The Effect of Changes in Segmental Lordosis on Global Lumbar and Adjacent Segment Lordosis After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: Restoration of lordosis in lumbar fusion reduces low back pain, decreases adjacent segment degeneration, and improves postoperative outcomes. However, the potential effects of changes in segmental lordosis on adjacent-level and global lordosis remain less understood. This study aims to examine the relationships between segmental (SL), adjacent-level, and global lumbar lordosis following L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF). METHODS: 80 consecutive patients who underwent single-level L5-S1 ALIF were divided into 3 groups based on the degree of change (∆) in index-level segmental lordosis: <5° (n = 23), 5°-10° (n = 29), >10° (n = 28). Radiographic parameters measured included global lumbar, segmental, and adjacent level lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and PI-LL mismatch. RESULTS: Patients with ∆SL 5°-10° or ∆SL >10° both showed significant increases in global lumbar lordosis from preoperative to final follow-up. However, patients with ∆SL >10° showed statistically significant losses in adjacent level lordosis at both immediate postoperative and final follow-up compared to preoperative. When comparing patients with ∆SL >10° to those with ∆SL 5-10°, there were no significant differences in global lumbar lordosis at final follow-up, due to significantly greater losses of adjacent level lordosis in these patients. CONCLUSION: The degree of compensatory loss of lordosis at the adjacent level L4-L5 correlated with the extent of segmental lordosis creation at the index L5-S1 level. This may suggest that the L4 to S1 segment acts as a "harmonious unit," able to accommodate only a certain amount of lordosis and further increases in segmental lordosis may be mitigated by loss of adjacent-level lordosis.

Increased cage angle effects on radiographic outcomes after stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a well-accepted surgical technique used to treat various lumbar degenerative pathologies. Recently, hyperlordotic cages have been introduced to create higher degrees of lordosis to the lumbar spine. There are little data currently available to define the radiographic benefits that these cages provide with stand-alone ALIF. The goal of the present study was to assess the effect of increasing cage angles on postoperative subsidence, sagittal alignment, and foraminal and disc height in patients who underwent single-level stand-alone ALIF surgery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed of consecutive patients who underwent single-level ALIF by a single spine surgeon. Radiographic analysis included global lordosis, operative level of segmental lordosis, cage subsidence, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, edge loading, foraminal height, posterior disc height, anterior disc height, and adjacent-level lordosis. Multivariate linear and logistic regressions were performed to analyze the relationship between cage angle and radiographic outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included in the study and divided into three groups based on cage angle: < 10° (n = 17), 10°-15° (n = 36), and > 15° (n = 19). Within the entire study cohort, there were significant improvements in disc and foraminal height, as well as segmental and global lordosis, at the final follow-up after single-level ALIF. However, when stratified by cage angle groups, patients with > 15° cages did not have any additional significant changes in global or segmental lordosis compared with those patients with smaller cage angles, but patients with > 15° cages showed greater risk of subsidence while also having significantly less improvements in foraminal height, posterior disc height, and average disc height compared with the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with < 15° stand-alone ALIF cages showed improved average foraminal and disc (posterior, anterior, and average) height without sacrificing improvements in sagittal parameters or increasing risk of subsidence when compared to patients with hyperlordotic cages. The use of hyperlordotic cages > 15° did not provide spinal lordosis commensurate with the lordotic angle of the cage and had a greater risk of subsidence. Although this study was limited by a lack of patient-reported outcomes to correlate with radiographic results, these findings support the judicious use of hyperlordotic cages in stand-alone ALIF.

Rates of Postoperative Complications and Approach-related Neurological Symptoms After L4-L5 Lateral Transpsoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared With Upper Lumbar Levels.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the likelihood of approach-related complications for patients undergoing single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) at L4-L5 to those undergoing the procedure at upper lumbar levels. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LLIF has been associated with a number of advantages when compared with traditional interbody fusion techniques. However, potential risks with the approach include vascular or visceral injury, thigh dysesthesias, and lumbar plexus injury. There are concerns of a higher risk of these complications at the L4-L5 level compared with upper lumbar levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort review was completed for consecutive patients undergoing single-level LLIF between 2004 and 2019 by a single surgeon. Indication for surgery was symptomatic degenerative lumbar stenosis and/or spondylolisthesis. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: LLIF at L4-L5 versus a single level between L1 and L4. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative complications, postoperative approach-related neurological symptoms, and patient-reported outcomes were compared and analyzed between the cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 122 were included in analysis, of which 58 underwent LLIF at L4-L5 and 64 underwent LLIF between L1 and L4. There were no visceral or vascular injuries or lumbar plexus injuries in either cohort. There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative hip pain, anterior thigh dysesthesias, and/or hip flexor weakness between the cohorts (53.5% L4-L5 vs. 37.5% L1-L4; P =0.102). All patients reported complete resolution of these symptoms by 6-month postoperative follow-up. DISCUSSION: LLIF surgery at the L4-L5 level is associated with a similar infrequent likelihood of approach-related complications and postoperative hip pain, thigh dysesthesias, and hip flexor weakness when compared with upper lumbar level LLIF. Careful patient selection, meticulous use of real-time neuromonitoring, and an understanding of the anatomic location of the lumbar plexus to the working corridor are critical to success.

