The Association of Preoperative Bone Mineral Density and Outcomes after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) outcomes and complications as a function of preoperative bone mineral density (BMD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative BMD optimization is commonly initiated before lumbar spinal fusion, but the effects of BMD on ACDF are less known. Consequently, it remains unclear whether preoperative BMD optimization is recommended before ACDF. METHODS: This systematic review included relevant clinical articles using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and MEDLINE from database inception until October 1, 2023. Eligible studies included those evaluating low BMD and outcomes after ACDF. All articles were graded using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) assessment tools. RESULTS: The initial retrieval yielded 4271 articles for which 4 articles with 671 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean patient age was 56.4 ± 3.9 years, and 331 patients (49.3%) were female. A total of 265 (39.5%) patients had low BMD (T score<-1.0) before ACDF. Preoperative low BMD was associated with cage subsidence in single-level ACDF (odds ratio (OR) 2.57; P=0.063; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.95-6.95), but this result did not reach statistical significance. Osteoporosis (T score<-2.5) was associated with the development of adjacent segment disease following ACDF (OR 4.41; P<0.01; 95% CI: 1.98-9.83). Low pre-operative BMD was associated with reoperation within 2 years (P<.05) and strongly associated with pseudarthrosis (OR: 11.01; P=0.002; 95% CI 2.4-49.9). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low BMD who undergo ACDF have higher rates of subsidence, adjacent segment disease, and pseudarthrosis than those with normal BMD. Given the individual and system-wide burdens associated with these complications, some patients may benefit from preoperative BMD screening and optimization before undergoing ACDF.

Outcomes and Complications Associated With the Learning Curve for Endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to examine the impact of the learning curve for endoscopic cervical foraminotomy for clinical outcomes and patient safety. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Endoscopic cervical foraminotomy is a minimally invasive surgical technique emerging in the literature for surgical management of cervical radiculopathy without the use of open incision. The adoption of endoscopic cervical foraminotomy may be hindered by the learning curve, although no review and meta-analysis exists to date on the topic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PubMed, CINAHL, and MEDLINE from database inception until July 11, 2023. Inclusion criteria were articles that examined endoscopic cervical foraminotomy, reported outcomes, and/or complications for endoscopic cervical spine surgery relevant to the learning curve and had full-text. A random effects meta-analysis was performed for outcomes and complications. RESULTS: A total of three articles (n=203 patients) were included from 792 articles initially retrieved. The learning curves from four surgeons were examined with a FWM 21 procedures until the competency phase. There was no significant difference in the postoperative hospitalization length ( P =0.669), postoperative recovery room time ( P =0.415), intraoperative blood loss ( P =0.064), and total complication rates (10.9% vs . 1.2%, P =0.139) between endoscopic cervical foraminotomy procedures performed in the learning phase as compared with the competency phase of the learning curve. There was a significant decrease in operative time from the learning phase to the competency phase ( P =0.005). CONCLUSION: Competency was achieved on the learning curve for endoscopic cervical foraminotomy after about 21 procedures. There is no significant difference in postoperative hospitalization time, postoperative recovery room time, intraoperative blood loss, and complication rates between the learning phase and the competency phase of the learning curve for endoscopic cervical foraminotomy, noting the relatively small sample size of this study that may underpower this finding.

Multilevel Cervical Disk Arthroplasty: Moving Beyond Two Levels.

Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) is well-studied for 1-level and 2-level cervical pathology. There is an increasing trend towards its utilization for greater than 2-level disease as an alternative to the gold standard, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The number of high-level, prospective studies or randomized trials regarding multilevel CDA is limited but continues to grow as the procedure gains popularity. In appropriately indicated patients with multilevel disease caused by disk herniations or spondylosis without extensive facet arthropathy, CDA shows promising results. Multilevel CDA should be avoided in patients with prior spinal trauma, significant degenerative spondylolisthesis with translation, arthrodesis without mobility, severely incompetent facet joints, ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, or kyphotic deformity. With overall similar risk profiles to ACDF but lower theoretical rates of pseudarthrosis and adjacent segment disease, multilevel CDA has been shown to preserve, or perhaps even increase, preoperative cervical range of motion. There are negligible differences in postoperative neck and arm pain, VAS scores, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores, and Neck Disability Index scores when comparing multilevel CDA and ACDF. Despite current indications for multilevel CDA largely being based on single and 2-level data, careful patient selection is critical. Expansion of indications can be expected as literature continues to emerge regarding outcomes and complications in multilevel CDA, as well as with improvements in prosthesis design.

Patient satisfaction with follow-up after spinal fusion.

