Postoperative C5 Palsy after Anterior or Posterior Decompression for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Subgroup Analysis of the Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Phase III, CSM-Protect Clinical Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of prospectively accrued data. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a large, prospective, multicentre dataset of surgically-treated DCM cases on the contemporary risk of C5 palsy with surgical approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The influence of surgical technique on postoperative C5 palsy after decompression for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is intensely debated. Comprehensive analyses are needed using contemporary data and accounting for covariates. METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe DCM were prospectively enrolled in the multicenter, randomized CSM-Protect clinical trial and underwent either anterior or posterior decompression between Jan 31, 2012, to May 16, 2017. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative C5 palsy, defined as onset of muscle weakness by at least one grade in manual muscle test at the C5 myotome with slight or absent sensory disruption after cervical surgery. Two comparative cohorts were made based on anterior or posterior surgical approach. Multivariate hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for C5 palsy. RESULTS: A total of 283 patients were included, and 53.4% underwent posterior decompression. The total incidence of postoperative C5 palsy was 7.4% and was significantly higher in patients that underwent posterior decompression compared to anterior decompression (11.26% vs. 3.03%, P=0.008). After multivariable regression, posterior approach was independently associated with greater than four times the likelihood of postoperative C5 palsy (P=0.017). Rates of C5 palsy recovery were comparable between the two surgical approaches. CONCLUSION: The odds of postoperative C5 palsy are significantly higher after posterior decompression compared to anterior decompression for DCM. This may influence surgical decision-making when there is equipoise in deciding between anterior and posterior treatment options for DCM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II.

Pre-operative expectations of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: an observational study from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Despite an abundance of literature on degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), little is known about pre-operative expectations of these patients. PURPOSE: The primary objective was to describe patient pre-operative expectations. Secondary objectives included identifying patient characteristics associated with high pre-operative expectations and to determine if expectations varied depending on myelopathy severity. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of a prospective multicenter, observational cohort of patients with DCM. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who consented to undergo surgical treatment between January 2019 and September 2022 were included. OUTCOMES MEASURES: An 11-domain expectation questionnaire was completed pre-operatively whereby patients quantified the expected change in each domain. METHODS: The most important expected change was captured. A standardized expectation score was calculated as the sum of each expectation divided by the maximal possible score. The high expectation group was defined by patients who had an expectation score above the 75th percentile. Predictors of patients with high expectations were determined using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: There were 262 patients included. The most important patient expectation was preventing neurological worsening (40.8%) followed by improving balance when standing or walking (14.5%), improving independence in everyday activities (10.3%), and relieving arm tingling, burning and numbness (10%). Patients with mild myelopathy were more likely to select no worsening as the most important expected change compared to patients with severe myelopathy (p<.01). Predictors of high patient expectations were: having fewer comorbidities (OR -0.30 for every added comorbidity, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.10, p=.01), a shorter duration of symptoms (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.35-1.19, p=.02), no contribution from "failure of other treatments" on the decision to undergo surgery (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.56-2.71, p=.02) and more severe neck pain (OR 0.19 for 1 point increase, 95% CI 0.05-0.37, p=.01). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing surgery for DCM expect prevention of neurological decline, better functional status, and improvement in their myelopathic symptoms. Stopping neurological deterioration is the most important expected outcomes by patients.

The Effects of Peri-Operative Adverse Events on Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Observational Cohort Study from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a lack of data examining the effects of perioperative adverse events (AEs) on long-term outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy. We aimed to investigate associations between the occurrence of perioperative AEs and coprimary outcomes: (1) modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score and (2) Neck Disability Index (NDI) score. METHODS: We analyzed data from 800 patients prospectively enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network multicenter observational study. The Spine AEs Severity system was used to collect intraoperative and postoperative AEs. Patients were assessed at up to 2 years after surgery using the NDI and the mJOA scale. We used a linear mixed-effect regression to assess the influence of AEs on longitudinal outcome measures as well as multivariable logistic regression to assess factors associated with meeting minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds at 1 year. RESULTS: There were 167 (20.9%) patients with minor AEs and 36 (4.5%) patients with major AEs. The occurrence of major AEs was associated with an average increase in NDI of 6.8 points (95% CI: 1.1-12.4, P = .019) and reduction of 1.5 points for mJOA scores (95% CI: -2.3 to -0.8, P < .001) up to 2 years after surgery. Occurrence of major AEs reduced the odds of patients achieving MCID targets at 1 year after surgery for mJOA (odds ratio 0.23, 95% CI: 0.086-0.53, P = .001) and for NDI (odds ratio 0.34, 95% CI: 0.11-0.84, P = .032). CONCLUSION: Major AEs were associated with reduced functional gains and worse recovery trajectories for patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy. Occurrence of major AEs reduced the probability of achieving mJOA and NDI MCID thresholds at 1 year. Both minor and major AEs significantly increased health resource utilization by reducing the proportion of discharges home and increasing length of stay.

