Incidental dural tears during pediatric posterior spinal fusions.

PURPOSE: To characterize the frequency of incidental dural tears in pediatric spine surgery, their treatment, complications, and results of long-term follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective review of all pediatric patients who underwent a posterior spinal fusion (PSF) between 2004-2019 at a tertiary children's hospital was conducted. Electronic medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, intra-operative data, presence of an incidental dural tear, repair method, and patient outcomes. RESULTS: 3043 PSFs were reviewed, with 99 dural tears identified in 94 patients (3.3% overall incidence). Mean follow-up was 35.7 months (range 0.1-142.5). When the cause of the dural tear was specified, 69% occurred during exposure, 5% during pedicle screw placement, 4% during osteotomy, 2% during removal of implants, and 2% during intra-thecal injection of morphine. The rate of dural tears during primary PSF was significantly lower than during revision PSF procedures (2.6% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.05). 86.9% of dural tears were repaired and/or sealed intraoperatively, while 13.1% had spontaneous resolution. Postoperative headaches developed in 13.1% of patients and resolved at a mean of 7.6 days. There was no difference in the incidence of headaches in patients that were ordered bedrest vs. no bedrest (p > 0.99). Postoperative infections occurred in 9.5% of patients and 24.1% patients were identified to have undergone a revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of intra-operative dural tears in pediatric spine surgery is 3.3%. Although complications associated with the dural tear occur, most resolve over time and there were no long-term sequelae in patients with 2 years of follow up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Surgical appropriateness nudges: Developing behavioral science nudges to integrate appropriateness criteria into the decision making of spine surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Substantial variation exists in surgeon decision making. In response, multiple specialty societies have established criteria for the appropriate use of spine surgery. Yet few strategies exist to facilitate routine use of appropriateness criteria by surgeons. Behavioral science nudges are increasingly used to enhance decision making by clinicians. We sought to design "surgical appropriateness nudges" to support routine use of appropriateness criteria for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis. METHODS: The work reflected Stage I of the NIH Stage Model for Behavioral Intervention Development and involved an iterative, multi-method approach, emphasizing qualitative methods. Study sites included two large referral centers for spine surgery. We recruited spine surgeons from both sites for two rounds of focus groups. To produce preliminary nudge prototypes, we examined sources of variation in surgeon decision making (Focus Group 1) and synthesized existing knowledge of appropriateness criteria, behavioral science nudge frameworks, electronic tools, and the surgical workflow. We refined nudge prototypes via feedback from content experts, site leaders, and spine surgeons (Focus Group 2). Concurrently, we collected data on surgical practices and outcomes at study sites. We pilot tested the refined nudge prototypes among spine surgeons, and surveyed them about nudge applicability, acceptability, and feasibility (scale 1-5, 5 = strongly agree). RESULTS: Fifteen surgeons participated in focus groups, giving substantive input and feedback on nudge design. Refined nudge prototypes included: individualized surgeon score cards (frameworks: descriptive social norms/peer comparison/feedback), online calculators embedded in the EHR (decision aid/mapping), a multispecialty case conference (injunctive norms/social influence), and a preoperative check (reminders/ salience of information/ accountable justification). Two nudges (score cards, preop checks) incorporated data on surgeon practices and outcomes. Six surgeons pilot tested the refined nudges, and five completed the survey (83%). The overall mean score was 4.0 (standard deviation [SD] 0.5), with scores of 3.9 (SD 0.5) for applicability, 4.1 (SD 0.5) for acceptability, and 4.0 (SD 0.5), for feasibility. Conferences had the highest scores 4.3 (SD 0.6) and calculators the lowest 3.9 (SD 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral science nudges might be a promising strategy for facilitating incorporation of appropriateness criteria into the surgical workflow of spine surgeons. Future stages in intervention development will test whether these surgical appropriateness nudges can be implemented in practice and influence surgical decision making.

