A comparative cohort study of surgical approaches for adult spinal deformity at a minimum 2-year follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective multi-center comparative cohort study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective institutional database of operative adult spinal deformity patients was utilized. All fusions > 5 vertebral levels and including the sacrum/pelvis were eligible for inclusion. Revisions, 3 column osteotomies, and patients with < 2-year clinical follow-up were excluded. Patients were separated into 3 groups based on surgical approach: 1) posterior spinal fusion without interbody (PSF), 2) PSF with interbody (PSF-IB), and 3) anteroposterior (AP) fusion (anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion with posterior screw fixation). Intraoperative, radiographic, and clinical outcomes, as well as complications, were compared between groups with ANOVA and χ2 tests. RESULTS: One-hundred and thirty-eight patients were included for study (PSF, n = 37; PSF-IB, n = 44; AP, n = 57). Intraoperatively, estimated blood loss was similar between groups (p = 0.171). However, the AP group had longer operative times (547.5 min) compared to PSF (385.1) and PSF-IB (370.7) (p < 0.001). Additionally, fusion length was shorter in PSF-IB (11.4) compared to AP (13.6) and PSF (12.9) (p = 0.004). There were no differences between the groups in terms of change in alignment from preoperative to 2 years postoperative. There were no differences in clinical outcomes. While postoperative complications were largely similar between groups, operative complications were higher in the AP group (31.6%) compared to the PSF (5.4%) and PSF-IB (9.1) groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: While there were differences in intraoperative outcomes (operative time and fusion length), there were no differences in postoperative clinical or radiographic outcomes. AP fusion was associated with a higher rate of operative complications.

Hip Osteoarthritis in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Severe Adult Spinal Deformity: Prevalence and Impact on Spine Surgery Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is common in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Limited data exist on the prevalence of hip OA in patients with ASD, or on its impact on baseline and postoperative alignment and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Therefore, this paper will assess the prevalence and impact of hip OA on alignment and PROMs. METHODS: Patients with ASD who underwent L1-pelvis or longer fusions were included. Two independent reviewers graded hip OA with the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification and stratified it by severity into non-severe (KL grade 1 or 2) and severe (KL grade 3 or 4). Radiographic parameters and PROMs were compared among 3 patient groups: Hip-Spine (hip KL grade 3 or 4 bilaterally), Unilateral (UL)-Hip (hip KL grade 3 or 4 unilaterally), or Spine (hip KL grade 1 or 2 bilaterally). RESULTS: Of 520 patients with ASD who met inclusion criteria for an OA prevalence analysis, 34% (177 of 520) had severe bilateral hip OA and unilateral or bilateral hip arthroplasty had been performed in 8.7% (45 of 520). A subset of 165 patients had all data components and were examined: 68 Hip-Spine, 32 UL-Hip, and 65 Spine. Hip-Spine patients were older (67.9 ± 9.5 years, versus 59.6 ± 10.1 years for Spine and 65.8 ± 7.5 years for UL-Hip; p < 0.001) and had a higher frailty index (4.3 ± 2.6, versus 2.7 ± 2.0 for UL-Hip and 2.9 ± 2.0 for Spine; p < 0.001). At 1 year, the groups had similar lumbar lordosis, yet the Hip-Spine patients had a worse sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) measurement (45.9 ± 45.5 mm, versus 25.1 ± 37.1 mm for UL-Hip and 19.0 ± 39.3 mm for Spine; p = 0.001). Hip-Spine patients also had worse Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Summary scores at baseline (25.7 ± 9.3, versus 28.7 ± 9.8 for UL-Hip and 31.3 ± 10.5 for Spine; p = 0.005) and 1 year postoperatively (34.5 ± 11.4, versus 40.3 ± 10.4 for UL-Hip and 40.1 ± 10.9 for Spine; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: This study of operatively treated ASD revealed that 1 in 3 patients had severe hip OA bilaterally. Such patients with severe bilateral hip OA had worse baseline SVA and PROMs that persisted 1 year following ASD surgery, despite correction of lordosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Restoring L4-S1 Lordosis Shape in Severe Sagittal Deformity: Impact of Correction Techniques on Alignment and Complication Profile.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Severe sagittal plane deformity with loss of L4-S1 lordosis is disabling and can be improved through various surgical techniques. However, data is limited on the differing ability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to achieve alignment goals in severely malaligned patients. PURPOSE: To examine surgical techniques aimed at restoring L4-S1 lordosis in severe adult spinal deformity (ASD). DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 96 patients who underwent ALIF, PSO, and TLIF were included in this study. OUTCOME MEASURES: The following data were observed for all cases: patient demographics, spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs. METHODS: Severe ASD patients with preoperative PI-LL >20°, L4-S1 lordosis <30°, and full body radiographs and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at baseline and six-week postoperative visit were included. Patients were grouped into ALIF (1-2 level ALIF at L4-S1), PSO (L4/L5 PSO), and TLIF (1-2 level TLIF at L4-S1). Comparative analyses were performed on demographics, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs. RESULTS: Among the 96 included patients, 40 underwent ALIF, 27 underwent PSO, and 29 underwent TLIF. At baseline, cohorts had comparable age, sex, race, Edmonton frailty scores and radiographic spinopelvic parameters (p>0.05). However, PSO was performed more often in revision cases (p<0.001). Following surgery, L4-S1 lordosis correction (p=0.001) was comparable among ALIF and PSO patients and caudal lordotic apex migration (p=0.044) was highest among ALIF patients. PSO patients had higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (p<0.001) and motor deficits (p=0.049), and in-hospital ICU admission (p=0.022) and blood products given (p=0.004) but were otherwise comparable in terms of length of stay, blood transfusion given, and postoperative admission to rehab. Likewise, 90-day postoperative complication profiles and six-week PROMs were comparable as well. CONCLUSIONS: ALIF can restore L4-S1 sagittal alignment as powerfully as PSO, with fewer intra-operative and in-hospital complications. When feasible, ALIF is a suitable alternative to PSO and likely superior to TLIF for correcting L4-S1 lordosis among patients with severe sagittal malalignment.

