any type of angiography. The incidence rates of bilateral VAI and concurrent carotid injury among all VAIs were 12.3% and 19.2%, respectively. VAI severity by Denver grade was as follows: grade I, 23.4%; grade II, 28.2%; grade III, 5.8%; grade IV, 42.1%; and grade V, 0.5%. The overall stroke risk was 5.32%, differing significantly among lesions of different Denver grades (p = 0.02). Grade III and IV lesions had the highest stroke prevalence (9.8% and 10.9% respectively), while strokes occurred significantly less frequently in patients with grade I and II lesions (1.9% and 3.0%, respectively). Denver grade V cases were too rare for meaningful analysis. Bilateral VAI was associated with a 33.2% stroke prevalence. The association between Denver grade and stroke occurrence persisted in a sensitivity subanalysis including only unilateral cases (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: VAI complicates a small yet nontrivial fraction of blunt trauma cases, with Denver grade IV lesions being the most common. This is the first study to document a significantly higher stroke prevalence among grade III and IV VAIs compared with grade I and II VAIs independently from bilaterality. Bilateral VAIs carry a significantly higher stroke rate.

MRI Vertebral Bone Quality Correlates With Interbody Cage Subsidence After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of consecutive patients. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate VBQ as a predictor of interbody subsidence and to determine threshold values that portend increased risk of subsidence. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Many risk factors have been reported for the subsidence of interbody cages in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). MRI Vertebral Bone Quality (VQB) is a relatively new radiographic parameter that can be easily obtained from preoperative MRI and has been shown to correlate with measurements of bone density such as DXA and CT Hounsfield Units. METHODS: All patients who underwent 1- to 3-level ACDF using titanium interbodies with anterior plating between the years 2018 and 2020 at our tertiary referral center were included. Subsidence measurements were performed by 2 independent reviewers on CT scans obtained 6 months postoperatively. VBQ was measured on pre-operative sagittal T1 MRI by 2 independent reviewers, and values were averaged. RESULTS: Eight-five fusion levels in 44 patients were included in the study. There were 32 levels (38%) with moderate subsidence and 12 levels with severe subsidence (14%). The average VBQ score in those patients with severe subsidence was significantly higher than those without subsidence (3.80 vs. 2.40, P<0.01). A threshold value of 3.2 was determined to be optimal for predicting subsidence (AUC=0.99) and had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 94.1% in predicting subsidence. CONCLUSIONS: VBQ strongly correlates with the subsidence of interbody grafts after ACDF. A threshold VBQ score value of 3.2 has excellent sensitivity and specificity for predicting subsidence. Spine surgeons can use VBQ as a readily available screening tool to identify patients at higher risk for subsidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-IV.

Intrathecal delivery of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells in traumatic spinal cord injury: Phase I trial.

Intrathecal delivery of autologous culture-expanded adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSC) could be utilized to treat traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). This Phase I trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03308565) included 10 patients with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade A or B at the time of injury. The study's primary outcome was the safety profile, as captured by the nature and frequency of adverse events. Secondary outcomes included changes in sensory and motor scores, imaging, cerebrospinal fluid markers, and somatosensory evoked potentials. The manufacturing and delivery of the regimen were successful for all patients. The most commonly reported adverse events were headache and musculoskeletal pain, observed in 8 patients. No serious AEs were observed. At final follow-up, seven patients demonstrated improvement in AIS grade from the time of injection. In conclusion, the study met the primary endpoint, demonstrating that AD-MSC harvesting and administration were well-tolerated in patients with traumatic SCI.

What factors influence surgical decision-making in anterior versus posterior surgery for cervical myelopathy? A QOD analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the preoperative patient characteristics that affect surgical decision-making when selecting an anterior or posterior operative approach in patients diagnosed with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). METHODS: This was a multi-institutional, retrospective study of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy module. Patients aged 18 years or older diagnosed with primary CSM who underwent multilevel (≥ 2-level) elective surgery were included. Demographics and baseline clinical characteristics were collected. RESULTS: Of the 841 patients with CSM in the database, 492 (58.5%) underwent multilevel anterior surgery and 349 (41.5%) underwent multilevel posterior surgery. Surgeons more often performed a posterior surgical approach in older patients (mean 64.8 ± 10.6 vs 58.5 ± 11.1 years, p < 0.001) and those with a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (class III or IV: 52.4% vs 46.3%, p = 0.003), a higher rate of motor deficit (67.0% vs 58.7%, p = 0.014), worse myelopathy (mean modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score 11.4 ± 3.1 vs 12.4 ± 2.6, p < 0.001), and more levels treated (4.3 ± 1.3 vs 2.4 ± 0.6, p < 0.001). On the other hand, surgeons more frequently performed an anterior surgical approach when patients were employed (47.2% vs 23.2%, p < 0.001) and had intervertebral disc herniation as an underlying pathology (30.7% vs 9.2%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The selection of approach for patients with CSM depends on patient demographics and symptomology. Posterior surgery was performed in patients who were older and had worse systemic disease, increased myelopathy, and greater levels of stenosis. Anterior surgery was more often performed in patients who were employed and had intervertebral disc herniation.