Timing of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) recovery and clinical recovery after termination of pediatric spinal deformity surgery due to loss of IONM signals.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) is used to reduce the risk of spinal cord injury during pediatric spinal deformity surgery. Significant reduction and/or loss of IONM signals without immediate recovery may lead the surgeon to acutely abort the case. The timing of when monitorable signals return remains largely unknown. PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to investigate the correlation between IONM signal loss, clinical examination, and subsequent normalization of IONM signals after aborted pediatric spinal deformity surgery to help determine when it is safe to return to the operating room. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This is a multicenter, multidisciplinary, retrospective study of pediatric patients (<18 years old) undergoing spinal deformity surgery whose surgery was aborted due to a significant reduction or loss of IONM potentials. PATIENT SAMPLE: Sixty-six patients less than 18 years old who underwent spinal deformity surgery that was aborted due to IONM signal loss were enrolled into the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: IONM data, operative reports, and clinical examinations were investigated to determine the relationship between IONM loss, clinical examination, recovery of IONM signals, and clinical outcome. METHODS: Information regarding patient demographics, deformity type, clinical history, neurologic and ambulation status, operative details, IONM information (eg, quality of loss [SSEPs, MEPs], laterality, any recovery of signals, etc.), intraoperative wake-up test, postoperative neurologic exam, postoperative imaging, and time to return to the operating were all collected. All factors were analyzed and compared with univariate and multivariate analysis using appropriate statistical analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were enrolled with a median age of 13 years [IQR 11-14], and the most common sex was female (42/66, 63.6%). Most patients had idiopathic scoliosis (33/66, 50%). The most common causes of IONM loss were screw placement (27/66, 40.9%) followed by rod correction (19/66, 28.8%). All patients had either complete bilateral (39/66, 59.0%), partial bilateral (10/66, 15.2%) or unilateral (17/66, 25.8%) MEP loss leading to termination of the case. Overall, when patients were returned to the operating room 2 weeks postoperatively, nearly 75% (40/55) had monitorable IONM signals. Univariate analysis demonstrated that bilateral SSEP loss (p=.019), bilateral SSEP and MEP loss (p=.022) and delayed clinical neurologic recovery (p=.008) were significantly associated with having unmonitorable IONM signals at repeat surgery. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that delayed clinical neurologic recovery (> 72 hours) was significantly associated with unmonitorable IONM signals when returned to the operating room (p=.006). All patients ultimately made a full neurologic recovery. CONCLUSIONS: In children whose spinal deformity surgery was aborted due to intraoperative IONM loss, there was a strong correlation between combined intraoperative SSEP/MEP loss, the magnitude of IONM loss, the timing of clinical recovery, and the time of electrophysiological IONM recovery. The highest likelihood of having a prolonged postoperative neurological deficit and undetectable IONM signals upon return to the OR occurs with bilateral complete loss of SSEPs and MEPs.

Characterizing antibiotic prophylaxis practices in pediatric deformity spinal surgery and impact on 30-day postoperative infection: an NSQIP pediatric database study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to characterize antibiotic prophylaxis practices in pediatric patients who have received posterior arthrodesis for spinal deformity and understand how these practices impact 30-day postoperative infection rates. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric database for year 2021. Patients 18 years of age or younger who received posterior arthrodesis for scoliosis or kyphosis correction were included. The outcome of interest was 30-day postoperative infection. Fisher's exact test and multivariable regression analysis were used to analyze the impact of intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis, intraoperative intravenous antibiotic redosing after 4 h, postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, intraoperative topical antibiotics on 30-day postoperative infection, and various antibiotic prophylaxis regimens. RESULTS: A total of 6974 patients were included in this study. The 30-day infection rate was 2.9%. Presurgical intravenous antibiotic (11.5% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.005), postoperative antibiotic (5.7% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.01), and intraoperative topical antibiotic (4.0% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.019) were associated with significantly reduced infection rates. There was no significant difference in infection rates between patients that received cefazolin versus vancomycin versus clindamycin. The addition of Gram-negative coverage did not result in significant differences in infection rates. Multivariable regression analysis found postoperative intravenous antibiotics and intraoperative topical antibiotics to reduce infection rates. CONCLUSIONS: We found the use of presurgical intravenous antibiotics, postoperative intravenous antibiotics, and intraoperative topical antibiotics to significantly reduce infection rates. Results from this study can be applied to future research on implementation of standardized infection prevention protocols. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Evaluating Funding for Authors Achieving High Citations vs. Online Popularity.

