Streamlining the Journey of Research Into Clinical Practice: Making Your Patients and Practice Flourish Optimizing Management and Minimizing Risk of Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures - Perspectives of the AO Spine KF Trauma and Infection Group Key Opinion Leaders.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature review with clinical recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To highlight important studies about osteoporotic spinal fractures (OF) that may be integrated into clinical practice based on the assessment of the AO Spine KF Trauma and Infection group key opinion leaders. METHODS: 4 important studies about OF that may affect current clinical practice of spinal surgeons were selected and reviewed with the aim of providing clinical recommendations to streamline the journey of research into clinical practice. Recommendations were graded as strong or conditional following the GRADE methodology. RESULTS: 4 studies were selected. Article 1: a validation of the Osteoporotic Fracture (OF)-score to treat OF fractures. Conditional recommendation to incorporate the OF score in the management of fractures to improve clinical results. Article 2: a randomized multicenter study comparing romosozumab/alendronate vs alendronate to decrease the incidence of new vertebral fractures. Strong recommendation that the group receiving romosozumab/alendronate had a decreased risk of new OF when compared with the alendronate only group only. Article 3: a systematic literature review of spinal orthoses in the management of. Conditional recommendation to prescribe a spinal orthosis to decrease pain and improve quality of life. Article 4: post-traumatic deformity after OF. A conditional recommendation that middle column injury and pre-injury use of steroids may lead to high risk of post-traumatic deformity after OF. CONCLUSIONS: Management of patients with OF is still complex and challenging. This review provides some recommendations that may help surgeons to better manage these patients and improve their clinical practice.

