Practical Answers to Frequently Asked Questions in Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery for Degenerative Conditions.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical counseling enables shared decision making and optimal outcomes by improving patients' understanding about their pathologies, surgical options, and expected outcomes. Here, we aimed to provide practical answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs) from patients undergoing an anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disk replacement (CDR) for the treatment of degenerative conditions. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary one-level or two-level ACDF or CDR for the treatment of degenerative conditions with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Data were used to answer 10 FAQs that were generated from author's experience of commonly asked questions in clinic before ACDF or CDR. RESULTS: A total of 395 patients (181 ACDF, 214 CDR) were included. (1, 2, and 3) Will my neck/arm pain and physical function improve? Patients report notable improvement in all patient-reported outcome measures. (4) Is there a chance I will get worse? 13% (ACDF) and 5% (CDR) reported worsening. (5) Will I receive a significant amount of radiation? Patients on average received a 3.7 (ACDF) and 5.5 mGy (CDR) dose during. (6) How long will I stay in the hospital? Most patients get discharged on postoperative day one. (7) What is the likelihood that I will have a complication? 13% (8% minor and 5% major) experienced in-hospital complications (ACDF) and 5% (all minor) did (CDR). (8) Will I need another surgery? 2.2% (ACDF) and 2.3% (CDR) of patients required a revision surgery. (9 & 10) When will I be able to return to work/driving? Most patients return to working (median of 16 [ACDF] and 14 days [CDR]) and driving (median of 16 [ACDF] and 12 days [CDR]). CONCLUSIONS: The answers to the FAQs can assist surgeons in evidence-based patient counseling.

Impact of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Cervical Disc Replacement for Cervical Radiculopathy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of preoperative symptom duration on postoperative functional outcomes following cervical disc replacement (CDR) for radiculopathy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CDR has emerged as a reliable and efficacious treatment option for degenerative cervical spine pathologies. The relationship between preoperative symptom duration and outcomes following CDR is not well established. METHODS: Patients with radiculopathy without myelopathy who underwent primary 1- or 2-level CDRs were included and divided into shorter (<6 mo) and prolonged (≥6 mo) cohorts based on preoperative symptom duration. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) included Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Neck and Arm. Change in PROM scores and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) rates were calculated. Analyses were conducted on the early (within 3 mo) and late (6 mo-2 y) postoperative periods. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients (43.6±8.7 y, 33.3% female) were included. In both early and late postoperative periods, the shorter preoperative symptom duration cohort experienced significantly greater change from preoperative PROM scores compared to the prolonged symptom duration cohort for NDI, VAS-Neck, and VAS-Arm. The shorter symptom duration cohort achieved MCID in the early postoperative period at a significantly higher rate for NDI (78.9% vs. 54.9%, P=0.001), VAS-Neck (87.0% vs. 56.0%, P<0.001), and VAS-Arm (90.5% vs. 70.7%, P=0.002). Prolonged preoperative symptom duration (≥6 mo) was identified as an independent risk factor for failure to achieve MCID at the latest timepoint for NDI (OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.2-6.9, P=0.016), VAS-Neck (OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 3.7-26.0, P<0.001), and VAS-Arm (OR: 7.5, 95% CI: 2.5-22.5, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates improved patient-reported outcomes for those with shorter preoperative symptom duration undergoing CDR for radiculopathy, suggesting delayed surgical intervention may result in poorer outcomes and greater postoperative disability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Chat Generative Pretraining Transformer Answers Patient-focused Questions in Cervical Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Review of Chat Generative Pretraining Transformer (ChatGPT) outputs to select patient-focused questions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the quality of ChatGPT responses to cervical spine questions. BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence and its utilization to improve patient experience across medicine is seeing remarkable growth. One such usage is patient education. For the first time on a large scale, patients can ask targeted questions and receive similarly targeted answers. Although patients may use these resources to assist in decision-making, there still exists little data regarding their accuracy, especially within orthopedic surgery and more specifically spine surgery. METHODS: We compiled 9 frequently asked questions cervical spine surgeons receive in the clinic to test ChatGPT's version 3.5 ability to answer a nuanced topic. Responses were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers on a Likert Scale for the accuracy of information presented (0-5 points), appropriateness in giving a specific answer (0-3 points), and readability for a layperson (0-2 points). Readability was assessed through the Flesh-Kincaid grade level analysis for the original prompt and for a second prompt asking for rephrasing at the sixth-grade reading level. RESULTS: On average, ChatGPT's responses scored a 7.1/10. Accuracy was rated on average a 4.1/5. Appropriateness was 1.8/3. Readability was a 1.2/2. Readability was determined to be at the 13.5 grade level originally and at the 11.2 grade level after prompting. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT has the capacity to be a powerful means for patients to gain important and specific information regarding their pathologies and surgical options. These responses are limited in their accuracy, and we, in addition, noted readability is not optimal for the average patient. Despite these limitations in ChatGPT's capability to answer these nuanced questions, the technology is impressive, and surgeons should be aware patients will likely increasingly rely on it.

