Subsidence in Nonexpandable, Single-Plane Expandable, and Dual-Plane Expandable TLIFs A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become a common tool to achieve interbody fusion in lumbar spine surgery while avoiding the time, expense, and morbidity associated with an anterior approach. Nonexpandable (NE) devices have excellent fusion results but are limited to implant size by spinal anatomy; conversely, expandable implants have been associated with increased intraoperative subsidence. Dual-plane expandable (DPE) devices are theorized to have reduced subsidence risk, but DPE cages have not been directly compared to NE and single plane expandable (SPE) implants in vivo. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of patients who underwent TLIF at a single metropolitan academic medical center from 2018 through 2021 was conducted to compare intraoperative subsidence between NE versus SPE or DPE devices. Patients were propensity score matched (PSM) by age and bone density according to implant type. A second PSM cohort comparing DPE with SPE devices was performed. RESULTS: A total of 402 patients underwent PSM with 46 NE and 49 DPE cases matched, and 103 SPE patients were matched with 24 DPE cases. The average age was 59 years with 52.5% female patients. Mean body mass index was 29. Nonexpandable TLIF was the most common device implanted 62%, followed by SPE (26%) and DPE (12.2%). Dual-plane expandable devices had a significantly greater intraoperative subsidence than NE devices (12% vs. 0%). Nonexpandable and SPE devices had significantly larger implant lordosis when compared to DPE (10.93 SPE vs. 6. 17 NE vs. 3.83 DPE). Single plane expandable devices had a significantly greater discrepancy between implant lordosis and interbody level lordosis compared to DPE. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-plane expandable cages are associated with increased intraoperative subsidence compared to NE and SPE implants. Additionally, SPE devices have greater discrepancy between stated implant lordosis and interbody level lordosis compared with DPE devices.

Should pelvic incidence influence realignment strategy? A detailed analysis in adult spinal deformity.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess how various realignment strategies affect mechanical failure and clinical outcomes in pelvic incidence (PI)-stratified cohorts following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: Median and interquartile range statistics were calculated for demographics and surgical details. Further statistical analysis was used to define subsets within PI generating significantly different rates of mechanical failure. These subsets of PI were further analyzed as subcohorts for the outcomes and effects of realignment within each subcohort. Multivariate logistic regression analysis controlling for baseline frailty and lumbar lordosis (LL; L1-S1) analyzed the association of age-adjusted realignment and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) strategies with the incidence of mechanical failure and clinical improvement within PI-stratified groups. RESULTS: A parabolic relationship between PI and mechanical failure was noted, whereas patients with either < 51° (n = 174, 39.1% of cohort) or > 63° (n = 114, 25.6% of cohort) of PI generated higher rates of mechanical failure (18.0% and 20.0%, respectively) and lower rates of good outcome (80.3% and 77.6%, respectively) than those with moderate PI (51°-63°). Patients with lower PI more often met good outcome criteria when undercorrected in age-adjusted PI-LL mismatch and sagittal age-adjusted score, and those not meeting good outcome criteria were more likely to deteriorate in GAP relative LL from first to final follow-up (OR 13.4, 95% CI 1.3-139.2). In those with moderate PI, patients were more likely to meet good outcome when aligned on the GAP lordosis distribution index (LDI; OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.9-3.3). Patients with higher PI meeting good outcome were more likely to be overcorrected in sagittal vertical axis (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.2) at first follow-up and less likely to be undercorrected in T1 pelvic angle (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9) by final follow-up. When assessing GAP alignment, patients were more likely to meet good outcome when aligned on GAP LDI (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.4-8.9). CONCLUSIONS: There was a parabolic relationship between PI and both mechanical failure and clinical improvement following deformity correction in this study. Understanding the associations between this fixed parameter and poor outcomes can aid the surgeon in strategical planning when seeking to realign ASD.

