Role of Topical Tranexamic Acid on Blood Loss and Transfusion Requirements in Spinal Fusion for Neuromuscular and Syndromic Scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case control study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the role of TXA when used as topical soaked sponges (tTXA) on peri-operative blood loss and changes in hemoglobin following posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for neuromuscular and syndromic scoliosis (NMS). METHODS: A single center review of NMS patients who underwent PSF was conducted. The initial set of patients where no tTXA (control) was used were compared to consecutive NMS patients in whom tTXA was used. In the tTXA group, sponges soaked in 1g TXA in 500 mL normal saline were packed in the wound instead of dry sponges. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was calculated intraoperatively using a standard way. Pre-operative, intra-operative and immediate post-operative variables were collected and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: 33 patients were included (mean age- 13.5 yrs., BMI- 21, 17 patients in tTXA and 16 patients in control group). Pre-op demographic and radiographic variables were similar between the 2 groups. EBL, EBL per level, EBVL, operative time and number of levels fused were similar in both groups. tTXA group received less intra-operative pRBC transfusion as compared to the control group (150 ± 214 vs 363 ± 186 cc, P = .004). No difference was noted in post-op blood transfusion and drain output for 3 days in both the groups. tTXA group had lesser hospital (5.1 vs 8.9 days) and ICU length of stay (2 vs 4.2 days) and fewer immediate post-operative complications (23.5 vs 52.9%) compared to the control group but not statistically significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Administration of tTXA-soaked sponges is an effective and safe method to reduce intraoperative blood transfusion requirements in the correction of spinal deformity in patients with NMS.

The Effects of Preoperative Epidural Steroid Injection on Pseudarthrosis Following Lumbar Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to evaluate the effects of preoperative lumbar epidural steroid injection on the rate of pseudarthrosis following lumbar spine fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Epidural corticosteroids help to reduce nerve root edema and suppress proinflammatory cytokines in patients with radiculopathy. Corticosteroids may inhibit bone formation and reduce bone matrix synthesis rates. Thus, there is concern that corticosteroids may reduce lumbar fusion capability, potentially resulting in increased rates of symptomatic pseudarthrosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all patients who underwent 1-level or 2-level lumbar fusion surgery between 2018 and 2022. Patients were categorized into one of 3 groups: no preoperative epidural steroid injection (ESI) history (group 0), preoperative ESI within 90 days of surgery (group 1), or most recent ESI >90 days before surgery (group 2). The primary outcome of this study was pseudarthrosis. Binominal regression analyses were performed to determine the relationships between potential risk factors (sex, age, body mass index, smoking history, diabetes status, history of systemic steroid use, preoperative ESI, perioperative intravenous steroid administration, type of surgery, and postoperative ESI within 6 mo) and the development of postoperative pseudarthrosis. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients were included in this study. Of those, 106 patients (23.7%) did not have a preoperative ESI (group 0), 132 patients (29.5%) had an ESI within 90 days of surgery (group 1), and 208 patients (46.6%) had their most recent ESI >90 days before surgery (group 2). The overall incidence of pseudarthrosis following lumbar fusion was 8.7% (39 of 446). Although the incidence of pseudarthrosis following ESI at any time point was higher than in our control cohort (group 0), this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study found no increased risk of postoperative pseudarthrosis in patients who underwent 1-level or 2-level lumbar fusions after preoperative ESI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Current Trends in Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2 (rhBMP2) Usage for Spinal Fusion Surgery.

(1) Background: Since first approved by the FDA, on-label and off-label usage of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP2) for spinal fusion surgeries has become widespread. While many studies have investigated the safety and efficacy of its use, as well as its economic impact, few have looked at the current trends in its on- and off-label use. The goal of this study is to evaluate the current trends of on- and off-label rhBMP2 use for spinal fusion surgery. (2) Methods: A deidentified survey was created and electronically distributed to members of two international spine societies. Surgeons were asked to report their demographic information, surgical experience, and current usage of rhBMP2. They were then presented with five spinal fusion procedures and asked to report if they use rhBMP2 for these indications in their current practice. Responses were stratified between rhBMP2 users vs. non-users and on-label vs. off-label use. Data were analyzed using chi-square with Fisher's exact test for categorical data. (3) Results: A total of 146 respondents completed the survey with a response rate of 20.5%. There was no difference in overall rhBMP2 usage based on specialty, experience, or number of cases per year. Fellowship-trained surgeons and those who practice in the United States were more likely to use rhBMP2. Surgeons who were trained in the Southeast and Midwest regions reported the highest usage rates. rhBMP2 use was more common among fellowship-trained and US surgeons for ALIFs; non-US surgeons for multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusions; and fellowship-trained and orthopedic spine surgeons for lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Non-US surgeons were more likely to use rhBMP2 for off-label indications compared to surgeons from the US. (4) Conclusions: While various demographics of surgeons report different rates of rhBMP2 use, off-label use remains relatively commonplace amongst practicing spine surgeons.

Early Clinical Outcomes of the Prone Transpsoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion Technique.

BACKGROUND: The prone transpsoas (PTP) approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a relatively novel technique. Currently, little is known about its associated complications and early patient-reported outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of LLIF performed via the PTP approach on sagittal radiographic parameters, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and rates of complications. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 82 consecutive patients who underwent LLIF via a PTP technique. Lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), anterior disc height (ADH), and posterior disc height (PDH) were measured on preoperative, initial postoperative, and 3-month postoperative radiographs. PROMs including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); the visual analog scale (VAS); and pain portions of the EQ5D, VAS back, and VAS leg ratings were collected at the preoperative and subsequent postoperative visits. Length of hospital stay and postoperative complications related to the procedure were recorded. RESULTS: Significant improvements were seen at the initial (4.5° ± 8.6°, P < 0.001) and 3-month (4.4° ± 7.2°, P < 0.001) postoperative periods for LL, as well as SL (6.8° ± 4.8°, P < 0.001; 6.7° ± 4.4°, P < 0.001), ADH (8.0 mm ± 3.6, P < 0.001; 7.4 mm ± 3.6, P < 0.001), and PDH (3.3 mm ± 2.4, P < 0.001; 3.1 mm ± 2.5, P < 0.001). Significant improvements were seen at 3 months postoperatively for ODI (P < 0.001), EQ5D pain (P = 0.016), VAS leg (P < 0.001), and VAS back (P < 0.001). The average length of stay was 2.7 ± 4.5 days. The most common complications were ipsilateral thigh pain/numbness (45.1%), ipsilateral hip flexor weakness (39.0%), and contralateral thigh pain/numbness (14.6%). CONCLUSIONS: While early PROMs and correction of sagittal radiographic parameters show promising results for the PTP approach for LLIF, it is not without risks. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: PTP interbody fusion is an emerging technique that allows for simultaneous access to the anterior and posterior columns of the lumbar spine. This early case series demonstrates significant improvement in functional outcomes and lumbar lordosis with a safety profile comparable to other well-established techniques.