Achievement and Maintenance of Optimal Alignment After Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery: A 5-Year Outcome Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess factors contributing to optimal radiographic outcomes. METHODS: Operative adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with baseline and 5-year (5Y) data were included. Optimal alignment (O) was defined as improving in at least 1 Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab modifier without worsening in any Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab modifier. A robust outcome was defined as having optimal alignment 2 years (2Y) post operation that was maintained at 5Y. Predictors of robust outcomes were identified using multivariate regression analysis, with a conditional inference tree for continuous variables. RESULTS: Two-hundred and ninety-seven ASD patients met inclusion criteria. Most patients (77.4%) met O at 6W, which decreased to 54.2% at 2Y. The majority of patients (89.4%) that met O at 2Y went on to meet radiographic durability at 5Y (48.5% of total cohort). Rates of junctional failure were higher in O2+5- compared with O2+5- (P = 0.013), with reoperation rates of 17.2% due to loss of alignment. Multivariable regression identified the following independent predictors of optimal alignment at 5Y in those that had O at 2Y: inadequate correction of pelvic tilt and overcorrection of the difference between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (P < 0.05). Increased age, body mass index, and invasiveness were the most significant nonradiographic predictors for not achieving 5Y durability (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The durability of optimal alignment after ASD corrective surgery was seen in about half of the patients at 5Y. While the majority of patients at 2Y maintained their radiographic outcomes at 5Y, major contributors to loss of alignment included junctional failure and adjacent region compensation, with only a minority of patients losing correction through the existing construct. The reoperation rate for loss of alignment was 17.2%. Loss of alignment requiring reoperation had a detrimental effect on 5Y clinical outcomes.

Post-Operative Physical Therapy Following Cervical Spine Surgery: Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Introduction Post-operative physical therapy (PT) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery is often performed to improve a patient's functional ability and reduce neck pain. However, current literature evaluating the benefits of post-operative PT using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is limited and remains inconclusive. Here we compare post-operative improvement between patients who did and did not undergo formal PT after ACDF using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. Methods A retrospective observational study examining patients who underwent one- or two-level primary ACDF or cervical disc replacement (CDR) at an academic orthopedic hospital and who had PROMIS scores recorded pre-operatively and through two-year follow-up. Patients were stratified according to whether or not they attended formal postoperative PT. PROMIS scores and patient demographics were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher's exact test, chi-square test of independence, and Student's t-test within and between cohorts. Results Two hundred and twenty patients were identified. Demographic differences between PT and no PT groups include age (PT 54.1 vs. no PT 49.5, p=0.005) and BMI (PT 28.1 vs. no PT 29.8, p=0.028). The only significant difference in post-operative PROMIS scores was in physical health scores at three months post-operatively (no PT 43.9 vs. PT 39.1, p=0.008). Physical health scores improved from baseline to one-year follow-up in both cohorts (PT +3.5, p=0.025; no PT +6.6, p=0.008). There were no significant differences when comparing improvements in physical health scores between groups at six months and one year. Conclusion In conclusion, there was no significance to support the benefits of post-operative PT as measured by PROMIS scores. No significant differences in PROMIS were observed between groups from pre-operative baseline scores to six-month and one-year follow-ups.

Reoperation Rates Due to Adjacent Segment Disease Following Primary 1 to 2-Level Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of the approach of the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF; open vs . minimally invasive (MIS)] on reoperation rates due to ASD at 2 to 4-year follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Adjacent segment degeneration is a complication of lumbar fusion surgery, which may progress to adjacent segment disease (ASD) and cause debilitating postoperative pain potentially requiring additional operative management for relief. MIS TLIF surgery has been introduced to minimize this complication but the impact on ASD incidence is unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For a cohort of patients undergoing 1 or 2-level primary TLIF between 2013 and 2019, patient demographics and follow-up outcomes were collected and compared among patients who underwent open versus MIS TLIF using the Mann-Whitney U test, Fischer exact test, and binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant difference in revision rates due to ASD between MIS and open TLIFs at 2 (5.8% vs . 15.4%, P =0.021) and 3 (8% vs . 23.2%, P =0.03) year follow-up, with open TLIFs demonstrating significantly higher revision rates. The surgical approach was the only independent predictor of reoperation rates at both 2 and 3-year follow-ups (2 yr, P =0.009; 3 yr, P =0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Open TLIF was found to have a significantly higher rate of reoperation due to ASD compared with the MIS approach. In addition, the surgical approach (MIS vs . open) seems to be an independent predictor of reoperation rates.