Durability of substantial clinical benefit leading to optimal outcomes in adult spinal deformity corrective surgery: a minimum 5-year analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate factors associated with the long-term durability of outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients. METHODS: Operative ASD patients fused from at least L1 to the sacrum with baseline (BL) to 5-year (5Y) follow-up were included. Substantial clinical benefit (SCB) in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS)-back, NRS-leg, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22r scores and physical component score were assessed on the basis of previously published values. Factors were evaluated on the basis of meeting optimal outcomes (OO) at 2 years (2+) and 5 years (5+). Furthermore, 2+ patients were isolated and evaluated on the basis of meeting OO at 5 years (2+5+) or not at 5 years (2+5-). OO were defined as follows: no reoperation, major mechanical failure, proximal junctional failure, and meeting either 1) SCB in terms of ODI score (decrease > 18.8) or 2) ODI < 15 and SRS-22r total > 4.5. RESULTS: In total, 330 ASD patients met the inclusion criteria, with 45.5% meeting SCB for ODI at 2 years, while 46.0% met SCB at 5 years; 79% of those who achieved 2-year (2Y) SCB went on to achieve 5Y SCB. This rate was lower for OO, with 41% achieving 2Y OO (2+), while 37% met 5Y OO (5+) and 80% of 2+ patients had durable outcomes until 5+ (32% of the total cohort). Of the patient factors, frailty was significantly different among groups at 2 years, while comorbidity burden was significantly different at 5 years and the combination thereof differed in those with durable outcomes. Those who regained their level of activity postoperatively had 4 times higher odds of maintaining OO from 2 years to 5 years (p < 0.05). Osteoporosis rates, although equivocal at BL, were higher at the last follow-up in those who met 2Y OO but failed to meet 5Y OO. The odds of achieving OO at 5 years in 2+ patients decreased by 47% for each additional comorbidity and decreased by 74% in those who had lower-extremity paresthesias at BL (both p < 0.05). Controlling for patient factors and BL disability found fewer levels fused, decreased correction of sagittal vertical axis, and increased correction of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch to be predictive of maintaining 2Y OO until 5 years (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SCB was met in 46% of ASD patients at 5 years. The durability of OO was seen in a third of patients until 5 years postoperatively. Higher rates of medical complications were seen in those who failed to achieve and maintain OO until 5 years. Frailty and comorbidity burden were significant factors associated with the achievement and durability of OO until 5 years.

Is It Possible for Patients with Early Distal Junctional Kyphosis following Adult Cervical Deformity Corrective Surgery to Achieve Similar Outcomes to Their Unaffected Counterparts? An Analysis of Recovery Kinetics.

Background: Distal junctional kyphosis (DJK) is a concerning complication for surgeons performing cervical deformity (CD) surgery. Patients sustaining such complications may demonstrate worse recovery profiles compared to their unaffected peers. Methods: DJK was defined as a >10° change in kyphosis between LIV and LIV-2, and a >10° index angle. CD patients were grouped according to the development of DJK by 3M vs. no DJK development. Means comparison tests and regression analyses used to analyze differences between groups and arelevant associations. Results: A total of 113 patients were included (17 DJK, 96 non-DJK). DJK patients were more sagittally malaligned preop, and underwent more osteotomies and combined approaches. Postop, DJK patients experienced more dysphagia (17.7% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.034). DJK patients remained more malaligned in cSVA through the 2-year follow-up. DJK patients exhibited worse patient-reported outcomes from 3M to 1Y, but these differences subsided when following patients through to 2Y; they also exhibited worse NDI (65.3 vs. 35.3) and EQ5D (0.68 vs. 0.79) scores at 1Y (both p < 0.05), but these differences had subsided by 2Y. Conclusions: Despite patients exhibiting similar preoperative health-related quality of life metrics, patients who developed early DJK exhibited worse postoperative neck disability following the development of their DJK. These differences subsided by the 2-year follow-up, highlighting the prolonged but eventually successful course of many DJK patients after CD surgery.

Assessing the Impact of Radiographic Realignment on Adult Spinal Deformity Patients with Sacroiliac Joint Pain at Presentation.

