Adult versus adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a meta-analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: While the natural history of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and adult idiopathic scoliosis (AdIS) is well documented in the literature, the impact of age on postoperative outcomes remains an active area of research. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare patients undergoing surgery for AIS and AdIS with respect to: (1) postoperative Cobb correction, (2) perioperative variables, and (3) postoperative complications. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. INCLUSION CRITERIA: studies published between 2002 and 2022, retrospective, and comparing AIS vs. AdIS patients undergoing deformity surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative Cobb correction. Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss (EBL), operative time, total instrumented levels, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative complications. Random-effects models were performed according to the method of DerSimonian and Laird. RESULTS: Of 190 identified articles, 14 fit the inclusion criteria. A total of 1788 patients were included, 1275(71.3%) with AIS, and 513(28.7%) with AdIS. There was a significant age difference between AIS and AdIS (15.3 vs. 36.7 years, mean difference (MD) = 21.3 years, 95%CI = 14.3-28.4,p < 0.001). Mean postoperative Cobb percentage correction was reported in 5 articles and was significantly higher in AIS (68.4%) vs. AdIS (61.4%) (MD = -7.2, 95%CI = -11.6,-2.7,p = 0.001). EBL was not significantly different between AIS and AdIS (695.6 mL vs 817.7 mL,p = 0.204). Furthermore, no difference was found in operative time (MD = 37.9 min,95%CI = -10.7;86.6,p = 0.127), total instrumented level (MD = 0.88,95%CI = -0.7,2.4,p = 0.273), and LOS (MD = 0.5, 95%CI = -0.2;1.2, p = 0.188). Four articles reported postoperative complications in AIS vs AdIS, with no difference in neurological deficit, instrumentation-related complications, and medical complications. CONCLUSION: AIS patients had better radiographic correction compared to AdIS. Though no difference was found in perioperative outcomes and complications, these findings emphasize the importance of counseling patients regarding the optimal timing of surgical correction.

Endoscopic transforaminal treatment of a thoracic perineural cyst: a case report.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: To describe the first case of a thoracic perineural cyst successfully treated using a direct thoracic transforaminal endoscopic approach. METHODS: Case report. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: A 66-year-old male presented with right-sided radicular pain in a T4 distribution. MRI of the thoracic spine revealed a right T4 perineural cyst caudally displacing the root in the T4-5 foramen. He had failed attempts at nonoperative management. The patient underwent an all endoscopic transforaminal perineural cyst decompression and resection as a same-day surgical procedure. Postoperatively, the patient noted near complete resolution of the preoperative radicular pain. A thoracic MRI with and without contrast was performed 3 months after surgery and showed no evidence of the preoperative perineural cyst and no symptom recurrence was noted by the patient. CONCLUSION: This case report presents the first safe and successful report of an all endoscopic transforaminal decompression and resection of a perineural cyst in the thoracic spine.

L1-pelvic angle: a convenient measurement to attain optimal deformity correction.

PURPOSE: (1) Evaluate the associations between L1-pelvic angle (L1PA) and both sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and T1-pelvic angle (T1PA), and (2) assess the clinical impact of L1PA. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective cohort study was undertaken for patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery from 2013 to 2017. Ideal L1PA was defined as (0.5xPelvic Incidence)-21. Pearson correlation was performed to compare L1PA, SVA, and T1PA. Univariate/multivariate regression was performed to assess the effect of L1PA on mechanical complications, controlling for age, BMI, and postoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI/LL). Due to the overlapping nature of patients with pseudarthrosis and rod fracture, these patients were analyzed together. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were included. Mean preoperative L1PA, SVA, and T1PA were 15.5 ± 8.9°, 90.7 ± 66.8 mm, and 27.1 ± 13.0°, respectively. Mean postoperative L1PA, SVA, and T1PA were 15.0 ± 8.9°, 66.7 ± 52.8 mm, and 22.3 ± 11.1°, respectively. Thirty-six (24.8%) patients achieved ideal L1PA. Though the correlation was modest, preoperative L1PA was linearly correlated with preoperative SVA (r2 = 0.16, r = 0.40, 95%CI = 0.22-0.60, p < 0.001) and T1PA (r2 = 0.41, r = 0.62, 95%CI = 0.46-0.76, p < 0.001). Postoperative L1PA was linearly correlated with postoperative SVA (r2 = 0.12, r = 0.37, 95%CI = 0.18-0.56, p < 0.001) and T1PA (r2 = 0.40, r = 0.62, 95%CI = 0.45-0.74, p < 0.001). Achieving ideal L1PA ± 5° was associated with a decreased risk of rod fracture/pseudarthrosis on univariate and multivariate regression (OR = 0.33, 95%CI = 0.12-0.86, p = 0.024). No association between achieving ideal L1PA and patient-reported outcomes was observed. CONCLUSION: L1PA was modestly correlated with SVA and T1PA, and achieving ideal L1PA was associated with lower rates of rod fracture/pseudarthrosis. Future studies are warranted to better define the clinical implications of achieving a normal L1PA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A clinical model to predict postoperative improvement in sub-domains of the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score for degenerative cervical myelopathy.