Reimbursement of Lumbar Fusion at an Orthopaedic Specialty Hospital Versus Tertiary Referral Center.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: To explore the differences in Medicare reimbursement for lumbar fusion performed at an orthopaedic specialty hospital (OSH) and a tertiary referral center and to elucidate drivers of Medicare reimbursement differences. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: To provide more cost-efficient care, appropriately selected patients are increasingly being transitioned to OSHs for lumbar fusion procedures. There are no studies directly comparing reimbursement of lumbar fusion between tertiary referral centers (TRC) and OSHs. METHODS: Reimbursement data for a tertiary referral center and an orthopaedic specialty hospital were compiled through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Any patient with lumbar fusions between January 2014 and December 2018 were identified. OSH patients were matched to TRC patients by demographic and surgical variables. Outcomes analyzed were reimbursement data, procedure data, 90-day complications and readmissions, operating room times, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were included in the final cohort. The tertiary referral center had higher post-trigger ($13,554 vs. $8,541, P<0.001) and total episode ($49,973 vs. $43,512, P<0.010) reimbursements. Lumbar fusion performed at an OSH was predictive of shorter OR time (ß=0.77, P<0.001), shorter procedure time (ß=0.71, P<0.001), and shorter LOS (ß=0.53, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in complications (9.21% vs. 15.8%, P=0.353) or readmission rates (3.95% vs. 7.89%, P=0.374) between the 2 hospitals; however, our study is underpowered for complications and readmissions. CONCLUSION: Lumbar fusion performed at an OSH, compared with a tertiary referral center, is associated with significant Medicare cost savings, shorter perioperative times, decreased LOS, and decreased utilization of post-acute resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Effect of Clinical and Radiographic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Classification on Patient-reported Outcomes and Spinopelvic Parameters for Patients With Single-level L4-L5 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis After Lumbar Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether preoperative clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification is associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes and spinopelvic parameters after posterior decompression and fusion for L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). SUMMARY: The CARDS classification for lumbar DS, an alternative to the Meyerding system, considers additional radiographic findings such as disc space collapse and segmental kyphosis and stratifies DS into 4 radiographically distinct classes. Although CARDS has been shown to be a reliable and reproducible method for classifying DS, very few studies have assessed whether the CARDS types represent distinct clinical entities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients with L4-L5 DS who underwent posterior lumbar decompression and fusion. Changes in spinopelvic alignment and patient-reported outcomes measures, including recovery ratios and percentage of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference, were compared among patients in each CARDS classification 1-year postoperatively using analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis H with Dunn post hoc analysis. Multiple linear regression determined whether CARDS groups significantly predicted patient-reported outcomes measures, lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) while controlling for demographic and surgical characteristics. RESULTS: Preoperative type B spondylolisthesis predicted decreased improvement in "physical component and mental component score of the short form-12" compared with type A spondylolisthesis (ß-coefficient = -5.96, P = 0.031) at 1 year. Significant differences were found between CARDS groups with regards to ΔLL (A: -1.63 degrees vs B: -1.17 degrees vs C: 2.88 degrees vs D: 3.19 degrees, P = 0.010) and ΔPI-LL (A: 1.02 degrees vs B: 2.09 degrees vs C: -2.59 degrees vs D: -3.70 degrees, P = 0.012). Preoperative type C spondylolisthesis was found to predict increased LL (ß-coefficient = 4.46, P = 0.0054) and decreased PI-LL (ß-coefficient = -3.49, P = 0.025) at 1 year compared with type A spondylolisthesis. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and radiographic outcomes differed significantly by preoperative CARDS classification type for patients undergoing posterior decompression and fusion for L4-L5 DS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Patient-specific Risk Factors Increase Episode of Care Costs After Lumbar Decompression.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. OBJECTIVE: To determine, which patient-specific risk factors increase total episode of care (EOC) costs in a population of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiaries undergoing lumbar decompression. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar decompression is an effective option for the treatment of central canal stenosis or radiculopathy in patients unresponsive to nonoperative management. Given that elderly Americans are more likely to have one or more chronic medical conditions, there is a need to determine, which, if any, patient-specific risk factors increase health care costs after lumbar decompression. METHODS: Care episodes limited to lumbar decompression surgeries were retrospectively reviewed on a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service reimbursement database at our academic institution between 2014 and 2019. The 90-day total EOC reimbursement payments were collected. Patient electronic medical records were then matched to the selected care episodes for the collection of patient demographics, medical comorbidities, surgical characteristics, and clinical outcomes. A stepwise multivariate linear regression model was developed to predict patient-specific risk factors that increased total EOC costs after lumbar decompression. Significance was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: A total of 226 patients were included for analysis. Risk factors associated with increased total EOC cost included increased age (per year) (ß = $324.70, P < 0.001), comorbid depression (ß = $4368.30, P = 0.037), revision procedures (ß = $6538.43, P =0.012), increased hospital length of stay (per day) (ß = $2995.43, P < 0.001), discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (ß = $14,417.42, P = 0.001), incidence of a complication (ß = $8178.07, P < 0.001), and readmission (ß = $18,734.24, P < 0.001) within 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Increased age, comorbid depression, revision decompression procedures, increased hospital length of stay, discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility, and incidence of a complication and readmission within 90 days were all associated with increased total episodes of care costs.

Validation of the Hierarchical Nature of the AO Spine Sacral Classification and the Development of the Sacral AO Spine Injury Score.

STUDY DESIGN: Global cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to validate the hierarchical nature of the AO Spine Sacral Classification System and develop an injury scoring system. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although substantial interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the AO Spine Sacral Classification System has been established, the hierarchical nature of the classification has yet to be validated. METHODS: Respondents numerically graded each variable within the classification system for severity. Based on the results, a Sacral AO Spine Injury Score (AOSIS) was developed. RESULTS: A total of 142 responses were received. The classification exhibited a hierarchical Injury Severity Score (ISS) progression (A1: 8 to C3: 95) with few exceptions. Subtypes B1 and B2 fractures showed no significant difference in ISS (B1 43.9 vs. B2 43.4, P =0.362). In addition, the transitions A3→B1 and B3→C0 represent significant decreases in ISS (A3 66.3 vs. B1 43.9, P <0.001; B3 64.2 vs. C0 46.4, P <0.001). Accordingly, A1 injury was assigned a score of 0. A2 and A3 received scores of 1 and 3 points, respectively. Posterior pelvic injuries B1 and B2 both received a score of 2. B3 received a score of 3 points. C0, C1, C2, and C3 received scores of 2, 3, 5, and 6 points, respectively. The scores assigned to neurological modifiers N0, N1, N2, N3, and NX were 0, 1, 2, 4, and 3, respectively. Case-specific modifiers M1, M2, M3, and M4 received scores of 0, 0, 1, and 2 points, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study validate the hierarchical nature of the AO Spine Sacral Classification System. The Sacral AOSIS sets the foundation for further studies to develop a universally accepted treatment algorithm for the treatment of complex sacral injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-Diagnostic.