Left-digit bias in surgical decision-making for lumbar spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Left-digit bias is a behavioral heuristic or cognitive "shortcut" in which the leftmost digit of a number, such as patient age, disproportionately influences surgical decisions. PURPOSE: To determine if left-digit bias in patient age influences the decision to perform arthrodesis with instrumentation vs decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis identified in the 2017-2021 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the percent of patients who underwent arthrodesis with instrumentation (AwI). Matched age group comparisons without left-digit differences (ie, 76/77 vs 78/79, 80/81 vs 82/83, etc.) were performed to isolate the effect of the heuristic. Secondary outcomes including peri-operative events and complications were also compared within AwI and decompression cohorts. METHODS: Using CPT codes, procedures were classified as either AwI or decompression. Patients were grouped into 6 cohorts based on 2-year age windows (74/75, 76/77, 78/79, 80/81, 82/83, 84/85). The cohorts were propensity matched with neighboring age groups based on the presence of spondylolisthesis, demographics, and comorbidities. The primary comparison was between those aged 78/79 vs 80/81. RESULTS: After matching, the primary cohort consisted of two groups of 1,550 patients (aged 78/79 and 80/81). Patients aged 80/81 were less likely to undergo AwI than patients aged 78/79 (23.5% vs 27.2%, p=.021). AwI procedures occurred at similar rates between age groups with the same left digit. Within the decompression and AwI cohorts, there were no differences in secondary outcomes between patients aged 78/79 and 80/81. CONCLUSIONS: LSS patients aged 80/81 are less likely to undergo AwI than patients aged 78/79, regardless of comorbidities. This was not seen when comparing patients with similar left digits in age. Until objective measures of physiologic capacity are established, left-digit bias may influence clinical decisions.

Decisional regret following corrective adult spinal deformity surgery: a single institution study of incidence and risk factors.

PURPOSE: To assess the characteristics and risk factors for decisional regret following corrective adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery at our hospital. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of a single-surgeon ASD database. Adult patients (> 40 years) who underwent ASD surgery from May 2016 to December 2020 with minimum 2-year follow-up were included (posterior-only, ≥ 4 levels fused to the pelvis) (n = 120). Ottawa decision regret questionnaires, a validated and reliable 5-item Likert scale, were sent to patients postoperatively. Regret scores were defined as (1) low regret: 0-39 (2) medium to high regret: 40-100. Risk factors for medium or high decisional regret were identified using multivariate models. RESULTS: Ninety patients were successfully contacted and 77 patients consented to participate. Nonparticipants were older, had a higher incidence of anxiety, and higher ASA class. There were 7 patients that reported medium or high decisional regret (9%). Ninety percentage of patients believed that surgery was the right decision, 86% believed that surgery was a wise choice, and 87% would do it again. 8% of patients regretted the surgery and 14% believed that surgery did them harm. 88% of patients felt better after surgery. On multivariate analysis, revision fusion surgery was independently associated with an increased risk of medium or high decisional regret (adjusted odds ratio: 6.000, 95% confidence interval: 1.074-33.534, p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: At our institution, we found a 9% incidence of decisional regret. Revision fusion was associated with increased decisional regret. Estimates for decisional regret should be based on single-institution experiences given differences in patient populations.