PURPOSE: The modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score consists of six sub-domains and is used to quantify the severity of cervical myelopathy. The current study aimed to assess for predictors of postoperative mJOA sub-domains scores following elective surgical management for patients with cervical myelopathy and develop the first clinical prediction model for 12-month mJOA sub-domain scores.Please confirm if the author names are presented accurately and in the correct sequence (given name, middle name/initial, family name). Author 1 Given name: [Byron F.] Last name [Stephens], Author 2 Given name: [Lydia J.] Last name [McKeithan], Author 3 Given name: [W. Hunter] Last name [Waddell], Author 4 Given name: [Anthony M.] Last name [Steinle], Author 5 Given name: [Wilson E.] Last name [Vaughan], Author 6 Given name: [Jacquelyn S.] Last name [Pennings], Author 7 Given name: [Jacquelyn S.] Last name [Pennings], Author 8 Given name: [Scott L.] Last name [Zuckerman], Author 9 Given name: [Kristin R.] Last name [Archer], Author 10 Given name: [Amir M.] Last name [Abtahi] Also, kindly confirm the details in the metadata are correct.Last Author listed should be Kristin R. Archer METHODS: A multivariable proportional odds ordinal regression model was developed for patients with cervical myelopathy. The model included patient demographic, clinical, and surgery covariates along with baseline sub-domain scores. The model was internally validated using bootstrap resampling to estimate the likely performance on a new sample of patients. RESULTS: The model identified mJOA baseline sub-domains to be the strongest predictors of 12-month scores, with numbness in legs and ability to walk predicting five of the six mJOA items. Additional covariates predicting three or more items included age, preoperative anxiety/depression, gender, race, employment status, duration of symptoms, smoking status, and radiographic presence of listhesis. Surgical approach, presence of motor deficits, number of surgical levels involved, history of diabetes mellitus, workers' compensation claim, and patient insurance had no impact on 12-month mJOA scores. CONCLUSION: Our study developed and validated a clinical prediction model for improvement in mJOA scores at 12 months following surgery. The results highlight the importance of assessing preoperative numbness, walking ability, modifiable variables of anxiety/depression, and smoking status. This model has the potential to assist surgeons, patients, and families when considering surgery for cervical myelopathy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Leveraging web-based prediction calculators to set patient expectations for elective spine surgery: a qualitative study to inform implementation.

BACKGROUND: Prediction calculators can help set outcomes expectations following orthopaedic surgery, however effective implementation strategies for these tools are unknown. This study evaluated provider and patient perspectives on clinical implementation of web-based prediction calculators developed using national prospective spine surgery registry data from the Quality Outcomes Database. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews in two health systems, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) and Duke University Health System (DUHS) of orthopedic and neurosurgery health care providers (VUMC: n = 19; DUHS: n = 6), health care administrators (VUMC: n = 9; DUHS: n = 9), and patients undergoing elective spine surgery (VUMC: n = 16). Qualitative template analysis was used to analyze interview data, with a focus on end-user perspectives regarding clinical implementation of web-based prediction tools. RESULTS: Health care providers, administrators and patients overwhelmingly supported the use of the calculators to help set realistic expectations for surgical outcomes. Some clinicians had questions about the validity and applicability of the calculators in their patient population. A consensus was that the calculators needed seamless integration into clinical workflows, but there was little agreement on best methods for selecting which patients to complete the calculators, timing, and mode of completion. Many interviewees expressed concerns that calculator results could influence payers, or expose risk of liability. Few patients expressed concerns over additional survey burden if they understood that the information would directly inform their care. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees had a largely positive opinion of the calculators, believing they could aid in discussions about expectations for pain and functional recovery after spine surgery. No single implementation strategy is likely to be successful, and strategies vary, even within the same healthcare system. Patients should be well-informed of how responses will be used to deliver better care, and concerns over how the calculators could impact payment and liability should be addressed prior to use. Future research is necessary to determine whether use of calculators improves management and outcomes for people seeking a surgical consult for spine pain.

A comparison of pain control and complications using three different ways of anesthesia in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

BACKGROUND: We aim to compare the degree of pain control and complications in three types of anesthesia using periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) plus intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA), low-dose spinal anesthesia, and intravenous (IV) sedation in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this clinical trial study, 106 patients were participated from December 2015 to December 2016 at Alzahra Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. Patients were randomly allocated into three groups to receive PPNB plus IRLA (n = 36), low-dose spinal anesthesia (n = 35) and IV sedation (n = 35) before TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Pain scores were recorded using a 10 point visual analog scale right after the biopsy was done. Early and late complications were assessed using a questionnaire after the procedure and in follow-up of patients. RESULTS: Overall, the pain score in the low-dose spinal anesthesia group was significantly lower than PPNB plus IRLA and IV sedation groups (P < 0.001). The differences in pain scores between PPNB plus IRLA group and IV sedation group were not significant (P = 0.30). Urinary retraction and fever were significantly more frequent in low-dose spinal anesthesia and IV sedation, retrospectively (P = 0.04, P = 0.03). No significant difference in late complications was found among the groups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that low-dose spinal anesthesia is superior to PPNB plus IRLA and IV sedation in terms of pain controlling and was associated with higher tolerance of the examination and patient comfort.

Psychometric properties of the Press Ganey® Outpatient Medical Practice Survey.