Anterior vs Posterior Surgery for Patients With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The advantages and disadvantages of anterior vs posterior surgical approaches for patients with progressive degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) remain uncertain. Our primary objective was to evaluate patient-reported disability at 1 year after surgery. Our secondary objectives were to evaluate differences in patient profiles selected for each approach in routine clinical practice and to compare neurological function, neck and arm pain, health-related quality of life, adverse events, and rates of reoperations. METHODS: We analyzed data from patients with DCM who were enrolled in an ongoing multicenter prospective observational cohort study. We controlled for differences in baseline characteristics and numbers of spinal levels treated using multivariable logistic regression. Adverse events were collected according to the Spinal Adverse Events Severity protocol. RESULTS: Among 559 patients, 261 (47%) underwent anterior surgery while 298 (53%) underwent posterior surgery. Patients treated posteriorly had significantly worse DCM severity and a greater number of vertebral levels involved. After adjusting for confounders, there was no significant difference between approaches for odds of achieving the minimum clinically important difference for the Neck Disability Index (odds ratio 1.23, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.86, P = .31). There was also no significant difference for change in modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scores, and differences in neck and arm pain and health-related quality of life did not exceed minimum clinically important differences. Patients treated anteriorly experienced greater rates of dysphagia, whereas patients treated posteriorly experienced greater rates of wound complications, neurological complications, and reoperations. CONCLUSION: Patients selected for posterior surgery had worse DCM and a greater number of vertebral levels involved. Despite this, anterior and posterior surgeries were associated with similar improvements in disability, neurological function, pain, and quality of life. Anterior surgery had a more favorable profile of adverse events, which suggests it might be a preferred option when feasible.

Stand-Alone Anchored Spacer vs Anterior Plate Construct in the Management of Adjacent Segment Disease after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of surgically treated adjacent segment disease (ASDis) following ACDF with either anterior plate construct (APC) or stand-alone anchored spacers (SAAS). METHOD: Multiple databases were searched until December 2022 for pertinent studies. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life outcomes [JOA, NDI, and VAS], whereas, the secondary outcomes included operative characteristics [estimated blood loss (EBL) and operative time (OT)], radiological outcomes [C2-C7 Cobb angle, disc height index (DHI) changes, fusion rate], and complications. RESULTS: A total of 5 studies were included, comprising 210 patients who had been surgically treated for cervical ASDis. Among them, 113 received APC, and 97 received SAAS. Postoperative dysphagia was significantly higher in the APC group [47% vs 11%, OR = 7.7, 95% CI = 3.1-18.9, P < .05]. Similarly, operative time and blood loss were higher in the APC group compared to the SAAS group; [MD = 16.96, 95% CI = 7.87-26.06, P < .05] and [MD = 5.22, 95% CI = .35 - 10.09, P < .05], respectively. However, there was no difference in the rate of prolonged dysphagia and clinical outcomes in terms of JOA, NDI, and VAS. Furthermore, there was no difference in the radiological parameters including the C2-7 Cobb angle and DHI as well as the fusion rate. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that both surgical techniques (APC and SAAS) are effective in treating ASDis. However, with low certainty of the evidence, considering patients are at high risk of dysphagia following revision cervical spine surgery SAAS may be the preferred choice.