Spine Surgical Subspecialty and Its Effect on Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify if intraoperative or postoperative differences in outcomes exist between orthopedic and neurological spine surgeons. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spine surgeons may become board certified through orthopedic surgery or neurosurgical residency training, and recent literature has compared surgical outcomes between surgeons based on residency training background with conflicting results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted and included articles comparing outcomes between orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to determine the quality of studies. Forest plots were generated using mean differences (MD) for continuous variables and odds ratios (OR) for binomial variables, and 95% CI was reported. RESULTS: Of 615 search term results, 16 studies were identified for inclusion. Evaluation of the studies found no differences in readmission rates [OR, ref: orthopedics: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.901, 1.09); I2 = 80%], overall complication rates [OR, ref: orthopedics: 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.10); I2 = 70%], reoperation rates [OR, ref: orthopedics: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.82, 1.00); I2 = 86%], or overall length of hospital stay between orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons [MD: -0.19 days (95% CI: -0.38, 0.00); I2 = 98%]. However, neurosurgeons ordered a significantly lower rate of postoperative blood transfusions [OR, ref: orthopedics: 0.49 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.57); I2 = 75%] while orthopedic spine surgeons had shorter operative times [MD: 14.28 minutes, (95% CI: 8.07, 20.49), I2 = 97%]. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is significant data heterogeneity, our meta-analysis found that neurosurgeons and orthopedic spine surgeons have similar readmission, complication, and reoperation rates regardless of the type of spine surgery performed.

Facet Distraction and Dysphagia: A Prospective Evaluation of This Common Postoperative Issue Following Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Our primary study was to investigate whether the degree of postoperative facet and disk space distraction following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) affects the rate of postoperative dysphagia. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although ACDF is safe and well tolerated, postoperative dysphagia remains a common complication. Intervertebral disk space distraction is necessary in ACDF to visualize the operative field, prepare the endplates for fusion, and facilitate graft insertion. However, the degree of distraction tolerated, before onset of dysphagia, is not well characterized ACDF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted of 70 patients who underwent ACDF between June 2018 and January 2019. Two independent reviewers measured all preoperative and postoperative radiographs measured for interfacet distraction distance and intervertebral distraction distance, with intrareviewer reproducibility measurements after one month. For multilevel surgery, the level with the greatest distraction was measured. Primary outcomes were numerical dysphagia (0-10), Eating Assessment Tool 10, and Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire score collected at initial visit and two, six, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were prospectively enrolled, 59 of whom had adequate radiographs. An average of 1.71 (SD: 0.70) levels were included in the ACDF construct. Preoperatively, 13.4% of patients reported symptoms of dysphagia, which subsequently increased in the postoperative period at through 12 weeks postoperatively, before returning to baseline at 24 weeks. Intrareviewer and interreviewer reliability analysis demonstrated strong agreement. There was no relationship between interfacet distraction distance/intervertebral distraction distance and dysphagia prevalence, numerical rating, Eating Assessment Tool 10, or Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had an ACDF have an increased risk of dysphagia in the short term, however, this resolved without intervention by six months. Our data suggests increased facet and intervertebral disk distraction does not influence postoperative dysphagia rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Clinical Improvements in Myelopathy Result in Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine if myelopathy severity predicted the magnitude of improvement in health-related quality of life metrics following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgery for myelopathy is primarily performed to halt disease progression. However, it is still controversial if these patients can expect significant health-related quality-of life improvements following ACDF. We explore the relationship between modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) improvements and its effect on other health-related quality-of life metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing ACDF for myelopathy were grouped based on preoperative mJOA scores into mild (15-17), moderate (12-14), and severe (<12) groups. Patients were subsequently categorized based on if they attained the minimum clinically detectable improvement (MCID) threshold for mJOA. Multivariate linear regression was performed to determine the magnitude of improvement in ∆patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 374 patients were identified for inclusion. Of those, 169 (45.2%) had mild myelopathy, 125 (33.4%) had moderate, and 80 (21.4%) had severe myelopathy. Only the moderate and severe groups had significant improvements in mJOA following surgery (mild: P =0.073, moderate: P <0.001, severe: P <0.001). There were no significant differences in the magnitude of improvement for any patient-reported outcome measure based on myelopathy severity, except for mJOA (mild: 0.27, moderate: 1.88, severe: 3.91; P <0.001). Patients meeting the MCID for mJOA had better ∆Short-Form 12 Mental Component Score (3.29 vs. -0.21, P =0.007), ∆Short-Form 12 Physical Component Score (6.82 vs. 1.96, P <0.001), ∆Visual Analog Scale Neck (-3.11 vs. -2.17, P =0.001), ∆Visual Analog Scale Arm (-2.92 vs. -1.48, P <0.001), ∆Neck Disability Index (-18.35 vs. -7.86, P <0.001), and ∆mJOA (3.38 vs. -0.56, P <0.001) compared with patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Worse baseline myelopathy severity predicts worse postoperative outcomes. However, baseline myelopathy severity is not predictive of the magnitude of postoperative improvement with the exception of mJOA. Patients who attain MCID improvement in mJOA had greater postoperative improvement for other health-related quality of life metrics.