Wound Closure and Wound Dressings in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery From the AO Spine Surveillance of Post-Operative Management.

STUDY DESIGN: An e-mail-based online survey for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeons. OBJECTIVE: Wound closure and dressing techniques may vary according to the discretion of the surgeon as well as geographical location. However, there are no reports on most common methods. The purpose of this study is to clarify the consensus. METHODS: An online survey was distributed via email to AO Spine members. Responses from 164 ASD surgeons were surveyed. The regions were divided into 5 regions: Europe and South Africa (ESA), North America (NA), Asia Pacific (AP), Latin America (LA), and Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Wound closure methods were evaluated by glue(G), staples(S), external non-absorbable sutures (ENS), tapes(T), and only subcuticular absorbable suture (SAS). Wound Dressings consisted of dry dressing (D), plastic occlusive dressing (PO), G, Dermabond Prineo (DP). RESULTS: The number of respondents were 57 in ESA, 33 in NA, 36 in AP, 22 in LA, and 16 in MENA. S (36.4%) was the most used wound closure method. This was followed by ENS (26.2%), SAS (14.4%), G (11.8%), and T (11.3%). S use was highest in ESA (44.3%), NA (28.6%), AP (31.7%), and MENA (58.8%). D was used by 50% of surgeons postoperatively. AP were most likely to use PO (36%). 21% of NA used DP, while between 0%-9% of surgeons used it in the rest of the world. CONCLUSION: Wound closure and dressings methods differ in the region. There are no current guidelines with these choices. Future studies should seek to standardize these choices.

Contemporary utilization of three-column osteotomy techniques in a prospective complex spinal deformity multicenter database: implications on full-body alignment and perioperative course.

