Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic spine surgery has recently grown in popularity due to the potential benefits of reduced pain and faster recovery time as compared to open surgery. Biportal spinal endoscopy has been successfully applied to lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Obesity is associated with increased risk of complications in spine surgery. Few prior studies have investigated the impact of obesity and associated medical comorbidities with biportal spinal endoscopy. METHODS: This study was a prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed comparative cohort design. Patients were divided into cohorts of normal body weight (Bone Mass Index (BMI)18.0-24.9), overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9) and obese (BMI > 30.0) as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). Patients underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution for treatment of lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Demographic data, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were analyzed. Statistics were calculated amongst treatment groups using analysis of variance and chi square where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were followed. 26 (30.1%) were normal BMI, 35 (41.7%) were overweight and 23 (27.4%) were obese. Patients with increasing BMI had correspondingly greater American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores. There were no significant differences in VAS Back, VAS Leg, and ODI scores, or postoperative complications among the cohorts. There were no cases of surgical site infections in the cohort. All cohorts demonstrated significant improvement up to 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that obesity is not a risk factor for increased perioperative complications with biportal spinal endoscopy and has similar clinical outcomes and safety profile as compared to patients with normal BMI. Biportal spinal endoscopy is a promising alternative to traditional techniques to treat common lumbar pathology.

The Role of Perioperative Nutritional Status and Supplementation in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Review of Postoperative Outcomes.

¼ Identification of malnourished and at-risk patients should be a standardized part of the preoperative evaluation process for every patient.¼ Malnourishment is defined as a disorder of energy, protein, and nutrients based on the presence of insufficient energy intake, weight loss, muscle atrophy, loss of subcutaneous fat, localized or generalized fluid accumulation, or diminished functional status.¼ Malnutrition has been associated with worse outcomes postoperatively across a variety of orthopaedic procedures because malnourished patients do not have a robust metabolic reserve available for recovery after surgery.¼ Screening assessment and basic laboratory studies may indicate patients' nutritional risk; however, laboratory values are often not specific for malnutrition, necessitating the use of prognostic screening tools.¼ Nutrition consultation and perioperative supplementation with amino acids and micronutrients are 2 readily available interventions that orthopaedic surgeons can select for malnourished patients.

Cervical Spine Surgery Following COVID-19 Infection: When is it Safe to Proceed?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. OBJECTIVE: We utilized the NIH National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) database to characterize the risk profile of patients undergoing spine surgery during multiple time windows following the COVID-19 infection. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: While the impact of COVID-19 on various organ systems is well documented, there is limited knowledge regarding its effect on perioperative complications following spine surgery or the optimal timing of surgery after an infection. METHODS: We asked the National COVID Cohort Collaborative for patients who underwent cervical spine surgery. Patients were stratified into those with an initial documented COVID-19 infection within 3 time periods: 0-2 weeks, 2-6 weeks, or 6-12 weeks before surgery. RESULTS: A total of 29,449 patients who underwent anterior approach cervical spine surgery and 46,379 patients who underwent posterior approach cervical spine surgery were included. Patients who underwent surgery within 2 weeks of their COVID-19 diagnosis had a significantly increased risk for venous thromboembolic events, sepsis, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality, irrespective of the anterior or posterior approach. Among patients undergoing surgery between 2 and 6 weeks after COVID-19 infection, the 30-day mortality risk remained elevated in patients undergoing a posterior approach only. Patients undergoing surgery between 6 and 12 weeks from the date of the COVID-19 infection did not show significantly elevated rates of any complications analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing either anterior or posterior cervical spine surgery within 2 weeks from the initial COVID-19 diagnosis are at increased risk for perioperative venous thromboembolic events, sepsis, and mortality. Elevated perioperative complication risk does not persist beyond 2 weeks, except for 30-day mortality in posterior approach surgeries. On the basis of these results, it may be warranted to postpone nonurgent spine surgeries for at least 2 weeks following a COVID-19 infection and advise patients of the increased perioperative complication risk when urgent surgery is required.