BACKGROUND: The Press Ganey® Medical Practice Survey ("Press Ganey® survey") is a patient-reported questionnaire commonly used to measure patient satisfaction with outpatient health care in the United States. Our objective was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Press Ganey® survey in a single institution setting. METHODS: We analyzed surveys from 34,503 unique respondents seen by 624 providers from 47 specialties and 94 clinics at the University of Utah in 2013. The University of Utah is a health care system that provides primary through tertiary care for over 200 medical specialties. Surveys were administered online. The Press Ganey® survey consisted of 24 items organized into 6 scales: Access (4 items), Moving Through the Visit (2), Nurse Assistant (2), Care Provider (10), Personal Issues (4) and Overall Assessment (2). Missingness, ceiling and floor rates were summarized. Cronbach's alpha was used to evaluate internal consistency reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess convergent and discriminant validities. RESULTS: Missingness was 0.01% for the total score and ranged from 0.8 to 11.4% across items. The ceiling rate was high at 29.3% for the total score, and ranged from 55.4 to 84.1% across items. Floor rates were 0.01% for the total score, and ranged from 0.1 to 2.1% across items. Internal consistency reliability ranged from 0.79 to 0.96, and item-scale correlations ranged from 0.49 to 0.9. Confirmatory factor analysis supported convergent and discriminant validities. CONCLUSION: The Press Ganey® survey demonstrated suitable psychometric properties for most metrics. However, the high ceiling rate can have a notable impact on quarterly percentile scores within our institution. Multi-institutional studies of the Press Ganey® survey are needed to inform administrative decision making and institution reimbursement decisions based on this survey.

Does Timing of Radiation Therapy Impact Wound Healing in Patients Undergoing Metastatic Spine Surgery?

INTRODUCTION: The impact of radiation on wound healing after metastatic spine surgery remains an active area of research. In patients undergoing metastatic spine surgery, we sought to (1) assess the relationship between preoperative and/or postoperative radiation on wound complications, and (2) evaluate the relationship between the timing of postoperative radiation and wound complications. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective, cohort study of patients undergoing metastatic spine surgery was conducted from 2010 to 2021. The primary exposure variable was the use/timing of radiation. Radiation included both external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Patients were trichotomized into the following groups: (1) preoperative radiation only, (2) postoperative radiation only, and (3) no radiation. The primary outcome variable was wound complications, which was defined as dehiscence requiring reoperation, infection requiring antibiotics, or infection requiring surgical debridement. Multivariable logistic/linear regression controlled for age, tumor size, primary organ of origin, and the presence of other organ metastases. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients underwent surgery for extradural spinal metastasis. Participants were divided into three groups: preoperative RT only (N = 29), postoperative RT only (N = 91), and no RT (N = 178). Patients who received postoperative RT only and no RT were significantly older than patients who received preoperative RT only (p = 0.009) and were less likely to be white (p < 0.001). No other significant differences were found in basic demographics, tumor characteristics, or intraoperative variables. Wound-related complications occurred in two (6.9%) patients with preoperative RT only, four patients (4.4%) in postoperative RT only, and 11 (6.2%) patients with no RT, with no significant difference among the three groups (p = 0.802). No significant difference was found in wound-related complications, reoperation, and time to wound complications between patients with preoperative RT only and no RT, and between postoperative RT only and no RT (p > 0.05). Among the postoperative-RT-only group, no difference in wound complications was seen between those receiving SBRT (5.6%) and EBRT (4.1%) (p > 0.999). However, patients who received preoperative RT only had a longer time to wound complications in comparison to those who received postoperative RT only (43.5 ± 6.3 vs. 19.7 ± 3.8, p = 0.004). Regarding timing of postoperative RT, the mean (SD) time to RT was 28.7 ± 10.0 days, with a median of 28.7 (21-38) days. No significant difference was found in time to postoperative RT between patients with and without wound complications (32.9 ± 12.3 vs. 29.0 ± 9.7 days, p = 0.391). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing metastatic spine surgery, a history of previous RT or postoperative RT did not significantly affect wound complications. However, those with previous RT prior to surgery had a longer time to wound complications than patients undergoing postoperative RT only. Moreover, timing of RT had no impact on wound complications, indicating that earlier radiation may be safely employed to optimize tumor control without fear of compromising wound healing.

Does Elective Admission vs. Emergency Department Presentation Affect Surgical Outcomes in Metastatic Spine Surgery?