INTRODUCTION: The Altmetric score is a validated tool that measures online attention of scientific studies. A relationship between government/industry funding for authors and their study's citations have been previously demonstrated. It is not known whether funding is related to greater online attention. We hypothesize authors publishing studies achieving greater online attention (higher Altmetric scores) receive greater monetary support from industry while authors publishing studies achieving critical acclaim (more citations) receive greater monetary support from the National Institute of Health (NIH). METHODS: Top spine surgery studies between 2010 and 2021 were selected based on Altmetric scores and citation number. The Open Payments Database was accessed to evaluate industry financial relationships while the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool was accessed to evaluate NIH funding. Payments were compared between groups and analyzed with the Student t-test, analysis of variance, and chi square analysis. Alpha <0.05. RESULTS: There were 60 and 51 authors with payment data in the top 50 Altmetric and top 50 citation studies, respectively, with eight authors having studies in both groups. Total industry payments between groups were not markedly different. The eight authors with studies in both groups received markedly more industry payments for consulting, travel/lodging, and faculty/speaking fees. Authors with articles in both groups (50%) were significantly more likely to receive NIH support, compared with authors of the top Altmetric articles (5%; P < 0.001) and top citation articles (12%; P < 0.001). Authors receiving NIH support received significantly less industry payments compared with authors not receiving NIH support ($148,544 versus $2,159,526; P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: These findings reject our hypothesis: no notable differences for industry payments and NIH funding between authors for top Altmetric and citation studies. Authors receiving funding from industry versus the NIH are generally two distinct groups, but there is a small group supported by both. These studies achieve both critical acclaim (citations) and online popularity (Altmetric scores). DATA AVAILABILITY: Data can be available on reasonable request.

Risk Factors for Reoperation Following Single-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty as Utilized in a Representative Sample of United States Clinical Practice: A Retrospective PearlDiver Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort. OBJECTIVES: Most data regarding cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) outcomes are from highly controlled clinical trials with strict inclusion/exclusion criteria. This study aimed to identify risk factors for CDA reoperation, in "real world" clinical practice using a national insurance claims database. METHODS: The PearlDiver database was queried for patients (2010-2020) who underwent a subsequent cervical procedure following a single-level CDA. Patients with less than 2 years follow-up were excluded. Primary outcome was to evaluate risk factors for reoperation. Secondary outcome was to evaluate the types of reoperations. Risk factors were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariate regression analyses were used to ascertain the association among risk factors and reoperation. RESULTS: Of 14,202 patients who met inclusion criteria, 916 (6.5%) underwent reoperation. Patients undergoing reoperation were slightly older with higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) scores, however both were not risk factors for reoperation. Patients with diagnoses such as smoking, myelopathy, inflammatory disorders, spinal deformity, trauma, or a history of prior cervical surgery were at greater risk for reoperation. No association was found between the year of index surgery and reoperation risk. The most common reoperation procedure was cervical fusion. CONCLUSIONS: As billed for in the United States since 2010, CDA was associated with a 6.5% reoperation rate over a mean follow-up time of 5.3 years. Smoking, myelopathy, inflammatory disorders, spinal deformity, and a history of prior cervical surgery or trauma are risk factors for reoperation following CDA. Though patients who underwent a reoperation were older, age was not found to be an independent risk factor for a subsequent procedure.

Is single-level cervical disc arthroplasty associated with a lower reoperation rate than anterior cervical discectomy and fusion?