Does diabetes affect outcome or reoperation rate after lumbar decompression or arthrodesis? A matched analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database data set.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a known risk factor for postsurgical and systemic complications after lumbar spinal surgery. Smaller studies have also demonstrated diminished improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), with increased reoperation and readmission rates after lumbar surgery in patients with DM. The authors aimed to examine longer-term PROs in patients with DM undergoing lumbar decompression and/or arthrodesis for degenerative pathology. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database was queried for patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression and/or arthrodesis for degenerative pathology. Patients were grouped into DM and non-DM groups and optimally matched in a 1:1 ratio on 31 baseline variables, including the number of operated levels. Outcomes of interest were readmissions and reoperations at 30 and 90 days after surgery in addition to improvements in Oswestry Disability Index, back pain, and leg pain scores and quality-adjusted life-years at 90 days after surgery. RESULTS: The matched decompression cohort comprised 7836 patients (3236 [41.3] females) with a mean age of 63.5 ± 12.6 years, and the matched arthrodesis cohort comprised 7336 patients (3907 [53.3%] females) with a mean age of 64.8 ± 10.3 years. In patients undergoing lumbar decompression, no significant differences in nonroutine discharge, length of stay (LOS), readmissions, reoperations, and PROs were observed. In patients undergoing lumbar arthrodesis, nonroutine discharge (15.7% vs 13.4%, p < 0.01), LOS (3.2 ± 2.0 vs 3.0 ± 3.5 days, p < 0.01), 30-day (6.5% vs 4.4%, p < 0.01) and 90-day (9.1% vs 7.0%, p < 0.01) readmission rates, and the 90-day reoperation rate (4.3% vs 3.2%, p = 0.01) were all significantly higher in the DM group. For DM patients undergoing lumbar arthrodesis, subgroup analyses demonstrated a significantly higher risk of poor surgical outcomes with the open approach. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with and without DM undergoing lumbar spinal decompression alone have comparable readmission and reoperation rates, while those undergoing arthrodesis procedures have a higher risk of poor surgical outcomes up to 90 days after surgery. Surgeons should target optimal DM control preoperatively, particularly for patients undergoing elective lumbar arthrodesis.

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy and driving abilities: defining the prevalence and long-term postoperative outcomes using the Quality Outcomes Database.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) can cause significant difficulty with driving and a subsequent reduction in an individual's quality of life due to neurological deterioration. The positive impact of surgery on postoperative patient-reported driving capabilities has been seldom explored. METHODS: The CSM module of the Quality Outcomes Database was utilized. Patient-reported driving ability was assessed via the driving section of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) questionnaire. This is an ordinal scale in which 0 represents the absence of symptoms while driving and 5 represents a complete inability to drive due to symptoms. Patients were considered to have an impairment in their driving ability if they reported an NDI driving score of 3 or higher (signifying impairment in driving duration due to symptoms). Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to evaluate mediators of baseline impairment and improvement at 24 months after surgery, which was defined as an NDI driving score < 3. RESULTS: A total of 1128 patients who underwent surgical intervention for CSM were included, of whom 354 (31.4%) had baseline driving impairment due to CSM. Moderate (OR 2.3) and severe (OR 6.3) neck pain, severe arm pain (OR 1.6), mild-moderate (OR 2.1) and severe (OR 2.5) impairment in hand/arm dexterity, severe impairment in leg use/walking (OR 1.9), and severe impairment of urinary function (OR 1.8) were associated with impaired driving ability at baseline. Of the 291 patients with baseline impairment and available 24-month follow-up data, 209 (71.8%) reported postoperative improvement in their driving ability. This improvement seemed to be mediated particularly through the achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in neck pain and improvement in leg function/walking. Patients with improved driving at 24 months noted higher postoperative satisfaction (88.5% vs 62.2%, p < 0.01) and were more likely to achieve a clinically significant improvement in their quality of life (50.7% vs 37.8%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of patients with CSM report impaired driving ability at presentation. Seventy-two percent of these patients reported improvements in their driving ability within 24 months of surgery. Surgical management of CSM can significantly improve patients' driving abilities at 24 months and hence patients' quality of life.