Background: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with concurrent sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain are susceptible to worse postoperative outcomes. There is scarce literature on the impact of ASD realignment surgery on SIJ pain. Methods: Patients undergoing ASD realignment surgery were included and stratified by the presence of SIJ pain at the baseline (SIJP+) or SIJ pain absence (SIJP-). Mean comparison tests via ANOVA were used to assess baseline differences between both cohorts. Multivariable regression analyses analyzed factors associated with SIJ pain resolution/persistence, factoring in BMI, frailty, disability, and deformity. Results: A total of 464 patients were included, with 30.8% forming the SIJP+ cohort. At the baseline (BL), SIJP+ had worse disability scores, more severe deformity, higher BMI, higher frailty scores, and an increased magnitude of lower limb compensation. SIJP+ patients had higher mechanical complication (14.7 vs. 8.2%, p = 0.024) and reoperation rates (32.4 vs. 20.2%, p = 0.011) at 2 years. SIJP+ patients who subsequently underwent SI fusion achieved disability score outcomes similar to those of their SIJ- counterparts. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that SIJP+ patients who were aligned in the GAP lordosis distribution index were more likely to report symptom resolution at six weeks (OR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.02-2.37, p = 0.039), 1 year (OR 3.21, 2.49-5.33), and 2 years (OR 3.43, 2.41-7.12). SIJP- patients who did not report symptom resolution by 1 year and 2 years were more likely to demonstrate PI-LL > 5° (OR 1.36, 1.07-2.39, p = 0.045) and SVA > 20 mm (OR 1.62, 1.24-1.71 p = 0.017). Conclusions: SIJ pain in ASD patients may result in worsened pain and disability at presentation. Symptom resolution may be achieved in affected patients by adequate postoperative lumbar lordosis restoration.

The Impact of Peri-operative Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols on Outcomes Following Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols on peri-operative course in adult cervical deformity (ACD) corrective surgery. METHODS: Patients ≥18 yrs with complete pre-(BL) and up to 2-year (2Y) radiographic and clinical outcome data were stratified by enrollment in an ERAS protocol that commenced in 2020. Differences in demographics, clinical outcomes, radiographic alignment targets, peri-operative factors and complication rates were assessed via means comparison analysis. Logistic regression analysed differences while controlling for baseline disability and deformity. RESULTS: We included 220 patients (average age 58.1 ± 11.9 years, 48% female). 20% were treated using the ERAS protocol (ERAS+). Disability was similar between both groups at baseline. When controlling for baseline disability and myelopathy, ERAS- patients were more likely to utilize opioids than ERAS+ (OR 1.79, 95% CI: 1.45-2.50, P = .016). Peri-operatively, ERAS+ had significantly lower operative time (P < .021), lower EBL (583.48 vs 246.51, P < .001), and required significantly lower doses of propofol intra-operatively than ERAS- patients (P = .020). ERAS+ patients also reported lower mean LOS overall (4.33 vs 5.84, P = .393), and were more likely to be discharged directly to home (χ2(1) = 4.974, P = .028). ERAS+ patients were less likely to require steroids after surgery (P = .045), were less likely to develop neuromuscular complications overall (P = .025), and less likely experience venous complications or be diagnosed with venous disease post-operatively (P = .025). CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced recovery after surgery programs in ACD surgery demonstrate significant benefit in terms of peri-operative outcomes for patients.