BACKGROUND: Research has focused on the increased correction from a three-column osteotomy (3CO) during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. However, an in-depth analysis on the performance of a 3CO in a cohort of complex spinal deformity cases has not been described. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This is a retrospective study on a prospectively enrolled, complex ASD database. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine if three-column osteotomies demonstrate superior benefit in correction of complex sagittal deformity at the cost of increased perioperative complications. METHODS: Surgical complex adult spinal deformity patients were included and grouped into thoracolumbar 3COs compared to those who did not have a 3CO (No 3CO) (remaining cohort). Rigid deformity was defined as ΔLL less than 33% from standing to supine. Severe deformity was defined as global (SVA > 70 mm) or C7-PL > 70 mm, or lumbopelvic (PI-LL > 30°). Means comparison tests assessed correction by 3CO grade/location. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity evaluated outcomes up to six weeks compared to No 3CO. RESULTS: 648 patients were included (Mean age 61 ± 14.6 years, BMI 27.55 ± 5.8 kg/m2, levels fused: 12.6 ± 3.8). 126 underwent 3CO, a 20% higher usage than historical cohorts. 3COs were older, frail, and more likely to undergo revision (OR 5.2, 95% CI [2.6-10.6]; p < .001). 3COs were more likely to present with both severe global/lumbopelvic deformity (OR 4), 62.4% being rigid. 3COs had greater use of secondary rods (OR 4st) and incurred 4 times greater risk for: massive blood loss (> 3500 mL), longer LOS, SICU admission, perioperative wound and spine-related complications, and neurologic complications when performed below L3. 3COs had similar HRQL benefit, but higher perioperative opioid use. Mean segmental correction increased by grade (G3-21; G4-24; G5-27) and was 4 × greater than low-grade osteotomies, especially below L3 (OR 12). 3COs achieved 2 × greater spinopelvic correction. Higher grades properly distributed lordosis 50% of the time except L5. Pelvic compensation and non-response were relieved more often with increasing grade, with greater correction in all lower extremity parameters (p < .01). Due to the increased rate of complications, 3COs trended toward higher perioperative cost ($42,806 vs. $40,046, p = .086). CONCLUSION: Three-column osteotomy usage in contemporary complex spinal deformities is generally limited to more disabled individuals undergoing the most severe sagittal and coronal realignment procedures. While there is an increased perioperative cost and prolongation of length of stay with usage, these techniques represent the most powerful realignment techniques available with a dramatic impact on normalization at operative levels and reciprocal changes.

Riluzole for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Secondary Analysis of the CSM-PROTECT Trial.

Importance: The modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scale is the most common scale used to represent outcomes of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM); however, it lacks consideration for neck pain scores and neglects the multidimensional aspect of recovery after surgery. Objective: To use a global statistical approach that incorporates assessments of multiple outcomes to reassess the efficacy of riluzole in patients undergoing spinal surgery for DCM. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of prespecified secondary end points within the Efficacy of Riluzole in Surgical Treatment for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy (CSM-PROTECT) trial, a multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 randomized clinical trial conducted from January 2012 to May 2017. Adult surgical patients with DCM with moderate to severe myelopathy (mJOA scale score of 8-14) were randomized to receive either riluzole or placebo. The present study was conducted from July to December 2023. Intervention: Riluzole (50 mg twice daily) or placebo for a total of 6 weeks, including 2 weeks prior to surgery and 4 weeks following surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was a difference in clinical improvement from baseline to 1-year follow-up, assessed using a global statistical test (GST). The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Score (SF-36 PCS), arm and neck pain numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score, and Nurick grade were combined into a single summary statistic known as the global treatment effect (GTE). Results: Overall, 290 patients (riluzole group, 141; placebo group, 149; mean [SD] age, 59 [10.1] years; 161 [56%] male) were included. Riluzole showed a significantly higher probability of global improvement compared with placebo at 1-year follow-up (GTE, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.00-0.16; P = .02). A similar favorable global response was seen at 35 days and 6 months (GTE for both, 0.07; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.15; P = .04), although the results were not statistically significant. Riluzole-treated patients had at least a 54% likelihood of achieving better outcomes at 1 year compared with the placebo group. The ASIA motor score and neck and arm pain NRS combination at 1 year provided the best-fit parsimonious model for detecting a benefit of riluzole (GTE, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.16; P = .007). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of the CSM-PROTECT trial using a global outcome technique, riluzole was associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with DCM. The GST offered probability-based results capable of representing diverse outcome scales and should be considered in future studies assessing spine surgery outcomes.

