The Postoperative Airway Compromise Score-First Steps to Developing a Postoperative Tool for the Assessment of Upper Airway-Related Complications Following Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Acute upper airway compromise is a rare but catastrophic complication after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. This study aims to develop a score to identify patients at risk of acute postoperative airway compromise (PAC). METHODS: Potential risk factors for acute PAC were selected by a modified Delphi process. Ten patients with acute PAC were identified of 1466 patients who underwent elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion between July 2014 and May 2019. A comparison group was created by a randomized selection process (non-PAC group). Factors associated with PAC and a P value of < 0.10 were entered into a logistic regression model and coefficients contributed to each risk factor's overall score. Calibration of the model was evaluated using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. Quantitative discrimination was calculated, and the final model was internally validated with bootstrap sampling. RESULTS: We identified 18 potential risk factors from our Delphi process, of which 6 factors demonstrated a significant association with airway compromise: age >65 years, current smoking status, American Society of Anesthesiologists class >2, history of a bleeding disorder, surgery of upper subaxial cervical spine (above C4), and duration of surgery >179 minutes. The final prediction model included 5 predictors with very strong performance characteristics. These 5 factors formed the PAC score, with a range from 0 to 100. A score of 20 yielded the greatest balance of sensitivity (80%) and specificity (88%). CONCLUSIONS: The acute PAC score demonstrates strong performance characteristics. The PAC score might help identify patients at risk of upper airway compromise caused by surgical site abnormalities.

Ongoing decision-making dilemma for treatment of de novo spinal infections: a comparison of the Spinal Infection Treatment Evaluation Score with the Spinal Instability Spondylodiscitis Score and Spine Instability Neoplastic Score.

OBJECTIVE: De novo spinal infections are an increasing medical problem. The decision-making for surgical or nonsurgical treatment for de novo spinal infections is often a non-evidence-based process and commonly a case-by-case decision by single physicians. A scoring system based on the latest evidence might help improve the decision-making process compared with other purely radiology-based scoring systems or the judgment of a single senior physician. METHODS: Patients older than 18 years with an infection of the spine who underwent nonsurgical or surgical treatment between 2019 and 2021 were identified. Clinical data for neurological status, pain, and existing comorbidities were gathered and transferred to an anonymous spreadsheet. Patients without an MR image and a CT scan of the affected spine region were excluded from the investigation. A multidisciplinary expert panel used the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), Spinal Instability Spondylodiscitis Score (SISS), and Spinal Infection Treatment Evaluation Score (SITE Score), previously developed by the authors' group, on every clinical case. Each physician of the expert panel gave an individual treatment recommendation for surgical or nonsurgical treatment for each patient. Treatment recommendations formed the expert panel opinion, which was used to calculate predictive validities for each score. RESULTS: A total of 263 patients with spinal infections were identified. After the exclusion of doubled patients, patients without de novo infections, or those without CT and MRI scans, 123 patients remained for the investigation. Overall, 70.70% of patients were treated surgically and 29.30% were treated nonoperatively. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the SITE Score, SINS, and SISS were 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.95, p < 0.01), 0.65 (95% CI 0.91-0.83, p < 0.01), and 0.80 (95% CI 0.91-0.89, p < 0.01). In comparison with the expert panel decision, the SITE Score reached a sensitivity of 96.97% and a specificity of 81.90% for all included patients. For potentially unstable and unstable lesions, the SISS and the SINS yielded sensitivities of 84.42% and 64.07%, respectively, and specificities of 31.16% and 56.52%, respectively. The SITE Score showed higher overall sensitivity with 97.53% and a higher specificity for patients with epidural abscesses (75.00%) compared with potentially unstable and unstable lesions for the SINS and the SISS. The SITE Score showed a significantly higher agreement for the definitive treatment decision regarding the expert panel decision, compared with the decision by a single physician for patients with spondylodiscitis, discitis, or spinal osteomyelitis. CONCLUSIONS: The SITE Score shows high sensitivity and specificity regarding the treatment recommendation by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The SITE Score shows higher predictive validity compared with radiology-based scoring systems or a single physician and demonstrates a high validity for patients with epidural abscesses.

