The Evolution of Risk Assessment in Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Risk assessment is critically important in elective and high-risk interventions, particularly spine surgery. This narrative review describes the evolution of risk assessment from the earliest instruments focused on general surgical risk stratification, to more accurate and spine-specific risk calculators that quantified risk, to the current era of big data. METHODS: The PubMed and SCOPUS databases were queried on October 11, 2023 using search terms to identify risk assessment tools (RATs) in spine surgery. A total of 108 manuscripts were included after screening with full-text review using the following inclusion criteria: 1) study population of adult spine surgical patients, 2) studies describing validation and subsequent performance of preoperative RATs, and 3) studies published in English. RESULTS: Early RATs provided stratified patients into broad categories and allowed for improved communication between physicians. Subsequent risk calculators attempted to quantify risk by estimating general outcomes such as mortality, but then evolved to estimate spine-specific surgical complications. The integration of novel concepts such as invasiveness, frailty, genetic biomarkers, and sarcopenia led to the development of more sophisticated predictive models that estimate the risk of spine-specific complications and long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: RATs have undergone a transformative shift from generalized risk stratification to quantitative predictive models. The next generation of tools will likely involve integration of radiographic and genetic biomarkers, machine learning, and artificial intelligence to improve the accuracy of these models and better inform patients, surgeons, and payers.

Branch-first aortic arch replacement strategy decreases perioperative mortality.

OBJECTIVE: Sparce evidence suggests superiority of total arch replacement with the branch-first technique and antegrade cerebral perfusion over conventional techniques with respect to morbidity and mortality. Thus, we aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing traditional total arch replacement versus branch-first total arch replacement. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 144 patients undergoing total arch replacement from January 2017 to December 2021. Patients were dichotomized based on technique, either traditional total arch replacement or branch-first total arch replacement. Primary end points were 30-day mortality and adverse events. Branch-first total arch replacement and traditional total arch replacement cohorts were compared using Student t tests and chi-square tests. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were performed to identify risk factors associated with 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients (47.2%) underwent traditional total arch replacement, and 76 patients (52.8%) underwent branch-first total arch replacement. The branch-first total arch replacement cohort had higher rates of chronic kidney disease, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and previous myocardial infarction (P = .04, .002, .035, and .031 respectively). The majority of total arch replacements (78, 55%) were performed for aneurysmal disease. Median antegrade cerebral perfusion times were significantly shorter in the branch-first total arch replacement cohort (P = .001). There were no significant differences in rates of stroke, reintubation, postoperative lumbar drainage, renal failure, reoperation for bleeding, or prolonged ventilation between total arch replacement cohorts. The branch-first total arch replacement group had significantly lower 30-day mortality compared with the traditional total arch replacement group (4% vs 19%, P = .004). After adjustment for chronic kidney disease, nonelective status, antegrade cerebral perfusion time, rates of dissections arriving in extremis or with malperfusion, and primary surgeon, undergoing a branch-first total arch replacement was associated with a 93% reduced odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.07, 95% CI, 0.009-0.48, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence that branch-first total arch replacement significantly reduces 30-day mortality compared with traditional total arch replacement.

Growth hormone secreting pituitary adenomas show distinct extrasellar extension patterns compared to nonfunctional pituitary adenomas.

PURPOSE: Patterns of extension of pituitary adenomas (PA) may vary according to PA subtype. Understanding extrasellar extension patterns in growth hormone PAs (GHPA) vis-a-vis nonfunctional PAs (NFPAs) may provide insights into the biology of GHPA and future treatment avenues. METHODS: Preoperative MR imaging (MRI) in 179 consecutive patients treated surgically for NFPA (n = 139) and GHPA (n = 40) were analyzed to determine patterns of extrasellar growth. Extension was divided into two principal directions: cranio-caudal (measured by infrasellar/suprasellar extension), and lateral cavernous sinus invasion (CSI) determined by Knosp grading score of 3-4. Suprasellar extension was defined as tumor extension superior to the tuberculum sellae- dorsum sellae line, and inferior extension as invasion through the sellar floor into the sphenoid sinus or clivus. Categorical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: GHPAs were overall more likely to remain purely intrasellar compared to NFPA (50% vs 26%, p < 0.001). GHPAs, however, were 7 times more likely to exhibit isolated infrasellar extension compared to NFPA (20% vs 2.8%, p = 0.001). Conversely, NFPAs were twice as likely to exhibit isolated suprasellar extension compared to GHPA (60% vs 28%, p < 0.001), as well as combined suprasellar/infrasellar extension (25% vs 3%, p = 0.011). There were no overall differences in CSI between the two subgroups. DISCUSSION: GHPA and NFPA demonstrate distinct extrasellar extension patterns on MRI. GHPAs show proclivity for inferior extension with bony invasion, whereas NFPAs are more likely to exhibit suprasellar extension through the diaphragmatic aperture. These distinctions may have implications into the biology and future treatment of PAs.

Surgical Management of Chronic Subdural Hematoma in Older Adults: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) is a form of intracranial hemorrhage common in older adults. Optimal treatment remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review to identify surgical thresholds, characterize outcomes, and delineate critical considerations in the surgical management of older adults in order to summarize the evidence supporting the best contemporary management of cSDH. METHODS: A systematic review exploring surgical management of cSDH among individuals aged 65 years and older was conducting by searching the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases for articles in English. Abstracts from articles were read and selected for full-text review according to a priori criteria. Relevant full-text articles were analyzed for bibliographic data, aim, study design, population, interventions, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1473 resultant articles, 21 were included. Surgery rationale was case-by-case for symptomatic patients with cSDH. Surgery was superior to conservative management and promoted equivalent neurologic outcomes and rates of complications. Recurrence and reoperation rates in older adults were similar to younger individuals. Some studies reported higher mortality rates for older adults, while others reported no difference. Anticoagulation or antiplatelet agent use did not seem to be associated with poorer outcomes in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery for cSDH in older adults leads to favorable neurologic outcomes without increased risk of overall complications, recurrence, or reoperation compared to younger patients. However, older adults may be at increased risk for mortality after surgery. It is important to determine use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents in older adults to optimally manage patients with cSDH.

A Bibliographic Analysis of the Most Cited Articles in Global Neurosurgery.

OBJECTIVE: Global neurosurgery is the practice of neurosurgery with the primary purpose of delivering timely, safe, and affordable neurosurgical care to all who need it. The aim of this study is to identify the most frequently cited articles in global neurosurgery through a bibliographic review to characterize articles and trends around this growing topic. METHODS: The top most-cited articles in global neurosurgery were determined by searching the Web of Science database using a priori search terms. Articles with at least 5 citations were selected, and there were no time period or language restrictions. The data were extracted from each included article and all characteristics were summarized. RESULTS: A total of 932 articles were identified using the search terms; 69 articles fulfilled inclusion criteria and 17 articles were selected that had more than 5 citations. The articles' number of citations ranged from 6 to 98 for the most-cited article. Authors from, or affiliated with, 14 countries contributed to the 17 articles, and the country that had the greatest representation was the United States. The main topic discussed was surgical capacity, the second topic was the treatment of different neurosurgical conditions, and volunteerism was the third topic. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently a deficit in both the amount of literature surrounding the topic of global neurosurgery and how much that literature is cited. Developing innovative ways to increase academic productivity within, or in collaboration with, low-middle income countries is essential to contribute to global neurosurgery.