Trends in Short Construct Lumbar Fusions Over the Past Decade at a Single Institution.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: (1) To compare the rates of fusion techniques over the last decade; (2) to identify whether surgeon experience affects a surgeon's preferred fusion technique; (3) to evaluate differences in complications, readmissions, mortality, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) based on fusion technique. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Database studies indicate the number of lumbar fusions have been steadily increasing over the last two decades; however, insufficient granularity exists to detect if surgeons' preferences are altered based on additive surgical experience. METHODS: A retrospective review of continuously collected patients undergoing lumbar fusion at a single urban academic center was performed. Rates of lumbar fusion technique: posterolateral decompression fusion (PLDF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (ALIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (LLIF) were recorded. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and inpatient mortality were compared with χ 2 test and Bonferroni correction. The Δ 1-year PROMs were compared with the analysis of variance. RESULTS: Of 3938 lumbar fusions, 1647 (41.8%) were PLDFs, 1356 (34.4%) were TLIFs, 885 (21.7%) were ALIFs, and 80 (2.0%) were lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Lumbar fusion rates increased but interbody fusion rates (2012: 57.3%; 2019: 57.6%) were stable across the study period. Surgeons with <10 years of experience performed more PLDFs and less ALIFs, whereas surgeons with >10 years' experience used ALIFs, TLIFs, and PLDFs at similar rates. Patients were more likely to be discharged home over the course of the decade (2012: 78.4%; 2019: 83.8%, P <0.001). No differences were observed between the techniques in regard to inpatient mortality ( P =0.441) or Δ (postoperative minus preoperative) PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Preferred lumbar fusion technique varies by surgeon preference, but typically remains stable over the course of a decade. The preferred fusion technique did not correlate with differences in PROMs, inpatient mortality, and patient complication rates. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 3-treatment.