L5-S1 Pseudoarthrosis Rate with ALIF Versus TLIF in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgeries: A Retrospective Analysis of 100 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbosacral pseudoarthrosis is a common complication following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery. This study assessed the reoperation rate for L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis in the ASD population. Compared with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIFs), we hypothesized that anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) would result in lower rates of L5-S1 pseudarthrosis. METHODS: This is a single center study with patient data retrieved from a prospective ASD database. The patients had a long-segment fusion, ALIF or TLIF at the L5-S1 level with a 2-year follow-up and were divided into 2 groups (TLIF and ALIF). The study's primary outcome was to assess the difference in the reoperation rate for clinical pseudoarthrosis between the TLIF and the ALIF groups. The secondary outcomes measured the radiological pseudoarthrosis rate and identified risks for L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis development. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included; 49 patients (mean age, 62.9 years; 77.5% females) were in TLIF and 51 patients (mean age, 64.4 years; 70.6% females) were in the ALIF group. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. Thirteen (13%) patients with L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis required reoperation. Clinical pseudoarthrosis was higher in the TLIF group than in the ALIF group (12/49 vs. 1/51; P < 0.001). Univariate analysis demonstrated a higher risk of L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis with TLIF than ALIF (risk ratio, 12.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.68-92.4; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed 4.86 times the risk of L5-S1 clinical pseudoarthrosis with TLIF than with ALIF (risk ratio, 4.86; 95% confidence interval 0.57-47; P = 0.17), but this ratio did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in reoperation risk for L5-S1 pseudarthrosis was observed based on the method of IF. rhBMP-2 was noted as a significant predictor.

Deterioration After Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: A Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence, etiology, and outcomes of patients who experience neurological deterioration after surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Postoperative neurological deterioration is one of the most undesirable complications that can occur after surgery for DCM. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network DCM prospective cohort study. We defined postoperative neurological deterioration as any decrease in modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score by at least one point from baseline to three months after surgery. Adverse events were collected using the Spinal Adverse Events Severity protocol. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported pain, disability, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Among a study cohort of 428 patients, 50 (12%) deteriorated by at least one mJOA point after surgery for DCM (21 by one point, 15 by two points, and 14 by three points or more). Significant risk factors included older age, female sex, and milder disease. Among those who deteriorated, 13 experienced contributing intraoperative or postoperative adverse events, six had alternative non-DCM diagnoses, and 31 did not have an identifiable reason for deterioration. Patients who deteriorated had significantly lower mJOA scores at one year after surgery [13.5 (SD 2.7) vs. 15.2 (SD 2.2), P <0.01 and those with larger deteriorations were less likely to recover their mJOA to at least their preoperative baseline, but most secondary measures of pain, disability, and health-related quality of life were unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of deterioration of mJOA scores after surgery for DCM was approximately one in 10, but some deteriorations were unrelated to actual spinal cord impairment and most secondary outcomes were unaffected. These findings can inform patient and surgeon expectations during shared decision-making, and they demonstrate that the interpretation of mJOA scores without clinical context can sometimes be misleading.

Timing of Recovery After Surgery for Patients With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

BACKGROUND: The time course over which postoperative neurological recovery occurs after surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy occurs is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine the time point at which patients experience significant neurological improvement. METHODS: We reviewed data from an ongoing prospective multicenter cohort study. We measured neurological function at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery using the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) scale. We implemented minimal clinical important differences (MCIDs) to guide interpretation of mJOA scores, and we used 1-way analysis of variance to compare changes between follow-up intervals. RESULTS: Among 330 patients, the mean overall mJOA improved from 12.9 (SD 2.6) to 14.6 (SD 2.4) at 3 months, 14.7 (SD 2.4) at 1 year, and 14.8 (SD 2.5) at 2 years. The difference in means was statistically significant (P < .01) at the interval from baseline to 3 months postoperatively, but not from 3 months to 1 year or 1 year to 2 years. The MCID was reached by 161 patients at 3 months, 32 more at 1 year, and 15 more at 2 years, with a statistically significant difference only at 3 months. Patients with moderate or severe disease reached the MCID more frequently than those with mild disease. CONCLUSION: Among patients who underwent surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy, most significant neurological improvement occurred by 3 months after surgery. These findings will facilitate valid discussions about postoperative expectations during shared clinical decision making between patients and their surgeons.