Opioid Use Prior to Adult Spine Deformity Correction Surgery is Associated With Worse Pre- and Postoperative Back Pain and Prolonged Opioid Demands.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective multicenter database post-hoc analysis. OBJECTIVES: Opioids are frequently prescribed for painful spinal conditions to provide pain relief and to allow for functional improvement, both before and after spine surgery. Amidst a current opioid epidemic, it is important for providers to understand the impact of opioid use and its relationship with patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate pre-/postoperative opioid consumption surrounding ASD and assess patient-reported pain outcomes in older patients undergoing surgery for spinal deformity. METHODS: Patients ≥60 years of age from 12 international centers undergoing spinal fusion of at least 5 levels and a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patient-reported outcome scores were collected using the Numeric Rating Scale for back and leg pain (NRS-B; NRS-L) at baseline and at 2 years following surgery. Opioid use, defined based on a specific question on case report forms and question 11 from the SRS-22r questionnaire, was assessed at baseline and at 2-year follow-up. RESULT: Of the 219 patients who met inclusion criteria, 179 (81.7%) had 2-year data on opioid use. The percentages of patients reporting opioid use at baseline (n = 75, 34.2%) and 2 years after surgery (n = 55, 30.7%) were similar (P = .23). However, at last follow-up 39% of baseline opioid users (Opi) were no longer taking opioids, while 14% of initial non-users (No-Opi) reported opioid use. Regional pre- and postoperative opioid use was 5.8% and 7.7% in the Asian population, 58.3% and 53.1% in the European, and 50.5% and 40.2% in North American patients, respectively. Baseline opioid users reported more preoperative back pain than the No-Opi group (7.0 vs 5.7, P = .001), while NRS-Leg pain scores were comparable (4.8 vs 4, P = .159). Similarly, at last follow-up, patients in the Opi group had greater NRS-B scores than Non-Opi patients (3.2 vs 2.3, P = .012), but no differences in NRS-Leg pain scores (2.2 vs 2.4, P = .632) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, almost one-third of surgical ASD patients were consuming opioids both pre- and postoperatively world-wide. There were marked international variations, with patients from Asia having a much lower usage rate, suggesting a cultural influence. Despite both opioid users and nonusers benefitting from surgery, preoperative opioid use was strongly associated with significantly more back pain at baseline that persisted at 2-year follow up, as well as persistent postoperative opioid needs.

Is Upper Extremity or Lower Extremity Function More Important for Patient Satisfaction? An Analysis of 24-Month Outcomes from the QOD Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Cohort.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a prospective, multicenter registry. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether upper or lower limb mJOA improvement more strongly associates with patient satisfaction after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) is commonly used to assess functional status in patients with CSM. Patients present with upper and/or lower extremity dysfunction, and it is unclear whether improvement in one and/or both symptoms drives postoperative patient satisfaction. METHODS: This study utilizes the prospective Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) CSM data set. Clinical outcomes included mJOA and North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction. The upper limb mJOA score was defined as upper motor plus sensory mJOA, and the lower limb mJOA as lower motor plus sensory mJOA. Ordered logistic regression was used to determine whether upper or lower limb mJOA was more closely associated with NASS satisfaction, adjusting for other covariates. RESULTS: Overall, 1141 patients were enrolled in the QOD CSM cohort. In all, 780 had both preoperative and 24-month mJOA scores, met inclusion criteria, and were included for analysis. The baseline mJOA was 12.1±2.7, and postoperatively, 85.6% would undergo surgery again (NASS 1 or 2, satisfied). Patients exhibited mean improvement in both upper (baseline:3.9±1.4 vs. 24 mo:5.0±1.1, P<0.001) and lower limb mJOA (baseline:3.9±1.4 vs. 24 mon:4.5±1.5, P<0.001); however, the 24-month change in the upper limb mJOA was greater (upper:1.1±1.6 vs. lower:0.6±1.6, P<0.001). Across 24-month NASS satisfaction, the baseline upper and lower limb mJOA scores were similar (pupper=0.28, plower=0.092). However, as satisfaction decreased, the 24-month change in upper and lower limb mJOA decreased as well (pupper<0.001, plower<0.001). Patients with NASS scores of 4 (lowest satisfaction) did not demonstrate significant differences from baseline in upper or lower limb mJOA (P>0.05). In ordered logistic regression, NASS satisfaction was independently associated with upper limb mJOA improvement (OR=0.81; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97; P=0.019) but not lower limb mJOA improvement (OR=0.84; 95% CI: 0.70-1.0; P=0.054). CONCLUSIONS: As the magnitude of upper and lower mJOA improvement decreased postoperatively, so too did patient satisfaction with surgical intervention. Upper limb mJOA improvement was a significant independent predictor of patient satisfaction, whereas lower limb mJOA improvement was not. These findings may aid preoperative counseling, stratified by patients' upper and lower extremity treatment expectations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-III.

The Importance of Planning Ahead: A Three-Dimensional Analysis of the Novel Trans-Facet Corridor for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Segmentation Technology.