OBJECTIVE: Long-term meta-analysis of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) trials report lower rates of subsequent cervical spine surgical procedures with CDA compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The objective of this study was to compare the rate of subsequent cervical spine surgery in single-level CDA-treated patients to that of a matched cohort of single-level ACDF-treated patients by using records from 2010 to 2021 included in a large national administrative claims database (PearlDiver). METHODS: This retrospective matched-cohort study used a large national insurance claims database; 525,510 patients who had undergone a single-level ACDF or CDA between 2010 and 2021 were identified. Patients with other same-day spine procedures, as well as those for trauma, infection, or tumor, were excluded, yielding 148,531 patients. ACDF patients were matched 2:1 to CDA patients on the basis of clinical and demographic characteristics. The primary outcome was the overall incidence of all-cause cervical reoperation after index surgery. Secondary outcomes included readmission, any adverse event within 90 days, and overall reintervention after index surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were adjusted for covariates and were employed to estimate the effect of the index ACDF or CDA procedure on patient outcomes. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimation, and differences between ACDF- and CDA-treated patients were compared using log-rank tests. RESULTS: After the patients were matched, 28,795 ACDF patients to 14,504 CDA patients were included. ACDF patients had higher rates of 90-day adverse events (18.4% vs 14.6%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.77, 95% CI 0.73-0.82, p < 0.001) and readmission (11.5% vs 9.7%, aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.93, p < 0.001). Over a mean 4.3 years of follow-up, 5.0% of ACDF patients and 5.4% of CDA patients underwent reoperation (aOR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.19, p = 0.059). The rate of aggregate reintervention was higher in CDA patients than in ACDF patients (11.7% vs 10.7%, aOR 1.10, p = 0.002). The Kaplan-Meier 10-year reoperation-free survival rate was worse for CDA than ACDF (91.0% vs 92.0%, p = 0.05), as was the rate of reintervention-free survival (81.2% vs 82.0%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Single-level CDA was associated with a similar rate of reoperation and higher rate of subsequent injections when compared with a matched cohort that underwent single-level ACDF. CDA was associated with lower rates of 90-day adverse events and readmissions.

Variations in surgical practice and short-term outcomes for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis: do surgeon training and experience matter?

For diverse procedures, sizable geographic variation exists in rates and outcomes of surgery, including for degenerative lumbar spine conditions. Little is known about how surgeon training and experience are associated with surgeon-level variations in spine surgery practice and short-term outcomes. This retrospective observational analysis characterized variations in surgical operations for degenerative lumbar scoliosis or spondylolisthesis, two common age-related conditions. The study setting was two large spine surgery centers in one region during 2017-19. Using data (International Classification of Diseases-10th edition and current procedural terminology codes) extracted from electronic health record systems, we characterized surgeon-level variations in practice (use of instrumented fusion - a more extensive procedure that involves device-related risks) and short-term postoperative outcomes (major in-hospital complications and readmissions). Next, we tested for associations between surgeon training (specialty and spine fellowship) and experience (career stage and operative volume) and use of instrumented fusion as well as outcomes. Eighty-nine surgeons performed 2481 eligible operations. For the study diagnoses, spine surgeons exhibited substantial variation in operative volume, use of instrumented fusion, and postoperative outcomes. Among surgeons above the median operative volume, use of instrumented fusion ranged from 0% to >90% for scoliosis and 9% to 100% for spondylolisthesis, while rates of major in-hospital complications ranged from 0% to 25% for scoliosis and from 0% to 14% for spondylolisthesis. For scoliosis, orthopedic surgeons were more likely than neurosurgeons to perform instrumented fusion for scoliosis [49% vs. 33%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.3-4.2, P-value = .006] as were fellowship-trained surgeons (49% vs. 25%, OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.8; P = .001). Fellowship-trained surgeons had lower readmission rates. Surgeons with higher operative volumes used instrumented fusion more often (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2, P < .05 for both diagnoses) and had lower rates of major in-hospital complications (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97; P = .006). Surgical practice can vary greatly for degenerative spine conditions, even within the same region and among colleagues at the same institution. Surgical specialty and subspecialty, in addition to recent operative volume, can be linked to variations in spine surgeons' practice patterns and outcomes. These findings reinforce the notion that residency and fellowship training may contribute to variation and present important opportunities to optimize surgical practice over the course of surgeons' careers. Future efforts to reduce unexplained variation in surgical practice could test interventions focused on graduate medical education. Graphical Abstract.