Minimally Invasive Tubular Lumbar Discectomy Versus Conventional Open Lumbar Discectomy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness of minimally invasive (MIS) tubular discectomy in comparison to conventional open surgery among patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN). METHODS: We performed an observational analysis of data that was prospectively collected. We implemented Minimum Clinically Important Differences (MCIDs), and we adjusted for potential confounders with multiple logistic regression. Adverse events were collected according to the Spinal Adverse Events Severity (SAVES) protocol. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-nine (62%) patients underwent MIS tubular discectomy and 211 (38%) underwent conventional open discectomy. There were no significant differences between groups for improvement of leg pain and disability, but the MIS technique was associated with reduced odds of achieving the MCID for back pain (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.99, P < 0.05). We identified statistically significant differences in favor of MIS for each of operating time (MIS mean (SD) 72.2 minutes (30.0) vs open 93.5 (40.9)), estimated blood loss (MIS 37.9 mL (36.7) vs open 76.8 (71.4)), length of stay in hospital (MIS 73% same-day discharge vs open 40%), rates of incidental durotomy (MIS 4% vs open 8%), and wound-related complications (MIS 3% vs open 9%); but not for overall rates of reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Open and MIS techniques yielded similar improvements of leg pain and disability at up to 12 months of follow-up, but MIS patients were less likely to experience improvement of associated back pain. Small differences favored MIS for operating time, blood loss, and adverse events but may have limited clinical importance.

Unexpected intraoperative positive culture (UIPC) in presumed aseptic revision spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Unexpected intraoperative positive culture (UIPC) has recently become increasingly common in revision spine surgery, being implicated as an etiological factor in revision spine surgery indications such as implant failure or pseudoarthrosis. PURPOSE: Utilizing the available literature, this study aimed to investigate the prevalence of UIPC, and its clinical importance in patients following presumed aseptic revision spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis and systematic review. METHODS: Multiple databases and reference articles were searched until May 2022. The primary outcome was the pooled rate of UIPC, and the secondary outcomes were the microbiological profile of UIPC, the risk factors of UIPC, and the clinical fate of UIPC. RESULTS: Twelve studies were eligible for meta-analysis, with a total of 1,108 patients. The pooled rate of UIPC was 24.3% (95% CI=15.8%-35.5%) in adult patients, and 43.2% (95% CI=32.9%-54.2%) in pediatric patients. The UIPC rate was higher when both conventional wound culture and sonication were used together compared to sonication alone or conventional wound culture alone. The rates were 28.9%, 23.6%, and 15.5 %, respectively. In adult and pediatric patients, the most commonly cultured organism was Cutibacterium acnes (42.5% vs 57.7%), followed by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (39.9% vs 30.5%). Male patients had a higher rate of UIPC (OR= 2.6, 95% CI=1.84-3.72, p<.001), as did patients with a longer fusion construct (MD=0.76, 95% CI=0.27-1.25, p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The pooled rate of UIPC in aseptic spine revision surgery was 24.3% and 43.2% in adult and pediatric patients respectively. The most common organisms were C. acnes and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus. The impact of UIPC on patients` clinical outcomes is not fully understood. We are not able to recommend routine culture in revision spine surgery, however, adding sonication may aid in the diagnosis of UIPC. There is not enough evidence to recommend specific treatment strategies at this time, and further studies are warranted.

Does extending a posterior cervical fusion construct into the upper thoracic spine impact patient-reported outcomes as long as 2 years after surgery in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy?

OBJECTIVE: In multilevel posterior cervical instrumented fusion, extension of fusion across the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) at T1 or T2 has been associated with decreased rates of reoperation and pseudarthrosis but with longer surgical time and increased blood loss. The impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective was to determine whether extension of fusion through the CTJ influenced PROs at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The secondary objective was to compare the number of patients who reached the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for the PROs, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of stay, discharge disposition, adverse events (AEs), reoperation within 24 months of surgery, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of prospectively collected multicenter data of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Patients who underwent posterior instrumented fusion of 4 levels or greater (between C2 and T2) between January 2015 and October 2020 and received 24 months of follow-up were included. PROs (scores on the Neck Disability Index [NDI], EQ-5D, physical component summary and mental component summary of SF-12, and numeric rating scale for arm and neck pain) and mJOA scores were compared using ANCOVA and adjusted for baseline differences. Patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and surgical details were abstracted. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for these outcomes were compared with the chi-square test. Operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, AEs, reoperation, discharge disposition, length of stay, and satisfaction was compared by using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the independent-samples t-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients were included in this study (101 patients with fusion not crossing the CTJ and 97 with fusion crossing the CTJ). Patients with a construct extending through the CTJ were more likely to be female and have worse baseline NDI scores (p > 0.05). When adjusted for baseline differences, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the PROs and mJOA scores at 3, 12, and 24 months. Surgical duration was longer (p < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss was greater in the group with fusion extending to the upper thoracic spine (p = 0.013). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of AEs (p > 0.05). Fusion with a construct crossing the CTJ was associated with reoperation (p = 0.04). Satisfaction with surgery was not significantly different between groups. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for the PROs were not statistically different at any time point. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically significant differences in PROs between patients with a posterior construct extending to the upper thoracic spine and those without such extension for as long as 24 months after surgery. The AE profiles were not significantly different, but longer surgical time and increased blood loss were associated with constructs extending across the CTJ.