BACKGROUND: The rise of minimally invasive lumbar fusions and advanced imaging technologies has facilitated the introduction of novel surgical techniques with the trans-facet approach being one of the newest additions. We aimed to quantify any pathology-driven anatomic changes to the trans-facet corridor, which could thereby alter the ideal laterality of approach to the disc space. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we measured the areas and maximum permissible cannula diameters of the trans-facet corridor using commercially available software (BrainLab, Munich, Germany). Exiting and traversing nerve roots, thecal sacs, and lumbar vertebrae were manually segmented on T2-SPACE magnetic resonance imaging. Spondylolisthesis, disc protrusions, and disc space heights were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 118 trans-facet corridors were segmented bilaterally in 16 patients (65.6 ± 12.1 years, 43.8% female, body mass index 29.2 ± 5.1 kg/m2). The mean areas at L1-L2, L2-L3, L3-L4, and L4-L5 were 89.4 ± 24.9 mm2, 124 ± 39.4 mm2, 123 ± 26.6 mm2, and 159 ± 42.7 mm2, respectively. The mean permissible cannula diameter at the same levels were 7.85 ± 1.43 mm, 8.98 ± 1.72 mm, 8.93 ± 1.26 mm, and 10.2 ± 1.94 mm, respectively. Both parameters increased caudally. Higher degrees for spondylolisthesis were associated with larger areas and maximum cannula diameters on regression analysis (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results illustrate that pathology, like spondylolisthesis, can increase the area of the trans-facet corridor. By understanding this effect, surgeons can better decide on the optimal approach to the disc while taking into consideration a patient's unique anatomy.

The Incremental Clinical Benefit of Adding Layers of Complexity to the Planning and Execution of Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For patients with surgical adult spinal deformity (ASD), our understanding of alignment has evolved, especially in the last 20 years. Determination of optimal restoration of alignment and spinal shape has been increasingly studied, yet the assessment of how these alignment schematics have incrementally added benefit to outcomes remains to be evaluated. METHODS: Patients with ASD with baseline and 2-year were included, classified by 4 alignment measures: Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab, Age-Adjusted, Roussouly, and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP). The incremental benefits of alignment schemas were assessed in chronological order as our understanding of optimal alignment progressed. Alignment was considered improved from baseline based on SRS-Schwab 0 or decrease in severity, Age-Adjusted ideal match, Roussouly current (based on sacral slope) matching theoretical (pelvic incidence-based), and decrease in proportion. Patients separated into 4 first improving in SRS-Schwab at 2-year, second Schwab improvement and matching Age-Adjusted, third two prior with Roussouly, and fourth improvement in all four. Comparison was accomplished with means comparison tests and χ2 analyses. RESULTS: Sevenhundredthirty-two. patients met inclusion. SRS-Schwab BL: pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (++:32.9%), sagittal vertical axis (++: 23%), pelvic tilt (++:24.6%). 640 (87.4%) met criteria for first, 517 (70.6%) second, 176 (24%) third, and 55 (7.5%) fourth. The addition of Roussouly (third) resulted in lower rates of mechanical complications and proximal junctional kyphosis (48.3%) and higher rates of meeting minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for physical component summary and SRS-Mental (P < .05) compared with the second. Fourth compared with the third had higher rates of MCID for ODI (44.2% vs third: 28.3%, P = .011) and SRS-Appearance (70.6% vs 44.8%, P < .001). Mechanical complications and proximal junctional kyphosis were lower with the addition of Roussouly (P = .024), while the addition of GAP had higher rates of meeting MCID for SRS-22 Appearance (P = .002) and Oswestry Disability Index (P = .085). CONCLUSION: Our evaluation of the incremental benefit that alignment schemas have provided in ASD corrective surgery suggests that the addition of Roussouly provided the greatest reduction in mechanical complications, while the incorporation of GAP provided the most significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes.

Revision Strategy for Proximal Junctional Failure: Combined Effect of Proximal Extension and Focal Correction.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospectively-collected multicenter database. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine optimal strategies in terms of focal angular correction and length of proximal extension during revision for PJF. METHODS: 134 patients requiring proximal extension for PJF were analyzed in this study. The correlation between amount of proximal junctional angle (PJA) reduction and recurrence of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and/or PJF was investigated. Following stratification by the degree of PJK correction and the numbers of levels extended proximally, rates of radiographic PJK (PJA >28° & ΔPJA >22°), and recurrent surgery for PJF were reported. RESULTS: Before revision, mean PJA was 27.6° ± 14.6°. Mean number of levels extended was 6.0 ± 3.3. Average PJA reduction was 18.8° ± 18.9°. A correlation between the degree of PJA reduction and rate of recurrent PJK was observed (r = -.222). Recurrent radiographic PJK (0%) and clinical PJF (4.5%) were rare in patients undergoing extension ≥8 levels, regardless of angular correction. Patients with small reductions (<5°) and small extensions (<4 levels) experienced moderate rates of recurrent PJK (19.1%) and PJF (9.5%). Patients with large reductions (>30°) and extensions <8 levels had the highest rate of recurrent PJK (31.8%) and PJF (16.0%). CONCLUSION: While the degree of focal PJK correction must be determined by the treating surgeon based upon clinical goals, recurrent PJK may be minimized by limiting reduction to <30°. If larger PJA correction is required, more extensive proximal fusion constructs may mitigate recurrent PJK/PJF rates.