The Evolution of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Assessing the Clinical Benefits of Developments Within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols in Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of evolving Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols on outcomes after cervical deformity (CD) surgery. BACKGROUND: ERAS can help accelerate patient recovery and assist hospitals in maximizing the incentives of bundled payment models while maintaining high-quality patient care. However, there remains a paucity of literature assessing how developments have impacted outcomes after adult CD surgery. METHODS: Patients with operative CD 18 years or older with pre-baseline and 2 years (2Y) postoperative data, who underwent ERAS protocols, were stratified by increasing implantation of ERAS components: (1) early (multimodal pain program), (2) intermediate (early protocol + paraspinal blocks, early ambulation), and (3) late (early/intermediate protocols + comprehensive prehabilitation). Differences in demographics, clinical outcomes, radiographic alignment targets, perioperative factors, and complication rates were assessed through Bonferroni-adjusted means comparison analysis. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients were included (59.4 ± 11.7 y, 45% females, 28.8 ± 6.0 kg/m 2 ). Of these patients, 38.9% were considered "early," 36.6% were "intermediate," and 24.4% were "late." Perioperatively, rates of intraoperative complications were lower in the late group ( P = 0.036). Postoperatively, discharge disposition differed significantly between cohorts, with late patients more likely to be discharged to home versus early or intermediate cohorts [χ 2 (2) = 37.973, P < 0.001]. In terms of postoperative disability recovery, intermediate and late patients demonstrated incrementally improved 6 W modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scores ( P = 0.004), and late patients maintained significantly higher mean Euro-QOL 5-Dimension Questionnaire and modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scores by 1 year ( P < 0.001, P = 0.026). By 2Y, cohorts demonstrated incrementally increasing SWAL-QOL scores (all domains P < 0.028) domain scores versus early or intermediate cohorts. By 2Y, incrementally decreasing reoperation was observed in early versus intermediate versus late cohorts ( P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that patients enrolled in an evolving ERAS program demonstrate incremental improvement in preoperative optimization and candidate selection, greater likelihood of discharge to home, decreased postoperative disability and dysphasia burden, and decreased likelihood of intraoperative complications and reoperation rates.

Assessing the Economic Benefits of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocols in Adult Cervical Deformity Patients: Is the Initial Additive Cost of Protocols Offset by Clinical Gains?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the financial impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols and cost-effectiveness in cervical deformity corrective surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospective CD database. BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) can help accelerate patient recovery and assist hospitals in maximizing the incentives of bundled payment models while maintaining high-quality patient care. However, the economic benefit of ERAS protocols, nor the heterogeneous components that make up such protocols, has not been established. METHODS: Operative CD patients ≥18 y with complete pre-(BL) and up to 2-year(2Y) postop radiographic/HRQL data were stratified by enrollment in Standard-of-Care ERAS beginning in 2020. Differences in demographics, clinical outcomes, radiographic alignment targets, perioperative factors, and complication rates were assessed through means comparison analysis. Costs were calculated using PearlDiver database estimates from Medicare pay scales. QALY was calculated using NDI mapped to SF6D using validated methodology with a 3% discount rate to account for a residual decline in life expectancy. RESULTS: In all, 127 patients were included (59.07±11.16 y, 54% female, 29.08±6.43 kg/m 2 ) in the analysis. Of these patients, 54 (20.0%) received the ERAS protocol. Per cost analysis, ERAS+ patients reported a lower mean total 2Y cost of 35049 USD compared with ERAS- patients at 37553 ( P <0.001). Furthermore, ERAS+ patients demonstrated lower cost of reoperation by 2Y ( P <0.001). Controlling for age, surgical invasiveness, and deformity per BL TS-CL, ERAS+ patients below 70 years old were significantly more likely to achieve a cost-effective outcome by 2Y compared with their ERAS- counterparts (OR: 1.011 [1.001-1.999, P =0.048]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing ERAS protocols experience improved cost-effectiveness and reduced total cost by 2Y post-operatively. Due to the potential economic benefit of ERAS for patients incorporation of ERAS into practice for eligible patients should be considered.