Costs of revision operations for distal junctional kyphosis following thoracic posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

PURPOSE: To assess direct costs and risks associated with revision operations for distal junctional kyphosis/failure (DJK) following thoracic posterior spinal instrumented fusions (TPSF) for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). METHODS: Children who underwent TPSF for AIS by a single surgeon (2014-2020) were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were minimum follow-up of 2 years, thoracolumbar posterior instrumented fusion with a lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) cranial to L2. Patients who developed DJK requiring revision operations were identified and compared with those who did not develop DJK. RESULTS: Seventy-nine children were included for analysis. Of these, 6.3% developed DJK. Average time to revision was 20.8 ± 16.2 months. Comparing index operations, children who developed DJK had significantly greater BMIs, significantly lower thoracic kyphosis postoperatively, greater post-operative lumbar Cobb angles, and significantly more LIVs cranial to the sagittal stable vertebrae (SSV), despite having statistically similar pre-operative coronal and sagittal alignment parameters and operative details compared with non-DJK patients. Revision operations for DJK, when compared with index operations, involved significantly fewer levels, longer operative times, greater blood loss, and longer hospital lengths of stay. These factors resulted in significantly greater direct costs for revision operations for DJK ($76,883 v. $46,595; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center experience, risk factors for development of DJK were greater BMI, lower post-operative thoracic kyphosis, and LIV cranial to SSV. As revision operations for DJK were significantly more costly than index operations, all efforts should be aimed at strategies to prevent DJK in the AIS population.

Avoiding Pitfalls in Adult Spinal Deformity.

To avoid the high rate of complications associated with the surgical management of adult spinal deformity, it is important to recognize and avoid three major pitfalls. The first is patient selection and determining which cases are appropriately indicated. The second is optimizing modifiable medical issues that can lead to a poor outcome, such as smoking, vitamin D deficiency, nutritional status, and poor bone quality. The third is optimizing surgical factors such as defining clinically appropriate, patient-specific target alignment goals as well as using techniques to avoid proximal junctional kyphosis and proximal junctional failure. It is important to describe these three key pitfalls that are commonly seen in the treatment of patients with adult spinal deformity and to describe methods to avoid them.

Combined Anterior Thoracic Vertebral Body Tethering and Posterior Lumbar Tethering Results in Quicker Return to Sport and Activity Compared to Posterior Spinal Instrumented Fusion in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported physical activity between anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) and posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) with minimum 2 year follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis and a thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude ≥40° who underwent either ATVBT/PLST or PSIF from 2015-2019 were included. The primary outcome was rate of returning to sport. Secondary outcomes included ability to bend and satisfaction with sport performance as well as weeks until return to sport, school, physical education (PE) classes, and running. RESULTS: Ten patients underwent ATVBT/PLST and 12 underwent PSIF. ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster return to sport (13.5 weeks vs 27.9 weeks, P = .04), running (13.3 weeks vs 28.8 weeks, P = .02), and PE class (12.6 weeks vs 26.2 weeks, P = .04) compared to PSIF patients. ATVBT/PLST patients reported that they had to give up activities due to their ability to bend at lower rates than PSIF patients while reporting "no changes" in their ability to bend after surgery at higher rates than PSIF patients (0% vs 4% giving up activities and 70% vs 0% reporting no changes in bending ability for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P = .01). Compared to PSIF patients, ATVBT/PLST patients experienced less main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curve correction at most recent follow-up (thoracic: 41 ± 19% vs 69 ± 18%, P = .001; thoracolumbar/lumbar: 59 ± 25% vs 78 ± 15%, P = .02). No significant differences in the number of revision surgeries were observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients (4 (40%) and 1 (8%) for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P = .221). CONCLUSIONS: ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster rates of returning to sport, running, and PE. In addition, ATVBT/PLST patients were less likely to have to give up activities due to bending ability after surgery and reported no changes in their ability to bend after surgery more frequently than PSIF patients. However, the overall rate of return to the same or higher level of sport participation was high amongst both groups, with no significant difference observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients.

Limited number of spine surgeons among recipients of National Institutes of Health grants awarded for degenerative spine disease research.