Single-Level Anterolateral and Posterior Interbody Fusion Techniques are Associated with Equivalent Long-Term Lumbar Reoperations.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: This study compares reoperation rates and complications following single-level ALIF/LLIF and TLIF/PLIF. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) are widely used for degenerative disc disease. Lumbar interbody fusions have high rates of reoperation primarily related to adjacent segment pathology and pseudarthrosis. METHODS: The PearlDiver database was queried for patients (2010-2021) who had single-level ALIF/LLIF or TLIF/PLIF with same-day, single-level posterior instrumentation. ALIF/LLIF were combined and similarly, TLIF/PLIF were combined, given how these operations are indistinguishable with Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding. All patients were followed for ≥2 years and excluded if they had spinal traumas, fractures, infections, or neoplasms prior to surgery. The two cohorts, ALIF/LLIF and TLIF/PLIF, were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, Elixhauser-Comorbidity Index (ECI), smoking status, and diabetes. The primary outcome was the incidence of all-cause subsequent lumbar operations. Secondary outcomes included 90-day surgical complications. RESULTS: After 1:1 matching, each cohort contained 14,070 patients. All-cause subsequent lumbar operations were nearly identical at 5-year follow-up (9.4% ALIF/LLIF vs. 9.5% TLIF/PLIF, P=0.91) (Table 2). Survival analysis using all-cause subsequent lumbar operations as the endpoint showed an equivalent 10-year survival rate of 86.0% (95%CI: 85.2-86.8) (Figure 1). Within 90 days, TLIF/PLIF had more infections (1.3% vs. 1.7%, P=0.007) and dural injuries (0.2% vs. 0.4%, P=0.001). There was no difference in wound dehiscence, hardware complications, or medical complications (Table 3). CONCLUSION: As utilized in real-world clinical practice, single-level anterolateral versus posterior approaches for interbody fusion have no effect on long term reoperation rates.

Complications Have Not Improved With Newer Generation Robots.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to see whether upgrades in newer generation robots improve safety and clinical outcomes following spine surgery. METHODS: All patients undergoing robotic-assisted spine surgery with the Mazor X Stealth EditionTM (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) from 2019 to 2022 at a combined orthopedic and neurosurgical spine service were retrospectively reviewed. Robot related complications were recorded. RESULTS: 264 consecutive patients (54.1% female; age at time of surgery 63.5 ± 15.3 years) operated on by 14 surgeons were analyzed. The average number of instrumented levels with robotics was 4.2 ± 2.7, while the average number of instrumented screws with robotics was 8.3 ± 5.3. There was a nearly 50/50 split between an open and minimally invasive approach. Six patients (2.2%) had robot related complications. Three patients had temporary nerve root injuries from misplaced screws that required reoperation, one patient had a permanent motor deficit from the tap damaging the L1 and L2 nerve roots, one patient had a durotomy from a misplaced screw that required laminectomy and intra-operative repair, and one patient had a temporary sensory L5 nerve root injury from a drill. Half of these complications (3/6) were due to a reference frame error. In total, four patients (1.5%) required reoperation to fix 10 misplaced screws. CONCLUSION: Despite newer generation robots, robot related complications are not decreasing. As half the robot related complications result from reference frame errors, this is an opportunity for improvement.

Subject matter predicts where top pediatric spine articles are shared: citations vs. social media.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. The purpose of this study was to compare the top 25 articles on pediatric spine surgery by number of citations and Altmetric score. All published articles pertaining to pediatric spine surgery from 2010 to 2021 were assessed for: Altmetric scores, Altmetric score breakdown (e.g. Twitter, News), citation counts, and article topics. The top 25 Altmetric articles and top 25 cited articles were identified. Out of the 50 total articles, only 3 (6.0%) overlapped between the two groups. The top Altmetric articles had averages (mean ± SD) of 167 ±â€…130 Altmetric score and 66 ±â€…135 citations, while the top citation articles had averages of 22 ±â€…45 Altmetric score and 196 ±â€…114 citations. When evaluating article topics, articles on 'back pain' (36% vs. 4%; P = 0.003) and 'backpacks' (16% vs. 0%; P = 0.030) were published significantly more in the top Altmetric group, while articles on 'scoliosis' (93% vs. 36%; P < 0.001) and 'growth friendly surgery' (24% vs. 4%; P = 0.041) were published significantly more in the top citation group. The total number of citations and online mentions for both groups are presented in Table 2. The biggest differences were the top Altmetric score articles receiving greater percentages of Twitter mentions relative to overall mentions (87% vs. 57%). The most socially popular articles focused on back pain and backpacks, and the most cited articles focused on scoliosis and growth-friendly surgery. Twitter had the most mentions of all social media for both the top cited articles and the top Altmetric articles.