Predictors of home discharge after scheduled surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy.

OBJECTIVE: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is an important public health issue. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for moderate and severe DCM. Delayed discharge of patients after DCM surgery is associated with increased healthcare costs. There is a paucity of data regarding predictive factors for discharge destination after scheduled surgery for patients with DCM. The purpose of this study was to identify factors predictive of home versus nonhome discharge after DCM surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing scheduled DCM surgery who had been enrolled in a prospective DCM substudy of the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry between January 2015 and October 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. Patient data were evaluated to identify potential factors predictive of home discharge after surgery. Logistic regression was used to identify independent factors predictive of home discharge. A multivariable model was then used as a final model. RESULTS: Overall, 639 patients were included in the initial analysis, 543 (85%) of whom were discharged home. The mean age of the entire cohort was 60 years (SD 11.8 years), with a BMI of 28.9 (SD 5.7). Overall, 61.7% of the patients were female. The mean length of stay was 2.72 days (SD 1.7 days). The final internally validated bootstrapped multivariable model revealed that younger age, higher 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire score, lower Neck Disability Index scores, fewer operated levels, mJOA scores indicating mild disease, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedure, and no perioperative adverse effects were predictive of home discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Younger age, less neck-related disability, fewer operated levels, more significant depression, less severe myelopathy, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion procedure, and no perioperative adverse effects are predictive of home discharge after surgery for DCM. These factors can help to guide clinical decision-making and optimize postoperative care pathways.

Factors Associated With Return to Work After Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Cohort Analysis From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrosepctive analysis of prospectively collected data from the multicentre Canadian Surgical Spine Registry (CSORN). OBJECTIVE: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the most common cause of spinal cord dysfunction in North America. Few studies have evaluated return to work (RTW) rates after DCM surgery. Our goals were to determine rates and factors associated with postoperative RTW in surgically managed patients with DCM. METHODS: Data was derived from the prospective, multicenter Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN). From this cohort, we included all nonretired patients with at least 1-year follow-up. The RTW rate was defined as the proportion of patients with active employment at 1 year from the time of surgery. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were used to identify patient characteristics, disease, and treatment variables associated with RTW. RESULTS: Of 213 surgically treated DCM patients, 126 met eligibility, with 49% working and 51% not working in the immediate period before surgery; 102 had 12-month follow-up data. In both the unadjusted and the adjusted analyses working preoperatively and an anterior approach were associated with a higher postoperative RTW (P < .05), there were no significant differences between the postoperative employment groups with respect to age, gender, preoperative mJOA (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association) score, and duration of symptoms (P > .05). Active preoperative employment (odds ratio = 15.4, 95% confidence interval = 4.5, 52.4) and anterior surgical procedures (odds ratio = 4.7, 95% confidence interval = 1.2, 19.6) were associated with greater odds of RTW at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of nonretired patients undergoing surgery for DCM had returned to work 12 months after surgery; active preoperative employment and anterior surgical approach were associated with RTW in this analysis.

Mechanical Complications in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Can Spinal Alignment Explain Everything?

STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to verify the validity of the global alignment and proportion (GAP) score, SRS-Schwab, and Roussouly theoretical apex of lordosis in predicting mechanical complications in adult spinal deformity (ASD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Achieving adequate sagittal alignment is critical to obtain favorable outcomes in ASD surgery. It has been proposed that mechanical complications are largely secondary to postoperative spinal alignment. METHODS: Retrospective review of consecutive primary ASD cases that underwent deformity correction in the same institution over a 5-year period. Association between the 6-week postoperative spinal alignment classification and occurrence of mechanical complications on the last follow-up was assessed using logistic regressions. The discriminant capacity was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: 58.3% (N = 49/84) of patients presented with mechanical complications and 32.1% (N = 27/84) underwent revision surgery. GAP score did not show discriminant ability to predict complications (AUC = 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.40-0.66, P = 0.58). Conversely, the SRS-Schwab sagittal modifier score demonstrated a statistically significant (although modest) predictive value for mechanical complications (AUC = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.54-0.79, P = 0.008). There was a significant association between pelvic tilt (PT) (P = 0.03) and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (P = 0.01) at 6 weeks postoperatively and the occurrence of later mechanical complications. There was no significant association between matched Roussouly theoretical apex of lordosis and final outcome (P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: The results point to the complexity of mechanical failure and the high likelihood that causative factors are multifactorial and not limited to alignment measures. GAP score should be used with caution as it may not explain or predict mechanical failure based on alignment in all populations as originally expected. Future studies should focus on etiology, surgical technique, and patient factors in order to generate a more universal score that can be applied to all populations.Level of Evidence: 4.

Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Patients With Back Pain and Degenerative Disc Disease: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: Uncontrolled retrospective observational study. OBJECTIVES: Surgery for patients with back pain and degenerative disc disease is controversial, and studies to date have yielded conflicting results. We evaluated the effects of lumbar fusion surgery for patients with this indication in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN). METHODS: We analyzed data that were prospectively collected from consecutive patients at 11 centers between 2015 and 2019. Our primary outcome was change in patient-reported back pain at 12 months of follow-up, and our secondary outcomes were satisfaction, disability, health-related quality of life, and rates of adverse events. RESULTS: Among 84 patients, we observed a statistically significant improvement of back pain at 12 months that exceeded the threshold of Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) (mean change -3.7 points, SD 2.6, p < 0.001, MCID = 1.2; 77% achieved MCID), and 81% reported being "somewhat" or "extremely" satisfied. We also observed improvements of Oswestry Disability Index (-17.3, SD 16.6), Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary (10.3, SD 9.6) and Short Form-12 Mental Component Summary (3.1, SD 8.3); all p < 0.001). The overall rate of adverse events was 19%. CONCLUSIONS: Among a highly selective group of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disc disease, most experienced a clinically significant improvement of back pain as well as significant improvements of disability and health-related quality of life, with high satisfaction at 1 year of follow-up. These findings suggest that surgery for this indication may provide some benefit, and that further research is warranted.

Cervical Sagittal Alignment in Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Among patients with CSM, we aimed to evaluate the extent to which: (1) Preoperative cervical sagittal alignment is associated with health-related quality of life, function, and symptoms; (2) Surgery leads to changes in cervical sagittal alignment; and (3) Postoperative cervical sagittal alignment is associated with health-related quality of life, function, and symptoms at 12 months of follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The importance of maintaining or improving cervical sagittal alignment in the surgical management of patients with CSM has not been established. METHODS: We measured C2-C7 Cobb angle, T1 slope, and C2-C7 cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA). We tested for associations with Neck Disability Index, Pain Scales for neck and arm pain, EuroQol 5D, Short Form 12 Physical and Mental Component Summaries, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores. We adjusted for potential confounders using multiple linear regression, and we performed various prespecified subgroup (cSVA > 40 mm, surgical approach) and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Among 250 patients, adjusted analyses yielded significant inverse associations prior to surgery between each of cSVA and T1 slope with SF12 Physical Component Summaries (T1 slope: -0.14, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.01, P = 0.03; C2-C7 cSVA: -0.13, 95% CI --0.21 to -0.05 P < 0.01). Surgery was associated with a small but statistically significant increase in cSVA across the cohort (+5.8 mm [SD 11.7], P < 0.01) but no change in Cobb angle or T1 slope. At 12-months after surgery, there were no significant associations between alignment parameters or change in alignment and any measures of health-related quality of life, function, or symptoms. Results were consistent across subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Increased cSVA and T1 slope were associated with inferior health-related quality of life at presentation among patients with CSM, but no significant associations were observed following surgical treatment.Level of Evidence: 3.

