Rate of Reoperation Following Decompression-Only Procedure for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review of Literature.

Background: Management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with decompression-only procedure has been performed for its added benefit of a shorter duration of surgery, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. However, reported failure rates for decompression-only procedures vary depending on the methods utilized for decompression. Hence, we aim to identify the failure rates of individual methods of decompression-only procedures performed for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: An independent systematic review of 4 scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, Web of Science) was performed to identify relevant articles as per the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Studies reporting on failure rates defined by reoperation at the index level following decompression-only procedure for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included for analysis. Studies were appraised using ROBINS tool of Cochrane, and analysis was performed using the Open Meta[Analyst] software. Results: The overall failure rate of decompression-only procedure was 9.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] [6.5-11.7]). Furthermore, open decompression had failure rate of 10.9% (95% CI [6.0-15.8]), while microendoscopic decompression had failure rate of 6.7% (95% CI [2.9-10.6]). The failure rate gradually increased from 6.9% (95% CI [2.0-11.7]) at 1 year to 7% (95% CI [3.6-10.3]), 11.7% (95% CI [4.5-18.9]), and 11.7% (95% CI [6.6-16.7]) at 2, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Single level decompression had a failure rate of 9.6% (95% CI [6.3-12.9]), while multilevel decompression recorded a failure rate of 8.7% (95% CI [5.6-11.7]). Conclusion: High-quality evidence on the decompression-only procedure for degenerative spondylolisthesis is limited. The decompression-only procedure had an overall failure rate of 9.1% without significant differences between the decompression techniques. Level of Evidence: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

AO Spine Guideline for the Use of Osteobiologics (AOGO) in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Spinal Degenerative Cases.

STUDY DESIGN: Guideline. OBJECTIVES: To develop an international guideline (AOGO) about the use of osteobiologics in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for treating degenerative spine conditions. METHODS: The guideline development process was guided by AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative (KF Degen) and followed the Guideline International Network McMaster Guideline Development Checklist. The process involved 73 participants with expertise in degenerative spine diseases and surgery from 22 countries. Fifteen systematic reviews were conducted addressing respective key topics and evidence was collected. The methodologist compiled the evidence into GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks. Guideline panel members judged the outcomes and other criteria and made the final recommendations through consensus. RESULTS: Five conditional recommendations were created. A conditional recommendation is about the use of allograft, autograft or a cage with an osteobiologic in primary ACDF surgery. Other conditional recommendations are about the use of osteobiologic for single- or multi-level ACDF, and for hybrid construct surgery. It is suggested that surgeons use other osteobiologics rather than human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) in common clinical situations. Surgeons are recommended to choose 1 graft over another or 1 osteobiologic over another primarily based on clinical situation, and the costs and availability of the materials. CONCLUSION: This AOGO guideline is the first to provide recommendations for the use of osteobiologics in ACDF. Despite the comprehensive searches for evidence, there were few studies completed with small sample sizes and primarily as case series with inherent risks of bias. Therefore, high-quality clinical evidence is demanded to improve the guideline.

Do Osteobiologics Augment Fusion in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Surgery Performed With Mechanical Interbody Devices (Polyether ether ketone, Carbon Fiber, Metal Cages) and is the Fusion Rate Comparable to that With Autograft? A Systematic Review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review of the Literature. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review describing fusion rates for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using autograft vs various interbody devices augmented with different osteobiologic materials. METHODS: A systematic review limited to the English language was performed in Medline, Embase and Cochrane library using Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms. Studies that evaluated fusion after ACDF using autografts and osteobiologics combined with PEEK, carbon fibre, or metal cages were searched for. Articles in full text that met the criteria were included in the review. The main outcomes evaluated were the time taken to merge, the definition of the fusion assessment, and the modality of the fusion assessment. The risk of bias of each article was assessed by the MINORS score or ROB 2.0 depending on the randomisation process. RESULTS: The total number of references reviewed was six hundred and eighty-two. After applying the inclusion criteria, 54 were selected for the retrieval of the full text. Eight studies were selected and included for final analysis in this study. Fusion rates were reported between 83.3% and 100% for autograft groups compared to 46.5% and 100% for various interbody device/osteobiological combinations. The overall quality of the evidence in all radiographic fusion studies was considered insufficient due to a serious risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Mechanical interbody devices augmented with osteobiologics performed similarly to autografts in terms of reliability and efficacy. Their time to fusion and fusion rate were comparable to autografts at the end of the final follow-up.