Evaluating Outcomes of Spinopelvic Fixation for Patients Undergoing Long Segment Thoracolumbar Fusion with a Prior Total Hip Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the relationship between spinal fusion and its effects on relative spinopelvic alignment in patients with prior total hip arthroplasty (THA) is critical. However, limited data exist on the effects of long spinal fusions on hip alignment in patients with a prior THA. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and changes in hip alignment between patients undergoing long fusion to the sacrum versus to the pelvis in the setting of prior THA. METHODS: Patients with a prior THA who underwent elective thoracolumbar spinal fusion starting at L2 or above were retrospectively identified. Patients were placed into one of two groups: fusion to the sacrum or pelvis. Preoperative, six-month postoperative, one-year postoperative, and delta spinopelvic and acetabular measurements were measured from standing lumbar radiographs. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (55 sacral fusions, 57 pelvic fusions) were included. Patients who underwent fusion to the pelvis experienced longer length of stay (LOS) (8.31 vs. 4.21, P < 0.001) and less frequent home discharges (30.8% vs. 61.9%, P = 0.010), but fewer spinal revisions (12.3% vs. 30.9%, P = 0.030). No difference was observed in hip dislocation rates (3.51% vs. 1.82%, P = 1.000) or hip revisions (5.26% vs. 3.64%, P = 1.000) based on fusion construct. Fusion to the sacrum alone was an independent predictor of an increased spine revision rate (odds ratio: 3.56, P = 0.023). Patients in the pelvic fusion group had lower baseline lumbar lordosis (LL) (29.2 vs. 42.9, P < 0.001), six-month postoperative LL (38.7 vs. 47.3, P = 0.038), and greater 1-year ∆ pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (-7.98 vs. 0.21, P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: Patients with prior THA undergoing long fusion to the pelvis experienced longer LOS, more surgical complications, and lower rate of spinal revisions. Patients with instrumentation to the pelvis had lower LL preoperatively with greater changes in LL and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis postoperatively. No differences were observed in acetabular positioning, hip dislocations, or THA revision rates between groups.

Readmission and Resource Utilization in Patients From Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Following Lumbar Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether: (1) patients from communities of socioeconomic distress have higher readmission rates or postoperative healthcare resource utilization and (2) there are differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) based on socioeconomic distress. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Socioeconomic disparities affect health outcomes, but little evidence exists demonstrating the impact of socioeconomic distress on postoperative resource utilization or PROMs. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent lumbar fusion at a single tertiary academic center from January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2021. Patients were classified according to the distressed communities index. Hospital readmission, postoperative prescriptions, patient telephone calls, follow-up office visits, and PROMs were recorded. Multivariate analysis with logistic, negative binomial regression or Poisson regression were used to investigate the effects of distressed communities index on postoperative resource utilization. Alpha was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: A total of 4472 patients were included for analysis. Readmission risk was higher in distressed communities (odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.87; P =0.028). Patients from distressed communities (odds ratio, 3.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.60-9.72; P =0.003) were also more likely to be readmitted for medical, but not surgical causes ( P =0.514), and distressed patients had worse preoperative (visual analog-scale Back, P <0.001) and postoperative (Oswestry disability index, P =0.048; visual analog-scale Leg, P =0.013) PROMs, while maintaining similar magnitudes of clinical improvement. Patients from distressed communities were more likely to be discharged to a nursing facility and inpatient rehabilitation unit (25.5%, P =0.032). The race was not independently associated with readmissions ( P =0.228). CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic distress is associated with increased postoperative health resource utilization. Patients from distressed communities have worse preoperative PROMs, but the overall magnitude of improvement is similar across all classes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

