Influence of Body Mass Index on Surgical and Patient Outcomes for Cervical Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of prospectively collected registry. OBJECTIVE: We aim to investigate the effects of body mass index (BMI) on postsurgical cervical spine surgery outcomes and identify a potential substratification of obesity with worse outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The impact of BMI on cervical spine surgery is unknown, with controversial outcomes for patients high and low BMI. METHODS: The cervical spine Quality Outcomes Database was queried for a total of 10,381 patients who underwent single-stage cervical spine surgery. Patients were substratified into 6 groups based on BMI. Surgical outcomes, complications, hospitalization outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes for each cohort, including modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Score, Numeric Rating Scale arm pain, Numeric Rating Scale neck pain, Neck Disability Index, and EuroQol Health Survey, were assessed. Univariate analysis was performed for 3- and 12-month follow-up after surgical intervention. RESULTS: Obese patients (class I, II, and III) requiring spine surgery were statistically younger than nonobese patients and had higher rates of diabetes compared with normal BMI patients. The surgical length was found to be longer for overweight and all classes of obese patients ( P < 0.01). Class III obese patients had higher odds of postoperative complications. Patients with class II and III obesity had lower odds of achieving optimal modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Score at 3 months [OR = 0.8 (0.67-0.94), P < 0.01, OR = 0.68 (0.56-0.82), P < 0.001, respectively] and 12 months [OR = 0.82 (0.68-0.98), P = 0.03, OR = 0.79 (0.64-0.98), P = 0.03, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: This study investigates the relationship between substratified BMI and postoperative outcomes of cervical spine surgery. Class II and III obese patients have substantially greater risk factors and poor outcomes postoperatively. In addition, low BMI also presents unique challenges for patients. Further research is needed for comprehensive analysis on outcomes of cervical spine surgery after correcting BMI.

Noniatrogenic spinal cord ischemia: A patient level meta-analysis of 125 case reports and series.

Background: Guidelines are needed to manage spinal cord infarctions. Here, we evaluated the incidence of noniatrogenic spinal ischemia, focusing on the spinal levels involved, and the relative efficacy of different management strategies. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of 147 patients who sustained noniatrogenic spinal cord ischemia within the past 10 years. The most common causes of injury were idiopathic (i.e., 47% medical/surgery-related) followed by systemic/chronic conditions (23.6%) and aortic vascular pathology (20%). Postdiagnostic treatment options included rehabilitation in 53.7% of patients, while steroids (35.37%), antiplatelets aggregates (30.61%), and anticoagulation (18.37%) were also used. Results: Traumatic causes of spinal cord ischemia were associated with worse outcomes, while those without a clear diagnosis despite extensive work-up had better results. At discharge, patients managed with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage had significant improvement (P = 0.04), while other therapies were not effective. Notably, ischemia mostly occurring between the T4 and T7 levels and was associated with the worst outcomes. In this thoracic "watershed" region, thoracic cord ischemia was most likely attributed to an increased susceptibility toto cord under-perfusion in this region (P < 0.05). Conclusion: This meta-analysis revealed a variety of etiologies for noniatrogenic typically T4-T7 spinal cord ischemia. Several different treatment strategies may be utilized in this patient population, including CSF drainage, blood pressure elevation, corticosteroids, antiplatelets/anticoagulants/thrombolytics, mannitol, naloxone, surgical revascularization, hyperbaric oxygen, and systemic hypothermia.

Short-Segment Pedicle Fixation of Traumatic Low Lumbar Fractures (L3-L5): Report of 36 Cases.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective review. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of short-segment pedicle fixation of low lumbar fractures (L3-L5). BACKGROUND: Low lumbar fractures are relatively uncommon, and limited data exists regarding the management of these injuries. No previous studies have specifically examined the surgical management of L3-L5 fractures exclusively with pedicle fixation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed prospectively collected data of 36 patients who underwent short-segment pedicle fixation for low lumbar fractures at our institution between 1993 and 2018. RESULTS: There was no worsening of neurological status following surgery, and three patients regained motor or sphincter function. Thirty-one (86.1%) patients went on to successful fusion. Three (8%) patients required reoperation. Four (11%) patients had surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: This large series provides information regarding the safety and efficacy of surgical management of low lumbar fractures with pedicle fixation. Following surgery, there was no neurological worsening and some patients regained neurological function. Low complication rates, low reoperation rates, and low pain levels at final follow-up provide evidence that the surgical management of low lumbar fractures utilizing short-segment pedicle fixation is safe and efficacious.