Breast Cancer Incidence, Mortality, and Cost in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients and the Role of Low Dose Biplanar Radiography.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) are susceptible to high doses of radiation from radiographs. The purpose of this study was to examine the future cost of radiation-induced breast cancer in patients with AIS and its potential financial and mortality impact. METHODS: A literature review identified articles relating radiation exposure in patients with AIS to increased risk for cancer. Based on population statistics and breast cancer treatment costs in the year 2020, the financial impact of radiation-induced breast cancer and the estimated number of additional deaths per year due to breast cancer for patients with AIS were calculated. RESULTS: The US female population in 1970 was 205.1 million. Based on a prevalence of 3.0%, an estimated 3.1 million patients had AIS in 1970. With an incidence of breast cancer in the general population of 128.3/100,000 and a standardized incidence ratio of 1.82-2.4 for breast cancer in patients with scoliosis, there will be a 3,282 to 5,603 patient increase in radiation-induced breast cancer in patients with scoliosis over the general population. With a projected base cost of $34,979 per patient for the first year of breast cancer diagnosis in 2020, the cost of radiation-induced breast cancer will be 114.8 to 196.0 million dollars per year. Using a standardized mortality ratio of 1.68 for scoliosis radiation-induced breast cancer, there will be an expected increase in deaths of 420 patients due to breast cancer presumably secondary to radiation exposure in the evaluation and treatment of AIS. CONCLUSION: The estimated radiation-induced breast cancer financial impact in 2020 will be between 114.8 and 196.0 million dollars per year, with an increase in deaths of 420 patients per year. Low-dose imaging systems reduce radiation exposure by up to 45 times while maintaining sufficient image quality. New low-dose radiography should be used whenever possible with patients with AIS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 5.

A Comparative Analysis of Revision Surgery Before or After 2 Years After Graduation From Growth-friendly Surgery for Early Onset Scoliosis.

INTRODUCTION: After discontinuation of growth-friendly (GF) surgery for early onset scoliosis, patients are termed graduates: they undergo a spinal fusion, are observed after final lengthening with GF implant maintenance, or are observed after GF implant removal. The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of and reasons for revision surgery in two cohorts of GF graduates: before or after 2 years of follow-up from graduation. METHODS: A pediatric spine registry was queried for patients who underwent GF spine surgery with a minimum of 2 years of follow-ups after graduation by clinical and/or radiographic evidence. Scoliosis etiology, graduation strategy, number of, and reasons for revision surgery were queried. RESULTS: There were 834 patients with a minimum of 2-year follow-up after graduation who were analyzed. There were 241 (29%) congenital, 271 (33%) neuromuscular, 168 (20%) syndromic, and 154 (18%) idiopathic. 803 (96%) had traditional growing rod/vertical expandable titanium rib as their GF construct and 31 (4%) had magnetically controlled growing rod. Five hundred ninety-six patients (71%) underwent spinal fusion at graduation, 208 (25%) had GF implants retained, and 30 (4%) had GF implants removed.In the entire cohort, there were 108/834 (13%) patients who underwent revision surgery. Of the revisions, 71/108 (66%) occurred as acute revisions (ARs) between 0 and 2 years from graduation (mean 0.6 y), and the most common AR indication was infection (26/71, 37%). The remaining 37/108 (34%) patients underwent delayed revision (DR) surgery >2 years (mean 3.8 y) from graduation, and the most common DR indication was implant issues (17/37, 46%).Graduation strategy affected revision rates. Of the 596 patients with spinal fusion as a graduation strategy, 98/596 (16%) underwent revision, compared with only 8/208 (4%) patients who had their GF implants retained, and 2/30 (7%) that had their GF implants removed ( P ≤ 0.001).A significantly higher percentage of the ARs had a spinal fusion as the graduation strategy (68/71, 96%) compared with 30/37 DRs, (81%, P = 0.015). In addition, the 71 patients who underwent AR undergo more revision surgeries (mean: 2, range: 1 to 7) than 37 patients who underwent DR (mean: 1, range: 1 to 2) ( P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this largest reported series of GF graduates to date, the overall risk of revision was 13%. Patients who undergo a revision at any time, as well as ARs in particular, are more likely to have a spinal fusion as their graduation strategy. Patients who underwent AR, on average, undergo more revision surgeries than patients who underwent DR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, comparative.

Concave and convex growth do not differ over tethered vertebral segments, even with open tri-radiate cartilage.