OBJECTIVE: Surgeon scientists remain underrepresented among recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants despite their unique ability to perform translational research. This study elucidates the portfolio of NIH grants awarded for degenerative spine diseases and the role of spine surgeons in this portfolio. METHODS: The most common diagnoses and surgical procedures for degenerative spine diseases were queried on the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database (2011-2021). Total NIH funding was extracted for 20 additional clinical areas and compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) were calculated. A retrospective cohort study of principal investigators (PIs) was conducted. NIH grants and funding totals were extracted and compared to those from other clinical areas. RESULTS: The total NIH research budget increased from $31 to $43 billion over the 10-year period (CAGR 3.4%). A total of 273 unique grants equaling $91 million (CAGR 0%) were awarded for degenerative spine diseases. Diabetes ($11.8 billion, CAGR 0%), obesity ($10.6 billion, CAGR 3%), and chronic pain ($5.6 billion, CAGR 7%) received the most funding. Most NIH funding for degenerative spine disease research was awarded through the R01 (66%) and R44 (8%) grant mechanisms. The National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases awarded the most NIH funding (64%). Departments of orthopedic surgery were awarded the most funding (32%). NIH funding supported clinical (28%), translational (37%), and basic science (35%) research. Disease mechanisms (58%), imaging modalities (20%), and emerging technologies (16%) received the most funding. Nineteen spine surgeons were identified as PIs (16%). There were no significant differences in NIH funding totals by PI demographic and academic characteristics (p > 0.05)-except for full professors, who had the most NIH funding (p = 0.007) and highest h-index values (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Few spine surgeons receive NIH grants for degenerative spine disease research. Future opportunities may exist for spine surgeons to collaborate in identified areas of clinical interest. Additional strategies are needed to increase NIH funding in spine surgery.

Erratum: Rates of readmission and reoperation after operative management of midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescents.

[This corrects the article on p. 1001 in vol. 12, PMID: 35036342.].

Radiographic and perioperative outcomes following anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering: a pilot series.

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT:  In patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) of main thoracic and lumbar spine regions, combined anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) is a novel non-fusion treatment option for growth modulation and conservation of motion. METHODS:  Fourteen patients with AIS who underwent ATVBT/PLST with at least 2-year follow-up were included. Primary outcomes included quality of life as assessed by SRS-22 instruments, radiographic analysis, and revision operations. We secondarily reported perioperative metrics and post-operative opiate morphine equivalents (OME). Clinical success was defined as patients who achieved skeletal maturity with ≤ 30° curve magnitude of both their main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curves and who did not undergo posterior spine instrumentation and fusion (PSIF). RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 11.6 years (range 10-14 years), majority were girls (92%), and mean follow-up was 3.0 years (range 2-4.8 years). All patients were skeletally immature with a Risser ≤ 2. Included curves were Lenke 1C, 3C, or 6C. Mean preoperative curve magnitudes were 53° ± 8° (range 45°-65°) main thoracic and 49° ± 9° (range 40°-62°) thoracolumbar/lumbar curves. At most recent follow-up, patients had a mean main thoracic curve of 29° ± 8° (range 15°-40°) and a mean thoracolumbar/lumbar curve of 20° ± 15° (range 4°-35°). 50% required a revision operation. Cable breakage occurred in 43%, which did not always require revision. One patient progressed to thoracic fusion, but no patient underwent lumbar fusion. Patients had a mean SRS-22 outcome score of 4.2 ± 0.4. CONCLUSIONS: ATVBT/PLST is a potential alternative to spine fusion for select immature patients with AIS at a minimum 2-year follow-up. ATVBT/PLST potentially offers motion conservation at the cost of a higher revision rate. Further study and reporting of results are necessary to refine indications and techniques, which in turn will improve outcomes of this procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-Case series without comparative group.

Perioperative Outcomes of Open Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering and Instrumented Posterior Spinal Fusion for Skeletally Immature Patients With Idiopathic Scoliosis.