Comparison of the Safety of Inpatient Versus Outpatient Lumbar Fusion : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to synthesize the early data regarding and analyze the safety profile of outpatient lumbar fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Performing lumbar fusion in an outpatient or ambulatory setting is becoming an increasingly employed strategy to provide effective value-based care. As this is an emerging option for surgeons to employ in their practices, the data is still in its infancy. METHODS: This study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies that described outcomes of inpatient and outpatient lumbar fusion cohorts were searched from PubMed, Medline, The Cochrane Library, and Embase. Rates of individual medical and surgical complications, readmission, and reoperation were collected when applicable. Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) were additionally collected if reported. Individual pooled comparative meta-analysis was performed for outcomes of medical complications, surgical complications, readmission, and reoperation. PROMs were reviewed and qualitatively reported. RESULTS: The search yielded 14 publications that compared outpatient and inpatient cohorts with a total of 75,627 patients. Odds of readmission demonstrated no significant difference between outpatient and inpatient cohorts [OR=0.94 (0.81-1.11)]. Revision surgery similarly was no different between the cohorts [OR=0.81 (0.57-1.15)]. Pooled medical and surgical complications demonstrated significantly decreased odds for outpatient cohorts compared with inpatient cohorts [OR=0.58 (0.34-0.50), OR=0.41 (0.50-0.68), respectively]. PROM measures were largely the same between the cohorts when reported, with few studies showing better ODI and VAS Leg outcomes among outpatient cohorts compared with inpatient cohorts. CONCLUSION: Preliminary data regarding the safety of outpatient lumbar fusion demonstrates a favorable safety profile in appropriately selected patients, with PROMs remaining comparable in this setting. There is no data in the form of prospective and randomized trials which is necessary to definitively change practice.

Is There an Implicit Racial Bias in the Case Order of Elective Total Joint Arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION: Identifying ways to improve equitable access to healthcare is of the utmost important. In this study, we analyzed whether patient race was negatively associated with surgical start times for total joint arthroplasties (TJA). METHODS: The surgical case order and start times of all primary TJAs performed at a large academic medical center between May 2014 and May 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if > 21, had a documented self-reported race, and were operated on by an arthroplasty fellowship-trained surgeon. Operations were categorized as first-start, early (7:00 AM-11:00 AM), mid-day (11:00 AM-3:00 PM), or late (after 3:00 PM). Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) was performed, and odds ratios (OR) were calculated. RESULTS: This study identified 1663 TJAs-871 total knee (TKA) and 792 total hip arthroplasties (THA) who met inclusion criteria. Overall, there was no association between race and surgical start time. Upon sub-analysis by surgical type, this held true for TKA patients, but self-identifying Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients undergoing THA were more likely to have later surgical start times (ORs: 2.08 and 1.88; p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Although there was no association between race and overall TJA surgical start times, patients with marginalized racial and ethnic identities were more likely to undergo elective THA later in the surgical day. Surgeons should be aware of potential implicit bias when determining case order to potentially prevent adverse outcomes due to staff fatigue or lack of proper resources later in the day.

How Much Protection Does a Collar Provide? Assessing Risk of Early Periprosthetic Femur Fractures Following Total Hip Arthroplasty in Elderly Patients.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) account for approximately 25% of early revisions following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Cemented femoral fixation is associated with a lower-risk of PPF, and collared-cementless stems may reduce the risk as well. The objective of this study was to compare early-PPF rates between cemented, collared-cementless, and non-collared cementless stems in elderly patients. METHODS: A consecutieve-series of 11,522 primary THAs performed between 2016 and 2021 at our institution in patients >65 years of age was identified. Stem types used were categorized as cemented, collared-cementless, or non-collared cementless. Patients undergoing THA who had cemented-stems were older, more commonly women, and more likely to have a posterior-approach. To reduce confounding of patient characteristics, we matched patients in the 3 stem-categories according to age, sex, and body mass index. This generated 3-groups (cemented, collared-cementless, and non-collared cementless) consisting of 936 patients per group. The mean age of these 2,808 patients was 73 years, the mean body mass index was 27, and 67% were women. Logistic regressions were used to evaluate risk-factors for early-PPF. In the entire cohort of primary THA in elderly patients, there were 85 early PPFs (0.7%) over the study period. RESULTS: Non-collared cementless stems were associated with an increased risk of early PPF (OR: 3.11; P = .03) compared to collared-cementless stems. There were no early PPFs in the matched cemented cohort, 6 early PPFs in the matched collared-cementless cohort, and 16 early-PPFs in the matched non-collared cementless cohort (0% versus 0.64% versus 1.71%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large-series of patients >65 years of age undergoing primary THA, cemented stem fixation had the lowest incidence of early PPF, but collared-cementless stems had a nearly 3-fold decrease in risk for early PPF compared to non-collared cementless stems.