How Do Patients With Predominant Neck Pain Improve After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy?

BACKGROUND: The presence of predominant pain in the arm vs the neck as a predictor of postoperative outcomes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been seldom reported; therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with predominant neck pain improve after surgery compared to patients with predominant arm pain or those with mixed symptoms in patients undergoing ACDF for radiculopathy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent ACDF at a single center from 2016 to 2018. Patients were split into groups based on preoperative neck and arm pain scores: neck (N) pain dominant group (visual analog scale [VAS] neck ≥ VAS arm by 1.0 point); neutral group (VAS neck < VAS arm by 1.0 point); or arm (A) pain dominant group (VAS arm ≥ VAS neck by 1.0 point), using a threshold difference of 1.0 point. Subsequently, individuals were substratified into 2 groups based on the arm to neck pain ratio (ANR): non-arm pain dominant defined as ANR ≤1.0 and arm pain dominant (APD) defined as ANR >1.0. Patient-reported outcome measurements including Neck Disability Index (NDI), Physical Component Score-12, and Mental Component Score (MCS-12) were compared between groups. RESULTS: No significant differences between groups when stratifying patients using a threshold difference of 1.0 point. When stratifying patients using the ANR, those in the APD group had significantly higher postoperative MCS-12 (P = 0.008) and NDI (P = 0.011) scores. In addition, the APD group showed a greater magnitude of improvement for MCS-12 and NDI scores (P = 0.043 and P = 0.038, respectively). Multiple linear regression showed that the A and the APD groups were both independent predictors of improvement in NDI. CONCLUSION: Patients with dominant arm pain showed significantly greater improvement in terms of MCS-12 and NDI scores compared to patients with dominant neck pain. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To compare the impact of ACDF on arm and neck pain in the context of cervical radiculopathy using patient-reported outcome measures as an objective measurement.

The History of Tourniquet Usage and Modern Utilization in Total Knee Arthroplasty.

The usage of tourniquets in orthopedic surgery is commonplace. This review will describe the history of tourniquet usage throughout medicine and trace this device's evolution to the modern device used today. Several basic principles of tourniquet usage will also be explored, debunking common myths regarding upper time-limits of tourniquet inflation, the ideal pressure of inflation, and tourniquet usage in patients with pre-existing vascular diseases. Additionally, special attention is paid to the utility of lower extremity tourniquets in total knee arthroplasty with regards to cementation, blood loss, pain control, and functional outcomes. Finally, the future of tourniquet usage is discussed.

Patient Satisfaction and Interest in Telemedicine Visits Following Total Knee and Hip Replacement Surgery.

Introduction: Telemedicine is the practice of caring for patients remotely when the patient and provider are not physically present at the same location. Within orthopedic surgery, telemedicine offers care without the typical obstacles of an in-person appointment such as difficulty ambulating following surgery and patient wait times. In this study, we evaluated patient interest and satisfaction in postoperative telemedicine visits following hip or knee arthroplasty surgery. Materials and Methods: Patients were offered either a traditional in-person or a remote telemedicine postoperative visit following surgery. Patients were asked to complete a satisfaction survey following their postoperative visit regarding their experience. Patient-survey responses as well as patient-reported outcome metrics were captured using a mobile and web-based electronic patient rehabilitation application. Results: A total of 766 patients were included in this study with 360 offered postoperative telemedicine visits and 402 offered traditional in-person visits. Two hundred fifty-nine patients reported satisfaction levels with their telemedicine visit, with 58.3% of patients characterizing their feelings with the visit as "extremely satisfied," 32.0% as "satisfied," 8.9% as "neutral," 0.3% as "dissatisfied," and 0.3% as "extremely dissatisfied." A total of 713 patients reported how the COVID-19 pandemic effected their feelings toward telemedicine with 12.9% of patients characterizing the affect as "extremely positively," 33.1% of patients as "positively," 48.9% of patients as "neutral," 3.6% of patients as "negatively," and 1.4% of patients as "extremely negatively." There were no significant differences in the change between preoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores/Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement, or Veterans RAND 12 Physical and Mental components and these values at 12 weeks follow-up and 1-year follow-up, respectively, in patients who had telemedicine visits versus those who had traditional in-person visits. Discussion: The results of this study demonstrate that the patients who decided to have a telemedicine visit during their postoperative visit were satisfied with their experience. Overall, COVID-19 had a positive influence on patient's feelings toward telemedicine visits.