BACKGROUND: Correcting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) without fusion can be achieved with anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT). However, little is known about the perioperative outcomes, pain control, and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing AVBT compared with instrumented posterior spinal fusion (IPSF). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we compared pediatric patients with AIS who underwent either AVBT or IPSF. Inclusion criteria were based on the AVBT group, which included primary thoracic idiopathic scoliosis, Risser ≤1, curve magnitude 40 to 70 degrees, age 9 to 15, no prior spine surgery, index surgery between 2014 and 2019, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient demographics, perioperative metrics, pain visual analog scale scores, opiate morphine equivalent usage, cost data, and radiographic outcomes were compared. RESULTS: We identified 23 patients who underwent AVBT and 24 matched patients in the IPSF group based on inclusion criteria. Patients undergoing AVBT and PSF were similar in age (12±1 y vs. 13±1 y, P =0.132) and average follow-up time (3.8±1.6 y vs. 3.3±1.4 y, P =0.210). There were 23 female patients (87%) in the AVBT group and 24 female (92%) patients in the IPSF group. Intraoperatively, estimated blood loss (498±290 vs. 120±47 mL, P <0.001) and procedure duration (419±95 vs. 331±83 min, P =0.001) was significantly greater in the IPSF group compared with AVBT. Length of stay was lower in the AVBT group compared with PSF (4±1 vs. 5±2 d, P =0.04). PSF patients had significantly greater total postoperative opiate morphine equivalent use compared with AVBT (2.2±1.9 vs. 5.6±3.4 mg/kg, P <0.001). Overall direct costs following PSF and AVBT were similar ($47,655+$12,028 vs. $50,891±$24,531, P =0.58). Preoperative radiographic parameters were similar between both the groups, with a major thoracic curve at 51±10 degrees for AVBT and 54±9 degrees for IPSF ( P =0.214). At the most recent follow-up, IPSF patients had greater curve reduction to a mean major thoracic curve of 11±7 degrees (79%) compared with 19±10 degrees (63%) in AVBT patients ( P =0.002). Nine patients (39%) required revision surgery following AVBT compared with 4 patients(17%) following IPSF ( P =0.09). CONCLUSIONS: In a select cohort of patients, AVBT offers decreased surgical time, blood loss, length of stay, and postoperative opiate usage compared with IPSF. Although IPSF resulted in greater deformity correction at 2-year follow-up, the majority of patients who underwent AVBT had ≤35 major curves and avoided fusion. There is optimism for AVBT as a treatment option for select AIS patients, but long-term complications are still being understood, and the risk for revision surgeries remains high. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Anterior vertebral body tethering for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis associated with less early post-operative pain and shorter recovery compared with fusion.

PURPOSE: While posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) for severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the gold standard, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is becoming an alternative for select cases. Several studies have compared technical outcomes for these two procedures, but no studies have compared post-operative pain and recovery. METHODS: In this prospective cohort, we evaluated patients who underwent AVBT or PSIF for AIS for a period of 6 weeks after operation. Pre-operative curve data were obtained from the medical record. Post-operative pain and recovery were evaluated with pain scores, pain confidence scores, PROMIS scores for pain behavior, interference, and mobility, and functional milestones of opiate use, independence in activities of daily living (ADLs), and sleeping. RESULTS: The cohort included 9 patients who underwent AVBT and 22 who underwent PSIF, with a mean age of 13.7 years, 90% girls, and 77.4% white. The AVBT patients were younger (p = 0.03) and had fewer instrumented levels (p = 0.03). Results were significant for decreased pain scores at 2 and 6 weeks after operation (p = 0.004, and 0.030), decreased PROMIS pain behavior at all time points (p = 0.024, 0.049, and 0.001), decreased pain interference at 2 and 6 weeks post-operative (p = 0.012 and 0.009), increased PROMIS mobility scores at all time points (p = 0.036, 0.038, and 0.018), and faster time to functional milestones of weaning opiates, independence in ADLs, and sleep (p = 0.024, 0.049, and 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this prospective cohort study, the early recovery period following AVBT for AIS is characterized by less pain, increased mobility, and faster recovery of functional milestones, compared with PSIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Utility of Spine Surgery Fellowship Training for Orthopaedic Surgeons in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Orthopaedic spine surgeons gain surgical experience through cases conducted during residency and fellowship training. This study elucidates the incremental benefit in spine surgery volume from orthopaedic spine surgery fellowship training. METHODS: This was a retrospective national cohort study of orthopaedic surgery residents and orthopaedic spine surgery fellows graduating from US Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited training programs during the 2017 to 2020 academic years. Comparisons in spine surgery case volume were made with parametric tests. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen spine surgery fellows and 3,000 orthopaedic surgery residents were included. There was a 3.5-fold increase in total spine surgery cases conducted during fellowship versus residency (314 ± 129 vs. 89 ± 61, P < 0.001). Spine surgery fellows one standard deviation more than the mean reported 443 total spine cases. The largest differences between fellows and residents were Decompression (104 ± 48 vs. 28 ± 23, P < 0.001), Posterior Arthrodesis (94 ± 46 vs. 21 ± 18, P < 0.001), Anterior Arthrodesis (64 ± 31 vs. 13 ± 13, P < 0.001), and Instrumentation (43 ± 25 vs. 22 ± 12, P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Spine surgery fellowship training affords orthopaedic surgeons the opportunity to increase spine surgery case volume by over threefold. The greatest increases in case volume were reported for Decompression, Posterior Arthrodesis, Anterior Arthrodesis, and Instrumentation.