MRSA Prophylaxis in Spine Surgery Decreases Postoperative Infections.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare infection rates before and after the implementation of a quality improvement protocol focused on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) screening and decolonization in patients undergoing lumbar fusion and/or decompression. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies have demonstrated MRSA infections comprise a sizable portion of SSIs. Additional studies are required to improve our understanding of the risks and benefits of MRSA decolonization with vancomycin prophylaxis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients who underwent spinal fusion or laminectomy before (2008-2011) and after (2013-2016) the implementation of an MRSA screening and treatment protocol. Odds ratios for MRSA, methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), and Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infection before and after screening was calculated. Multivariate analysis assessed demographic characteristics as potential independent predictors of infection. RESULTS: A total of 8425 lumbar fusion and 2558 lumbar decompression cases met inclusion criteria resulting in a total cohort of 10,983 patients. There was a significant decrease in the overall rate of infections ( P <0.001), MRSA infections ( P <0.001), and MSSA infections ( P <0.001) after protocol implementation. Although VRE infections after protocol implementation were not significantly different ( P =0.066), VRE rates as a percentage of all postoperative infections were substantially increased (0 vs. 3.36%, P =0.007). On multivariate analysis, significant predictors of the infection included younger age (OR=0.94[0.92-0.95]), shorter length of procedure (OR=1.00[0.99-1.00]), spinal fusion (OR=18.56[8.22-53.28]), higher ASA class (OR=5.49[4.08-7.44]), male sex (OR=1.61[1.18-2.20]), and history of diabetes (OR=1.58[1.08-2.29]). CONCLUSION: The implemented quality improvement protocol demonstrated that preoperative prophylactically treating MRSA colonized patients decreased the rate of overall infections, MSSA infections, and MRSA infections. In addition, younger age, male sex, diabetic status, greater ASA scores, and spinal fusions were risk factors for postoperative infection.

Management of C0 Sacral Fractures Based on the AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification: A Narrative Review.

The Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Osteosynthese fragen Spine Sacral Injury Classification hierarchically separates fractures based on their injury severity with A-type fractures representing less severe injuries and C-type fractures representing the most severe fracture types. C0 fractures represent moderately severe injuries and have historically been referred to as nondisplaced "U-type" fractures. Injury management of these fractures can be controversial. Therefore, the purpose of this narrative review is to first discuss the Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Osteosynthese fragen Spine Sacral Injury Classification System and describe the different fracture types and classification modifiers, with particular emphasis on C0 fracture types. The narrative review will then focus on the epidemiology and etiology of C0 fractures with subsequent discussion focused on the clinical presentation for patients with these injuries. Next, we will describe the imaging findings associated with these injuries and discuss the injury management of these injuries with particular emphasis on operative management. Finally, we will outline the outcomes and complications that can be expected during the treatment of these injuries.

Impact of Heart Disease History on Safety of Telemedicine Cardiac Clearance Appointments.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare complication, readmission, mortality, and cancellation rates between patients who had either an in-person or telemedicine preoperative cardiac clearance visit before spine surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients who underwent a spine procedure at a single tertiary academic center from February 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. Cancellations, inpatient complications, 90-day readmissions, and inpatient and 90-day mortality rates were compared between in-person and telemedicine cardiac clearance visits. Secondary analysis included multiple logistic regression to determine independent predictors of case cancellations and complications. Alpha was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1,331 consecutive patients were included, with 775 patients (58.2%) having an in-person cardiac clearance visit and 556 (41.8%) having telemedicine clearance. Overall, the telemedicine cohort did not have more cancellations, complications, or readmissions. Regardless of the type of clearance, patients with a history of cardiac disease had more inpatient complications (15.8% versus 6.9%, P < 0.001) and higher 90-day mortality rates (2.3% versus 0.4%, P = 0.005). Subgroup analysis of patients with a history of cardiac disease showed that patients who had telemedicine visits had more cancellations (4.6% versus 10.9%, P = 0.036) and higher 90-day mortality rates (1.4% versus 4.4%, P = 0.045). On regression analysis, telemedicine visits were not independent predictors of preoperative cancellation rates (P = 0.173) but did predict greater preoperative cancellations among patients with cardiac history (odds ratio 2.73, P = 0.036). DISCUSSION: Patients with cardiac disease who undergo preoperative telemedicine visits have greater preoperative surgical cancellation rates and postoperative 90-day mortality rates. Although preoperative telemedicine visits may be appropriate for most patients, a history of cardiac disease should be a contraindication.