Effects on gait kinematics, pedobarography, functional and subjective results after isolated chopart injury.

BACKGROUND: This study analysed changes in gait and pedobarography and subjective and functional outcomes after isolated Chopart joint injury. METHODS: The results of 14 patients were reviewed. Kinematic 3D gait analysis, comparative bilateral electromyography (EMG) and pedobarography were performed. RESULTS: On the injured side, the 3D gait analysis showed a significantly increased internal rotation and decreased external rotation of the hip and significantly decreased adduction and decreased range of motion (ROM) for the ankle. On the healthy side, the pedobarography revealed a significantly increased mean force in the forefoot, an increased peak maximum force and an increased maximum pressure in the metatarsal. When standing, significantly more weight was placed on the healthy side. The EMG measurements showed no significant differences between the healthy and injured legs. CONCLUSIONS: After isolated Chopart injuries, significant changes in gait and pedobarography can be seen over the long term.

COVID-19 Vaccine Related Cervical Radiculitis and Parsonage-Turner Syndrome: Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Parsonage-Turner Syndrome, or neuralgic amyotrophy, is an acute-onset upper limb and shoulder girdle palsy that can occur in a post-viral, post-surgical or idiopathic setting. There have also been some reported cases of the syndrome occurring following vaccinations. The pathophysiology of neuralgic amyotrophy is not completely understood and many of the commonly used diagnostic imaging modalities we use to try and diagnose this syndrome are inaccurate and misleading. We present the case of a 40-year-old gentleman who presented with acute onset burning pain and fasciculations in his right upper extremity following vaccination with the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. His symptoms progressed to weakness in isolated muscle groups with electromyographic evidence of decreased nerve conduction. MRI of the cervical spine demonstrated multilevel central and foraminal stenosis, suggesting a diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. The patient underwent a C4-5/C5-6 and C6-7 laminoforaminotomy and tolerated the procedure well. Post-operatively, the patient has experienced gradual symptom improvement with residual right triceps and pectoralis muscle weakness as well as paresthesias of the right elbow and forearm. Parsonage-Turner Syndrome is a brachial plexus palsy that can affect one or multiple branches of the brachial plexus. It causes acute-onset pain and weakness, and the diagnosis can be difficult to make with the commonly used diagnostic imaging methods. We reviewed other case reports about neuralgic amyotrophy following vaccinations as well as the current literature on more accurate diagnostic imaging modalities that may help our diagnosis and understanding of the pathophysiology of this condition.

Posterior pelvic ring injuries, lumbosacral junction instabilities and stabilization techniques for spinopelvic dissociation: a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: From transiliac Harrington rods to minimally invasive (MIS) percutaneous 3D-navigated transsacral-transiliac screw (TTS) fixation, concepts of fixation methods in pelvic injuries with spinopelvic dissociation (SPD) are steadily redefined. This narrative review examines the literature of recent years regarding surgical treatment options and trends in SPD, outlining risks and benefits of each treatment option and addressing biomechanical aspects of sacral injuries and common classification systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search on the search across relevant online databases was conducted. As a scale for quality assessment, the SANRA-scoring system was taken into account. RESULTS: Sacral Isler type 1 injuries of the LPJ in U- and H-type fractures are frequently treated with stand-alone TTS. Fractures with higher instability (Isler types 2 and 3) require unilateral or bilateral LPF, subject to side involvement, as a buttressing construct, or triangular fixation as additional compression and neutralization, determined by fracture radiation. A more comprehensive classification from which to derive stabilization options is provided by the 2023 301SPD classification. MIS techniques are on the rise and offer shorter OR time, less blood loss, fewer infections, and fewer wound complications. It is advisable to implement MIS techniques as much as possible, as long as decompression is not required and closed fracture reduction succeeds satisfactorily. CONCLUSION: SPD is characteristic of severe injuries, mostly in polytraumatized patients. The complication rates are decreasing due to the increasing adaptation of MIS techniques.