Impact of educational background on preoperative disease severity and postoperative outcomes among patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis: a Quality Outcomes Database study.

OBJECTIVE: Deficiency in patient education has been correlated with increased disease-related morbidity and decreased access to care. However, the associations between educational level, preoperative disease severity, and postoperative outcomes in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis have yet to be explored. METHODS: The spondylolisthesis dataset of the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD)-a cohort with prospectively collected data by the SpineCORe study team of the 12 highest enrolling sites with an 81% follow-up at 5 years -was utilized and stratified for educational level. Patients were classified into three categories (high school or less, graduate, or postgraduate). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) documented at baseline and follow-up included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, EQ-5D in quality-adjusted life years, and numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain. Disease severity was measured with PROMs. Postoperatively, patients also completed the North American Spine Society assessment to measure their satisfaction with surgery. Multivariable regression analysis was used to compare education level with disease severity and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients underwent analysis, with 260 individuals (42.8%) at an educational level of high school or less. On univariate analysis, baseline disease severity was worse among patients with lower levels of education. On multivariable regression analysis, patients with postgraduate level of education had significantly lower ODI scores (ß = -3.75, 95% CI -7.31 to -0.2, p = 0.039) compared to graduates, while the other PROMs were not associated with significant differences at baseline. Five years postoperatively, patients from various educational backgrounds exhibited similar rates of minimal clinically important differences in PROMs. Nevertheless, patients with the lowest educational level had higher ODI scores (27.1, p < 0.01), lower EQ-5D scores (0.701, p < 0.01), and higher NRS leg pain (3.0, p < 0.01) and back pain (4.0, p < 0.01) scores compared to those with graduate or postgraduate levels of education. The odds for postoperative satisfaction were also comparable between cohorts at 5 years (reference, graduate level; high school or less, OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46-1.64, p = 0.659; postgraduate, OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.65, p = 0.262). CONCLUSIONS: Lower patient education level was associated with a greater baseline disease severity in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Surgery demonstrated similar benefits irrespective of educational background; however, individuals with lower educational level reported lower outcomes overall. This emphasizes the need for enhanced health literacy to mitigate disparities for reported outcomes.

Comparing posterior cervical foraminotomy with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in radiculopathic patients: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between posterior foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients presenting with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database was queried for patients who had undergone ACDF or posterior foraminotomy for radiculopathy. To create two highly homogeneous groups, optimal individual matching was performed at a 5:1 ratio between the two groups on 29 baseline variables (including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, underlying pathologies, and levels treated). Outcomes of interest were length of stay, reoperations, patient-reported satisfaction, increase in EQ-5D score, and decrease in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores for arm and neck pain as long as 1 year after surgery. Noninferiority analysis of achieving patient satisfaction and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in PROs was performed with an accepted risk difference of 5%. RESULTS: A total of 7805 eligible patients were identified: 216 of these underwent posterior foraminotomy and were matched to 1080 patients who underwent ACDF. The patients who underwent ACDF had more underlying pathologies, lower EQ-5D scores, and higher NDI and neck pain scores at baseline. Posterior foraminotomy was associated with shorter hospitalization (0.5 vs 0.9 days, p < 0.001). Reoperations within 12 months were significantly more common among the posterior foraminotomy group (4.2% vs 1.9%, p = 0.04). The two groups performed similarly in PROs, with posterior foraminotomy being noninferior to ACDF in achieving MCID in EQ-5D and neck pain scores but also having lower rates of maximal satisfaction at 12 months (North American Spine Society score of 1 achieved by 65.2% posterior foraminotomy patients vs 74.6% of ACDF patients, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The two procedures were found to be offered to different populations, with ACDF being selected for patients with more complicated pathologies and symptoms. After individual matching, posterior foraminotomy was associated with a higher reoperation risk within 1 year after surgery compared to ACDF (4.2% vs 1.9%). In terms of 12-month PROs, posterior foraminotomy was noninferior to ACDF in improving quality of life and neck pain. The two procedures also performed similarly in improving NDI scores and arm pain, but ACDF patients had higher maximal satisfaction rates.