Unplanned readmissions following ambulatory spine surgery: assessing common reasons and risk factors.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although outpatient spine surgery is becoming increasingly popular in the United States, unplanned readmission following outpatient surgery remains a significant postoperative concern. PURPOSE: This study aimed to (1) describe the incidence and timing of 30-day unplanned readmission after ambulatory lumbar and cervical spine surgery (2) evaluate the common reasons for readmission, and (3) identify factors associated with readmission in this population. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent ambulatory cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital readmission within 30 postoperative days. METHODS: Patients who underwent ambulatory cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2015 and 2020 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Reasons for and timing of unplanned readmissions were recorded. Multivariable poisson regressions were employed to determine any independent predictors of readmission. RESULTS: A total of 33,092 ambulatory cervical and 68,115 ambulatory lumbar spine surgery patients were identified. Incidences of 30-day readmission were 3.37% and 3.07% among cervical and lumbar patients, respectively. The most common surgical site-related reasons for readmission included uncontrolled pain, recurrence of disc herniation or major symptom, and postoperative hematoma/seroma. Common nonsurgical site-related reasons included gastrointestinal, neurological, and cardiovascular complications. Factors associated with readmission among cervical patients included age ≥55, BMI ≥35, functional dependence, diabetes, smoking, COPD, and steroid use, whereas factors associated with readmission following lumbar spine surgery included age ≥65, female sex, BMI ≥35, functional dependence, ASA ≥3, diabetes, smoking, COPD, and hypertension (p<.05 for all). CONCLUSION: This study highlights the common reasons and factors associated with unplanned readmission following ambulatory spine surgery. Consideration of these factors may be critical to ensuring appropriate patient selection for ambulatory spine surgery.

The Association of Lumbar Plexus Lengthening with Neurologic Deficit After Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the association between nerve lengthening after adult deformity correction and motor deficits dervied from the upper lumbar plexus or femoral nerve. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is associated with high rates of neurological deficits. Certain postoperative deficits may be related to lengthening of the upper lumbar plexus (ULP) and/or femoral nerve (FN) after correction of lumbar deformity. METHODS: Patients with ASD who underwent posterior-only corrective surgery from the sacrum to L3 or above were included. The length of each lumbar nerve root (NR) was calculated geometrically using the distance from the foramen to the midpoint between the anterosuperior iliac crest and pubic symphysis on AP and lateral radiographs. The mean lengths of the L1-3 and L2-4 NRs were used to define the lengths of the ULP and FN, respectively. Pre- to postoperative changes in nerve length were calculated. Neurological examination was performed at discharge. Proximal weakness (PW) was defined as the presence of weakness compared to baseline in either hip flexors or knee extensors. Multiple linear regression analysis was used for estimating the postoperative lengthening according to the magnitude of preoperative curvature and postoperative correction angles. RESULTS: A total of 202 sides were analyzed in 101 patients, and PW was present on 15 (7.4%) sides in 10 patients. Excluding the 10 cases with three-column osteotomies, those with PW had a significantly higher rate of pure sagittal deformity (P<.001) and greater nerve lengthening than those without PW (ULP 24 vs 15 mm, P=0.02; FN 18 vs 11 mm, P=0.05). No patient had advanced imaging showing neural compression, and complete recovery of PW occurred in 8 patients at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: After ASD surgery, lengthening of the ULP was associated with PW. In preoperative planning, surgeons must consider how the type of correction may influence the risk for nerve lengthening, which may contribute to postoperative neurologic deficit. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Genetic Risk Factors for End-Stage Hip Osteoarthritis Treated With Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Genome-wide Association Study.

BACKGROUND: Although a genetic component to hip osteoarthritis (OA) has been described, focused evaluation of the genetic components of end-stage disease is limited. We present a genomewide association study for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) to characterize the genetic risk factors associated with end-stage hip osteoarthritis (ESHO), defined as utilization of the procedure. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary THA for hip OA were identified in a national patient data repository using administrative codes. Fifteen thousand three hundred and fifty-five patients with ESHO and 374,193 control patients were identified. Whole genome regression of genotypic data for patients who underwent primary THA for hip OA corrected for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) was performed. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the composite genetic risk from the identified genetic variants. RESULTS: There were 13 significant genes identified. Composite genetic factors resulted in an odds ratio 1.04 for ESHO (P < .001). The effect of genetics was lower than that of age (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.38; P < .001) and BMI (1.81; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Multiple genetic variants, including 5 novel loci, were associated with end-stage hip OA treated with primary THA. Age and BMI were associated with greater odds of developing end-stage disease when compared to genetic factors.