Achievement and Maintenance of Optimal Alignment After Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery: A 5-Year Outcome Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess factors contributing to optimal radiographic outcomes. METHODS: Operative adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with baseline and 5-year (5Y) data were included. Optimal alignment (O) was defined as improving in at least 1 Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab modifier without worsening in any Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab modifier. A robust outcome was defined as having optimal alignment 2 years (2Y) post operation that was maintained at 5Y. Predictors of robust outcomes were identified using multivariate regression analysis, with a conditional inference tree for continuous variables. RESULTS: Two-hundred and ninety-seven ASD patients met inclusion criteria. Most patients (77.4%) met O at 6W, which decreased to 54.2% at 2Y. The majority of patients (89.4%) that met O at 2Y went on to meet radiographic durability at 5Y (48.5% of total cohort). Rates of junctional failure were higher in O2+5- compared with O2+5- (P = 0.013), with reoperation rates of 17.2% due to loss of alignment. Multivariable regression identified the following independent predictors of optimal alignment at 5Y in those that had O at 2Y: inadequate correction of pelvic tilt and overcorrection of the difference between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (P < 0.05). Increased age, body mass index, and invasiveness were the most significant nonradiographic predictors for not achieving 5Y durability (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The durability of optimal alignment after ASD corrective surgery was seen in about half of the patients at 5Y. While the majority of patients at 2Y maintained their radiographic outcomes at 5Y, major contributors to loss of alignment included junctional failure and adjacent region compensation, with only a minority of patients losing correction through the existing construct. The reoperation rate for loss of alignment was 17.2%. Loss of alignment requiring reoperation had a detrimental effect on 5Y clinical outcomes.

Does the presence of cervical deformity in patients with baseline mild myelopathy increase operative urgency in adult cervical spinal surgery? A retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess whether delaying surgical management of cervical deformity (CD) in patients with concomitant mild myelopathy increases the risk of suboptimal outcomes. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years who had a baseline diagnosis of mild myelopathy with baseline and up to 2 years of postoperative data were assessed. Patients were categorized as having CD (CD+) or not (CD-) at baseline. Patients with symptoms of myelopathy for more than 1 year after the initial visit prior to surgery were considered delayed. Clinical and radiographic data were assessed using means comparison analyses. Multivariate regression analysis assessed correlations between increasing time to surgery and peri- and postoperative outcomes adjusted for baseline age and frailty score. Backstep logistic regression analysis assessed the risk of complications or reoperation, while controlling for baseline T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (TS-CL). RESULTS: One hundred six patients were included (mean age 58.11 ± 11.97 years, 48% female, mean BMI 29.13 ± 6.89). Of the patients with baseline mild myelopathy, 22 (20.8%) were CD- while 84 (79.2%) were CD+. Overall, 9.5% of patients were considered to have delayed surgery. Linear regression revealed that both CD- and CD+ patients were more likely to require reoperation when there was more time between the initial visit and surgical admission (p < 0.001). Additionally, an adjusted logistic regression indicated that CD+ patients who had a greater length of time to surgery had a higher likelihood for major complications (p < 0.001). Conversely, CD+ patients who were operated on within 30 days of the initial visit had a significantly lower risk for a major complication (OR 0.901, 95% CI 0.889-1.105, p = 0.043), and a lower risk for reoperation (OR 0.954, 95% CI 0.877-1.090, p = 0.043), while controlling for the severity of deformity based on baseline TS-CL. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study demonstrate that a delay in surgery after the initial visit significantly increases the risk for major complications and reoperation in patients with CD with associated mild baseline myelopathy. Early operative treatment in this patient population may lower the risk of postoperative complications.

Post-Operative Physical Therapy Following Cervical Spine Surgery: Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Introduction Post-operative physical therapy (PT) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery is often performed to improve a patient's functional ability and reduce neck pain. However, current literature evaluating the benefits of post-operative PT using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is limited and remains inconclusive. Here we compare post-operative improvement between patients who did and did not undergo formal PT after ACDF using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. Methods A retrospective observational study examining patients who underwent one- or two-level primary ACDF or cervical disc replacement (CDR) at an academic orthopedic hospital and who had PROMIS scores recorded pre-operatively and through two-year follow-up. Patients were stratified according to whether or not they attended formal postoperative PT. PROMIS scores and patient demographics were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher's exact test, chi-square test of independence, and Student's t-test within and between cohorts. Results Two hundred and twenty patients were identified. Demographic differences between PT and no PT groups include age (PT 54.1 vs. no PT 49.5, p=0.005) and BMI (PT 28.1 vs. no PT 29.8, p=0.028). The only significant difference in post-operative PROMIS scores was in physical health scores at three months post-operatively (no PT 43.9 vs. PT 39.1, p=0.008). Physical health scores improved from baseline to one-year follow-up in both cohorts (PT +3.5, p=0.025; no PT +6.6, p=0.008). There were no significant differences when comparing improvements in physical health scores between groups at six months and one year. Conclusion In conclusion, there was no significance to support the benefits of post-operative PT as measured by PROMIS scores. No significant differences in PROMIS were observed between groups from pre-operative baseline scores to six-month and one-year follow-ups.