Do Patients with Back Pain-Dominant Symptoms Improve After Lumbar Surgery for Radiculopathy or Claudication?

BACKGROUND: Currently, few studies have examined whether patients with back or leg pain-predominant symptoms fare better clinically after lumbar spine surgery; therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with back pain-dominant symptoms improved to a similar degree as patients with mixed or leg pain-dominant symptoms after lumbar surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single academic center, in which patients were stratified into three groups: (1) back pain-dominant group (B) (visual analog score [VAS] back - VAS leg ≥ 1.0 point), (2) neutral group (N) (VAS back - VAS leg < 1.0 point), or (3) leg pain-dominant group (L) (VAS leg - VAS back ≥ 1.0 point), using a VAS threshold difference of 1.0 point. As a secondary analysis, the VAS leg-to-back pain (LBR) ratio was used to further stratify patients: (1) nonleg pain-dominant (NLPD) group (LBR ≤ 1.0) or (2) leg pain-dominant (LPD) group (LBR > 1.0). Patient outcomes, including physical component score of the short form-12 survey (PCS-12), mental component score of the short form-12 survey (MCS-12), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), were identified and compared between groups using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in preoperative, postoperative, or delta scores for PCS-12 or ODI scores between groups. In patients undergoing decompression surgery, those with back pain-dominant or mixed symptoms (B, N, or NLPD groups) did not improve with respect to MCS-12 scores after surgery (P > .05), and those with leg pain-dominant symptoms (LPD group) had greater delta MCS-12 scores (P = .046) and greater recovery rates (P = .035). Multiple linear regression did not find LPD to be an independent predictor of PCS-12 or ODI scores. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing lumbar decompression surgery and leg pain-dominant symptoms noted a greater improvement in MCS-12 scores; however, there were no differences in PCS-12 or ODI scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients undergoing lumbar decompression surgery demonstrate no major clinically significant differences when split up by pain-dominance groups.

Can Imaging Characteristics on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predict the Acuity of a Lumbar Disc Herniation?

BACKGROUND: Currently, no authors of existing studies have attempted to classify the signal characteristics of disc herniation on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and their temporal relationship to symptoms of lumbar radiculopathy. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the MRI signal characteristics are predictive of acuity of symptoms in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients treated at an academic center for LDH from 2015 to 2018. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on symptom duration (acute: ≤6 weeks; or chronic: >4 months). Two independent observers measured T1, T2 signal, and other MRI characteristics at the affected disc level. Univariate analysis was used to compare differences between groups. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine predictors of acuity. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included (33 acute, 56 chronic) with no significant baseline differences between groups. Rater 2 observed a higher proportion of disc bulges in the chronic group (P = .021) and a higher abnormal T1 herniation signal in the acute group (P = .048). Rater 1 found a higher Pfirrmann grade (P = .005) and a higher prevalence of vertebral body spurring (P = .007) in the chronic group. Interobserver agreement for T1 central and herniation signals demonstrated poor to fair agreement, whereas the remainder of the measurements showed moderate to substantial agreement (κ = 0.4-0.8). Multiple logistic regression showed that Pfirrmann Grade 5 (odds ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [0.02, 0.74], P = .022) and anterior/posterior spurring (odds ratio = 0.053 [0.03, 0.85], P = .023) were not associated with acuity. CONCLUSIONS: Other than Pfirrmann grade or vertebral body spurring, no MRI characteristics could be reliably identified that correlate with acuity of symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

How Does the Presence of a Surgical Trainee Impact Patient Outcomes in Lumbar Fusion Surgery?