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 20% of patients with metastatic spine disease develop symptomatic spinal cord compression, and these patients can present urgently to the emergency department (ED) or, in a more organized fashion, to a clinic. In a cohort of patients undergoing metastatic spine surgery, we sought to (1) determine the rate of ED presentation, (2) identify preoperative and perioperative risk factors associated with ED presentation, and (3) evaluate whether ED vs. clinic presentation impacts long-term outcomes. METHODS: A single-institution, multi-surgeon, retrospective cohort study was undertaken of patients undergoing metastatic spinal tumor surgery between 02/2010 and 01/2021. The primary exposure variable was presentation setting, dichotomized to the ED vs. clinic. The primary outcomes were postoperative functional status, measured with the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) and McCormick Scale (MMS), local recurrence (LR), and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included complications and readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 311 patients underwent metastatic spine surgery (51.7% ED vs. 48.3% clinic). Those presenting to the ED had higher rates of smoking (21.7% vs. 16.0%, p = 0.02), were more likely to have 2+ comorbidities (47.2% vs. 32.7%, p = 0.011), and were more likely to have public insurance (43.5% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.043). Preoperative KPS was lower in ED patients (p < 0.001), while the Bilsky score was higher (p = 0.049). ED patients had higher rates of oligometastatic disease (p = 0.049), higher total decompressed levels (p = 0.041), and higher rates of costotransversectomy (p = 0.031) compared to clinic patients. Length of stay was significantly longer for ED patients (7.7 ± 6.1 vs. 6.1 ± 5.8 days, p = 0.020), and they were less likely to be discharged home (52.2% vs. 69.3%, p = 0.025). ED presentation was significantly associated with shorter overall survival (HR =1.53 95% CI = 1.13-2.08, p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Of patients undergoing metastatic spine disease, approximately half presented through the ED vs. clinic. ED patients had higher rates of smoking, public insurance, and higher Bilsky score. ED patients also underwent more extensive surgery, had longer LOS, were less likely discharged home, and most importantly, had a shorter overall survival. These results suggest that initial presentation for patients undergoing surgery for metastatic spine disease significantly impacts outcomes, and signs/symptoms of metastatic spine disease should be recognized as soon as possible to prevent ED presentation.

Clinical Effectiveness of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Tritanium C Anterior Cervical Cage vs. PEEK Cage.

Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has proven to be a clinically efficient and cost-effective method for treating patients with degenerative cervical spine conditions. New intervertebral implant products are being developed to improve fusion and stability while decreasing complications. This study assesses the effectiveness of Tritanium C (Tri-C) Anterior Cervical Cage (Stryker) in the treatment of degenerative disk disease (DDD) of the cervical spine compared with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using data prospectively collected from two institutions. Patients who underwent ACDFs for DDD using either the Tri-C cage or PEEK cage were identified. The patients' demographics, comorbidities, operative variables, and baseline patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected. PROs included the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and numeric rating scale (NRS) for neck and arm pain. The primary outcomes included 3- and 12-month PROs as well as the rates of 90-day readmission, 90-day reoperation, and perioperative complication. The radiographic outcomes included rates of subsidence, cage movement, and successful fusion within 12 months. Multivariate linear regression models were run to identify variables predictive of 12-month PROs. Results: A total of 275 patients who underwent ACDF were included in this study and were divided into two groups: PEEK (n=213) and Tri-C (n=62). Both groups showed improvement in neck and arm pain and NDI postoperatively. When Tri-C and PEEK were compared, no significant differences were observed in the 3- or 12-month changes in neck or arm pain or NDI. Furthermore, there were no differences in the rates of 90-day readmission, 90-day reoperation, and perioperative complication. Regression analysis revealed that Tri-C vs. PEEK was not a significant predictor of any outcome. Conclusions: Our results indicate that the use of porous titanium Tri-C cage during ACDFs is an effective method for managing cervical DDD in terms of PROs, perioperative morbidity, and radiologic parameters. No significant difference was observed in any clinical outcome between patients undergoing ACDF using the Tri-C cage and those in whom the PEEK cage was used. Level of Evidence: III.

Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes, Complications, Readmissions, and Revisions in Posterior Lumbar Fusion With, Versus Without, an Interbody Device.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis on prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVES: To compare posterior lumbar fusions with versus without an interbody in: (1) Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 1 year and (2) postoperative complications, readmission, and reoperations. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Elective lumbar fusion is commonly used to treat various lumbar pathologies. Two common approaches for open posterior lumbar fusion include posterolateral fusion (PLF) alone without an interbody and with an interbody through techniques, like transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Whether fusion with or without an interbody leads to better outcomes remains an area of active research. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Lumbar Module of the Quality Outcomes Database was queried for adults undergoing elective primary posterior lumbar fusion with or without an interbody. Covariates included demographic variables, comorbidities, primary spine diagnosis, operative variables, and baseline PROs, including Oswestry Disability Index, North American Spine Society satisfaction index, numeric rating scale-back/leg pain, and Euroqol 5-dimension. Outcomes included complications, reoperations, readmissions, return to work/activities, and PROs. Propensity score matching and linear regression modeling were used to estimate the average treatment effect on the treated to assess the impact of interbody use on patient outcomes. RESULTS: After propensity matching, there were 1044 patients with interbody and 215 patients undergoing PLF. The average treatment effect on the treated analysis showed that having an interbody or not had no significant impact on any outcome of interest, including 30-day complications and reoperations, 3-month readmissions, 12-month return to work, and 12-month PROs. CONCLUSION: There were no discernible differences in outcomes between patients undergoing PLF alone versus with an interbody in elective posterior lumbar fusion. These results add to the growing body of evidence that posterior lumbar fusions with and without an interbody seem to have similar outcomes up to 1 year postoperatively when treating degenerative lumbar spine conditions.