PURPOSE: To assess the following hypotheses related to vertebral body tethering (VBT): 1. VBT is associated with asymmetric (concave > convex) increases in height over the instrumented vertebra. 2. The instrumented Cobb angle improves following VBT surgery with growth. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of pediatric patients from a multicenter scoliosis registry treated with VBT between 2013 to 2021. INCLUSION CRITERIA: patients with standing radiographs at < 4 months and ≥ 2 years after surgery. Distances between the superior endplate of the UIV and the inferior endplate of the LIV were measured at the concave corner, mid-point, and convex corner of the endplates. The UIV-LIV angle was recorded. Subgroup analyses included comparing different Risser scores and tri-radiate cartilage (TRC) closed versus open using student t-tests. RESULTS: 83 patients met inclusion criteria (92% female; age at time of surgery 12.5 ± 1.4 years) with mean follow-up time of 3.8 ± 1.4 years. Risser scores at surgery were: 0 (n = 33), 1 (n = 12), 2 (n = 10), 3 (n = 11), 4 (n = 12), and 5 (n = 5). Of the 33 Risser 0 patients, 17 had an open TRC, 16 had a closed TRC. The UIV-LIV distance at concave, middle, and convex points significantly increased from immediate post-op to final-follow-up for Risser 0 patients, but not for Risser 1-5 patients. Increases in UIV-LIV distance were not significantly different between concave, middle, and convex points for all groups. There was no significant improvement or worsening in UIV-LIV angle for any group. CONCLUSION: At a mean of 3.8 years following VBT, 33 Risser 0 patients demonstrated significant growth in the instrumented segment, though there was no difference between concave or convex growth, even for patients with open TRC.

Building consensus for the medical management of children with moderate and severe acute spinal cord injury: a modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: The focus of this modified Delphi study was to investigate and build consensus regarding the medical management of children with moderate and severe acute spinal cord injury (SCI) during their initial inpatient hospitalization. This impetus for the study was based on the AANS/CNS guidelines for pediatric SCI published in 2013, which indicated that there was no consensus provided in the literature describing the medical management of pediatric patients with SCIs. METHODS: An international, multidisciplinary group of 19 physicians, including pediatric neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and intensivists, were asked to participate. The authors chose to include both complete and incomplete injuries with traumatic as well as iatrogenic etiologies (e.g., spinal deformity surgery, spinal traction, intradural spinal surgery, etc.) due to the overall low incidence of pediatric SCI, potentially similar pathophysiology, and scarce literature exploring whether different etiologies of SCI should be managed differently. An initial survey of current practices was administered, and based on the responses, a follow-up survey of potential consensus statements was distributed. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of participants reaching agreement on a 4-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree). A final meeting was held virtually to generate final consensus statements. RESULTS: Following the final Delphi round, 35 statements reached consensus after modification and consolidation of previous statements. Statements were categorized into the following eight sections: inpatient care unit, spinal immobilization, pharmacological management, cardiopulmonary management, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, genitourinary management, gastrointestinal/nutritional management, and pressure ulcer prophylaxis. All participants stated that they would be willing or somewhat willing to change their practices based on consensus guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: General management strategies were similar for both iatrogenic (e.g., spinal deformity, traction, etc.) and traumatic SCIs. Steroids were recommended only for injury after intradural surgery, not after acute traumatic or iatrogenic extradural surgery. Consensus was reached that mean arterial pressure ranges are preferred for blood pressure targets following SCI, with goals between 80 and 90 mm Hg for children at least 6 years of age. Further multicenter study of steroid use following acute neuromonitoring changes was recommended.