BACKGROUND: While the impact of trainee involvement in other surgical fields is well established, there is a paucity of literature assessing this relationship in orthopaedic spine surgery. The goal of this study was to further elucidate this relationship. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was initiated on patients undergoing 1-3 level lumbar spine fusion at a single academic center. Operative reports from cases were examined, and patients were divided into 2 groups depending on whether a fellow or resident (F/R) or a physician's assistant (PA) was used as the primary assist. Patients with less than 1-year follow-up were excluded. Multiple linear regression was used to assess change in each patient-reported outcome, and multiple binary logistic regression was used to determine significant predictors of revision, infection, and 30- or 90-day readmission. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-two patients were included in the F/R group compared with 178 patients in the PA group. No differences existed between groups for total surgery time, length of stay, 30- or 90-day readmissions, infection, or revision rates. No differences existed between groups in terms of patient-reported outcomes preoperatively or postoperatively. In addition, presence of a surgical trainee was not a significant predictor of patient outcomes or rates of infection, overall revision, or 30- and 90-day readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate the presence of an orthopaedic spine F/R does not increase complication rates and does not affect short-term patient-reported outcomes in lumbar decompression and fusion surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Lumbar Pedicle Morphology and Vertebral Dimensions in Isthmic and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis-A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: The pedicle screw is the most common device used to achieve fixation in fusion of spondylolistheses. Safe and accurate placement with this technique relies on a thorough understanding of the bony anatomy. There is a paucity of literature comparing the surgically relevant osseous anatomy in patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and an isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). The goal of this study was to determine the differences in the osseous anatomy in patients with a DS and those with an IS. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study was conducted on patients with a single-level, symptomatic L4-L5 DS or a single-level, symptomatic L5-S1 IS. Magnetic resonance imaging for these patients was reviewed. Morphometries of the pedicle and vertebral body were analyzed by 2 independent observers for the levels from L3 to S1, and radiographic parameters were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 572 levels in 143 patients were studied, including 103 patients with a DS and 40 with an IS. After accounting for confounders, IS and DS had an independent effect on transverse vertebral body width, pedicle height and width, and sagittal pedicle angle. Patients with an IS had a smaller pedicle height (P < .001) and pedicle width (P = .001) than patients with DS. In addition, the angulation of the pedicles varied on the basis of the diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The osseous anatomy is significantly different in patients with a DS than with an IS. Patients with an IS have smaller pedicles in the lumbar spine. Also, the L4 and L5 pedicles are more caudally angulated and the S1 pedicle is less medialized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding the differences in pedicle anatomy is important for the safe placement of pedicle screws.

Combined Depression and Anxiety Influence Patient-Reported Outcomes after Lumbar Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Currently, no studies have assessed what effect the presence of both anxiety and depression may have on patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) compared to patients with a single or no mental health diagnosis. METHODS: Patients undergoing 1- to 3-level lumbar fusion at a single academic hospital were retrospectively queried. Anyone with depression and/or anxiety was identified using an existing clinical diagnosis in the medical chart. Patients were separated into 3 groups: no depression or anxiety (NDA), depression or anxiety alone (DOA), and combined depression and anxiety (DAA). Absolute PROMs, recovery ratios, and the percentage of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference (% MCID) between groups were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of the 391 patients included in the cohort, 323 (82.6%) were in the NDA group, 37 (9.5%) in the DOA group, and 31 (7.9%) in the DAA group. Patients in the DAA group had significantly worse outcome scores before and after surgery with respect to Short Form-12 mental component score (MCS-12) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores (P <.001); however, the change in PROMs, recovery ratio, % MCID were not found to be significantly different between groups. Using multivariate analysis, the DAA group was found to be an independent predictor of worse improvement in MCS-12 and ODI scores (P = .026 and P = .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with combined anxiety and depression fared worse with respect to disability before and after surgery compared to patients with a single diagnosis or no mental health diagnosis; however, there were no significant differences in recovery ratio or % MCID. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Combined anxiety and depression may predict less improvement in MCS-12 and ODI after lumbar arthrodesis compared with single or no mental health diagnosis.

The Effect of Medicare's Bundled Payments for Care Initiative on Patient Risk Factors Prior to Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Medicare's Bundled Payments for Care Initiative (BPCI) is a risk-sharing alternative payment model. There is a concern that BPCI providers may avoid operating on obese patients and active smokers to reduce costs. We sought to understand if increased focus on these patient factors has led to a change in patient demographics in Medicare-insured patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent TKA at an academic orthopedic specialty hospital between 1/1/13 and 8/31/19. Surgical date, insurance provider, BMI, and smoking status were collected. Patients were categorized as a current, former, or never smoker. Patients were categorized as obese if their BMI was >30 kg/m2, morbidly obese if their BMI was >40 kg/m2, and super obese if their BMI was >50 kg/m2. RESULTS: In total, 10,979 patients with complete insurance information were analyzed. There was no statistically significant change in the proportion of Medicare patients who were active smokers (4.34% in 2013, 4.85% in 2019, Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.6092, P = .146). The proportion of Medicare patients with BMI >30 kg/m2 increased over the study period (35.84% in 2013, 55.77% in 2019, Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.8505, P = .015). When looking at patients with BMI >40 kg/m2 and >50 kg/m2, there was no significant change. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concern that reimbursement payments could alter access to care for patients with certain risk factors, this study did not find a noticeable difference in the representation of patients with obesity and smoking status undergoing TKA following the installation of BPCI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective observational analysis.

