Spinal alignment, surgery, and outcomes in cervical deformity: A practical guide to aid the spine surgeon.

Compared to the thoracolumbar spine, the literature on cervical spine alignment is scarce. While a consistent number of articles have been published, few analyze the ideal surgical approaches for each type of deformity and the optimal amount of correction to achieve. This paper provides a comprehensive review of current literature on cervical spinal deformities (with or without myelopathy) and their surgical management; it is our goal to create a framework on which surgical planning can be made. A general assessment of the actually utilized parameters and correlation between the cervical and thoracolumbar spine alignment is presented. Moreover, we provide an analysis of cervical surgical approaches (anterior, posterior, or combined), techniques (laminoplasty, laminectomy and fusion, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, corpectomy), and their indications. Finally, a complete evaluation of outcomes and postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures based on questionnaires (NDI, VAS, SF-36, mJOA) is discussed. Several prospective studies would be useful in understanding how cervical alignment may be important in the assessment and treatment of cervical deformities with or without myelopathy. In particular, future works should concentrate on the correlation between cervical alignment parameters, disability scores, and myelopathy outcomes. We propose, via comprehensive literature review, a guide of practical key points on surgical techniques, cervical alignment, and symptom improvement goals surgeons should aim to achieve for each patient.

The frontotemporal-orbitozygomatic approach: reconstructive technique and outcome.

BACKGROUND: The frontotemporal-orbitozygomatic (FTOZ) approach, also known as "the workhorse of skull base surgery," has captured the interest of many researchers throughout the years. Most of the studies published have focused on the surgical technique and the gained exposure. However, few studies have described reconstructive techniques or functional and cosmetic outcomes. The goal of this study was to describe the surgical reconstruction after the FTOZ approach and analyze the functional and cosmetic outcomes. METHODS: Seventy-five consecutive patients who had undergone FTOZ craniotomy for different reasons were selected. The same surgical (one-piece FTOZ) and reconstructive techniques were applied in all patients. The functional outcome was measured by complications related to the surgical approach: retro-orbital pain, exophthalmos, enophthalmos, ocular movement restriction, cranial nerve injuries, pseudomeningocele (PMC) and secondary surgeries required to attain a reconstructive closure. The cosmetic outcome was evaluated by analyzing the satisfaction of the patients and their families. Questionnaires were conducted later in the postoperative period. A statistical analysis of the data obtained from the charts and questions was performed. RESULTS: Of the 75 patients studied, 59 had no complications whatsoever. Ocular movement restriction was found in two patients (2.4 %). Cranial nerve injury was documented in seven patients (8.5 %). One patient (1.2 %) underwent surgical repair of a cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak from the initial surgery. Two patients (2.4 %) developed delayed postoperative pseudomenigocele. One patient (1.2 %) developed intraparenchymal hemorrhage (IPH). Full responses to the questionnaires were collected from 28 patients giving an overall response rate of 34 %. Overall, 22 patients (78.5 %) were satisfied with the cosmetic outcome of surgery. CONCLUSION: The reconstruction after FTOZ approach is as important as the performance of the surgical technique. Attention to anatomical details and the stepwise reconstruction are a prerequisite to the successful preservation of function and cosmesis. In our series, the orbitozygomatic osteotomy did not increase surgical complications or alter cosmetic outcomes.

California makes unprecedented commitment to fund stem cell research.

California voters commit $3 billion over the next ten years to stem cell research.