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.

Lumbopelvic fixation in the treatment of spinopelvic dissociation: union, complications, and neurologic outcomes of a multicenter case series.

PURPOSE: To review outcomes of spinopelvic dissociation treated with open lumbopelvic fixation. METHODS: We reviewed all cases of spinopelvic dissociation treated at three Level-I trauma centers with open lumbopelvic fixation, including those with adjunctive percutaneous fixation. We collected demographic data, associated injuries, pre- and postoperative neurologic status, pre- and postoperative kyphosis, and Roy-Camille classification. Outcomes included presence of union, reoperation rates, and complications involving hardware or wound. RESULTS: From an initial cohort of 260 patients with spinopelvic dissociation, forty patients fulfilled inclusion criteria with a median follow-up of 351 days. Ten patients (25%) had a combination of percutaneous iliosacral and open lumbopelvic repair. Average pre- and postoperative kyphosis was 30 degrees and 26 degrees, respectively. Twenty patients (50%) had neurologic deficit preoperatively, and eight (20%) were unknown or unable to be assessed. All patients presenting with bowel or bladder dysfunction (n = 12) underwent laminectomy at time of surgery, with 3 patients (25%) having continued dysfunction at final follow-up. Surgical site infection occurred in four cases (10%) and wound complications in two (5%). All cases (100%) went on to union and five patients (13%) required hardware removal. CONCLUSION: Open lumbopelvic fixation resulted in a high union rate in the treatment of spinopelvic dissociation. Approximately 1 in 6 patients had a wound complication, the majority of which were surgical site infections. Bowel and bladder dysfunction at presentation were common with the majority of cases resolving by final follow-up when spinopelvic dissociation had been treated with decompression and stable fixation.

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.

Systemic considerations for the surgical treatment of spinal metastatic disease: a scoping literature review.

Systemic assessment is a pillar in the neurological, oncological, mechanical, and systemic (NOMS) decision-making framework for the treatment of patients with spinal metastatic disease. Despite this importance, emerging evidence relating systemic considerations to clinical outcomes following surgery for spinal metastatic disease has not been comprehensively summarised. We aimed to conduct a scoping literature review of this broad topic. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases from Jan 1, 2000, to July 31, 2021. 61 articles were included, accounting for a total of 22 335 patients. Preoperative systemic variables negatively associated with postoperative clinical outcomes included demographics (eg, older age [>60 years], Black race, male sex, low or elevated body-mass index, and smoking status), medical comorbidities (eg, cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, renal, endocrine, vascular, and rheumatological), biochemical abnormalities (eg, hypoalbuminaemia, atypical blood cell counts, and elevated C-reactive protein concentration), low muscle mass, generalised motor weakness (American Spinal Cord Injury Association Impairment Scale grade and Frankel grade) and poor ambulation, reduced performance status, and systemic disease burden. This is the first comprehensive scoping review to broadly summarise emerging evidence relevant to the systemic assessment component of the widely used NOMS framework for spinal metastatic disease decision making. Medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists can consider these findings when prognosticating spinal metastatic disease-related surgical outcomes on the basis of patients' systemic condition. These factors might inform a shared decision-making approach with patients and their families.

Optimal baseplate rotational alignment for locking-screw fixation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a three-dimensional computer-aided design study.

BACKGROUND: Baseplate loosening in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) remains a concern. Placing peripheral screws into the 3 pillars of the densest scapular bone is believed to optimize baseplate fixation. Using a 3-dimensional computer-aided design (3D CAD) program, we investigated the optimal rotational baseplate alignment to maximize peripheral locking-screw purchase. METHODS: Seventy-three arthritic scapulae were reconstructed from computed tomography images and imported into a 3D CAD software program along with representations of an RTSA baseplate that uses 4 fixed-angle peripheral locking screws. The baseplate position was standardized, and the baseplate was rotated to maximize individual and combined peripheral locking-screw purchase in each of the 3 scapular pillars. RESULTS: The mean ± standard error of the mean positions for optimal individual peripheral locking-screw placement (referenced in internal rotation) were 6° ± 2° for the coracoid pillar, 198° ± 2° for the inferior pillar, and 295° ± 3° for the scapular spine pillar. Of note, 78% (57 of 73) of the screws attempting to obtain purchase in the scapular spine pillar could not be placed without an in-out-in configuration. In contrast, 100% of coracoid and 99% of inferior pillar screws achieved full purchase. The position of combined maximal fixation was 11° ± 1°. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that approximately 11° of internal rotation is the ideal baseplate position for maximal peripheral locking-screw fixation in RTSA. In addition, these results highlight the difficulty in obtaining optimal purchase in the scapular spine.

The effects of nutritional deficiencies, smoking, and systemic disease on orthopaedic outcomes.

Most patients are evaluated by an internist for medical clearance before undergoing an elective orthopaedic procedure. Internists and anesthesiologists evaluate a patient's risk for morbidity or mortality from a procedure, whereas orthopaedic surgeons are often primarily concerned with a patient's risk for a poor outcome. Nutritional and systemic comorbidities can increase the risks for surgical site infections and poor outcomes. Knowing how to handle and identify these issues before surgery can have a substantial effect on improving the likelihood of good outcomes from elective orthopaedic procedures.

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.