Determining the Effect of Intraoperative TXA on Postoperative Blood Loss in ACDF.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of intraoperative tranexamic acid (TXA) in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) on postoperative blood loss. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: TXA has been proven to be a safe and effective agent in reducing blood loss after cervical surgery; however, its efficacy when used intraoperatively for ACDF surgeries had yet to be researched. Currently, there are few studies examining the effects of intraoperative TXA in cervical spinal fusion, and none specifically examining TXA use in ACDF. METHODS: A tertiary medical center's prospectively collected spine registry was queried between 1/1/18 and 12/1/21 for all patients who underwent elective ACDF surgery and received a drain postoperatively. Patients were separated into 2 groups; those who had received intraoperative TXA and those who did not. Baseline demographic and operative variables were collected from the registry. The primary outcome was postoperative blood loss over a 24-hour period. Secondary outcomes included total drain output, intraoperative estimated blood loss, operative duration, drain duration, changes in preoperative to postoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit levels, and rate of transfusions, complications, revisions, and reoperations. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-six patients were included. One hundred ninety patients underwent ACDF and did not receive intraoperative TXA, whereas 96 patients underwent ACDF and did receive TXA. There were no differences in any demographic or baseline variables. Multivariate analysis showed intraoperative TXA was associated with shorter drain duration (ß=-5.74, 95% CI: -10.9 to -0.53, P =0.031) and reduction in 24-hour drain output (ß=-12.2, 95% CI: -19.4 to -4.89, P =0.001) and total drain output (ß=-14.0, 95% CI: -22.9 to -5.05, P =0.002). CONCLUSIONS: TXA use during ACDF procedures leads to a decrease in perioperative blood loss and faster drain removal. TXA is an effective and safe agent for reducing perioperative blood loss in ACDF surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Combining Wearable Technology and Telehealth Counseling for Rehabilitation After Lumbar Spine Surgery: Feasibility and Acceptability of a Physical Activity Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a wearable device and telehealth counseling physical activity intervention early after lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: Sixteen patients were randomized to an 8-session physical activity intervention or to usual postoperative care after surgery. The intervention included a wearable device (ie, Fitbit) and telehealth counseling by a licensed physical therapist. The feasibility of study procedures was assessed through recruitment, randomization, retention, and participation rates. Acceptability was assessed through a satisfaction survey and median within-participant change in objective physical activity (steps per day and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity [MVPA]) and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Of 64 participants who were eligible, recruitment and randomization rates were 41 and 62%, respectively. Retention for objective physical activity and patient-reported outcomes was 94 and 100%, respectively, at 6-month follow-up. Seven (88%) participants in the intervention group completed all telehealth sessions, and 6 (75%) met step goals over the 8 sessions. All participants in the intervention group found the wearable device and telehealth counseling to be helpful and reported it much or somewhat more important than other postoperative services. Median within-participant change for steps per day improved from baseline (preoperative) to 6 months after surgery for both the intervention (1070) and usual care (679) groups, while MVPA only improved for the intervention group (2.2. minutes per day). Improvements in back and leg pain and disability were noted for both groups. No adverse events were reported in the study. CONCLUSION: Combining wearable technology and telehealth counseling is a feasible approach to promote the physical activity during the early postoperative period after spine surgery. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to investigate the efficacy of leveraging wearables and telehealth during postoperative rehabilitation. IMPACT: This study has implications for the clinical dissemination of physical activity strategies in the rehabilitation setting.

Comparison of Outcomes in Patients with Cervical Spine Metastasis After Different Surgical Approaches: A Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: In patients undergoing cervical spine surgery for metastatic spine disease, we sought to 1) compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes among 3 different operative approaches, 2) report fusion rates, and 3) compare different types of anterior vertebral body replacement. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing extradural cervical/cervicothoracic spine metastasis surgery between February 2010 and January 2021 was conducted. Operative approaches were anterior-alone, posterior-alone, or combined anterior-posterior, and the grafts/cages used in the anterior fusions were cortical allografts, static cages, or expandable cages. All cages were filled with autograft/allograft. Outcomes included perioperative/postoperative variables, along with fusion rates, functional status, local recurrence (LR), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Sixty-one patients underwent cervical spine surgery for metastatic disease, including 11 anterior (18.0%), 28 posterior (45.9%), and 22 combined (36.1%). New postoperative neurologic deficit was the highest in the anterior approach group (P = 0.038), and dysphagia was significantly higher in the combined approach group (P = 0.001). LR (P > 0.999), OS (P = 0.655), and time to both outcomes (log-rank test, OS, P = 0.051, LR, P = 0.187) were not significantly different. Of the 51 patients alive at 3 months, only 19 (37.2%) obtained imaging ≥3 months. Fusion was seen in 11/19 (57.8%) at a median of 8.3 months (interquartile range, 4.6-13.7). Among the anterior corpectomies, the following graft/cage was used: 6 allografts (54.5%), 4 static cages (36.3%), and 1 expandable cage (9.0%), with no difference found in outcomes among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The only discernible differences between operative approaches were that patients undergoing an anterior approach had higher rates of new postoperative neurologic deficit, and the combined approach group had higher rates of postoperative dysphagia.