Cage subsidence-A multifactorial matter!

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study OBJECTIVE: Wider cages are associated with improved decompression and reduced subsidence, but variation in cage physical properties limits consistent outcome analysis after thoracolumbar interbody fusion. This study investigated cage subsidence and its relationship to lateral and posterior approaches with a focus on the hypothesis that the larger surface area of lateral cages results in lower subsidence rates. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed 194 patients who underwent interbody fusion between 2016 and 2019 with a primary outcome of cage subsidence. Secondary outcomes were cage distribution (patients, approaches, expandability), cage dimensions, t­scores, length of hospital stay, blood loss, surgical time, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch. RESULTS: Medical records were reviewed for 194 patients receiving 387 cages at 379 disc levels. Subsidence was identified in 35.1% of lateral cages, 40.9% of posterior cages, and 36.3% of all cages. Lower surface area (p = 0.008) and cage expandability were associated with subsidence risk. Lower anteroposterior cage length proved to be a significant factor in the subsidence of posteriorly placed cages (p = 0.007). Osteopenic and osteoporotic patients experienced cage subsidence 36.8% of the time compared to 3.5% of patients with normal t­scores (p = 0.001). Cage subsidence correlated with postoperative deterioration of the PI-LL mismatch (p = 0.03). Patients receiving fusion augmentation with bone morphogenic protein experienced higher fusion rates (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Cage subsidence is a common complication that can significantly impact operative outcomes following thoracolumbar interbody fusion. Low t­scores, smaller surface area, cage expandability, and lower cage length in posterior approaches contribute significantly to cage subsidence.

The impact of knee arthrodesis on gait kinematics, muscle activity and patient-reported outcome.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze gait kinematicsandoutcome parameters after knee arthrodesis. METHODS: Fifteenpatients with a mean follow-up of 5.9 (range0.8-36) years after unilateral knee arthrodesis were included. A 3D gait analysis was performed and compared to a healthy control group of14patients. Comparative electromyography was performed bilaterally at the rectus femoris, vastuslateralis/medialisand tibialis anterior muscles. The assessment further included standardized outcome scores- Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) andShort Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: The 3D analysis showed a significantly shortened stance phase (p = 0.000), an extended swing phase (p = 0.000), and an increased time per step (p = 0.009) for the operated side compared with thenonoperatedside. There were statistically significant differences in the extent of movement of the hips, knees and ankles among the operated andnonoperatedsides and the control group. For the mean EMG measurement, no significant difference was found between the healthy control group and the patients with arthrodesis.The average LEFSscorewas 27.5 ± 10.6out of a maximum of 80 points,and the mean physical total scale and mean emotional total scale scores for the SF-36 were 27.9 ± 8.5and 52.9 ± 9.9, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Arthrodesis of the knee joint causes significant kinematic changes in gait pattern,and patients achieve poor results in subjective and functional outcomes(SF- 36, LEFS).Arthrodesis ensures that the extremities are preserved and can enable walking, but it must be viewed as a severe handicap for the patient.

Rate of progressive healing with a carbon-fiber orthosis in cases of partial union and nonunion after ankle arthrodesis using the Ilizarov external fixator.

BACKGROUND: The Ilizarov fixator is a popular device for treating arthrodesis of the ankle joint in complex situations. However, the therapy can fail, with nonunion or partial union that might not be load stable. There is the possibility of follow-up surgery or extended wearing of the fixator. Full weight bearing with a carbon orthosis remains another treatment option, which has not yet been investigated.The aim of the study was to determine the rate of progress that can be obtained with a carbon orthosis in cases of partial union or nonunion after fixator removal. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study thirty-three patients received a carbon orthosis after fixator removal due to nonunion or partial union. All patients were allowed to walk with the orthosis under full load. The consolidation rate was determined radiologically and compared with the imaging data obtained during the last follow-up. In addition to demographic data, the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure and pain using a numeric rating scale were determined. Nine patients had to be excluded due to insufficient follow-up, and finally n = 24 patients were included in the study. RESULTS: The average duration of fixator use was 21 weeks (range 15-40 weeks), and the total average follow-up after removal of the fixator was 16 months (range 4- 56). For 14 (58.33%) patients, there was a further increase in consolidation with the orthosis after the fixator was removed. CONCLUSION: The results show that if there is only partial union or nonunion, further consolidations can be achieved after the application of a carbon orthosis. In a difficult patient population, using an orthosis should therefore be attempted to avoid unnecessary revision operations.

