Prevalence and Risk Factors of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis and Retrolisthesis in the Thoracolumbar and Lumbar Spine - An EOS Study Using Updated Radiographic Parameters.

STUDY DESIGN: Single centre, cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVES: The objective is to report the prevalence of spondylolisthesis and retrolisthesis, analyse both conditions in terms of the affected levels and severity, as well as identify their risk factors. METHODS: A review of clinical data and radiographic images of consecutive spine patients seen in outpatient clinics over a 1-month period is performed. Images are obtained using the EOS® technology under standardised protocol, and radiographic measurements were performed by 2 independent, blinded spine surgeons. The prevalence of both conditions were shown and categorised based on the spinal level involvement and severity. Associated risk factors were identified. RESULTS: A total of 256 subjects (46.1% males) with 2304 discs from T9/10 to L5/S1 were studied. Their mean age was 52.2(± 18.7) years. The overall prevalence of spondylolisthesis and retrolisthesis was 25.9% and 17.1% respectively. Spondylolisthesis occurs frequently at L4/5(16.3%), and retrolisthesis at L3/4(6.8%). Majority of the patients with spondylolisthesis had a Grade I slip (84.3%), while those with retrolisthesis had a Grade I slip. The presence of spondylolisthesis was found associated with increased age (P < .001), female gender (OR: 2.310; P = .005), predominantly sitting occupations (OR:2.421; P = .008), higher American Society of Anaesthesiology grades (P = .001), and lower limb radiculopathy (OR: 2.175; P = .007). Patients with spondylolisthesis had larger Pelvic Incidence (P < .001), Pelvic Tilt (P < .001) and Knee alignment angle (P = .011), but smaller Thoracolumbar junctional angle (P = .008), Spinocoxa angle (P = .007). Retrolisthesis was associated with a larger Thoracolumbar junctional angle (P =.039). CONCLUSION: This is the first study that details the prevalence of spondylolisthesis and retrolisthesis simultaneously, using the EOS technology and updated sagittal radiographic parameters. It allows better understanding of both conditions, their mutual relationship, and associated clinical and radiographic risk factors.

Efficacy of digital cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Although cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) has been recommended the initial therapy for insomnia, its clinical usage remains limited due to the lack of therapists. Digital CBT-I (dCBT-I) can potentially circumvent this problem. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the short-term and long-term efficacy of dCBT-I for adults with insomnia. METHODS: Systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL from inception till 5 March 2020 was conducted. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dCBT-I with controls (wait-list/treatment-as-usual/online education) in adults with insomnia were eligible. The primary outcome was insomnia severity index (ISI) at post-intervention, short-term follow-up (ranging 4 weeks to 6 months) and 1-year follow-up. Mean differences were pooled using the random-effects model. RESULTS: 94 articles were assessed full-text independently by two team members and 33 studies were included in this meta-analysis. 4719 and 4645 participants were randomised to dCBT-I and control respectively. dCBT-I significantly reduces ISI at post-intervention with mean difference -5.00 (95% CI -5.68 to -4.33, p < 0.0001) (I2 = 79%) compared to control. The improvements were sustained at short-term follow-up, -3.99 (95% CI -4.82 to -3.16, p < 0.0001) and 1-year follow-up, -3.48 (95% CI -4.21 to -2.76, p < 0.0001). Compared to dCBT-I, face-to-face CBT-I produced greater improvement in ISI, 3.07 (95% CI 1.18 to 4.95, p = 0.001). However, this was within the non-inferiority interval of 4 points on ISI. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis provides strong support for the effectiveness of dCBT-I in treating insomnia. dCBT-I has potential to revolutionise the delivery of CBT-I, improving the accessibility and availability of CBT-I content for insomnia patients worldwide.

Management of Nonunion and Malunion After Primary Mandibular Condylar Fracture Treatment: A Review and Recommendations.

PURPOSE: After primary treatment of mandibular condylar fractures, nonunion and malunion can result in considerable malocclusion and temporomandibular joint dysfunction owing to the integral role the condylar head plays in the temporomandibular joint. At present, the choice and timing of treatment are highly heterogeneous. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current literature to identify possible pitfalls, discuss available treatment options, and make recommendations. METHODS: The electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, PROSPERO, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Embase were searched for content matching mandibular condylar fracture "revision surgery," "secondary surgery," "refracture," "malunion," and "malunion osteotomy." Articles in English, limited to human adults, published in the past 10 years, with abstracts and full text available and appropriate study designs, were included. RESULTS: A total of 101 articles were retrieved for analysis, and 4 articles were included. Because of heterogeneity in these studies, a pooled analysis could not be performed. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery can be considered as primary treatment of condylar fractures, and early detection of complications allows for early intervention, leading to better outcomes. Treatment of temporomandibular joint dysfunction is highly heterogeneous and ranges from nonsurgical measures to joint reconstruction. Unilateral malocclusion can often be corrected with unilateral surgery, but bilateral surgery may be indicated in select cases. Bilateral deformities often require bilateral mandibular surgery, but in cases with preserved symmetry, maxillary surgery can be performed.

Evolution of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies at a single institution.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to study the changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) at a single centre. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of sixty consecutive patients who underwent MIDP from September 2006 to November 2016 at a single institution. To study the evolution of MIDP, the study population was divided into three groups consisting of twenty patients (Group I, Group II and Group III). RESULTS: Sixty patients underwent MIDP with 11 (18.3%) requiring open conversions. The median operation time was 305 (range: 85-775) min and the median post-operative stay was 6 (range: 3-73) days. Fifteen procedures were spleen-saving pancreatectomies. Major post-operative morbidity (>Grade 2) occurred in 12 (20.0%) patients and there was no mortality or reoperations. There were 33 (55.0%) pancreatic fistulas, of which 15 (25.0%) were Grade B fistulas of which 12 (20.0%) required percutaneous drainage. Comparison between the three groups demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the frequency of procedures performed, increase in robotic-assisted procedures and proportion of asymptomatic tumours resected. There also tended to be non-significant decrease in open conversion rates from 25% to 5% between the three groups and increase in tumour size resected from 24 to 40 mm. CONCLUSION: Comparison between the three groups demonstrated that MIDP was performed with increased frequency. There was a statistically significant increase in the frequency of resections performed for asymptomatic tumours and resections performed through robotic assistance. There was also a non-significant trend towards a decrease in open conversions and increase in the size of tumours resected.

A comparison between robotic-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the early perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). METHODS: The clinicopathologic features of 45 consecutive patients who underwent minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomy from 2006 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients who met our study criteria were included. Eight patients underwent RDP and 31 had LDP. There were 10 (25.6%) open conversions. Six (15.4%) patients had major (> grade 2) morbidities and there was no in-hospital mortality. There were 14 (35.9%) grade A and 9 (23.1%) grade B pancreatic fistulas. Comparison between RDP and LDP demonstrated no significant difference between the patients' baseline characteristics except there was increased frequency of spleen-preserving pancreatectomies (3 (37.5%) vs 25 (80.6%), P=0.016) and splenic-vessel preservation (5 (62.5%) vs 4 (12.9%), P=0.003) in RDP. Comparison between outcomes demonstrated that RDP was associated with a longer median operation time (452.5 (range, 300-685) vs 245 min (range, 85-430), P=0.001) and increased frequency of the procedure completed purely laparoscopically (8 (100%) vs 18 (58.1%), P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: RDP can be safely adopted and is equivalent to LDP in most perioperative outcomes. It is also associated with a decreased frequency of the need for hand-assistance laparoscopic surgery or open conversion but needed a longer operation time. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.