Assessment of malalignment at early stage in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a longitudinal cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to assess abnormalities of the odontoid-hip axis (OD-HA) angle in a mild scoliotic population to determine whether screening for malalignment would help predict the distinction between progressive and stable adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) at early stage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients (non-scoliotic and AIS) underwent a biplanar X-ray between 2013 and 2020. In AIS, inclusion criteria were Cobb angle between 10° and 25°; Risser sign lower than 3; age higher than 10 years; and no previous treatment. A 3D spine reconstruction was performed, and the OD-HA was computed automatically. A reference corridor for OD-HA values in non-scoliotic subjects was calculated as the range [5th-95th percentiles]. A severity index, helping to distinguish stable and progressive AIS, was calculated and weighted according to the OD-HA value. RESULTS: Eighty-three non-scoliotic and 205 AIS were included. The mean coronal and sagittal OD-HA angles in the non-scoliotic group were 0.2° and -2.5°, whereas in AIS values were 0.3° and -0.8°, respectively. For coronal and sagittal OD-HA, 27.5% and 26.8% of AIS were outside the reference corridor compared with 10.8% in non-scoliotic (OR = 3.1 and 3). Adding to the severity index a weighting factor based on coronal OD-HA, for thoracic scoliosis, improved the positive predictive value by 9% and the specificity by 13%. CONCLUSION: Analysis of OD-HA suggests that AIS patients are almost three times more likely to have malalignment compared with a non-scoliotic population. Furthermore, analysis of coronal OD-HA is promising to help the clinician distinguish between stable and progressive thoracic scoliosis.

SPINE20 A global advocacy group promoting evidence-based spine care of value.

PURPOSE: The Global Burden of Diseases (GBD) Studies have estimated that low back pain is one of the costliest ailments worldwide. Subsequent to GBD publications, leadership of the four largest global spine societies agreed to form SPINE20. This article introduces the concept of SPINE20, the recommendations, and the future of this global advocacy group linked to G20 annual summits. METHODS: The founders of SPINE20 advocacy group coordinated with G20 Saudi Arabia to conduct the SPINE20 summit in 2020. The summit was intended to promote evidence-based recommendations to use the most reliable information from high-level research. Eight areas of importance to mitigate spine disorders were identified through a voting process of the participating societies. Twelve recommendations were discussed and vetted. RESULTS: The areas of immediate concern were "Aging spine," "Future of spine care," "Spinal cord injuries," "Children and adolescent spine," "Spine-related disability," "Spine Educational Standards," "Patient safety," and "Burden on economy." Twelve recommendations were created and endorsed by 31/33 spine societies and 2 journals globally during a vetted process through the SPINE20.org website and during the virtual inaugural meeting November 10-11, 2020 held from the G20 platform. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time that international spine societies have joined to support actions to mitigate the burden of spine disorders across the globe. SPINE20 seeks to change awareness and treatment of spine pain by supporting local projects that implement value-based practices with healthcare policies that are culturally sensitive based on scientific evidence.

Digital Image Correlation (DIC) Assessment of the Non-Linear Response of the Anterior Longitudinal Ligament of the Spine during Flexion and Extension.

While the non-linear behavior of spine segments has been extensively investigated in the past, the behavior of the Anterior Longitudinal Ligament (ALL) and its contribution during flexion and extension has never been studied considering the spine as a whole. The aims of the present study were to exploit Digital Image Correlation (DIC) to: (I) characterize the strain distribution on the ALL during flexion-extension, (II) compare the strain on specific regions of interest (ROI) of the ALL in front of the vertebra and of the intervertebral disc, (III) analyze the non-linear relationship between the surface strain and the imposed rotation and the resultant moment. Three specimens consisting of 6 functional spinal units (FSUs) were tested in flexion-extension. The full-field strain maps were measured on the surface of the ALL, and the most strained areas were investigated in detail. The DIC-measured strains showed different values of peak strain in correspondence with the vertebra and the disc but the average over the ROIs was of the same order of magnitude. The strain-moment curves showed a non-linear response like the moment-angle curves: in flexion the slope of the strain-moment curve was greater than in extension and with a more abrupt change of slope. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study addressing, by means of a full-field strain measurement, the non-linear contribution of the ALL to spine biomechanics. This study was limited to only three specimens; hence the results must be taken with caution. This information could be used in the future to build more realistic numerical models of the spine.

A comparative analysis of a disposable and a reusable pedicle screw instrument kit for lumbar arthrodesis: integrating HTA and MCDA.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar arthrodesis is a common surgical technique that consists of the fixation of one or more motion segments with pedicle screws and rods. However, spinal surgery using these techniques is expensive and has a significant impact on the budgets of hospitals and Healthcare Systems. While reusable and disposable instruments for laparoscopic interventions have been studied in literature, no specific information exists regarding instrument kits for lumbar arthrodesis. The aim of the present study was to perform a complete health technology assessment comparing a disposable instrument kit for lumbar arthrodesis (innovative device) with the standard reusable instrument. METHODS: A prospective and observational study was implemented, by means of investigation of administrative records of patients undergoing a lumbar arthrodesis surgical procedure. The evaluation was conducted in 2013, over a 12- month time horizon, considering all the procedures carried out using the two technologies. A complete health technology assessment and a multi-criteria decision analysis approach were implemented in order to compare the two alternative technologies. Economic impact (with the implementation of an activity based costing approach), social, ethical, organisational, and technology-related aspects were taken into account. RESULTS: Although the cost analysis produced similar results in the comparison of the two technologies (total cost equal to € 4,279.1 and € 4,242.6 for reusable instrument kit and the disposable one respectively), a significant difference between the two instrument kits was noted, in particular concerning the organisational impact and the patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: The replacement of a reusable instrument kit for lumbar arthrodesis, with a disposable one, could improve the management of this kind of devices in hospital settings.

Higher risk of dural tears and recurrent herniation with lumbar micro-endoscopic discectomy.

Existing studies on micro-endoscopic lumbar discectomy report similar outcomes to those of open and microdiscectomy and conflicting results on complications. We designed a randomised controlled trial to investigate the hypothesis of different outcomes and complications obtainable with the three techniques. 240 patients aged 18-65 years affected by posterior lumbar disc herniation and symptoms lasting over 6 weeks of conservative management were randomised to micro-endoscopic (group 1), micro (group 2) or open (group 3) discectomy. Exclusion criteria were less than 6 weeks of pain duration, cauda equina compromise, foraminal or extra-foraminal herniations, spinal stenosis, malignancy, previous spinal surgery, spinal deformity, concurrent infection and rheumatic disease. Surgery and follow-up were made at a single Institution. A biomedical researcher independently collected and reviewed the data. ODI, back and leg VAS and SF-36 were the outcome measures used preoperatively, postoperatively and at 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-up. 212/240 (91%) patients completed the 24-month follow-up period. VAS back and leg, ODI and SF36 scores showed clinically and statistically significant improvements within groups without significant difference among groups throughout follow-up. Dural tears, root injuries and recurrent herniations were significantly more common in group 1. Wound infections were similar in group 2 and 3, but did not affect patients in group 1. Overall costs were significantly higher in group 1 and lower in group 3. In conclusion, outcome measures are equivalent 2 years following lumbar discectomy with micro-endoscopy, microscopy or open technique, but severe complications are more likely and costs higher with micro-endoscopy.