Do the Choice of Fusion Construct With and Without Autograft Influence the Fusion and Complication Rates in Patients Undergoing 1 or 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Surgery? A PRISMA-Compliant Network Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Network meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To compare the fusion outcome and complications of different 1 or 2-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) constructs performed with and without the application of autografts. METHODS: We performed an independent and duplicate search in electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus for relevant articles published between 2000 and 2020. We included comparative studies reporting fusion rate and complications with and without the use of autografts in ACDF across 5 different fusion constructs. A network meta-analysis was performed in Stata, categorized based on the type of fusion constructs utilized. Fusion constructs were ranked based on p-score approach and surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores. The confidence of results from the analysis was appraised with Cochrane's CINeMA approach. RESULTS: A total of 2216 patients from 22-studies including 6 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and 16 non-RCTs were included in network analysis. The mean age of included patients was 49.3 (±3.62) years. Based on our meta-analysis, we could conclude that use of autograft in 1- or 2-level ACDF did not affect the fusion and mechanical implant-related complications. The final fusion and mechanical complication rates were also not significantly different across the different fusion constructs. The use of plated constructs was associated with a significant increase in post-ACDF dysphagia rates [OR 3.42; 95%CI (.01,2.45)], as compared to stand-alone constructs analysed. CONCLUSION: The choice of fusion constructs and use of autografts does not significantly affect the fusion and overall complication rates following 1 or 2-level ACDF surgery.

Does the choice of chemoprophylaxis affect the prevention of deep vein thrombosis in lumbar fusion surgery? A systematic review of the literature.

Introduction: To date, the available guidance on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in elective lumbar fusion surgery is largely open to surgeon interpretation and preference without any specific suggested chemoprophylactic regimen. Research question: This study aimed to comparatively analyze the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) with the use of commonly employed chemoprophylactic agents such as unfractionated heparin (UH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in lumbar fusion surgery. Material and methods: An independent systematic review of four scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, Web of Science) was performed to identify relevant articles as per the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies reporting on DVT/PE outcomes of lumbar fusion surgery in adult patients with UH or LMWH chemoprophylaxis were included for analysis. Analysis was performed using the Stata software. Results: Twelve studies with 8495 patients were included in the analysis. A single-arm meta-analysis of the included studies found a DVT incidence of 14% (95%CI [8%-20%]) and 1% (95%CI [-6% - 8%]) with LMWH and UH respectively. Both the chemoprophylaxis agents prevented PE with a noted incidence of 0% (95%CI [0%-0.1%]) and 0% (95%CI [0%-1%]) with LMWH and UH respectively. The risk of bleeding-related complications with the usage of LMWH and UH was 0% (95% CI [0.0%-0.30%]) and 3% (95% CI [0.3%-5%]) respectively. Discussion and conclusion: Both LMWH and UH reduces the overall incidence of DVT/PE, but there is a paucity of evidence analyzing the comparative effectiveness of the chemoprophylaxis regimens in lumbar fusion procedures. The heterogeneity in data prevents any conclusions, as there remains an evidence gap. We recommend future high-quality randomized controlled trials to investigate in this regard to help develop recommendations on thromboprophylaxis usage.

Surgeon Preferences Worldwide in Wound Drain Utilization in Open Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Pathologies.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE: Although literature does not recommend routine wound drain utilization, there is a disconnect between the evidence and clinical practice. This study aims to explore into this controversy and analyze the surgeon preferences related to drain utilization, and the factors influencing drain use and criterion for removal. METHODS: A survey was distributed to AO Spine members worldwide. Surgeon demographics and factors related to peri-operative drain use in 1 or 2-level open fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative pathologies were collected. Multivariate analyses by drain utilization, and criterion of removal were conducted. RESULTS: 231 surgeons participated, including 220 males (95.2%), orthopedics (178, 77.1%), and academic/university-affiliated (114, 49.4%). Most surgeons preferred drain use (186, 80.5%) and subfascial drains (169, 73.2%). Drains were removed based on duration by 52.87% of the surgeons, but 27.7% removed drains based on outputs. On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of drain use were surgeon's aged 35-44 (OR = 11.9, 95% CI = 1.2-117.2, P = .034), 45-54 (29.1, 3.1-269.6, P = .003), 55-64 (8.9, 1.4-56.5, .019), and wound closure using coaptive films (6.0, 1.2-29.0, P = .025). Additionally, surgeons from Asia Pacific (OR = 5.19, 95% CI = 1.65-16.38, P = .005), Europe (3.55, 1.22-10.31, P = .020), and Latin America (4.40, 1.09-17.83, .038) were more likely to remove drain based on time duration, but surgeons <5 years of experience (10.23, 1.75-59.71, P = .010) were more likely to remove drains based on outputs. CONCLUSIONS: Most spine surgeons worldwide prefer to place a subfascial wound drain for degenerative open lumbar surgery. The choice for drain placement is associated with the surgeon's age and use of coaptive films for wound closure, while the criterion for drain removal is associated with the surgeons' region of practice and experience.