Posterior Displacement of L1 May be a Risk Factor for Proximal Junctional Kyphosis After Adult Spinal Deformity Correction.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Overcorrection in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery may lead to proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) because of posterior spinal displacement. The aim of this paper is to determine if the L1 position relative to the gravity line (GL) is associated with PJK. METHODS: ASD patients fused from the lower thoracic spine to sacrum by 4 spine surgeons at our hospital were retrospectively studied. Lumbar-only and upper thoracic spine fusions were excluded. Spinopelvic parameters, the L1 plumb line (L1PL), L1 distance to the GL (L1-GL), and Roussouly type were measured. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen patients met inclusion criteria (63 patients with PJK, 51 without). Mean age and follow up was 65.51 and 3.39 years, respectively. There was no difference between the PJK and the non-PJK groups in baseline demographics, pre-operative and immediate post-operative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, sagittal vertical axis, or coronal Cobb. The immediate postoperative L1-GL was -7.24 cm in PJK and -3.45 cm in non-PJK (P < 0.001), L1PL was 1.71 cm in PJK and 3.07 cm in non-PJK (P = 0.004), and PT (23.76° vs 18.90°, P = 0.026) and TK (40.56° vs 31.39°, P < 0.001) were larger in PJK than in non-PJK. After univariate and multivariate analyses, immediate postoperative TK and immediate postoperative L1-GL were independent risk factors for PJK without collinearity. CONCLUSIONS: A dorsally displaced L1 relative to the GL was associated with an increased risk of PJK after ASD surgery. The postoperative L1-GL distance may be a factor to consider during ASD surgery.

Thoracic posterior spinal instrumented fusion vs. thoracic anterior spinal tethering for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with a minimum of 2-year follow-up: a cost comparison of index and revision operations.

PURPOSE: To compare direct costs of index and revision operations of thoracic posterior spinal instrumented fusion (TPSIF) and thoracic anterior spinal tethering (TAST) for adolescent idiopathic thoracic scoliosis in children. METHODS: Children (ages 11-18 years) who underwent TPSIF and TAST (2/2013-9/2019) were reviewed. Follow-up < 2 years and cervical instrumentation and/or instrumentation of a lumbar level at L3 or below were exclusion criteria. Patient demographics, radiographic curve magnitude, index operations and postoperative data, as well as indications for revisions/readmissions were collected. Direct costs were identified and compared for index and revision operations during follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred and four patients were included (TPSIF: 78; TAST: 25). TAST procedures were performed in children significantly younger and for smaller curve magnitudes. They had significantly fewer levels instrumented, shorter operating room (OR) times, and less estimated blood loss (EBL). After operation, a significantly higher percentage of TAST were admitted to ICU. Hospital length of stay (LOS) was similar between groups. Index operations' average direct costs were significantly higher for TAST than TPSIF ($52,947 v. $46,641; p = 0.02). Major cost drivers for both groups were implants, OR services, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and room/board. Revisions following TAST were more frequent than for TPSIF (36 v. 11.5%). Majority of TPSIF revisions were for junctional deformity. Curve progression and overcorrection were most common reason for TAST revisions. Average direct costs for revisions/readmissions were similar between groups (TPSIF: $28,485 v. TAST: $27,590; p = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Index operations' average direct costs were statistically similar between TPSIF and TAST for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Major cost drivers were implants, OR services, PACU, and room/board. TAST index operations' direct costs and associated direct costs for implants and room/board were significantly higher, while their anesthesia and OR services were significantly lower than TPSIF. TAST revisions were for overcorrection and curve progression, while TPSIF revisions were most commonly for junctional deformity. Overall average direct costs for revisions were similar despite revision rates being higher for TAST. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