Background: Postoperative follow-up visits (PFUs) allow providers to track patient recovery but can be costly to patients. With the advent of the novel coronavirus pandemic, virtual/phone visits have been utilized as an alternative to in-person PFUs. Patients were surveyed to elucidate patient satisfaction with postoperative care in the setting of increased virtual follow-up visits. A prospective survey with retrospective cohort analysis of chart data was conducted to better understand the factors influencing patient satisfaction related to their PFUs after spine fusion with the goal of improving the value of postoperative care. Methods: Adult patients at least 1 year postoperative from cervical or lumbar fusion surgery completed a telephone survey related to their postoperative clinic experience. Medical record data including complications, number of visits and length of follow-up, and presence of phone/virtual visits were abstracted and analyzed. Results: Fifty patients (54% female) were included. Univariate analysis demonstrated no association between satisfaction and patient demographics, rates of complication, mean length or number of PFUs, or incidence of phone/virtual visits. Patients "very satisfied" with their clinic experience were more likely to be "very satisfied" with their outcome (P<0.01), and to feel their concerns were "very well addressed" (P<0.01). Multivariate analysis additionally demonstrated that satisfaction was positively associated with how well patient concerns were addressed (P<0.01) and the incidence of virtual/phone visits (P=0.01), and negatively associated with age (P=0.01) and level of education (P=0.01). Conclusions: After spinal fusion, patient satisfaction is positively related to virtual/phone visits and to how well their concerns are addressed. As long as patient concerns remain adequately addressed, surgeons can eliminate excess PFUs which are not clinically beneficial without adversely impacting patients' postoperative experience.

Do Patients Accurately Recall Their Preoperative Symptoms After Elective Orthopedic Procedures?

Patient-reported outcome measures are a frequent tool used to assess orthopedic surgical outcomes. However, recall bias is a potential limitation of these tools when used retrospectively, as they rely on patients to accurately recall their preoperative symptoms. A database search of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline Ovid, and Scopus until May 2021 was completed in duplicate by two reviewers. Studies considered eligible for inclusion were those which reported on patient recall bias associated with orthopedic surgery. The primary outcome of interest investigated was the accuracy of patient recollection of preoperative health status. Any factors that were identified as affecting patient recall were secondary outcomes of interest. Of the 4,065 studies initially screened, 20 studies with 3,454 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, there were 2,371 (69%) knee and hip patients, 422 (12%) shoulder patients, 370 (11%) spine patients, 208 (6%) other upper extremity patients, and 83 (2%) foot and ankle patients. Out of the eight studies that evaluated patient recall within three months postoperatively, seven studies concluded that patient recall is accurate. Out of the 13 studies that evaluated patient recall beyond three months postoperatively, nine studies concluded that patient recall is inaccurate. The accuracy of patient recall of preoperative symptoms after elective orthopedic procedures is not reliable beyond three months postoperatively.

Investigating the Association of Patient Body Mass Index With Posterior Subcutaneous Fat Thickness in the Cervical Spine: A Retrospective Radiographic Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although BMI is often used as a surrogate for posterior cervical subcutaneous fat thickness (SFT), the association of BMI with cervical SFT is unknown. We performed a retrospective radiographic study to analyze the relationship between BMI and cervical SFT. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cervical CT scans. SFT was assessed by measuring the distance (mm) from the spinous processes of C2-C7 to the skin edge. Pearson correlations and linear regression were used to analyze the relationship between BMI and SFT. One-way ANOVA was used to analyze differences in C2-C7 distances while stratifying by BMI. RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were included. BMI had a moderate correlation with average C2-C7 (r=0.546, p < 0.05) SFT, and a weak to moderate correlation with each individual C2-C7 distance. The strongest correlation was at the C7 level (r= 0.583, p < 0.05). These analyses remained significant controlling for potential confounders of patient age, sex, and diabetes. No difference was found in the average C2-C7 distance in patients with BMIs of 25-30 compared to those with BMIs of 30-40 (p=0.996), whereas in patients with BMI <25 and BMI >40, differences were significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: BMI is not strongly correlated with SFT in the cervical spine. Although BMI less than 25 or greater than 40 is correlated with respectively decreased or increased cervical SFT, BMI of 25-40 is not correlated with cervical SFT. This is clinically important information for surgeons counseling patients on perioperative risk before undergoing cervical spine procedures, namely infection. Further research delineating the relationship between posterior SFT and surgical site infection in the cervical spine is warranted.

Postoperative Neurological Complications Following Revision Spine Surgery: A State Inpatient Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative neurological complications after spine surgery can result in increased mortality and morbidity. Despite the introduction of new spinal implants and surgical technology, reoperation rates have remained stable over recent years. Understanding the reasons for revision (refusion) surgery and the risk of neurological complications can assist in developing more effective screening protocols for repeat surgeries and early detection of potential neurological complications. METHODS: This study was designed and conducted as a retrospective cohort study. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether revision spine surgery increased the risk of postoperative neurological deficits. A secondary objective of the study was to analyze whether deficits following repeat spine surgery increased morbidity and mortality. Data on revision spine procedures were extracted from the California State Inpatient Database for years 2008 to 2011. Patients who developed postoperative neurological deficits were then subdivided into causative procedure: revision anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, revision posterior cervical fusion, and revision thoracolumbar fusion. These data were then used to calculate the total incidence of postoperative neurological deficits following each type of procedure. The impact of neurological deficits on in-hospital morbidity following revision procedures was also calculated. RESULTS: Revision procedures accounted for 5.84% of all spine procedures in a total of 7645 patients. Among these patients, 67 patients (0.88%) developed a postoperative neurological deficit with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.56 (95% CI, 1.20-2.00, P < .05). When using individuals with no neurological deficit as the reference group, the odds of morbidity were 5.3 (95% CI, 3.15-9.00, P < .05) in those who sustained neurological deficit following revision procedure. CONCLUSIONS/CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study exposes the increased risk of postoperative neurological complications in revision spine surgeries. In response, further studies are needed to evaluate the use of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring to reduce this risk.