Impact of Educational Background on Preoperative Disease Severity and Postoperative Outcomes Among Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. OBJECTIVE: Assess differences in preoperative status and postoperative outcomes among patients of different educational backgrounds undergoing surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient education level (EL) has been suggested to correlate with health literacy, disease perception, socioeconomic status (SES), and access to health care. METHODS: The CSM data set of the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing surgical management of CSM. EL was grouped as high school or below, graduate-level, and postgraduate level. The association of EL with baseline disease severity (per patient-reported outcome measures), symptoms >3 or ≤3 months, and 24-month patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 1141 patients with CSM, 509 (44.6%) had an EL of high school or below, 471 (41.3%) had a graduate degree, and 161 (14.1%) had obtained postgraduate education. Lower EL was statistically significantly associated with symptom duration of >3 months (odds ratio=1.68), higher arm pain numeric rating scale (NRS) (coefficient=0.5), and higher neck pain NRS (coefficient=0.79). Patients with postgraduate education had statistically significantly lower Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (coefficient=-7.17), lower arm pain scores (coefficient=-1), and higher quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) scores (coefficient=0.06). Twenty-four months after surgery, patients of lower EL had higher NDI scores, higher pain NRS scores, and lower QALY scores ( P <0.05 in all analyses). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing surgical management for CSM, those reporting a lower educational level tended to present with longer symptom duration, more disease-inflicted disability and pain, and lower QALY scores. As such, patients of a lower EL are a potentially vulnerable subpopulation, and their health literacy and access to care should be prioritized.

Trends in Reimbursement and Approach Selection for Lumbar Arthrodesis.

BACKGROUND: Changes in reimbursement policies have been demonstrated to correlate with clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To investigate trends in physician reimbursement for anterior, posterior, and combined anterior/posterior (AP) lumbar arthrodesis and relative utilization of AP. METHODS: We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project registry for anterior, posterior, and AP lumbar arthrodeses during 2010 and 2020. Work relative value units per operative hour (wRVUs/h) were calculated for each procedure. Trends in reimbursement and utilization of the AP approach were assessed with linear regression. Subgroup analyses of age and underlying pathology of AP arthrodesis were also performed. RESULTS: During 2010 and 2020, AP arthrodesis was associated with significantly higher average wRVUs/h compared with anterior and posterior arthrodesis (AP = 17.4, anterior = 12.4, posterior = 14.5). The AP approach had a significant yearly increase in wRVUs/h (coefficient = 0.48, P = .042), contrary to anterior (coefficient = -0.01, P = .308) and posterior (coefficient = -0.13, P = .006) approaches. Utilization of AP approaches over all arthrodeses increased from 7.5% in 2010 to 15.3% in 2020 (yearly average increase 0.79%, P < .001). AP fusions increased significantly among both degenerative and deformity cases (coefficients 0.88 and 1.43, respectively). The mean age of patients undergoing AP arthrodesis increased by almost 10 years from 2010 to 2020. Rates of major 30-day complications were 2.7%, 3.1%, and 3.5% for AP, anterior, and posterior arthrodesis, respectively. CONCLUSION: AP lumbar arthrodesis was associated with higher and increasing reimbursement (wRVUs/h) during the period 2010 to 2020. Reimbursement for anterior arthrodesis was relatively stable, while reimbursement for posterior arthrodesis decreased. The utilization of the combined AP approach relative to the other approaches increased significantly during the period of interest.