Reoperation Rates Due to Adjacent Segment Disease Following Primary 1 to 2-Level Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of the approach of the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF; open vs . minimally invasive (MIS)] on reoperation rates due to ASD at 2 to 4-year follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Adjacent segment degeneration is a complication of lumbar fusion surgery, which may progress to adjacent segment disease (ASD) and cause debilitating postoperative pain potentially requiring additional operative management for relief. MIS TLIF surgery has been introduced to minimize this complication but the impact on ASD incidence is unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For a cohort of patients undergoing 1 or 2-level primary TLIF between 2013 and 2019, patient demographics and follow-up outcomes were collected and compared among patients who underwent open versus MIS TLIF using the Mann-Whitney U test, Fischer exact test, and binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria. There was a significant difference in revision rates due to ASD between MIS and open TLIFs at 2 (5.8% vs . 15.4%, P =0.021) and 3 (8% vs . 23.2%, P =0.03) year follow-up, with open TLIFs demonstrating significantly higher revision rates. The surgical approach was the only independent predictor of reoperation rates at both 2 and 3-year follow-ups (2 yr, P =0.009; 3 yr, P =0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Open TLIF was found to have a significantly higher rate of reoperation due to ASD compared with the MIS approach. In addition, the surgical approach (MIS vs . open) seems to be an independent predictor of reoperation rates.

The History of Tourniquet Usage and Modern Utilization in Total Knee Arthroplasty.

The usage of tourniquets in orthopedic surgery is commonplace. This review will describe the history of tourniquet usage throughout medicine and trace this device's evolution to the modern device used today. Several basic principles of tourniquet usage will also be explored, debunking common myths regarding upper time-limits of tourniquet inflation, the ideal pressure of inflation, and tourniquet usage in patients with pre-existing vascular diseases. Additionally, special attention is paid to the utility of lower extremity tourniquets in total knee arthroplasty with regards to cementation, blood loss, pain control, and functional outcomes. Finally, the future of tourniquet usage is discussed.

How Do Patients With Predominant Neck Pain Improve After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy?

BACKGROUND: The presence of predominant pain in the arm vs the neck as a predictor of postoperative outcomes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been seldom reported; therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with predominant neck pain improve after surgery compared to patients with predominant arm pain or those with mixed symptoms in patients undergoing ACDF for radiculopathy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent ACDF at a single center from 2016 to 2018. Patients were split into groups based on preoperative neck and arm pain scores: neck (N) pain dominant group (visual analog scale [VAS] neck ≥ VAS arm by 1.0 point); neutral group (VAS neck < VAS arm by 1.0 point); or arm (A) pain dominant group (VAS arm ≥ VAS neck by 1.0 point), using a threshold difference of 1.0 point. Subsequently, individuals were substratified into 2 groups based on the arm to neck pain ratio (ANR): non-arm pain dominant defined as ANR ≤1.0 and arm pain dominant (APD) defined as ANR >1.0. Patient-reported outcome measurements including Neck Disability Index (NDI), Physical Component Score-12, and Mental Component Score (MCS-12) were compared between groups. RESULTS: No significant differences between groups when stratifying patients using a threshold difference of 1.0 point. When stratifying patients using the ANR, those in the APD group had significantly higher postoperative MCS-12 (P = 0.008) and NDI (P = 0.011) scores. In addition, the APD group showed a greater magnitude of improvement for MCS-12 and NDI scores (P = 0.043 and P = 0.038, respectively). Multiple linear regression showed that the A and the APD groups were both independent predictors of improvement in NDI. CONCLUSION: Patients with dominant arm pain showed significantly greater improvement in terms of MCS-12 and NDI scores compared to patients with dominant neck pain. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To compare the impact of ACDF on arm and neck pain in the context of cervical radiculopathy using patient-reported outcome measures as an objective measurement.