Deformity angular ratio is associated with neuromonitoring changes without a vertebral column resection: spinal deformity is more influential than type of surgery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the deformity angular ratio (DAR) on intra-operative neuromonitoring (IONM) signal changes during posterior spinal fusion (PSF) without vertebral column resection (VCR). METHODS: Retrospective review of severe pediatric spinal deformity patients treated with PSF without VCR or three-column osteotomy from 2008 to 2018. Exclusion criteria were prior instrumentation, lack of IONM, and incomplete radiographic data. Coronal DAR (C-DAR), sagittal DAR (S-DAR), and total DAR (T-DAR) were calculated and compared between patients with IONM signal loss and those without. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-three patients met inclusion criteria. Forty-seven of two hundred and fifty-three (19%) patients had IONM signal loss. Intra-operative wake-up test was performed in seven cases; three of seven (43%) had a neurological deficit on wake-up test. All neurological deficits resolved at a mean of 41 days postop. IONM loss was associated with increased kyphosis (p = 0.003) and was not associated with Cobb angle (p = 0.16). S-DAR (p = 0.03) and T-DAR (p = 0.005) were associated with IONM signal loss but C-DAR was not (p = 0.06). Increased incidence of IONM signal loss was seen with S-DAR > 7 (p = 0.02) or T-DAR > 27 (p = 0.02). Twenty-four of ninety-two (26%) patients with S-DAR > 7 had IONM signal loss compared to twenty-three of one hundred and sixty-one (14%) with S-DAR ≤ 7 (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.0). Seven of sixteen (44%) patients with T-DAR > 27 had signal loss compared to forty of two hundred and thirty-seven (17%) patients with T-DAR ≤ 27 (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3-10.9). CONCLUSION: Patients with S-DAR > 7 or T-DAR > 27 have a higher risk of IONM loss during pediatric PSF even in the absence of a VCR or three-column osteotomies.

Rate and risk factors for pediatric cervical spine fusion pseudarthrosis: opportunity for improvement.

PURPOSE: Although the pediatric population typically has a high union rate, the cervical spine has a reputation for frequent pseduarthrosis, as high as 38% in some prior series. Our purpose was to examine the rate and risk factors for pseudarthrosis in pediatric cervical spine fusions. METHODS: Retrospective review of all patients with ≥ 2 years follow-up undergoing cervical spinal fusion between January 2004 and December 2019 at a tertiary pediatric hospital. Pseudarthrosis was defined as an absence of radiographic union as assessed by the attending surgeon for which revision surgery was performed. RESULTS: 64 patients (mean age: 8.4 ± 4.7 years) met inclusion criteria. Mean follow-up was 63.3 ± 41.4 months (range: 24-187 months). 28 fusions (44%) included the occiput. 41 patients (64%) had instrumentation, while 23 patients (36%) had uninstrumented fusions. 48 (75%) patients had a halo for a mean of 97.6 ± 49.5 days. The incidence of pseudarthrosis was as follows: overall = 8/64 (12.5%); posterior fusion = 14.8% (8/54); anterior fusions = 0% (0/4); and anteroposterior fusions = 0% (0/6). The rate of pseudarthrosis was over 8 times higher in fusions involving the occiput (occipitocervical fusion: 25.0%; 7/28 vs. cervical alone: 2.8%; 1/36; p = 0.02). Although not statistically significant, the rate of pseudarthrosis was 3 times higher in uninstrumented fusions (21.7%; 5/23) than instrumented fusions (7.3%; 3/41) (p = 0.12). In patients with uninstrumented fusion to the occiput, pseudarthrosis rate was 35.7% (5/14), which was higher compared to those who did not (6.0%; 3/50) (p = 0.01). Incidence of pseudarthrosis was similar in patients who received autograft (13.0%; 7/54) compared to allograft alone (10.0%; 1/10) (p > 0.999). CONCLUSIONS: The pseudarthrosis rate in pediatric cervical spine fusions remained high despite frequent use of halo immobilization and autograft. Patients with uninstrumented occipitocervical fusions are at particularly high risk with more than 1 in 3 developing a pseudarthrosis. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, Comparative. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Perioperative Management of Nonorthopaedic Devices in the Pediatric Neuromuscular Patient Population.

Pediatric patients with neuromuscular conditions often have nonorthopaedic implants that can pose a challenge for MRI acquisition and surgical planning. Treating physicians often find themselves in the position of navigating between seemingly overly risk-averse manufacturer's guidelines and an individual patient's benefits of an MRI or surgery. Most nonorthopaedic implants are compatible with MRI under specific conditions, though often require reprogramming or interrogation before and/or after the scan. For surgical procedures, the use of electrosurgical instrumentation poses a risk of electromagnetic interference and implants are thus often programmed or turned off for the procedures. Special considerations are needed for these patients to prevent device damage or malfunction, which can pose additional risk to the patient. Additional planning before surgery is necessary to ensure appropriate equipment, and staff are available to ensure patient safety.