Flexibility-tilt agreement best predicts shoulder balance following posterior spine fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

PURPOSE: We propose a novel concept, called flexibility-tilt agreement (FTA), which could be applied intra-operatively to improve shoulder balance following posterior spine fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS). We retrospectively applied this concept to a cohort with thoracic-only curves, seeking to: (1) evaluate the impact of FTA and other peri-operative variables on post-operative shoulder balance, and (2) evaluate deformity characteristics associated with achieving FTA. METHODS: A single-institution registry was queried for patients undergoing PSF from 2000 to 2017 with main thoracic and double thoracic curves with at least 2-year follow-up. Flexibility was defined as the Cobb angle of the unfused proximal thoracic curve (cephalad to chosen UIV) on pre-operative bender. Tilt refers to post-operative UIV tilt angle. FTA means these values cancel (Flexibility + Tilt = 0 ± 5°). Logistic regression was performed to determine the association between peri-operative variables and shoulder balance. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-one patients were included, mean age 13.6 years old, and 47-month mean follow-up. FTA was achieved in 74 (46%) patients and was associated with post-operative (OR = 4.59) and final (OR = 6.98) medial shoulder balance with a threshold of 6° (AUC = 0.77, p = 0.038). FTA was the best predictor of shoulder balance of all tested variables. CONCLUSION: Patients that showed flexibility-tilt agreement, or FTA, had vastly increased odds of medial and lateral shoulder balance at a minimum of 2-year follow-up for all thoracic curves. Future studies can evaluate whether applying FTA to determine intra-operative corrective maneuvers prospectively leads to improvements in shoulder balance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Combined Influence of Sleep Disturbance and Depression on 12-month Outcomes After Lumbar Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To examine the combined influence of preoperative sleep disturbance and depression on 12-month patient-reported outcomes after lumbar spine surgery (LSS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Psychological and behavioral factors are considered major risk factors for poor outcomes after LSS. However, there is a need to explore the combined effects of preoperative factors such as sleep disturbance and depression. Understanding the influence of sleep disturbance and depression can inform evidence-based preoperative assessment and shared-decision making of preoperative and postoperative treatment. METHODS: Data from 700 patients undergoing LSS were analyzed. Preoperative sleep disturbance and depression were assessed with PROMIS subscales. Established thresholds defined patients with moderate/severe symptoms. Outcomes for disability (Oswestry Disability Index) and back and leg pain (Numeric Rating Scales) were assessed preoperatively and at 12 months. Separate multivariable linear regressions examined the influence of each factor on 12-month outcomes with and without accounting for the other and in combination as a 4-level variable: (1) moderate/severe sleep disturbance alone, (2) moderate/severe depression alone, (3) both moderate/severe sleep disturbance and depression, (4) no moderate/severe sleep disturbance or depression. RESULTS: Preoperative sleep disturbance and depression were associated with 12-month disability and pain ( P <0.05). After accounting for depression, preoperative sleep disturbance remained associated with disability, while preoperative depression adjusting for sleep disturbance remained associated with all outcomes ( P <0.05). Patients reporting both moderate/severe sleep disturbance and moderate/severe depression had 12.6 points higher disability and 1.5 points higher back and leg pain compared with patients without moderate/severe sleep disturbance or depression. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of sleep disturbance and depression impacts postoperative outcomes considerably. The high-risk group of patients with moderate/severe sleep disturbance and depression could benefit from targeted treatment strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Open Versus Endoscopic Approach for Thoracic Disk Herniations: Equivalent Short-Term Outcomes With Significantly Different Costs.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Open thoracic diskectomy often requires significant bone resection and fusion, whereas an endoscopic thoracic diskectomy offers a less invasive alternative. Therefore, we sought to compare one-level open vs endoscopic thoracic diskectomy regarding (1) perioperative outcomes, (2) neurological recovery, and (3) total cost. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective, cohort study using prospectively collected data of patients undergoing one-level thoracic diskectomy was undertaken from 2018 to 2023. The primary exposure variable was open vs endoscopic. The primary outcome was perioperative outcomes and neurological recovery. Secondary outcomes were total cost of care. Multivariable regression analysis controlled for age, body mass index, sex, symptom onset, disk characteristics, operative time, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 29 patients undergoing thoracic diskectomy, 17 were open and 12 were endoscopic. Preoperative demographics, symptoms, and radiographic findings were comparable between the cohorts. Perioperatively, open surgery had significantly higher mean length of stay (4.9 ± 1.5 vs 0.0 ± 0.0 days, P < .001), median (IQR) longer operative time (342.8 [68.4] vs 141.5 [36] minutes, P < .001), and more blood loss (350 [390] vs 6.5 [20] mL; P < .001). 16 (94%) open patients required fusion vs 0 endoscopic (P < .001). Postoperative opioid use (P = .119), readmission (P = .665), reoperation (P = .553), and rate of neurological improvement (P > .999) were similar between the 2 groups. Financially, open surgical median costs were 7x higher than endoscopic ($59 792 [$16 118] vs $8128 [$1848]; P < .001), driven by length of stay (ß = $2261/night, P < .001), open surgery (ß = $24 106, P < .001), and number of pedicle screws (ß = $1829/screw, P = .002) on multivariable analysis. On sensitivity analysis, open surgery was never cost-efficient against endoscopic surgery and excess endoscopic revision rates of 86% above open revision rates were required for break-even costs between the surgical approaches. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic thoracic diskectomy was associated with decreased length of stay, operative time, blood loss, and total cost compared with the open approach, with similar neurological outcomes. These findings may help patients and surgeons seek endoscopic approach as a less morbid and less costly alternative.

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.