The longitudinal impact of COVID-19 pandemic on neurosurgical practice.

OBJECTIVE: This observational cross-sectional multicenter study aimed to evaluate the longitudinal impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on neurosurgical practice. METHODS: We included 29 participating neurosurgeons in centers from all geographical regions in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study period, which was between March 5, 2020 and May 20, 2020, was divided into three equal periods to determine the longitudinal effect of COVID-19 measures on neurosurgical practice over time. RESULTS: During the 11-week study period, 474 neurosurgical interventions were performed. The median number of neurosurgical procedures per day was 5.5 (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.5-8). The number of cases declined from 72 in the first week and plateaued at the 30's range in subsequent weeks. The most and least number of performed procedures were oncology (129 [27.2 %]) and functional procedures (6 [1.3 %]), respectively. Emergency (Priority 1) cases were more frequent than non-urgent (Priority 4) cases (178 [37.6 %] vs. 74 [15.6 %], respectively). In our series, there were three positive COVID-19 cases. There was a significant among-period difference in the length of hospital stay, which dropped from a median stay of 7 days (IQR: 4-18) to 6 (IQR: 3-13) to 5 days (IQR: 2-8). There was no significant among-period difference with respect to institution type, complications, or mortality. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic decreased the number of procedures performed in neurosurgery practice. The load of emergency neurosurgery procedures did not change throughout the three periods, which reflects the need to designate ample resources to cover emergencies. Notably, with strict screening for COVID -19 infections, neurosurgical procedures could be safely performed during the early pandemic phase. We recommend to restart performing neurosurgical procedures once the pandemic gets stabilized to avoid possible post pandemic health-care system intolerable overload.

Neurosurgical Procedures and Safety During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case-Control Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative documentation of the effects of outbreaks, including the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, is limited in neurosurgery. Our study aimed to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on neurosurgical practice and to determine whether surgical procedures are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: A multicenter case-control study was conducted, involving patients who underwent neurosurgical intervention in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during 2 periods: pre-COVID-19 and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The surgical intervention data evaluated included diagnostic category, case priority, complications, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 850 procedures were included, 36% during COVID-19. The median number of procedures per day was significantly lower during the COVID-19 period (5.5 cases) than during the pre-COVID-19 period (12 cases; P < 0.0001). Complications, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality did not differ during the pandemic. In a multivariate analysis comparing both periods, case priority levels 1 (immediate) (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-2.67), 1 (1-24 h) (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10-2.41), and 4 (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.42) showed significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall number of neurosurgical procedures declined, but the load of emergency procedures remained the same, thus highlighting the need to allocate sufficient resources for emergencies. More importantly, performing neurosurgical procedures during the pandemic in regions with limited effects of the outbreak on the health care system was safe. Our findings may aid in developing guidelines for acute and long-term care during pandemics in surgical subspecialties.

Pedicle screw insertion in the thoracolumbar spine: comparison of 4 guidance techniques in the intact cadaveric spine.

OBJECT: Pedicle screw fixation is a mainstay of thoracolumbar stabilization. Screw insertion using anatomical landmarks and fluoroscopy is common but can be technically challenging and generally involves substantial exposure to ionizing radiation. Computerized navigation has been reported to improve accuracy but is expensive and complex. The authors undertook this study to evaluate these 3 methods in comparison with a fourth technique using standard cervical distractor screws to mark the entry point and trajectory. METHODS: Four cadaveric human spines were used for this study. After an initial CT scan, 34 pedicle screws were inserted in each intact spine from T-1 to L-5 using the following 4 screw insertion guidance techniques (1 technique per specimen): use of anatomical landmarks, use of cervical distractor screws and spot fluoroscopy, fluoroscopy-based navigation, and fluoroscopy- and CT-based navigation (using merged imaging data). Postprocedural CT and anatomical dissection were then performed to evaluate screw position for site and degree of breach. RESULTS: The cervical distractor screw method had a breach rate of 5.9% versus 29.4%, 32.4%, and 20.6% for use of anatomical landmarks, fluoroscopic navigation, and fluoroscopic-CT navigation, respectively (p < 0.05). There is also a significant association between degree of medial and distal breach and the method of screw insertion (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical distractor screws as pedicle markers offer favorable insertion accuracy and reduction of radiation exposure compared with the other 3 methods used in clinical practice.