Impact of unplanned readmissions on lumbar surgery outcomes: a national study of 33,447 patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Unplanned readmissions following lumbar spine surgery have immense clinical and financial implications. However, little is known regarding the impact of unplanned readmissions on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following lumbar spine surgery. PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of unplanned readmissions, including specific readmission reasons, on patient reported outcomes 12 months after lumbar spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data was conducted using patients included in the lumbar module of the Quality and Outcomes Database (QOD), a national, multicenter spine registry. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 33,447 patients who underwent elective lumbar spine surgery for degenerative diseases were included. Mean age was 59.8 (SD=14.04), 53.6% were male, 89.5% were white, 45.9% were employed, and 47.5% had private insurance. OUTCOME MEASURES: Unplanned 90-day readmissions and 12-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores, and North American Spine Society (NASS) patient-satisfaction scores. METHODS: The lumbar module of the QOD was queried for adults undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery for degenerative disease. Unplanned 90-day readmissions were classified into 4 groups: medical, surgical, pain-only, and no readmissions. Medical and surgical readmissions were further categorized into primary reason for readmission. 12-month PROs assessing patient back and leg pain (NRS), disability (ODI), quality of life (EQ-5D), and patient satisfaction were collected. Multivariable models predicting 12-month PROs were built controlling for covariates. RESULTS: A total of 31,430 patients (94%) had no unplanned readmission while 2,017 patients (6%) had an unplanned readmission within 90 days following lumbar surgery. Patients with readmissions had significantly worse 12-month PROs compared with those with no unplanned readmissions in covariate-adjusted models. Using Wald-df as a measure of predictor importance, surgical readmissions were associated with the worst 12-month outcomes, followed by pain-only, then medical readmissions. In separate covariate adjusted models, we found that readmissions for pain, SSI/wound dehiscence, and revisions were among the most important predictors of worse outcomes at 12-months. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned 90-day readmissions were associated with worse pain, disability, quality of life, and greater dissatisfaction at 12-months, with surgical readmissions having the greatest impact, followed by pain-only readmissions, then medical readmissions. Readmissions for pain, SSI/wound dehiscence, and revisions were the most important predictors of worse outcomes. These results may help providers better understand the factors that impact outcomes following lumbar spine surgery and promote improved patient counseling and perioperative management.

Impact of Unplanned Readmission on Patient-Reported Outcomes After Cervical Spine Surgery: A National Study of 13 355 Patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although risk factors for unplanned readmission after cervical spine surgery have been widely reported, less is known about how readmission itself affects patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Using the Quality Outcomes Database registry of patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery, we sought to (1) determine the impact of unplanned readmission on PROMs and (2) compare the effect of specific readmission reasons on PROMs. METHODS: An observational study was performed using a multi-institution, retrospective registry for patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. The occurrence of 90-day unplanned readmission classified into medical, surgical, pain only, and no readmissions was the exposure variable. Outcome variables included 12-month PROMs of Neck Disability Index (NDI), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-neck/arm pain, EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and patient dissatisfaction. Multivariable models predicting each PROM were built using readmission reasons controlling for demographics, clinical characteristics, and preoperative PROMs. RESULTS: Data from 13 355 patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery (82% anterior approach and 18% posterior approach) were analyzed. Unplanned readmission within 90 days of surgery occurred in 3.8% patients, including medical (1.6%), surgical (1.8%), and pain (0.3%). Besides medical reasons, wound infection/dehiscence was the most common reason for unplanned readmission for the total cohort (0.5%), dysphagia in the anterior approach (0.6%), and wound infection/dehiscence in the posterior approach (1.5%). Based on multivariable regression, surgical readmission was significantly associated with worse 12-month NDI, NRS-neck pain, NRS-arm pain, EQ-5D, and higher odds of dissatisfaction. Pain readmissions were associated with worse 12-month NDI and NRS-neck pain scores, and worse dissatisfaction. For specific readmission reasons, pain, surgical site infection/wound dehiscence, hematoma/seroma, revision surgery, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism were significantly associated with worsened 12-month PROMs. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery, 90-day unplanned surgical and pain readmissions were associated with worse 12-month PROMs compared with patients with medical readmissions and no readmissions.

Combined Anterior-Posterior vs. Posterior-Only Approach in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Which Strategy Is Superior?