The Socioeconomic consequences of femoral shaft fracture for patients in Malawi.

Background: Femoral shaft fractures are common in Malawi, with an annual incidence of 44 per 100,000 people. Inadequate treatment and delayed presentation often result in functional, biopsychosocial, and financial challenges for patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the socioeconomic consequences of femoral shaft fractures for patients in Malawi. Methods: This study of 42 patients was part of a larger study that prospectively examined quality of life. Questionnaires were distributed to patients at 1-year follow-up following femoral shaft fracture treatment. Patients reported pre- and post-injury standard of living and financial well-being. Results: Patients reported relatively high transportation costs to and from the hospital. One year after injury, 17 patients (40%) had not returned to work. Of the 25 (60%) who had returned, 5 (20%) changed jobs due to their injury, all reported decreased productivity. Household income decreased for 29% of patients. 20 (49%) of 41 patients reported food insecurity in the week prior to questionnaire completion. Many patients reported changing their residence, borrowing money, selling personal property, and unenrolling children from school due to financial hardship caused by their injury. Conclusion: While the Malawian public healthcare system is free at the point of care, it lacks the financial risk protection that is essential to universal health coverage (UHC). In this study, we found that the indirect costs of care due to femoral shaft fractures had substantial socioeconomic consequences on the majority of patients and their families. Increased investment of financial and human capital should be made into capacity building and preventative measures to decrease the burden of injury, increase access to care, improve care delivery, and provide financial risk protection for patients with traumatic injuries in Malawi.

Rates of Operative Management of Midshaft Clavicle Fracture in Adolescents Have Increased in Florida between 2005 and 2014.

Background: It is not known if the adult literature on midshaft clavicle fracture treatment with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) has influenced injury management in adolescents. Purpose: We sought to longitudinally evaluate the rates of operative management of adolescent midshaft clavicle fractures in the state of Florida. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of data from the following Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project databases: the State Inpatient Database, the State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database, and the State Emergency Department Database. Patients in Florida ages 10 to 18 years with midshaft clavicle fractures between 2005 and 2014 were identified along with data on age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance type, treatment, and income percentile. We reviewed the data to identify trends in the rates of operative management of midshaft clavicle fractures. We then compared the rates of operative management between the first 3 years and the most recent 3 years (2005-2007 vs 2012-2014). Various demographic and socioeconomic factors were compared between patients treated with and without surgery. Descriptive statistics as well as univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: There were 4297 midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescents identified between 2005 and 2014, and 338 (7.8%) of these fractures underwent operative management. There was a significant increase in the rate of operative management; it increased from 4.3% (n = 59) of the 1373 clavicle fractures that occurred between 2005 and 2007 to 11.2% (n = 130) of the 1164 clavicle fractures that occurred between 2012 and 2014. Patients with commercial insurance and patients who were older were more likely to undergo ORIF. Patients with Medicaid were more likely to undergo ORIF between 2012 and 2014 compared with patients with Medicaid between 2005 and 2007. Conclusions: Operative management rates of adolescent midshaft clavicle fractures have significantly increased in Florida over a decade; additional research is needed to understand these findings.

Diagnosis and Management of Spondylolysis and Spondylolisthesis in Children.