Evaluating robotic pedicle screw placement against conventional modalities: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Several approaches have been studied for internal fixation of the spine using pedicle screws (PSs), including CT navigation, 2D and 3D fluoroscopy, freehand, and robotic assistance. Robot-assisted PS placement has been controversial because training requirements, cost, and previously unclear benefits. This meta-analysis compares screw placement accuracy, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and overall complications of PS insertion using traditional freehand, navigated, and robot-assisted methods. METHODS: A systematic review was performed of peer-reviewed articles indexed in several databases between January 2000 and August 2021 comparing ≥ 2 PS insertion methods with ≥ 10 screws per treatment arm. Data were extracted for patient outcomes, including PS placement, misplacement, and accuracy; operative time, overall complications, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital length of stay, postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score for back pain. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score and Cochrane tool. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to estimate PS placement accuracy as the primary outcome. RESULTS: Overall, 78 studies consisting of 6262 patients and > 31,909 PSs were included. NMA results showed that robot-assisted and 3D-fluoroscopy PS insertion had the greatest accuracy compared with freehand (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively), CT navigation (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively), and 2D fluoroscopy (p < 0.01 and p < 0.01, respectively). The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve method further demonstrated that robot-assisted PS insertion accuracy was superior (S = 0.937). Optimal screw placement was greatest in robot-assisted (S = 0.995) placement, and misplacement was greatest with freehand (S = 0.069) approaches. Robot-assisted placement was favorable for minimizing complications (S = 0.876), while freehand placement had greater odds of complication than robot-assisted (OR 2.49, p < 0.01) and CT-navigation (OR 2.15, p = 0.03) placement. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this NMA suggest that robot-assisted PS insertion has advantages, including improved accuracy, optimal placement, and minimized surgical complications, compared with other PS insertion methods. Limitations included overgeneralization of categories and time-dependent effects.

The evolving neurosurgical perspective on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS): a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs may be implemented to minimize the body's stress response to surgery and enable a safe and timely discharge. Successful implementation involves a multifaceted approach from surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, nutritionists, and nonclinical staff. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: National databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar databases) were searched to identify studies on the clinical implementation of ERAS protocols in neurosurgery. A systematic review was chosen to select studies and pooled data analysis was performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five studies reported the use of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), with 13 studies on cranial surgery and 22 on spinal surgery. Overall, 27 studies reported length of stay, 10 studies reported differences in opioid use, 21 studies reported either complications, readmission rate, or long term (>30 day) follow-up, 14 studies reported patient feedback, and 10 studies reported cost reduction of ERAS implementation. Findings supported significant reduction in length of stay, opioid use, and costs associated with ERAS regimens. Complications, readmission rates, and follow-up pain scores remained similar in ERAS and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our review finds that ERAS regimen implementation can serve an important role in facilitating clinical quality improvement and cost-effective care in all applications related to neurosurgical care and recovery. While application of ERAS in neurological surgery may have an important role in facilitating patient beneficial and cost-effective care, the findings of this review confirm that several challenges remain in select settings and prevent widespread implementation.

Iatrogenic spinal cord ischemia: A patient level meta-analysis of 74 case reports and series.

BACKGROUND: We seek to characterize the features of iatrogenic spinal ischemia, determine which spinal levels are affected, and evaluate the efficacy of management strategies. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of case reports and series of spinal ischemia in the past 10 years. 343 full-length case reports and case series were screened against predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. 89 patients were included for our final meta-analysis using PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 59.62 years (range: 9 months-88 years). 66% of all cases were male. Endovascular surgery (32.6%) and aortic surgery (36.0%) were most common causes of iatrogenic injury, followed by non-aortic surgery (32.6%), and non-surgical procedures (22.47%). A- and B-level ASIA Impairment was found in 66% of all patients. Rehabilitation was the most common management (49.44% of cases), followed by blood pressure management (40.45%). Non-aortic surgeries had the poorest overall outcomes (OR = 0.28, p = 0.016), whereas aortic and endovascular surgeries saw significant improvement in outcomes measured at discharge (OR = 2.6, OR = 2.3, respectively, p < 0.05). Therapeutic surgical infarctions were found to be associated with improved outcomes (OR = 5.33, p = 0.032). Ischemic injury to T4-T7, and T10 were associated with significantly poorer outcomes. Autonomic impairment was associated with a likelihood of infarction at T10 (OR = 4.54, p = 0.0183). CONCLUSIONS: In this paper, we compare outcomes following iatrogenic spinal ischemia. We demonstrate the need for more comprehensive randomized controlled trials to test effective treatment strategies.