Poor muscle health and low preoperative ODI are independent predictors for slower achievement of MCID after minimally invasive decompression.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although some previous studies have analyzed predictors of nonimprovement, most of these have focused on demographic and clinical variables and have not accounted for radiological predictors. In addition, while several studies have examined the degree of improvement after decompression, there is less data on the rate of improvement. PURPOSE: To identify the risk factors and predictors (both radiological and nonradiological) for slower as well as nonachievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) after minimally invasive decompression. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent minimally invasive decompression for degenerative lumbar spine conditions and had a minimum of 1-year follow up were included. Patients with preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) <20 were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURE: MCID achievement in ODI (cut off 12.8). METHODS: Patients were stratified into two groups (achieved MCID, did not achieve MCID) at two timepoints (early ≤3 months, late ≥6 months). Nonradiological (age, gender, BMI, comorbidities, anxiety, depression, number of levels operated, preoperative ODI, preoperative back pain) and radiological (MRI - Schizas grading for stenosis, dural sac cross-sectional area, Pfirrmann grading for disc degeneration, psoas cross-sectional area and Goutallier grading, facet cyst/effusion; X-ray - spondylolisthesis, lumbar lordosis, spinopelvic parameters) variables were assessed with comparative analysis to identify risk factors and with multiple regression models to identify predictors for slower achievement of MCID (MCID not achieved by ≤3 months) and nonachievement of MCID (MCID not achieved at ≥6 months). RESULTS: A total of 338 patients were included. At ≤3 months, patients who did not achieve MCID had significantly lower preoperative ODI (40.1 vs 48.1, p<0.001) and worse psoas Goutallier grading (p=.048). At ≥6 months, patients who did not achieve MCID had significantly lower preoperative ODI (38 vs 47.5, p<.001), higher age (68 vs 63 years, p=.007), worse average L1-S1 Pfirrmann grading (3.5 vs 3.2, p=.035), and higher rate of pre-existing spondylolisthesis at the operated level (p=.047). When these and other probable risk factors were put into a regression model, low preoperative ODI (p=.002) and poor Goutallier grading (p=.042) at the early timepoint and low preoperative ODI (p<.001) at the late timepoint came out as independent predictors for MCID nonachievement. CONCLUSION: After minimally invasive decompression, low preoperative ODI and poor muscle health are risk factors and predictors for slower achievement of MCID. For nonachievement of MCID, low preoperative ODI, higher age, greater disc degeneration, and spondylolisthesis are risk factors and low preoperative ODI is the only independent predictor.

External Validation of a Machine Learning Algorithm for Predicting Clinically Meaningful Functional Improvement After Arthroscopic Hip Preservation Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Individualized risk prediction has become possible with machine learning (ML), which may have important implications in enhancing clinical decision making. We previously developed an ML algorithm to predict propensity for clinically meaningful outcome improvement after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. External validity of prognostic models is critical to determine generalizability, although it is rarely performed. PURPOSE: To assess the external validity of an ML algorithm for predicting clinically meaningful improvement after hip arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: An independent hip preservation registry at a tertiary academic medical center was queried for consecutive patients/athletes who underwent hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between 2015 and 2017. By assuming a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) outcome/event proportion of 75% based on the original study, a minimum sample of 132 patients was required. In total, 154 patients were included. Age, body mass index, alpha angle on anteroposterior pelvic radiographs, Tönnis grade and angle, and preoperative Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale were used as model inputs to predict the MCID for the Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale 2 years postoperatively. Performance was assessed using identical metrics to the internal validation study and included discrimination, calibration, Brier score, and decision curve analysis. RESULTS: The concordance statistic in the validation cohort was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.87), suggesting good to excellent discrimination. The calibration slope was 1.16 (95% CI, 0.74 to 1.61) and the calibration intercept 0.13 (95% CI, -0.26 to 0.53). The Brier score was 0.15 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.18). The null model Brier score was 0.20. Decision curve analysis revealed favorable net treatment benefit for patients with use of the algorithm as compared with interventional changes made for all and no patients. CONCLUSION: The performance of this algorithm in an independent patient population in the northeast region of the United States demonstrated superior discrimination and comparable calibration to that of the derivation cohort. The external validation of this algorithm suggests that it is a reliable method to predict propensity for clinically meaningful improvement after hip arthroscopy and is an essential step forward toward introducing initial use in clinical practice. Potential uses include integration into electronic medical records for automated prediction, enhanced shared decision making, and more informed allocation of resources to optimize patient outcomes.

Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) at index osseointegration do not lead to increased postoperative infectious events.

Introduction: The most common complication following transcutaneous osseointegration for amputees is infection. Although an obvious source of contamination is the permanent stoma, operative site contamination at the time of implantation may be an additional source. This study investigates the impact of unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) on postoperative infection. Methods: Charts were reviewed for 8 patients with UPIC and 22 patients with negative intraoperative cultures (NIC) who had at least 1 year of post-osseointegration follow-up. All patients had 24 h of routine postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, with UPIC receiving additional antibiotics guided by culture results. The main outcome measure was postoperative infection intervention, which was graded as (0) none, (1) antibiotics unrelated to the initial surgery, (2) operative debridement with implant retention, or (3) implant removal. Results: The UPIC vs. NIC rate of infection management was as follows: Grade 0, 6/8 = 75 % vs. 14/22 = 64 %, p = 0.682; Grade 1, 2/8 = 25 % vs. 8/22 = 36.4 % (Fisher's p = 0.682); Grade 2, 1/8 = 12.5 % vs. 0/22 = 0 % (Fisher's p = 0.267); Grade 3, 0/8 = 0 % vs. 1/22 = 4.5 % (Fisher's p = 1.000). No differences were statistically significant. Conclusions: UPIC at index osseointegration, managed with directed postoperative antibiotics, does not appear to increase the risk of additional infection management. The therapeutic benefit of providing additional directed antibiotics versus no additional antibiotics following UPIC is unknown and did not appear to increase the risk of other adverse outcomes in our cohort.

Characterization of Genetic Risk of End-Stage Knee Osteoarthritis Treated with Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Genome-Wide Association Study.

BACKGROUND: End-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly debilitating disease for which total knee arthroplasty (TKA) serves as an effective treatment option. Although a genetic component to OA in general has been described, evaluation of the genetic contribution to end-stage OA of the knee is limited. To this end, we present a genome-wide association study involving patients undergoing TKA for primary knee OA to characterize the genetic features of severe disease on a population level. METHODS: Individuals with the diagnosis of knee OA who underwent primary TKA were identified in the U.K. Biobank using administrative codes. The U.K. Biobank is a data repository containing prospectively collected clinical and genomic data for >500,000 patients. A genome-wide association analysis was performed using the REGENIE software package. Logistic regression was also used to compare the total genetic risk between subgroups stratified by age and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: A total of 16,032 patients with end-stage knee OA who underwent primary TKA were identified. Seven genetic loci were found to be significantly associated with end-stage knee OA. The odds ratio (OR) for developing end-stage knee OA attributable to genetics was 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10 to 1.14), which was lower than the OR associated with BMI (OR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.78 to 1.83) and age (OR = 2.38; 95% CI, 2.32 to 2.45). The magnitude of the OR for developing end-stage knee OA attributable to genetics was greater in patients <60 years old than in patients ≥60 years old (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This population-level genome-wide association study of end-stage knee OA treated with primary TKA was notable for identifying multiple significant genetic variants. These loci involve genes responsible for cartilage development, cartilage homeostasis, cell signaling, and metabolism. Age and BMI appear to have a greater impact on the risk of developing end-stage disease compared with genetic factors. The genetic contribution to the development of severe disease is greater in younger patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Survivorship and Risk Factors for Re-Revision after Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Aged ≤55 Years.

BACKGROUND: There is a relative paucity of literature on the outcomes after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) in young patients. This study reports the survivorship and risk factors for re-revision in patients aged ≤55 years. METHODS: We identified 354 patients undergoing aseptic nononcologic rTHA at mean follow-up of 5 years after revision, with mean age of 48 years, body mass index of 28 kg/m2, and 64% female. Thirty-five (10%) patients underwent at least 1 previous rTHA. The main indications for rTHA included wear/osteolysis (21%), adverse local tissue reaction (21%), recurrent instability (20%), acetabular loosening (16%), and femoral loosening (7%); and included acetabular component-only rTHA in 149 patients (42%), femoral component-only rTHA in 46 patients (13%), both component rTHA in 44 patients (12%), and head/liner exchanges in patients 115 (33%). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to measure survivorship free from re-revision THA, and multivariate regression was used to identify risk factors for re-revision THA. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (18%) underwent re-revision THA at the mean time of 2.5 years, most commonly for instability (37%), aseptic loosening (27%), and prosthetic joint infection (15%). The rTHA survivorship from all-cause re-revision and reoperation was 83% and 79% at 5 years, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients undergoing femoral component only (hazard ratio 4.8, P = .014) and head/liner exchange rTHA (hazard ratio 2.5, P = .022) as risk factors for re-revision THA. CONCLUSION: About 1 in 5 patients aged ≤55 years undergoing rTHA required re-revision THA at 5 years, most commonly for instability. The highest risk group included patients undergoing head/liner exchanges and isolated femoral component revisions.