¼: Spondylolysis is defined as a defect of the pars interarticularis, and spondylolisthesis is defined as a slippage of a vertebra relative to the immediately caudal vertebra. ¼: Most cases of spondylolysis and low-grade spondylolisthesis can be treated nonoperatively. Depending on a patient's age, nonoperative treatment may include a thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO), physical therapy, and activity modification. Bracing and physical therapy have been found to be more effective than activity modification alone. ¼: Patients with dysplastic spondylolisthesis are at higher risk for progression and should be monitored with serial radiographs every 6 to 9 months. ¼: Operative management is recommended for symptomatic patients with failure of at least 6 months of nonoperative management or patients with high-grade spondylolisthesis. ¼: Surgical techniques include pars defect repair, reduction, and fusion, which may include posterior-only, anterior-only, or circumferential fusion.

Comparison of 90-day complications and two-year reoperation rates between anterior and posterior interbody fusion for single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Background: For the surgical treatment of single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), patients can be treated with either an anterior or posterior interbody fusion. Prior studies have shown that patients with symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis treated surgically maintain substantially greater pain relief and improvement in function when compared to those treated non-operatively, but no consensus has emerged between which approach results in the best outcomes. Methods: The PearlDiver MARINER database was queried for patients with single-level DS who underwent either an anterior or posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Both populations were compared on multiple outcomes, including reoperation, post-operative complications, and readmission rates at 90 days, as well as rates of reoperation and cauda equina syndrome two-years postoperatively. Results: At 90 days patients who underwent anterior interbody were found to have higher rates of DVT (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.74 - 3.70, p<0.001), ileus (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.25 - 1.64, p<0.001), and readmission (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.38, p<0.001). Patients who underwent posterior interbody fusion were found to have higher rates of revision procedures (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.59 - 0.66, p<0.001), transfusion (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58 - 0.78, p<0.001), acute kidney injury (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 - 0.95, p=0.0046), and cauda equina syndrome (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.40 - 0.69, p<0.001). At 2 years, patients who underwent posterior fusion required revision procedures (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.67 - 0.74, p<0.001) and developed cauda equina syndrome (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 - 0.77, p<0.001) at a higher rate than those who underwent anterior fusion. Conclusions: Patients who underwent anterior interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis were found to have increased rates of DVT, ileus, and were more likely to be readmitted to the hospital within 90 days, while patients who underwent posterior interbody fusion were found to have higher rates of reoperation, transfusion, AKI, and cauda equina syndrome. Increased rates of reoperation and development of cauda equina in the posterior fusion group persisted at 2 years post-operatively.

The accuracy of patient-reported weight prior to total joint arthroplasty and arthroscopy of the lower extremity.

PURPOSE: The accuracy of preoperative patient-reported weight was never evaluated in patients undergoing lower extremity procedures. The purpose of this study was to: (1) compare the disparity between patient-reported and measured weights in patients undergoing lower extremity total joint arthroplasty (LE-TJA) and arthroscopy; and (2) investigate the association between patient-specific factors (patient age, BMI, zip code, and psychiatric comorbidities) and the accuracy of patient-reported weight. METHODS: Preoperative self-reported weights were retrospectively compared to measured weights in 400 LE-TJA and 85 control arthroscopy patients. The difference between reported and measured weights was calculated. Additionally, the percent of accurate reporting within 0.5, 1, and 5 kg ranges of the measured weight was calculated. Outcomes were compared between surgical modalities as well as between patient-specific factors. RESULTS: There was low disparity (p = 0.838) between patient-reported and measured weights among LE-TJA (mean difference 0.18 ± 3.63 kg; p = 0.446) and that of arthroscopy (0.27 ± 4.08 kg; p = 0.129) patients. Additionally, LE-TJA patients were equally likely to report weights accurately within 0.5 kg of the measured weight (74% vs. 71.76%; p = 0.908). LE-TJA and arthroscopy patients had similar reporting accuracy within 1 and 5 kg of the measured weights (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Preoperative patient-reported weights demonstrated acceptable accuracy in both LE-TJA and lower extremity arthroscopic orthopaedic patient populations making it a potentially reliable parameter of preoperative assessment.