Conservative Treatment for Spontaneous Resolution of Postoperative Symptomatic Thoracic Spinal Epidural Hematoma-A Case Report.

Introduction: Postoperative epidural hematomas of the cervical and thoracic spine can pose a great risk of rapid neurological impairment and sometimes require immediate decompressive surgery. Case Report: We present the case of a young patient operated on for stabilization of a two-level thoracic vertebra fracture who developed total paralysis due to an epidural hematoma postoperatively. The course of epidural hematoma was quickly reversed with the help of a conservative technique that prevented revision surgery. The patient regained complete neurologic function very rapidly, and has been well on every follow-up to date. Conclusion: There is a role of similar maneuvers as described in this case to be employed in the management of postoperative epidural hematomas. However, prolonged watchful waiting should still be discouraged, and patients should remain ready for revision surgery if there are no early signs of rapid recovery.

Intraoperative gamma hand-held probe navigation in resection of osteoid osteoma tumor--report of two cases.

Two cases of osteoid osteoma tumor (OO) are presented and our early experience with intraoperative gamma probing to localize OO during surgery is reported. The concept of radioguided surgery was developed 60 years ago and the gamma detection probe technology for radioguided biopsy and/or resection of bone lesions has been applied since the early 1980s. Bone scintigraphy is very important for initial diagnosis of OO with almost 100% sensitivity. The bone scan finding is specific, with so called double density appearance, very intense accumulation of radiopharmaceutical in the nidus and therefore great difference between the nidus and the surrounding healthy bone, thus making possible to treat this lesion with probe guided surgery. Three phase bone scintigraphy and single photon emission computed tomography were conducted in our patients for initial diagnosis of OO. A second bone scintigraphy was performed before surgery. The surgery followed 12-15 hours later by intraoperative nidus detection with a hand-held gamma probe. Gamma hand-held probe is a system that detects gamma photons. The count rate in the nidus area on the day of surgery was 3 to 4 times higher than in the healthy bone area. Drilling was performed until the counts decreased to the level of the surrounding bone counts, thereby confirming complete excision. This is the method of choice for minimizing bone resection, the risk of pathologic fracture, the need of bone grafting, and reducing the period of convalescence. Evidence for the treatment efficiency is pain disappearance after the surgery.

Can Croatian medicine do without palliative medicine?--Study investigating the need for formal education.

The aim of this study was to determine the public's, i.e. citizens' attitude on one hand, and health-care professionals' attitude on the other, regarding the public education in palliative care. Also, the assessment of health-care professionals' attitude regarding the need to establish a sub-specialty in palliative medicine in Croatia was performed. The study was carried out during 2007 and 2008 in the capitals of 7 Croatian counties, involving 2353 participants. Two types of anonymous questionnaire were distributed. Citizens were surveyed at public places, business offices, waiting rooms, while health-care professionals were surveyed in medical centers. The survey was conducted personally by the authors, i.e. "face to face" with the respondents. The collected data were entered into a database and analyzed, taking into account the anonymity, privacy and data confidentiality. The response rate was 99% for the public and 97% for health-care professionals. 44% of the public thought that educating the public in palliative care is absolutely necessary, and 42% that it is mostly necessary; compared with 47% of health-care professionals who thought education was absolutely necessary, and 45% who thought it is mostly necessary. In addition, health-care professionals were asked about their opinion regarding the establishment of a sub-specialty in palliative medicine and 76% of respondents considered it absolutely necessary. Both the public and health-care professionals recognize the need for public education in palliative care. The authors wish to especially emphasize health-care professionals' perception of a great need for the establishment of an official medical curriculum and a medical sub-specialty in palliative medicine.