Does Smoking Status Influence Health-Related Quality of Life Outcome Measures in Patients Undergoing ACDF?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: Whereas smoking has been shown to affect the fusion rates for patients undergoing an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), the relationship between smoking and health-related quality of life outcome measurements after an ACDF is less clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether smoking negatively affects patient outcomes after an ACDF for cervical degenerative pathology. METHODS: Patients with tumor, trauma, infection, and previous cervical spine surgery and those with less than a year of follow-up were excluded. Smoking status was assessed by self-reported smoking history. Patient outcomes, including Neck Disability Index, Short Form 12 Mental Component Score, Short Form 12 Physical Component Score (PCS-12), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) arm pain, VAS neck pain, and pseudarthrosis rates were evaluated. Outcomes were compared between smoking groups using multiple linear and logistic regression, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI), among other factors. A P value <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of 19.8 months, age of 53.1 years, and BMI of 29.6 kg/m2. There were 43 current, 69 former, and 152 nonsmokers in the cohort. At baseline, nonsmokers had higher PCS-12 scores than current smokers (P = .010), lower VAS neck pain than current (P = .035) and former (P = .014) smokers, as well as lower VAS arm pain than former smokers (P = .006). Postoperatively, nonsmokers had higher PCS-12 scores than both current (P = .030) and former smokers (P = .035). Smoking status was not a significant predictor of change in patient outcome in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas nonsmokers had higher function and lower pain than former or current smokers preoperatively, smoking status overall was not found to be an independent predictor of outcome scores after ACDF. This supports the notion that smoking status alone should not deter patients from undergoing ACDF for cervical degenerative pathology.

Processing and Handling Cost of Single-use Versus Traditional Instrumentation for 1 Level Lumbar Fusions.

STUDY DESIGN: A single center, observational prospective clinical study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the instrumentation-related cost and efficiency of single-use instrumentation versus traditional reusable instrument trays. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Single-use instrumentation provides the opportunity to reduce costs associated with cleaning and sterilizing instrumentation after surgery. Although previous studies have shown single-use instrumentation is effective in other orthopedic specialties, it is unclear if single-use instrumentation could provide economic advantages in spine surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 (20 reusable instrumentation and 20 single-use instrumentation) lumbar decompression (1-3 level) and fusion (1 level) spine surgeries were collected. Instrument handling, opening, setup, re-stocking, cleaning, sterilization, inspection, packaging, and storage were recorded by direct observation for both reusable and single-use instrumentation. The rate of infection was noted for each group. RESULTS: Mean time of handling instruments by the scrub nurse was 11.6 (±3.9) minutes for reusable instrumentation and 2.1 (±0.5) minutes for single-use instrumentation. Mean cost of handling reusable instruments was estimated to be $8.52 (±$2.96) per case, and the average cost to reprocess a single tray by Sterilization Processing Department (SPD) was $58. Thus, the median cost for sterilizing 2 reusable trays per case was $116, resulting in an average total Costresuable of $124.52 (±$2.96). Mean cost of handling single-use instrumentation was estimated to be $1.57 ($0.38) per case. CONCLUSION: Single-use instrumentation provided greater cost savings and reduced time from the opening of instrumentation to use in surgery when compared with reusable instrumentation.