Introduction: Whether a combined anterior-posterior (AP) approach offers additional benefits over the posterior-only (P) approach in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery remains unknown. In a cohort of patients undergoing ASD surgery, we compared the combined AP vs. the P-only approach in: (1) preoperative/perioperative variables, (2) radiographic measurements, and (3) postoperative outcomes. Methods: A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was performed for patients undergoing ASD surgery from 2009 to 2021. Inclusion criteria were ≥5-level fusion, sagittal/coronal deformity, and 2-year follow-up. The primary exposure was the operative approach: a combined AP approach or P alone. Postoperative outcomes included mechanical complications, reoperation, and minimal clinically important difference (MCID), defined as 30% of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Multivariable linear regression was controlled for age, BMI, and previous fusion. Results: Among 238 patients undergoing ASD surgery, 34 (14.3%) patients underwent the AP approach and 204 (85.7%) underwent the P-only approach. The AP group consisted mostly of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L5/S1 (73.5%) and/or L4/L5 (38.0%). Preoperatively, the AP group had more previous fusions (64.7% vs. 28.9%, p < 0.001), higher pelvic tilt (PT) (29.6 ± 11.6° vs. 24.6 ± 11.4°, p = 0.037), higher T1 pelvic angle (T1PA) (31.8 ± 12.7° vs. 24.0 ± 13.9°, p = 0.003), less L1-S1 lordosis (-14.7 ± 28.4° vs. -24.3 ± 33.4°, p < 0.039), less L4-S1 lordosis (-25.4 ± 14.7° vs. 31.6 ± 15.5°, p = 0.042), and higher sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (102.6 ± 51.9 vs. 66.4 ± 71.2 mm, p = 0.005). Perioperatively, the AP approach had longer operative time (553.9 ± 177.4 vs. 397.4 ± 129.0 min, p < 0.001), more interbodies placed (100% vs. 17.6%, p < 0.001), and longer length of stay (8.4 ± 10.7 vs. 7.0 ± 9.6 days, p = 0.026). Radiographically, the AP group had more improvement in T1PA (13.4 ± 8.7° vs. 9.5 ± 8.6°, p = 0.005), L1-S1 lordosis (-14.3 ± 25.6° vs. -3.2 ± 20.2°, p < 0.001), L4-S1 lordosis (-4.7 ± 16.4° vs. 3.2 ± 13.7°, p = 0.008), and SVA (65.3 ± 44.8 vs. 44.8 ± 47.7 mm, p = 0.007). These outcomes remained statistically significant in the multivariable analysis controlling for age, BMI, and previous fusion. Postoperatively, no significant differences were found in mechanical complications, reoperations, or MCID of PROMs. Conclusions: Preoperatively, patients undergoing the combined anterior-posterior approach had higher PT, T1PA, and SVA and lower L1-S1 and L4-S1 lordosis than the posterior-only approach. Despite increased operative time and length of stay, the anterior-posterior approach provided greater sagittal correction without any difference in mechanical complications or PROMs.

Impact of occupational characteristics on return to work for employed patients after elective cervical spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE: In a cohort of employed patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery with an uncomplicated postoperative course, the authors sought to determine the demographic, functional, and occupational characteristics associated with return to work (RTW) following surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data was undertaken of patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery for degenerative disease in the Quality Outcomes Database. Study inclusion criteria were: 1) employed prior to surgery and planned to RTW, 2) no unplanned readmissions, 3) achieved 30% improvement on the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and 4) were satisfied with the surgical outcome at 3 or 12 months postoperatively. A multivariable Cox regression model was built using demographic, functional, operative, and occupational characteristic to predict time to RTW. RESULTS: Of 5110 included patients, 4788 (93.7%) returned to work within 12 months, with a median time of 35 (IQR 19-60) days. Patients who did RTW were significantly younger (51.3 ± 9.4 vs 55.8 ± 9.6 years, p < 0.001), more often underwent an anterior approach (85.8% vs 80.7%, p = 0.009), were significantly more privately insured (82.1% vs 64.0%, p < 0.001), and were less likely to have workers' disability insurance (6.7% vs 14.6%, p < 0.001) compared with patients who did not RTW. On multivariable Cox regression, demographic factors associated with a longer RTW were older age (hazard ratio [HR] 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00, p < 0.001) and Black race (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.81, p < 0.001). Male sex was associated with a shorter RTW time (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.11-1.26, p < 0.001). Regarding baseline functional status, worse preoperative NDI (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-0.99, p < 0.001) was associated with a longer RTW, whereas the absence of myelopathy was associated with a shorter RTW (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.25, p < 0.001). Having a sedentary (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.65-1.99, p < 0.001), light-intensity (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.45-1.76, p < 0.001), and medium-intensity (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.22, p = 0.037) occupation was associated with a shorter RTW time compared with a heavy-intensity occupation at any time point. Heavy-intensity occupations were independently the strongest predictor of longer RTW. Similar predictors of shorter RTW were found in a subanalysis of occupation intensity and among operative approaches used. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing elective degenerative cervical spine surgery who had favorable surgical outcomes and planned to RTW before surgery, 94% had a successful RTW. Age was the strongest predictor of lower odds of RTW. Regarding time to RTW, having a sedentary, light-intensity, or medium-intensity occupation was associated with a shorter RTW time compared with a heavy-intensity occupation. These findings highlight the importance of considering the demographic and occupational characteristics when predicting postoperative RTW in patients with satisfactory surgical outcomes.