A novel scoring system concept for de novo spinal infection treatment, the Spinal Infection Treatment Evaluation Score (SITE Score): a proof-of-concept study.

OBJECTIVE: De novo infections of the spine are an increasing healthcare problem. The decision for nonsurgical or surgical treatment is often made case by case on the basis of physician experience, specialty, or practice affiliation rather than evidence-based medicine. To create a more systematic foundation for surgical assessments of de novo spinal infections, the authors applied a formal validation process toward developing a spinal infection scoring system using principles gained from other spine severity scoring systems like the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score, Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score, and AO Spine classification of thoracolumbar injuries. They utilized an expert panel and literature reviews to develop a severity scale called the "Spinal Infection Treatment Evaluation Score" (SITE Score). METHODS: The authors conducted an evidence-based process of combining literature reviews, extracting key elements from previous scoring systems, and obtaining iterative expert panel input while following a formal Delphi process. The resulting basic SITE scoring system was tested on selected de novo spinal infection cases and serially refined by an international multidisciplinary expert panel. Intra- and interobserver reliabilities were calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Fleiss' and Cohen's kappa, respectively. A receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed for cutoff value analysis. The predictive validity was assessed through cross-tabulation analysis. RESULTS: The conceptual SITE scoring system combines the key variables of neurological symptoms, infection location, radiological variables for instability and impingement of neural elements, pain, and patient comorbidities. Ten patients formed the first cohort of de novo spinal infections, which was used to validate the conceptual scoring system. A second cohort of 30 patients with de novo spinal infections, including the 10 patients from the first cohort, was utilized to validate the SITE Score. Mean scores of 6.73 ± 1.5 and 6.90 ± 3.61 were found in the first and second cohorts, respectively. The ICCs for the total score were 0.989 (95% CI 0.975-0.997, p < 0.01) in the first round of scoring system validation, 0.992 (95% CI 0.981-0.998, p < 0.01) in the second round, and 0.961 (95% CI 0.929-0.980, p < 0.01) in the third round. The mean intraobserver reliability was 0.851 ± 0.089 in the third validation round. The SITE Score yielded a sensitivity of 97.77% ± 3.87% and a specificity of 95.53% ± 3.87% in the last validation round for the panel treatment decision. CONCLUSIONS: The SITE scoring concept showed statistically meaningful reliability parameters. Hopefully, this effort will provide a foundation for a future evidence-based decision aid for treating de novo spinal infections. The SITE Score showed promising inter- and intraobserver reliability. It could serve as a helpful tool to guide physicians' therapeutic decisions in managing de novo spinal infections and help in comparison studies to better understand disease severity and outcomes.