Depression Identified on the Mental Component Score of the Short Form-12 Affects Health Related Quality of Life After Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to further elucidate the relationship between preoperative depression and patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) following lumbar decompression surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The impact of preoperative depression on PROMs after lumbar decompression surgery is not well established. METHODS: Patients undergoing lumbar decompression between 1 and 3 levels were retrospectively identified. Patients were split into 2 groups using a preoperative Mental Component Score (MCS)-12 threshold score of 45.6 or 35.0 to identify those with and without depressive symptoms. In addition, patients were also split based on a pre-existing diagnosis of depression in the medical chart. Absolute PROM scores, the recovery ratio and the percent of patients achieving minimum clinically important difference between groups were compared, and a multiple linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 184 patients were included, with 125 (67.9%) in the MCS-12 >45.6 group and 59 (32.1%) in the MCS-12 ≤45.6 group. The MCS-12 ≤45.6 and MCS<35.0 group had worse baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (P<0.001 for both) and Visual Analogue Scale Leg (P=0.018 and 0.024, respectively) scores. The MCS ≤45.6 group had greater disability postoperatively in terms of SF-12 Physical Component Score (PCS-12) (39.1 vs. 43.1, P=0.015) and ODI (26.6 vs. 17.8, P=0.006). Using regression analysis, having a baseline MCS-12 scores ≤45.6 before surgical intervention was a significant predictor of worse improvement in terms of PCS-12 [ß=-4.548 (-7.567 to -1.530), P=0.003] and ODI [ß=8.234 (1.433, 15.035), P=0.010] scores than the MCS-12 >45.6 group. CONCLUSION: Although all patients showed improved in all PROMs after surgery, those with MCS-12 ≤45.6 showed less improvement in PCS-12 and ODI scores.

Are Patient Outcomes Affected by the Presence of a Fellow or Resident in Lumbar Decompression Surgery?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the presence of a fellow or resident (F/R) compared to a physician assistant (PA) affected surgical variables or short-term patient outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although orthopedic spine fellows and residents must participate in minimum number of decompression surgeries to gain competency, the impact of trainee presence on patient outcomes has not been assessed. METHODS: One hundred and seventy-one patients that underwent a one- to three-level lumbar spine decompression procedure at a high-volume academic center were retrospectively identified. Operative reports from all cases were examined and patients were placed into one of two groups based on whether the first assist was a F/R or a PA. Univariate analysis was used to compare differences in total surgery duration, 30-day and 90-day readmissions, infection and revision rates, patient-reported outcome measures (Short Form-12 Physical Component Score and Mental Component Score, Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale [VAS] Back, VAS Leg) between groups. Multiple linear regression was used to assess change in each patient reported outcome and multiple binary logistic regression was used to determine significant predictors of revision, infection, and 30- or 90-day readmission. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients were included in the F/R group compared to 93 patients in the PA group. There were no differences between groups for total surgery time, 30-day or 90-day readmissions, infection, or revision rates. Using univariate analysis, there were no differences between the two groups pre- or postoperatively (P > 0.05). Using multivariate analysis, presence of a surgical trainee did not significantly influence any patient reported outcome and did not affect infection, revision, or 30- and 90-day readmission rates. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first studies to show that the presence of an orthopedic spine fellow or resident does not affect patient short-term outcomes in lumbar decompression surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

BMI Does Not Affect Complications or Patient Reported Outcomes After Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective comparative review. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify the influence of body mass index (BMI) on postsurgical complications and patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) following lumbar decompression surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current literature does not accurately identify the impact of BMI on postsurgical complications or outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records from a single-center, academic hospital were used to identify patients undergoing 1 to 3-level lumbar decompression surgery. Patients under 18 years of age, those undergoing surgery for infection, trauma, tumor, or revision, and those with <1-year follow-up were excluded. Patients were split into groups based on preoperative BMI: class I: BMI <25.0 kg/m; class II: BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m; class III: BMI 30.0-34.9 kg/m; and class IV: BMI >35.0 kg/m. Absolute PROM scores, the recovery ratio and the percent of patients achieving minimum clinically important difference between groups were compared and a multiple linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 195 patients were included with 34 (17.4%) patients in group I, 80 (41.0%) in group II, 49 (25.1%) in group III, and 32 (16.5%) in group IV. Average age was 60.0 (58.0, 62.0) years and average follow-up was 13.0 (12.6, 13.4) months. All patients improved significantly within each group, except for class III and class IV patients, who did not demonstrate significant improvements in terms of Mental Component Score (MCS-12) scores (P=0.546 and 0.702, respectively). There were no significant differences between BMI groups for baseline or postoperative PROM values, recovery ratio, or the percent of patients reaching minimum clinically important difference. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that BMI was not a significant predictor for change in outcomes for any measure. The 30-day readmission rate was 6.2% and overall revision rate at final follow-up was 5.1%, with no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: This study's results suggest that BMI may not significantly affect complications or patient outcomes at 1-year in those undergoing lumbar decompression surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.