Single-level Lumbar Fusion Versus Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Comparison of 1-year Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Primary hip and knee arthroplasty represent two of the most successful orthopaedic surgical interventions in the past century. Similarly, lumbar fusion (LF) remains a valuable, evidence-based option to relieve pain and disability related to spinal degenerative conditions. This study evaluates the relative improvements in 1-year health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures among patients undergoing primary single-level LF, primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), and primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Patients older than 18 years who underwent primary single-level posterior LF (posterolateral decompression and fusion with or without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, involving any single lumbar level), TKA, and THA at a single academic institution were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected. HRQOL measures were collected preoperatively and at 1-year postoperative time point including Short-Form 12 Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) along with subspecialty-specific outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2,563 patients were included (346 LF, 1,035 TKA, and 1,182 THA). Change in MCS-12 and PCS-12 after LF did not vary markedly by preoperative diagnosis. LF patients had a significantly lower preoperative MCS-12 (LF: 50.8, TKA: 53.9, THA: 52.9, P < 0.001), postoperative MCS-12 (LF: 52.5, TKA: 54.8, THA: 54.5, P < 0.001), postoperative PCS-12 (LF: 40.1, TKA: 44.0, THA: 43.9, P < 0.001), ΔPCS-12 (LF: 7.9, TKA: 10.8, THA: 11.9, P < 0.001), and PCS-12 recovery ratio (LF: 10.7%, TKA: 15.1%, THA 16.6%, P < 0.001) compared with TKA and THA patients. In regression analysis, both TKA and LF were found to be independently associated with a smaller ΔPCS-12 improvement (TKA: ß = -1.36, P = 0.009; LF: ß = -4.74, P < 0.001) compared with THA. TKA (ß = -1.42, P = 0.003) was also independently associated with a smaller ΔMCS-12 improvement compared with THA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing single-level LF, TKA, and THA demonstrate notable improvements in HRQOL outcomes at 1 year postoperatively compared with preoperative baseline scores. The greatest improvements were found among THA patients, followed subsequently by TKA and LF patients. Both LF and TKA were independently associated with markedly less improvement in physical disability at 1 year postoperatively compared with THA. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Demographics and Medical Comorbidities as Risk Factors for Increased Episode of Care Costs Following Lumbar Fusion in Medicare Patients.

The objective was to evaluate medical comorbidities and surgical variables as independent risk factors for increased health care costs in Medicare patients undergoing lumbar fusion. Care episodes limited to lumbar fusions were retrospectively reviewed on the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) reimbursement database at a single academic institution. Total episode of care cost was also collected. A multivariable linear regression model was developed to identify independent risk factors for increased total episode of care cost, and logistic models for surgical complications and readmission. A total of 500 Medicare patients were included. Risk factors associated with increased total episode of care cost included transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) (ß = $5,399, P < 0.001) and ALIF+PLF (AP) fusions (ß = $24,488, P < 0.001), levels fused (ß = $3,989, P < 0.001), congestive heart failure (ß = $6,161, P = 0.022), hypertension with end-organ damage (ß = $10,138, P < 0.001), liver disease (ß = $16,682, P < 0.001), inpatient complications (ß = $4,548, P = 0.001), 90-day complications (ß = $10,012, P = 0.001), and 90-day readmissions (ß = $15,677, P < 0.001). The most common surgical complication was postoperative anemia, which was associated with significantly increased costs (ß = $18,478, P < 0.001). Female sex (OR = 2.27, P = 0.001), AP fusion (OR = 2.59, P = 0.002), levels fused (OR = 1.45, P = 0.005), cerebrovascular disease (OR = 4.19, P = 0.003), cardiac arrhythmias (OR = 2.32, P = 0.002), and fluid electrolyte disorders (OR = 4.24, P = 0.002) were independent predictors of surgical complications. Body mass index (OR = 1.07, P = 0.029) and AP fusions (OR = 2.87, P = 0.049) were independent predictors of surgical readmission. Among medical comorbidities, congestive heart failure, hypertension with end-organ damage, and liver disease were independently associated with a significant increase in total episode of care cost. Interbody devices were associated with increased admission cost.

The Effect of Online Prescription Drug Monitoring on Opioid Prescription Habits After Elective Single-level Lumbar Fusion.

