Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic spine surgery has recently grown in popularity due to the potential benefits of reduced pain and faster recovery time as compared to open surgery. Biportal spinal endoscopy has been successfully applied to lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Obesity is associated with increased risk of complications in spine surgery. Few prior studies have investigated the impact of obesity and associated medical comorbidities with biportal spinal endoscopy. METHODS: This study was a prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed comparative cohort design. Patients were divided into cohorts of normal body weight (Bone Mass Index (BMI)18.0-24.9), overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9) and obese (BMI > 30.0) as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). Patients underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution for treatment of lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Demographic data, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were analyzed. Statistics were calculated amongst treatment groups using analysis of variance and chi square where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were followed. 26 (30.1%) were normal BMI, 35 (41.7%) were overweight and 23 (27.4%) were obese. Patients with increasing BMI had correspondingly greater American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores. There were no significant differences in VAS Back, VAS Leg, and ODI scores, or postoperative complications among the cohorts. There were no cases of surgical site infections in the cohort. All cohorts demonstrated significant improvement up to 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that obesity is not a risk factor for increased perioperative complications with biportal spinal endoscopy and has similar clinical outcomes and safety profile as compared to patients with normal BMI. Biportal spinal endoscopy is a promising alternative to traditional techniques to treat common lumbar pathology.

Proximal Femur Replacements for an Oncologic Indication Offer a Durable Endoprosthetic Reconstruction Option: A 40-year Experience.

BACKGROUND: Proximal femur replacements (PFRs) are an effective surgical option to treat primary and metastatic tumors causing large bony defects in the proximal femur. Given the relative rarity of these indications, current studies on PFR for oncologic indications are generally limited by patient volume or relatively short-term follow-up. Because recent advances in systemic therapy have improved the prognosis of patients who undergo limb salvage surgery for musculoskeletal tumors, data on the long-term durability of endoprosthetic reconstructions have become increasingly important. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How does the long-term survival of cemented bipolar PFRs compare with patient survival in patients who underwent PFR for benign, aggressive, and metastatic tumors? (2) What are common reasons for revisions of primary PFRs? (3) Which factors are associated with survival of primary PFRs? (4) What is the survivorship free from conversion of bipolar PFRs to THA? METHODS: Between January 1, 1980, and December 31, 2020, we treated 812 patients with an endoprosthetic reconstruction for an oncologic indication. All patients who underwent a primary PFR for an oncologic indication were included in this study. The study cohort consisted of 122 patients receiving a primary PFR. Eighteen patients did not reach a censored endpoint such as death, revision, or amputation within 2 years. Thirty-three patients died within 2 years of their surgery. Of the 122 patients with primary PFRs, 39 did not reach a censored endpoint and have not been seen within the past 5 years. However, the mean follow-up time for these patients was longer than 10 years. The Social Security Death Index was queried to identify any patients who may have died but might not have been captured by our database To allow for adequate follow-up, endoprosthetic reconstructions performed after December 31, 2020 were excluded. The mean age at the time of the index surgery was 48 ± 22 years. The mean follow-up time of surviving patients was 7 ± 8 years. All PFRs were performed using a bipolar hemiarthroplasty with a cemented stem, and all implants were considered comparable. Demographic, oncologic, procedural, and outcome data including prosthesis survival, patient survival, complication rates, and rates of conversion to THA were analyzed. Patient, prosthesis, and limb salvage survival rates were generated, with implant revision as the endpoint and death as a competing risk. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Generally, patients with benign or low-grade (Stage I) disease outlived their implants (100% patient survival through 30 years; p = 0.02), whereas the opposite was true in patients with high-grade, localized Stage II disease (64% patient survival at 5 years [95% CI 49% to 76%]; p = 0.001) or widespread Stage III metastatic disease (6.2% patient survival at 5 years [95% CI 0.5% to 24%]; p < 0.001). Primary PFR implant survival at 5, 10, 20, and 30 years was 97% (95% CI 90% to 99%), 81% (95% CI 67% to 90%), 69% (95% CI 46% to 84%), and 51% (95% CI 24% to 73%), respectively. Eight percent (10 of 122) of primary PFRs were revised for any reason. The most common causes of revision were aseptic loosening (3% [four of 122]), infection (3% [three of 122]), breakage of the implant (2% [two of 122]), and tumor progression (1% [one of 122]). Follow-up time was the only factor that was associated with revision of primary PFRs. Neither segment length nor stem length were associated with revision of primary. Six percent (seven of 122) of PFRs were converted to THA at a mean 15 ± 8 years from the index procedure. Survivorship free from conversion to THA (accounting for death as a competing risk) was 94% (95% CI 85% to 99%), 86% (95% CI 68% to 94%). and 77% (95% CI 51% to 91%) at 10, 20, and 30 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cemented bipolar PFRs for an oncologic indication are a relatively durable reconstruction technique. Given the relative longevity and efficacy of PFRs demonstrated in our study, especially in patients with high-grade or metastatic disease where implant survival until all-cause revision was longer than patient survival, surgeons should continue to seriously consider PFRs in appropriate patients. The relative rarity of these reconstructions limits the number of patients in this study as well as in current research; thus, further multi-institutional collaborations are needed to provide the most accurate prognostic data for our patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Biportal Endoscopic Approach for Lumbar Degenerative Disease in the Ambulatory Outpatient vs Inpatient Setting: A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Biportal spinal endoscopy is increasingly utilized for lumbar disc herniations and lumbar stenosis. The objective was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of the technique in the outpatient vs inpatient setting. METHODS: This is a comparative study of consecutive patients who underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution. Demographics, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Statistics were calculated among treatment groups using unpaired t test and χ 2 analysis where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included, 58 (69.0%) as outpatient, 26 (31.0%) as inpatient. Mean follow-up was 7.5 months. Statistically significant differences in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and Charleston Comorbidity Index scores were reported between cohorts, with younger and healthier patients undergoing outpatient surgery (P < 0.0001). Outpatients were more likely to have discectomies while inpatients were more likely to have decompressions for stenosis. No significant differences in postoperative complications were found between groups.Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain scores and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P < 0.001). Outpatients had significantly lower postoperative VAS back pain (P = 0.001) and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.004) at 5-8 weeks compared with inpatients, but there was no significant difference for VAS leg pain scores at all time points between the cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Early results demonstrate that biportal spinal endoscopy can safely and effectively be performed in both inpatient and outpatient settings. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Outpatient biportal spinal endoscopy can be performed successfully in well selected patients, which may reduce the financial burden of spine surgery to the U.S. healthcare system.