An Assessment of the Safety of Surgery and Hardware Placement in de-novo Spinal Infections. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives were outcomes comparison of instrumented surgery used for de-novo spinal infections in terms of infection recurrence, reoperations, primary failure, mortality, and length of stay relative to non-instrumented surgery. Secondary objectives were outcomes for surgical and non-surgical treatment of de-novo spinal infections regarding recurrence of infection, mortality, quality of life, and length-of-stay. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed database. Studies comparing outcome variables of patients with de-novo spinal infections (DNSI) treated with and without instrumentation and surgical versus non-surgical treatment were included. Studies primarily focusing on epidural abscesses or non-de-novo infections were excluded. A meta-analysis was performed for infection recurrence, reoperation, primary treatment failure, mortality, and quality-of-life parameters. RESULTS: A total of 17 retrospective studies with 2.069 patients met the inclusion criteria. 1.378 patients received surgical treatment with or without instrumentation; 676 patients were treated non-surgically. For the comparison of instrumented to non-instrumented surgery Odds-Ratios were .98 (P = .95) for infection recurrence, .83 (P = .92) for primary failure, .53 (P = .02) for mortality and .32 (P = .05) for reoperation. For the comparison of non-surgical to surgical treatment, Odds-Ratios were .98 (P = .95) for infection recurrence, and 1.05 (P = .89) for mortality. CONCLUSION: Available data support that instrumented surgery can be performed safely without higher rates of infection recurrence or primary failure and lower reoperation and mortality rates compared to nonsurgical treatment for DNSI. Furthermore, spine surgical treatment may generally be performed without higher risk of infection recurrence and mortality and better quality-of-life outcomes compared to generic non-surgical treatment.

Complication rates following stand-alone lateral interbody fusion: a single institution series after 10 years of experience.

PURPOSE: This retrospective single institution study's goal was to analyze and report the complications from stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusions (LLIF). METHODS: This research was approved by the institutional review board (STUDY2021000113). We retrospectively reviewed the database of patients with adult degenerative spine deformity treated via LLIF at our institution between January 2016 and December 2020. RESULTS: Stand-alone LLIF was performed in 158 patients (145 XLIF, 13 OLIF; mean age 65 y.; 88 f., 70 m.). Mean surgical time was 85 min (± 24 min). Mean follow-up was 14 months (± 5 m). Surgical blood loss averaged 120 mL (± 187 mL) and the mean number of fused levels was 1.2 (± 0.4 levels). Overall complication rate was 19.6% (31 total; 23 approach-related, 8 secondary complications). CONCLUSION: Lateral interbody fusion appears to be a safe surgical intervention with relatively low complication- and revision rates.

The Risk of Adverse Events in Smokers Undergoing Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: Determine if tobacco use is associated with increased risk of postoperative adverse events within 90 days in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. METHODS: Databases were queried to identify cohort studies that directly compared smokers with non-smokers and provided the absolute number of adverse events and the population at risk. Data quality was evaluated using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and compared between studies. The grading of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) criteria were used to assess the strength of the evidence. RESULTS: Seventeen studies assessing 37 897 participants met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 10 031 (26.5%) were smokers and 27 866 (73.5%) were nonsmokers. The mean age for the study population was 58 years, and 45% were males. Smoking was not associated with increased risk of one or more major adverse events within 90 days following spine surgery (seven studies, pooled RR 1.13, 95% CI [.75-1.71], I2 = 41%). However, smoking was significantly associated with one or more major adverse events in ≤2 level fusion (three studies, pooled RR 2.46, 95% CI [1.18-5.12], I2 = 0%), but not in fusions of ≥3 levels (four studies, pooled RR .87, 95% CI [.70-1.08], I2 = 0%). Additionally, there was no statistically significant association between smoking and any adverse event, nor increased reoperation risk due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, tobacco use was not associated with a statistically significant increased risk of adverse events within 90 days in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. Our results are limited by the variable reporting methodology for both complication rates as well as smoking incidence between the included individual studies.

Qualitative Evaluation of Educational Content on Lateral Spine Surgery YouTube™ Demonstrations.

OBJECTIVE:  This study assessed the quality of educational content for lateral spine fusion procedures on YouTube™. METHODS:  YouTube™ was searched using the following keywords and phrases: "Lateral lumbar interbody fusion," "lateral lumbar spine surgery," "Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF)," "Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF)," and "Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF)." An expert panel of three senior-level spine surgeons [rater one to three (R1-R3)] rated videos on 13 qualitative evaluation parameters via a modified Delphi approach. RESULTS:  Thirty-eight videos were included for evaluation. Interrater reliability analysis indicated a moderate agreement between R1 and R2 (κ=0.50; standard error, SE = 0.05), R1 and R3 (κ = 0.60, SE = 0.04), and a substantial agreement between R2 and R3 (κ = 0.65, SE = 0.04). Unanimously positive assessments of the quality of the intraoperative presentation varied between 42% and 63% of the rated videos. However, perioperative quality features were unanimously rated positively less than 21% of the videos. CONCLUSION:  With regard to the surgical approach and execution of lateral lumbar fusions, YouTube™ videos can be seen as a valuable addition to academic education. The main problem, however, is the lack of control mechanisms that check the quality of the content offered before it is consumed by patients, students, and doctors in training.