INTRODUCTION: The United States opioid epidemic is a well-documented crisis stemming from increased prescriptions of narcotics. Online prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are a potential resource to mitigate narcotic misuse by tracking controlled substance prescriptions. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate opioid prescription trends after implementation of an online PDMP in patients who underwent single-level lumbar fusion. METHODS: Patients who underwent a single-level lumbar fusion between August 27, 2017, and August 31, 2020, were identified and placed categorically into one of two cohorts: an "early adoption" cohort, September 1, 2017, to August 31, 2018, and a "late adoption" cohort, September 1, 2019, to August 31, 2020. This allowed for a 1-year washout period after Pennsylvania PDMP implementation on August 26, 2016. Opioid use data were obtained by searching for each patient in the state government's online PDMP and recording data from the year before and the year after the patient's procedure. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in preoperative opioid prescriptions between the early and late adoption cohorts. The late adoption group independently predicted decreased postoperative opioid prescriptions (ß, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.93; P = 0.007), opioid prescribers (ß, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.90; P < 0.001), pharmacies used (ß, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97; P = 0.006), opioid pills (ß, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74; P < 0.001), days of opioid prescription (ß, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.72; P < 0.001), and morphine milligram equivalents prescribed (ß, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.66; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PDMP implementation was associated with decreased postoperative opioid prescription patterns but not preoperative opioid prescribing behaviors. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Is Patient Geography a Risk Factor for Chronic Opioid Use After ACDF?

The social and medical implications intrinsic to patient zip codes with high opioid fatality may reveal residence in these locations to be a risk factor predicting chronic opioid use after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The purpose of this study is to determine if residence in Pennsylvania zip codes with high incidence of opioid overdose deaths is a risk factor for chronic postoperative opioid use after ACDF. Preoperative opioid usage did not vary meaningfully between high- and low-risk zip code groups. Patients in high-risk opioid overdose zip codes were significantly more likely to exhibit chronic postoperative opioid use. The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated that opioid discontinuation was less probable at any postoperative time for patients residing in high opioid fatality zip codes. Logistic regression found opioid tolerance, smoking, and depression to predict extended opioid use.

Clinical Outcomes at One-year Follow-up for Patients With Surgical Site Infection After Spinal Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. OBJECTIVE: To compare health-related quality of life outcomes at one-year follow-up between patients who did and did not develop surgical site infection (SSI) after thoracolumbar spinal fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: SSI is among the most common healthcare-associated complications. As healthcare systems increasingly emphasize the value of delivered care, there is an increased need to understand the clinical impact of SSIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective 3:1 (control:SSI) propensity-matched case-control study was conducted for adult patients who underwent thoracolumbar fusion from March 2014 to January 2020 at a single academic institution. Exclusion criteria included less than 18 years of age, incomplete preoperative and one-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, and revision surgery. Continuous and categorical data were compared via independent t tests and χ 2 tests, respectively. Intragroup analysis was performed using paired t tests. Regression analysis for ∆ patient-reported outcome measures (postoperative minus preoperative scores) controlled for demographics. The α was set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients (105 control, 35 SSI) were included in final analysis. The infections group had a higher rate of readmission (100% vs. 0.95%, P <0.001) and revision surgery (28.6% vs. 12.4%, P =0.048). Both groups improved significantly in Physical Component Score (control: P =0.013, SSI: P =0.039), Oswestry Disability Index (control: P <0.001, SSI: P =0.001), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Back (both, P <0.001), and VAS Leg (control: P <0.001, SSI: P =0.030). Only the control group improved in Mental Component Score ( P <0.001 vs. SSI: P =0.228), but history of a SSI did not affect one-year improvement in ∆MCS-12 ( P =0.455) on regression analysis. VAS Leg improved significantly less in the infection group (-1.87 vs. -3.59, P =0.039), which was not significant after regression analysis (ß=1.75, P =0.050). CONCLUSION: Development of SSI after thoracolumbar fusion resulted in increased revision rates but did not influence patient improvement in one-year pain, functional disability, or physical and mental health status.