Using Augmented Reality Technology to Optimize Transfacet Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Case Report.

The transfacet minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is a novel approach available for the management of lumbar spondylolisthesis. It avoids the need to manipulate either of the exiting or traversing nerve roots, both protected by the bony boundaries of the approach. With the advancement in operative technologies such as navigation, mapping, segmentation, and augmented reality (AR), surgeons are prompted to utilize these technologies to enhance their surgical outcomes. A 36-year-old male patient was complaining of chronic progressive lower back pain. He was found to have grade 2 L4/5 spondylolisthesis. We studied the feasibility of a trans-Kambin or a transfacet MIS-TLIF, and decided to proceed with the latter given the wider corridor it provides. Preoperative trajectory planning and level segmentation in addition to intraoperative navigation and image merging were all utilized to provide an AR model to guide us through the surgery. The use of AR can build on the safety and learning of novel surgical approaches to spine pathologies. However, larger high-quality studies are needed to further objectively analyze its impact on surgical outcomes and to expand on its application.

Impact of Self-Reported Loss of Balance and Gait Disturbance on Outcomes following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate if imbalance influences complication rates, radiological outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Methods: ASD patients with baseline and 2-year radiographic and PROMs were included. Patients were grouped according to whether they answered yes or no to a recent history of pre-operative loss of balance. The groups were propensity-matched by age, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and surgical invasiveness score. Results: In total, 212 patients were examined (106 in each group). Patients with gait imbalance had worse baseline PROM measures, including Oswestry disability index (45.2 vs. 36.6), SF-36 mental component score (44 vs. 51.8), and SF-36 physical component score (p < 0.001 for all). After 2 years, patients with gait imbalance had less pelvic tilt correction (-1.2 vs. -3.6°, p = 0.039) for a comparable PI-LL correction (-11.9 vs. -15.1°, p = 0.144). Gait imbalance patients had higher rates of radiographic proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) (26.4% vs. 14.2%) and implant-related complications (47.2% vs. 34.0%). After controlling for age, baseline sagittal parameters, PI-LL correction, and comorbidities, patients with imbalance had 2.2-times-increased odds of PJK after 2 years. Conclusions: Patients with a self-reported loss of balance/unsteady gait have significantly worse PROMs and higher risk of PJK.

Evolution of the Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): From Open to Percutaneous to Patient-Specific.

The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has seen significant evolution since its early inception, reflecting advancements in surgical techniques, patient safety, and outcomes. Originally described as an improvement over the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), the TLIF began as an open surgical procedure, that notably reduced the need for the extensive neural retractation that hindered the PLIF. In line with the broader practice of surgery, trending toward minimally invasive access, the TLIF was followed by the development of the minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), a technique that further decreased tissue trauma and postoperative complications. Subsequent advancements, including Trans-Kambin's Triangle TLIF (percLIF) and transfacet LIF, have continued to refine surgical access, minimize surgical footprint, and reduce the risk of injury to the patient. The latest evolution, as we will describe it, the patient-specific TLIF, is a culmination of the aforementioned adaptations and incorporates advanced imaging and segmentation technologies into perioperative planning, allowing surgeons to tailor approaches based on individual patient anatomy and pathology. These developments signify a shift towards more precise methods in spine surgery. The ongoing evolution of the TLIF technique illustrates the dynamic nature of surgery and emphasizes the need for continued adaptation and refinement.

Early Experience with Prone Lateral Interbody Fusion in Deformity Correction: A Single-Institution Experience.