Classification(s) of Cervical Deformity.

Cervical spine deformities (CSD) are complex surgical issues with currently heterogenous management strategies. The classification of CSD is still an evolving field. Rudimentary classification schemas were initially proposed in the late 20th century but were largely informal and based on the underlying etiology (i.e. , postsurgical, traumatic, or inflammatory). The first formal classification schema was proposed by Ames et al. in 2015 who established a standard nomenclature for describing these deformities. This classification system established 5 deformity descriptors based on curve apex location (cervical, cervicothoracic, thoracic, craniovertebral junctional, and coronal deformities) and 5 deformity modifiers which helped surgeons utilize a standard language when discussing CSD patients. Koller et al. in 2019 subsequently established a classification system for patients with rigid cervical kyphosis based on regional and global sagittal alignment. Most recently, Kim et al. in 2020 proposed an updated classification system utilizing dynamic cervical spine imaging to guide surgical treatment of CSD patients. It identified 4 major groups of deformities - (1) those with "flat-neck" deformities caused by cervical lordosis T1 slope mismatch; (2) those with focal kyphotic deformities between 2 cervical vertebrae; (3) those with cervicothoracic deformities caused by large T1 slope; and (4) those with coronal deformities. Group 2 deformities most often required combined anterior-posterior approaches with short constructs, and group 3 deformities most often required posterior-only approaches with 3-column osteotomies.

The history of orthopaedic surgery in India: from antiquity to present.

Indian orthopedists have a legacy dating back more than 4000 years. Starting with the Harappan civilization, ancient orthopaedic surgeons reduced fractures and conducted therapeutic trepanations. Since then, Indian physicians have pioneered many of the orthopaedic techniques still used today - including the use of prosthetics, fracture tables, and rehabilitative physical therapy. Today, orthopaedic surgeons coexist with traditional Indian bonesetters. Although bonesetting practices can have complication rates as high as 40%, bonesetters still handle a majority of fractures in India and are often culturally preferred. Importantly though, bonesetters are often the only expedient option available in both rural and urban settings.

Intraoperative Scrub Nurse Handoffs Are Associated with Increased Operative Times for Lower Extremity Orthopaedic Sports Procedures.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of intraoperative scrub nurse handoffs on surgical times for arthroscopically-assisted anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions and hip arthroscopies. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was done at a major, urban academic medical center for all patients who underwent arthroscopically-assisted ACL reconstructions and hip arthroscopies for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between May 2014 and May 2020. All ACL reconstructions were performed by 1 of 6 sports medicine fellowship-trained surgeons, and all hip arthroscopies were performed by a single surgeon. Operative times, number of scrub nurse handoffs, surgeon, patient demographics, and procedure-specific information were recorded. The association between patient characteristics and the number of handoffs, as well as the association between patient characteristics and operative times, stratified by scrub nurse handoffs, were calculated. A multivariable linear regression was performed to assess the association between intra-operative handoffs and operative times. RESULTS: Eight hundred twenty ACL reconstructions and 269 hip arthroscopies were identified. Multivariable linear regression demonstrated increasing intraoperative scrub nurse handoffs were associated with increased operative times for all patients. For ACL reconstructions, when including all possible covariates, 1 scrub nurse handoff increased operative times by 21.1 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.36 to 26.89; P < .001), and 2+ handoffs increased operative times by 34.2 minutes (95% CI: 26.28 to 42.15; P < .001). For hip arthroscopies, 1 scrub nurse handoff increased operative times by 7.0 minutes (95% CI: 0.31 to 13.74; P = .04). CONCLUSION: Although a causal link cannot be made, intraoperative scrub nurse handoffs were associated with statistically significant increase in operative times for both ACL reconstructions and hip arthroscopies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.