Patient Satisfaction and Interest in Telemedicine Visits Following Total Knee and Hip Replacement Surgery.

Introduction: Telemedicine is the practice of caring for patients remotely when the patient and provider are not physically present at the same location. Within orthopedic surgery, telemedicine offers care without the typical obstacles of an in-person appointment such as difficulty ambulating following surgery and patient wait times. In this study, we evaluated patient interest and satisfaction in postoperative telemedicine visits following hip or knee arthroplasty surgery. Materials and Methods: Patients were offered either a traditional in-person or a remote telemedicine postoperative visit following surgery. Patients were asked to complete a satisfaction survey following their postoperative visit regarding their experience. Patient-survey responses as well as patient-reported outcome metrics were captured using a mobile and web-based electronic patient rehabilitation application. Results: A total of 766 patients were included in this study with 360 offered postoperative telemedicine visits and 402 offered traditional in-person visits. Two hundred fifty-nine patients reported satisfaction levels with their telemedicine visit, with 58.3% of patients characterizing their feelings with the visit as "extremely satisfied," 32.0% as "satisfied," 8.9% as "neutral," 0.3% as "dissatisfied," and 0.3% as "extremely dissatisfied." A total of 713 patients reported how the COVID-19 pandemic effected their feelings toward telemedicine with 12.9% of patients characterizing the affect as "extremely positively," 33.1% of patients as "positively," 48.9% of patients as "neutral," 3.6% of patients as "negatively," and 1.4% of patients as "extremely negatively." There were no significant differences in the change between preoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores/Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement, or Veterans RAND 12 Physical and Mental components and these values at 12 weeks follow-up and 1-year follow-up, respectively, in patients who had telemedicine visits versus those who had traditional in-person visits. Discussion: The results of this study demonstrate that the patients who decided to have a telemedicine visit during their postoperative visit were satisfied with their experience. Overall, COVID-19 had a positive influence on patient's feelings toward telemedicine visits.

Management of Acute Subaxial Trauma and Spinal Cord Injury in Professional Collision Athletes.

Sports-related acute cervical trauma and spinal cord injury (SCI) represent a rare but devastating potential complication of collision sport injuries. Currently, there is debate on appropriate management protocols and return-to-play guidelines in professional collision athletes following cervical trauma. While cervical muscle strains and sprains are among the most common injuries sustained by collision athletes, the life-changing effects of severe neurological sequelae (ie, quadriplegia and paraplegia) from fractures and SCIs require increased attention and care. Appropriate on-field management and subsequent transfer/workup at an experienced trauma/SCI center is necessary for optimal patient care, prevention of injury exacerbation, and improvement in outcomes. This review discusses the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, immediate/long-term management, and current return-to-play recommendations of athletes who suffer cervical trauma and SCI.

Does the Size or Location of Lumbar Disc Herniation Predict the Need for Operative Treatment?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine whether the absolute size (mm2), relative size (% canal compromise), or location of a single-level, lumbar disc herniation (LDH) on axial and sagittal cuts of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were predictive of eventual surgical intervention. METHODS: MRIs of 89 patients were reviewed, and patients were split into groups based on type of management received (34 nonoperative vs 55 microdiscectomy). Radiographic characteristics-including size of disc herniation (mm2), size of spinal canal (mm2), location of herniation on axial (central, paracentral, foraminal) and sagittal (disc level, suprapedicle, pedicle, infrapedicle) planes, and type of herniation (bulge, protrusion, extrusion, sequestration)-were measured by 2 independent, orthopedic spine fellows and compared between groups via univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The operative group showed a significantly higher percentage of canal compromise (39.5% vs 31.1%, P = .001) compared to the nonoperative group. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed higher odds of eventual operative intervention for a disc protrusion (odds ratio [OR] 6.30 [1.99, 19.86], P = .002) or disc extrusion (OR 11.5 [1.63, 81.2], P = .014) for Rater 1 and a higher odds of eventual surgical management for a paracentral location for both Rater 1 and Rater 2 (OR = 3.39 [1.25, 9.22], P = .017, and OR = 5.46 [1.77, 16.8], P = .003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Disc herniations in a paracentral location were more likely to undergo operative treatment than those more centrally located, on axial MRI views.