Background/Objectives: Lateral spine surgery offers effective minimally invasive deformity correction, but traditional approaches often involve separate anterior, lateral, and posterior procedures. The prone lateral technique streamlines this process by allowing single-position access for lateral and posterior surgery, potentially benefiting from the lordosing effect of prone positioning. While previous studies have compared prone lateral to direct lateral for adult degenerative diseases, this retrospective review focuses on the outcomes of adult deformity patients undergoing prone lateral interbody fusion. Methods: Ten adult patients underwent single-position prone lateral surgery for spine deformity correction, with a mean follow-up of 18 months. Results: Results showed significant improvements: sagittal vertical axis decreased by 2.4 cm, lumbar lordosis increased by 9.1°, pelvic tilt improved by 3.3°, segmental lordosis across the fusion construct increased by 12.2°, and coronal Cobb angle improved by 6.3°. These benefits remained consistent over the follow-up period. Correlational analysis showed a positive association between improvements in PROs and SVA and SL. When compared to hybrid approaches, prone lateral yielded greater improvements in SVA. Conclusions: Prone lateral surgery demonstrated favorable outcomes with reasonable perioperative risks. However, further research comparing this technique with standard minimally invasive lateral approaches, hybrid, and open approaches is warranted for a comprehensive evaluation.

Pushing the Limits of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery-From Preoperative to Intraoperative to Postoperative Management.

The introduction of minimally invasive surgery ushered in a new era of spine surgery by minimizing the undue iatrogenic injury, recovery time, and blood loss, among other complications, of traditional open procedures. Over time, technological advancements have further refined the care of the operative minimally invasive spine patient. Moreover, pre-, and postoperative care have also undergone significant change by way of artificial intelligence risk stratification, advanced imaging for surgical planning and patient selection, postoperative recovery pathways, and digital health solutions. Despite these advancements, challenges persist necessitating ongoing research and collaboration to further optimize patient care in minimally invasive spine surgery.

Post-operative bracing following adult spine deformity surgery: Results from the AO Spine surveillance of post-operative management of patients with adult spine deformity.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional international survey with a literature review. OBJECTIVES: While some surgeons favor spine bracing after surgery for adult spine deformity (ASD) to help prevent mechanical failures, there is a lack of evidence. The objective of the present study was to better understand the current trend in the use of bracing following ASD surgery based on an international survey. METHODS: An e-mail-based online survey was conducted among over 6000 international AO Spine members regarding the post-operative management of patients with ASD. The details of brace prescription, indications and influencing factors were solicited. Descriptive data were summarized based on different demographic groups and fusion levels for the responding surgeons who annually perform at least 10 long-segment fusions of >5 levels extending to the pelvis. RESULTS: A total of 116 responses were received, including 71 surgeons (61%) who used post-operative bracing for >5 levels of long fusion. The most common reason for bracing was pain management (55%) and bone quality was the strongest influencing factor (69%). Asia-Pacific surgeons had the highest rate of bracing (88%), while North American surgeons had the lowest (45%). The most common type of brace used were TLSO for cases with an uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) in the low- or mid-thoracic spine and a cervical brace for UIV at T1-3. The majority (56%) used bracing for 6-12 weeks after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The present survey demonstrated significant interest in bracing following ASD surgery, however, there is substantial variability in post-operative bracing practice. A formal study on the role of bracing in ASD surgery is needed.

Postoperative C5 Palsy after Anterior or Posterior Decompression for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Subgroup Analysis of the Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Phase III, CSM-Protect Clinical Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of prospectively accrued data. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a large, prospective, multicentre dataset of surgically-treated DCM cases on the contemporary risk of C5 palsy with surgical approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The influence of surgical technique on postoperative C5 palsy after decompression for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is intensely debated. Comprehensive analyses are needed using contemporary data and accounting for covariates. METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe DCM were prospectively enrolled in the multicenter, randomized CSM-Protect clinical trial and underwent either anterior or posterior decompression between Jan 31, 2012, to May 16, 2017. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative C5 palsy, defined as onset of muscle weakness by at least one grade in manual muscle test at the C5 myotome with slight or absent sensory disruption after cervical surgery. Two comparative cohorts were made based on anterior or posterior surgical approach. Multivariate hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for C5 palsy. RESULTS: A total of 283 patients were included, and 53.4% underwent posterior decompression. The total incidence of postoperative C5 palsy was 7.4% and was significantly higher in patients that underwent posterior decompression compared to anterior decompression (11.26% vs. 3.03%, P=0.008). After multivariable regression, posterior approach was independently associated with greater than four times the likelihood of postoperative C5 palsy (P=0.017). Rates of C5 palsy recovery were comparable between the two surgical approaches. CONCLUSION: The odds of postoperative C5 palsy are significantly higher after posterior decompression compared to anterior decompression for DCM. This may influence surgical decision-making when there is equipoise in deciding between anterior and posterior treatment options for DCM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II.