Revisiting the Posterior Approach for Cervical Radiculopathy Utilizing Endoscopic Techniques: A Favorable Short-Term Outcome and Cost Comparison With Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Cervical radiculopathy is a spine ailment frequently requiring surgical decompression via anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior foraminotomy/discectomy. While endoscopic posterior foraminotomy/discectomy is gaining popularity, its financial impact remains understudied despite equivalent randomized long-term outcomes to ACDF. In a cohort of patients undergoing ACDF vs endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy/discectomy, we sought to compare the total cost of the surgical episode while confirming an equivalent safety profile and perioperative outcomes. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with unilateral cervical radiculopathy undergoing ACDF or endoscopic cervical foraminotomy between 2018 and 2023 was undertaken. Primary outcomes included the total cost of care for the initial surgical episode (not charges or reimbursement). Perioperative variables and neurological recovery were recorded. Multivariable analysis tested age, body mass index, race, gender, insurance type, operative time, and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 38 ACDF and 17 endoscopic foraminotomy/discectomy operations were performed. All patients underwent single-level surgery except for 2 two-level endoscopic decompressions. No differences were found in baseline characteristics and symptom length except for younger age (46.8 ± 9.4 vs 57.6 ± 10.3, P = 0.002) and more smokers (18.4% vs 11.8%, P = 0.043) in the ACDF group. Actual hospital costs for the episode of surgical care were markedly higher in the ACDF cohort (mean ±95% CI; $27,782 ± $2011 vs $10,103 ± $720, P < 0.001) driven by the ACDF approach (ß = $17,723, P < 0.001) on multivariable analysis. On sensitivity analysis, ACDF was never cost-efficient compared with endoscopic foraminotomy, and endoscopic failure rates of 64% were required for break-even cost. ACDF was associated with significantly longer operative time (167.7 ± 22.0 vs 142.7 ± 27.4 minutes, P < 0.001) and length of stay (1.1 ± 0.5 vs 0.1 ± 0.2 days, P < 0.001). No significant difference was found regarding 90-day neurological improvement, readmission, reoperation, or complications. CONCLUSION: Compared with patients treated with a single-level ACDF for unilateral cervical radiculopathy, endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy/discectomy can achieve a similar safety profile, pain relief, and neurological recovery at considerably less cost. These findings may help patients and surgeons revisit offering the posterior cervical foraminotomy/discectomy utilizing endoscopic techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy/discectomy offers comparable safety, pain relief, and neurological recovery to traditional methods but at a significantly lower cost.

Who Can Be Discharged Home after Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery?

Introduction: After adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery, patients often require postoperative rehabilitation at an inpatient rehabilitation (IPR) center or a skilled nursing facility (SNF). However, home discharge is often preferred by patients and hsas been shown to decrease costs. In a cohort of patients undergoing ASD surgery, we sought to (1) report the incidence of discharge to home, (2) determine the factors significantly associated with discharge to home in the form of a simple scoring system, and (3) evaluate the impact of discharge disposition on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods: A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was undertaken for patients undergoing ASD surgery from 2009 to 2021. Inclusion criteria were ≥ 5-level fusion, sagittal/coronal deformity, and at least 2-year follow-up. Exposure variables included preoperative, perioperative, and radiographic data. The primary outcome was discharge status (dichotomized as home vs. IPR/SNF). Secondary outcomes included PROMs, such as the numeric rating scales (NRSs) for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D. A subanalysis comparing IPR to SNF discharge was conducted. Univariate analysis was performed. Results: Of 221 patients undergoing ASD surgery with a mean age of 63.6 ± 17.6, 112 (50.6%) were discharged home, 71 (32.2%) were discharged to an IPR center, and 38 (17.2%) were discharged to an SNF. Patients discharged home were significantly younger (55.7 ± 20.1 vs. 71.8 ± 9.1, p < 0.001), had lower rate of 2+ comorbidities (38.4% vs. 45.0%, p = 0.001), and had less hypertension (57.1% vs. 75.2%, p = 0.005). Perioperatively, patients who were discharged home had significantly fewer levels instrumented (10.0 ± 3.0 vs. 11.0 ± 3.4 levels, p = 0.030), shorter operative times (381.4 ± 139.9 vs. 461.6 ± 149.8 mins, p < 0.001), less blood loss (1101.0 ± 977.8 vs. 1739.7 ± 1332.9 mL, p < 0.001), and shorter length of stay (5.4 ± 2.8 vs. 9.3 ± 13.9 days, p < 0.001). Radiographically, preoperative SVA (9.1 ± 6.5 vs. 5.2 ± 6.8 cm, p < 0.001), PT (27.5 ± 11.1° vs. 23.4 ± 10.8°, p = 0.031), and T1PA (28.9 ± 12.7° vs. 21.6 ± 13.6°, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in patients who were discharged to an IPR center/SNF. Additionally, the operating surgeon also significantly influenced the disposition status (p < 0.001). A scoring system of the listed factors was proposed and was validated using univariate logistic regression (OR = 1.55, 95%CI = 1.34-1.78, p < 0.001) and ROC analysis, which revealed a cutoff value of > 6 points as a predictor of non-home discharge (AUC = 0.75, 95%CI = 0.68-0.80, p < 0.001, sensitivity = 63.3%, specificity = 74.1%). The factors in the scoring system were age > 56, comorbidities ≥ 2, hypertension, TIL ≥ 10, operative time > 357 mins, EBL > 1200 mL, preop SVA > 6.6 cm, preop PT > 33.6°, and preop T1PA > 15°. When comparing IPR (n = 71) vs. SNF (n = 38), patients discharged to an SNF were significantly older (74.4 ± 8.6 vs. 70.4 ± 9.1, p = 0.029) and were more likely to be female (89.5% vs. 70.4%, p = 0.024). Conclusions: Approximately 50% of patients were discharged home after ASD surgery. A simple scoring system based on age > 56, comorbidities ≥ 2, hypertension, total instrumented levels ≥ 10, operative time > 357 mins, EBL > 1200 mL, preop SVA > 6.6 cm, preop PT > 33.6°, and preop T1PA > 15° was proposed to predict non-home discharge. These findings may help guide postoperative expectations and resource allocation after ASD surgery.