The impact of the lower instrumented level on outcomes in cervical deformity surgery.

BACKGROUND: The lower instrumented vertebrae (LIVs) in cervical deformity (CD) constructs may have varying effects on patient outcomes that are still poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to compare outcomes in CD patients undergoing instrumented correction according to the relation of LIV with primary driver (PD). METHODS: Patients who met radiographic criteria for CD were included in the study. Patients were stratified by PD of deformity: cervical (C) through AMES classification (TS-CL >20 or cervical sagittal vertical axis >40) and thoracic (T) through hyper/hypokyphosis (TK) from T4-T12 (60 < TK < 40). Patients were further stratified by LIV in relation to curve apex (above/below). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified group differences in postoperative health-related quality-of-life and distal junctional kyphosis (DJK) (>10° LIV and LIV + 2) rate up to 1 year. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were analyzed. Twenty-one patients had a C-PD and 41 had a T-PD by definition. 100% of C-PDs had LIVs below CL apex, while 9.2% of T-PDs had LIVs below (caudal) to TK apex and 90.8% had LIVs above TK apex. By 1 year, C patients trended lower Neck Disability Index (NDI) (21.9 vs. 29.0, P = 0.245), lower numeric rating scales neck pain (4.2 vs. 5.1, P = 0.358), and significantly higher EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire Visual Analog Scale (69.2 vs. 52.4, P = 0.040). When T patients with LIVs below TK apex were excluded, remaining T patients with LIV above apex had significantly higher 1-year NDI than C patients (37.5 vs. 21.9, P = .05). T patients also trended higher rates of postoperative DJK than C (19.5% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.119). CONCLUSIONS: Stopping before apex was more common in patients with a primary thoracic driver (T) and associated with deleterious effects. Primary cervical driver (C) tended to have LIVs inclusive of CL apex with lower rates of DJK.

Do Patients with Back Pain-Dominant Symptoms Improve After Lumbar Surgery for Radiculopathy or Claudication?

BACKGROUND: Currently, few studies have examined whether patients with back or leg pain-predominant symptoms fare better clinically after lumbar spine surgery; therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with back pain-dominant symptoms improved to a similar degree as patients with mixed or leg pain-dominant symptoms after lumbar surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single academic center, in which patients were stratified into three groups: (1) back pain-dominant group (B) (visual analog score [VAS] back - VAS leg ≥ 1.0 point), (2) neutral group (N) (VAS back - VAS leg < 1.0 point), or (3) leg pain-dominant group (L) (VAS leg - VAS back ≥ 1.0 point), using a VAS threshold difference of 1.0 point. As a secondary analysis, the VAS leg-to-back pain (LBR) ratio was used to further stratify patients: (1) nonleg pain-dominant (NLPD) group (LBR ≤ 1.0) or (2) leg pain-dominant (LPD) group (LBR > 1.0). Patient outcomes, including physical component score of the short form-12 survey (PCS-12), mental component score of the short form-12 survey (MCS-12), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), were identified and compared between groups using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in preoperative, postoperative, or delta scores for PCS-12 or ODI scores between groups. In patients undergoing decompression surgery, those with back pain-dominant or mixed symptoms (B, N, or NLPD groups) did not improve with respect to MCS-12 scores after surgery (P > .05), and those with leg pain-dominant symptoms (LPD group) had greater delta MCS-12 scores (P = .046) and greater recovery rates (P = .035). Multiple linear regression did not find LPD to be an independent predictor of PCS-12 or ODI scores. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing lumbar decompression surgery and leg pain-dominant symptoms noted a greater improvement in MCS-12 scores; however, there were no differences in PCS-12 or ODI scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients undergoing lumbar decompression surgery demonstrate no major clinically significant differences when split up by pain-dominance groups.