Impact of preoperative spinal injections within 30 days of lumbar decompression on surgical outcomes: a matched institutional study.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine how the temporal proximity of lumbar epidural spinal injection prior to surgery impacts clinical outcomes (e.g., 30-day readmission, postoperative complications, CSF leak) in patients undergoing lumbar decompression without fusion. METHODS: The authors queried their institutional registry to identify patients who underwent elective lumbar decompression for spondylotic pathology between January 2019 and March 2022 at multiple centers within the same hospital network. Patients were divided into groups based on the time between their surgical date and the most recent preoperative spinal injection: group 1, patients with duration < 1 month; group 2, 1-3 months; and group 3, no spinal injection within 3 months. Primary outcomes of interest were the length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, rate of intraoperative CSF leak, and rates of reoperation and hospital readmission. For patients in groups 1 and 2, the authors also recorded the number of injections within 12 months prior to surgery to better understand the effect of multiple recent injections. The independent Student t-test and Pearson's chi-square test were mainly performed for univariate analyses of the continuous and categorical variables, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 121 and 283 patients received a spinal injection at < 1 month and 1-3 months prior to surgery, respectively, and were separately matched in a 3:1 ratio with 2562 patients with no history of preoperative spinal injection within 3 months before surgery. Among the matched cohorts, patients who received spinal injections < 1 month before lumbar decompression had significantly higher risks of 30-day complication (7.4% vs 0.8%, OR 9.6, p < 0.001), 30-day readmission (5.8% vs 2.2%, OR 3.5, p = 0.049), and 90-day readmission (9.1% vs 2.8%, OR 3.5, p = 0.003) than patients with no history of spinal injection. However, compared with patients with no history of spinal injection, the patients who received spinal injections 1-3 months before surgery were not at higher risk for postoperative complications or readmission. The CSF leak rates were significantly different between the three patient cohorts (10.7% vs 6.7% vs 4.9% for the < 1 month, 1-3 months, and no injection cohorts, respectively; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar decompression within 1 month of preoperative spinal injection was associated with higher risks of readmission and postoperative complications, including CSF leak. However, with the exception of CSF leak, these risks were no longer observed when spinal injection occurred 1-3 months prior to lumbar decompression.

Prediction Model for Neurogenic Bladder Recovery One Year After Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.

INTRODUCTION: Neurogenic bladder is a common complication after spinal cord injury (SCI) that carries substantial burdens on the inflicted individual. The objective of this study is to build a prediction model for neurogenic bladder recovery 1 year after traumatic SCI. METHODS: We queried the National Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems database for patients with traumatic SCI who had neurogenic bladder at the time of injury. The primary outcome of interest was the complete recovery of bladder function at 1 year. Multiple imputations were performed to generate replacement values for missing data, and the final imputed data were used for our analysis. A multivariable odds logistic regression model was developed for complete bladder recovery at 1 year. RESULTS: We identified a total of 2515 patients with abnormal bladder function at baseline who had an annual follow-up. A total of 417 patients (16.6%) recovered bladder function in 1 year. Predictors of complete bladder recovery included the following baseline parameters: sacral sensation, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment score, bowel function at baseline, voluntary sphincter contraction, anal sensation, S1 motor scores, and the number of days in the rehabilitation facility. The model performed with a discriminative capacity of 90.5%. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a prediction model for the probability of complete bladder recovery 1 year after SCI. The model performed with a high discriminative capacity. This prediction model demonstrates potential utility in the counseling, research allocation, and management of individuals with SCI.

Surgical Management of Hirayama Disease (Monomelic Amyotrophy): Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient-Level Data.

BACKGROUND: Hirayama disease or juvenile-onset monomelic amyotrophy is a clinical syndrome that disproportionately affects young males. Standard of care revolves around conservative management, but some patients experience disease progression that may benefit from surgical intervention. METHODS: Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review of previous reports of surgical treatment for Hirayama disease was performed. Studies were included if they provided individual patient-level data, described the clinical presentation and surgical intervention, and reported neurological improvement at last follow-up. Comparison between those who improved and those with stable symptoms at last follow-up was performed. Decision-tree analysis was used to identify the best predictors of neurological improvement by last follow-up. RESULTS: Of 624 unique articles, 30 were included in the qualitative review and 23 in the meta-analysis. Among the 70 patients in the meta-analysis, mean age was 21.2 ± 6.3 years, 91% were male, and mean symptom duration at presentation was 43.3 ± 61.8 months. Fifty-nine patients (84.3%) had improvement in their neurological symptoms by last follow-up. Univariable analysis showed the only significant predictor of improvement in neurological symptoms by last follow-up was the use of stabilization-alone versus decompression with or without stabilization. Baseline clinical symptoms nor radiographic features predicted outcome. Decision-tree analysis showed surgical strategy (stabilization-alone vs. decompression ± stabilization), age (<20 vs. ≥20), and surgical approach (anterior-only vs. posterior-only or anterior-posterior) predicted a higher likelihood of neurological improvement by last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 85% of patients experienced improvement in neurological symptoms. Improvement was best for those who underwent stabilization-alone, and decision-tree analysis suggested that the likelihood of improvement was also superior for patients under 20 years of age and those treated with an anterior versus posterior or staged approach.