The Use of the Ilizarov Fixator for the Treatment of Open and Closed Tibial Shaft and Distal Tibial Fractures in Patients with Complex Cases.

INTRODUCTION: Open and closed fractures of the tibial shaft or distal tibia can be challenging for surgeons to treat if the fractures are accompanied by aggravating conditions, such as various accompanying diseases, pronounced soft tissue injuries, osteomyelitis, and/or noncompliance. The aim of this retrospective study was to present our approach and results with the Ilizarov fixator as a treatment option for such individually complex cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2005 and 2018, 20 patients were treated with the Ilizarov fixator for fractures of the tibial shaft/distal tibia. The indication for this was a 2nd- to 3rd-degree open fracture in 10 patients, a 1st-degree open fracture in one patient, and closed fractures in 9 patients. Aggravating conditions included soft tissue injuries, osteomyelitis, leg deformities, multiple traumas, smoking, alcohol/drug abuse, and obesity (BMI > 60). In addition to demographic data, the time of fixator treatment, complications, and the endpoint of consolidation were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: The mean time of fixator treatment was 29 (range 15-65) weeks. Complete fracture consolidation was achieved in 13 patients (65%) with the Ilizarov fixator. The mean follow-up period after fixator removal was 36 (range 2-186) months in 14 patients. Five patients with complete consolidation were lost to further follow-up. One patient was amputated. In six patients without union, internal osteosynthesis was carried out. CONCLUSION: The use of the Ilizarov fixator is a treatment option for individual high-risk patients with complicating courses but should be seen as a salvage procedure due to the high complication rate and long treatment process.

[Femoral neck stress fracture in a young runner - a rare but severe injury]. / Laterale Schenkelhalsstressfraktur eines 29-jährigen Marathonläufers ­ eine seltene und risikobehaftete Überlastungsfraktur des Sportlers.

A 29-year-old athlete suffered from vague hip pain during the preparation for a marathon competition. During the competition, severe pain forced him to drop out after 29 kilometres. He underwent conventional x-rays immediately, which showed a displaced lateral fracture of the femoral neck. The fracture was immediately treated with a dynamic hip screw. A few days later, the patient was discharged. He returned to sport upon completion of treatment. Vague hip pain after exercise may be an indicator for a rare stress fracture of the femoral neck and should be taken into consideration in athletes. Delayed diagnostic investigation and treatment reduce return-to-sport rates and outcomes.

The Risk of Nonunion in Smokers Revisited: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systemic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To review and establish the effect of tobacco smoking on risk of nonunion following spinal fusion. METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to December 31, 2020, was conducted. Cohort studies directly comparing smokers with nonsmokers that provided the number of nonunions and fused segments were included. Following data extraction, the risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies Tool, and the strength of evidence for nonunion was evaluated using the GRADE working group criteria. All data analysis was performed in Review Manager 5, and a random effects model was used. RESULTS: Twenty studies assessing 3009 participants, which included 1117 (37%) smokers, met inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis found that smoking was associated with increased risk of nonunion compared to not smoking ≥1 year following spine surgery (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.35). Smoking was significantly associated with increased nonunion in those receiving either allograft (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.73) or autograft (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.72). Both multilevel and single level fusions carried increased risk of nonunion in smokers (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.64 to 3.23; RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.86, respectively). CONCLUSION: Smoking status carried a global risk of nonunion for spinal fusion procedures regardless of follow-up time, location, number of segments fused, or grafting material. Further comparative studies with robust methodology are necessary to establish treatment guidelines tailored to smokers.