External validation of a predictive algorithm for in-hospital and 90-day mortality after spinal epidural abscess.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Mortality in patients with spinal epidural abscess (SEA) remains high. Accurate prediction of patient-specific prognosis in SEA can improve patient counseling as well as guide management decisions. There are no externally validated studies predicting short-term mortality in patients with SEA. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to externally validate the Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) stochastic gradient boosting algorithm for prediction of in-hospital and 90-day postdischarge mortality in SEA. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective, case-control study at a tertiary care academic medical center from 2003 to 2021. PATIENT SAMPLE: Adult patients admitted for radiologically confirmed diagnosis of SEA who did not initiate treatment at an outside institution. OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital and 90-day postdischarge mortality. METHODS: We tested the SORG stochastic gradient boosting algorithm on an independent validation cohort. We assessed its performance with discrimination, calibration, decision curve analysis, and overall performance. RESULTS: A total of 212 patients met inclusion criteria, with a short-term mortality rate of 10.4%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the SORG algorithm when tested on the full validation cohort was 0.82, the calibration intercept was -0.08, the calibration slope was 0.96, and the Brier score was 0.09. CONCLUSIONS: With a contemporaneous and geographically distinct independent cohort, we report successful external validation of a machine learning algorithm for prediction of in-hospital and 90-day postdischarge mortality in SEA.

Development and External Validation of a Risk Calculator for Prediction of Major Complications and Readmission After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective, case-control study. OBJECTIVE: We aim to build a risk calculator predicting major perioperative complications after anterior cervical fusion. In addition, we aim to externally validate this calculator with an institutional cohort of patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The average age and proportion of patients with at least one comorbidity undergoing ACDF have increased in recent years. Given the increased morbidity and cost associated with perioperative complications and unplanned readmission, accurate risk stratification of patients undergoing ACDF is of great clinical utility. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of adults who underwent anterior cervical fusion at any nonfederal California hospital between 2015 and 2017. The primary outcome was major perioperative complication or 30-day readmission. We built standard and ensemble machine learning models for risk prediction, assessing discrimination, and calibration. The best-performing model was validated on an external cohort comprised of consecutive adult patients who underwent ACDF at our institution between 2013 and 2020. RESULTS: A total of 23,184 patients were included in this study; there were 1886 cases of major complication or readmissions. The ensemble model was well calibrated and demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.728. The variables most important for the ensemble model include male sex, medical comorbidities, history of complications, and teaching hospital status. The ensemble model was evaluated on the validation cohort (n=260) with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.802. The ensemble algorithm was used to build a web-based risk calculator. CONCLUSION: We report derivation and external validation of an ensemble algorithm for prediction of major perioperative complications and 30-day readmission after anterior cervical fusion. This model has excellent discrimination and is well calibrated when tested on a contemporaneous external cohort of ACDF cases.

Assessing the academic achievement of United States orthopaedic departments.

BACKGROUND: Assessing academic productivity allows academic departments to identify the strengths of their scholarly contribution and provides an opportunity to evaluate areas for improvement. AIM: To provide objective benchmarks for departments seeking to enhance academic productivity and identify those with significant improvement in recent past. METHODS: Our study retrospectively analyzed a cohort of orthopaedic faculty at United States-based academic orthopaedic programs. 5502 full-time orthopaedic faculty representing 178 programs were included in analysis. Variables included for analysis were National Institutes of Health funding (2014-2018), leadership positions in orthopaedic societies (2018), editorial board positions of top orthopaedic journals (2018), total number of publications and Hirsch-index. A weighted algorithm was used to calculate a cumulative score for each academic program. This study was performed at a large, United States medical school. RESULTS: All 178 programs included in analysis were evaluated using the comprehensive weighted algorithm. The five institutions with the highest cumulative score, in decreasing order, were: Washington University in St. Louis, the Hospital for Special Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College (SKMC) at Thomas Jefferson University, the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH)/Brigham and Women's/Harvard. The five institutions with the highest score per capita, in decreasing order, were: Mayo Clinic (Rochester), Washington University in St. Louis, Rush University, Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) and MGH/Brigham and Women's/Harvard. The five academic programs that had the largest improvement in cumulative score from 2013 to 2018, in decreasing order, were: VCU, SKMC at Thomas Jefferson University, UCSF, MGH/Brigham and Women's/Harvard, and Brown University. CONCLUSION: This algorithm can provide orthopaedic departments a means to assess academic productivity, monitor progress, and identify areas for improvement as they seek to expand their academic contributions to the orthopaedic community.