Effectiveness of Surgical Decompression in Patients With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Results of the Canadian Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), particularly in mild DCM. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate the impact of surgery on patient-reported outcomes in patients with mild (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association [mJOA] ≥ 15), moderate (mJOA 12-14), and severe (mJOA < 12) DCM. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter cohort study of patients with DCM who underwent surgery between 2015 and 2019 and completed 1-yr follow-up. Outcome measures (mJOA, Neck Disability Index [NDI], EuroQol-5D [EQ-5D], Short Form [SF-12] Physical Component Score [PCS]/Mental Component Score [MCS], numeric rating scale [NRS] neck, and arm pain) were assessed at 3 and 12 mo postoperatively and compared to baseline, stratified by DCM severity. Changes in outcome measures that were statistically significant (P < .05) and met their respective minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) were deemed clinically meaningful. Responder analysis was performed to compare the proportion of patients between DCM severity groups who met the MCID for each outcome measure. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 391 patients: 110 mild, 163 moderate, and 118 severe. At 12 mo after surgery, severe DCM patients experienced significant improvements in all outcome measures; moderate DCM patients improved in mJOA, NDI, EQ-5D, and PCS; mild DCM patients improved in EQ-5D and PCS. There was no significant difference between severity groups in the proportion of patients reaching MCID at 12 mo after surgery for any outcome measure, except NDI. CONCLUSION: At 12 mo after surgery, patients with mild, moderate, and severe DCM all demonstrated improved outcomes. Severe DCM patients experienced the greatest breadth of improvement, but the proportion of patients in each severity group achieving clinically meaningful changes did not differ significantly across most outcome measures.

National adverse event profile after lumbar spine surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders and comparison of complication rates between hospitals: a CSORN registry study.

OBJECTIVE: Previous works investigating rates of adverse events (AEs) in spine surgery have been retrospective, with data collection from administrative databases, and often from single centers. To date, there have been no prospective reports capturing AEs in spine surgery on a national level, with comparison among centers. METHODS: The Spine Adverse Events Severity system was used to define the incidence and severity of AEs after spine surgery by using data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective registry. Patient data were collected prospectively and during hospital admission for those undergoing elective spine surgery for degenerative conditions. The Spine Adverse Events Severity system defined minor and major AEs as grades 1-2 and 3-6, respectively. RESULTS: There were 3533 patients enrolled in this cohort. There were 85 (2.4%) individual patients with at least one major AE and 680 (19.2%) individual patients with at least one minor AE. There were 25 individual patients with 28 major intraoperative AEs and 260 patients with 275 minor intraoperative AEs. Postoperatively there were 61 patients with a total of 80 major AEs. Of the 487 patients with minor AEs postoperatively there were 698 total AEs. The average enrollment was 321 patients (range 47-1237 patients) per site. The rate of major AEs was consistent among sites (mean 2.9% ± 2.4%, range 0%-9.1%). However, the rate of minor AEs varied widely among sites-from 7.9% to 42.5%, with a mean of 18.8% ± 9.7%. The rate of minor AEs varied depending on how they were reported, with surgeon reporting associated with the lowest rates (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of major AEs after lumbar spine surgery is consistent among different sites but the rate of minor AEs appears to vary substantially. The method by which AEs are reported impacts the rate of minor AEs. These data have implications for the detection and reporting of AEs and the design of strategies aimed at mitigating complications.

Atypical vertebral hemangioma: an aggressive form of a benign disease. Case Report and Literature Review.

Vertebral hemangiomas are an incidental and relatively common radiological finding and a benign tumor of vascular origin. VH are the most common spine tumors with an estimated incidence of 1.9-27% in the general population. Rarely, vertebral hemangiomas can exhibit extraosseous expansion with resulting compression of the spinal cord. Such lesions are termed aggressive or atypical vertebral hemangiomas (AVH) and account for less than 1% of spinal hemangiomas. A 68-year-old female was referred with progressive walking difficulty and sensory disturbances in her lower extremities. MRI imaging of the thoracic spine revealed a T1- and T2-weighted hyperintense lesion involving the T10 vertebra. Additionally, there was extraosseous extension of the tumor into the spinal canal, located both anterior and posterior to the spinal cord, causing severe spinal cord compression. A combined endovascular and surgical approach (arterial coil embolization and en bloc resection) for treatment was decided. Although vertebral hemangiomas are an incidental and relatively common radiological finding, the findings of our case were consistent with an aggressive hemangioma with atypical MRI and clinical prognostic characteristics. In summary, the present case highlights the need for multidisciplinary approach and in-depth knowledge of this rare pathologic entity.