High-Intensity Zones on MRI of the Cervical Spine in Patients: Epidemiology and Association With Pain and Disability.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to address the prevalence, distribution, and clinical significance of cervical high-intensity zones (HIZs) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with respect to pain and other patient-reported outcomes in the setting of patients that will undergo an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedure. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of ACDF patients surgically treated at a single center from 2008 to 2015. Based on preoperative MRI, HIZ subtypes were identified as either traditional T2-hyperintense, T1-hypointense ("single-HIZs"), or combined T1- and T2-hyperintense ("dual-HIZs"), and their level-specific prevalence was assessed. Preoperative symptoms, patient-reported outcomes, and disc degeneration pathology were assessed in relation to HIZs and HIZ subtypes. RESULTS: Of 861 patients, 58 demonstrated evidence of HIZs in the cervical spine (6.7%). Single-HIZs and dual-HIZs comprised 63.8% and 36.2% of the overall HIZs, respectively. HIZs found outside of the planned fusion segment reported better preoperative Neck Disability Index (NDI; P = .049) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Arm (P = .014) scores relative to patients without HIZs. Furthermore, patients with single-HIZs found inside the planned fusion segment had worse VAS Neck (P = .045) and VAS Arm (P = .010) scores. In general, dual-HIZ patients showed no significant differences across all clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate the clinical significance of HIZs in the cervical spine, noting level-specific and clinical outcome-specific variations. Single-HIZs were associated with significantly more pain when located inside the fusion segment, while dual-HIZs showed no associations with patient-reported outcomes. The presence of single-HIZs may correlate with concurrent spinal pathologies and should be more closely evaluated.

Factors Affecting the Decision to Initiate Anticoagulation After Spine Surgery: Findings From the AOSpine Anticoagulation Global Initiative.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, international survey. OBJECTIVES: To identify factors influencing pharmacologic anticoagulation initiation after spine surgery based on the AOSpine Anticoagulation Global Survey. METHODS: This survey was distributed to the international membership of AOSpine (n = 3805). A Likert-type scale described grade practice-specific factors on a scale from low (1) to high (5) importance, and patient-specific factors a scale from low (0) to high (3) importance. Analysis was performed to determine which factors were significant in the decision making surrounding the initiation of pharmacologic anticoagulation. RESULTS: A total of 316 spine surgeons from 64 countries completed the survey. In terms of practice-specific factors considered to initiate treatment, expert opinion was graded the highest (mean grade ± SD = 3.2 ± 1.3), followed by fellowship training (3.2 ± 1.3). Conversely, previous studies (2.7 ± 1.2) and unspecified guidelines were considered least important (2.6 ± 1.6). Patient body mass index (2.0 ± 1.0) and postoperative mobilization (2.3 ± 1.0) were deemed most important and graded highly overall. Those who rated estimated blood loss with greater importance in anticoagulation initiation decision making were more likely to administer thromboprophylaxis at later times (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68-0.71), while those who rated drain output with greater importance were likely to administer thromboprophylaxis at earlier times (HR = 1.32-1.43). CONCLUSION: Among our global cohort of spine surgeons, certain patient factors (ie, patient mobilization and body mass index) and practice-specific factors (ie, expert opinion and fellowship training) were considered to be most important when considering anticoagulation start times.

Revision Strategies for Harrington Rod Instrumentation: Radiographic Outcomes and Complications.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes following revision surgery following Harrington rod instrumentation. METHODS: Patients who underwent revision surgery with a minimum of 1-year follow-up for flatback syndrome following Harrington rod instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis were identified from a multicenter dataset. Baseline demographics and intraoperative information were obtained. Preoperative, initial postoperative, and most recent spinopelvic parameters were compared. Postoperative complications and reoperations were subsequently evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients met the inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 27.7 months. Overall, 14 patients (34.1%) underwent a combined anterior-posterior fusion, and 27 (65.9%) underwent an osteotomy for correction. Preoperatively, the most common lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) was at L3 and L4 (61%), whereas 85% had a LIV to the pelvis after revision. The mean preoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch and C7 sagittal vertical axis were 23.7° and 89.6 mm. This was corrected to 8.1° and 28.9 mm and maintained to 9.04° and 34.4 mm at latest follow-up. Complications included deep wound infection (12.2%), durotomy (14.6%), implant related failures (14.6%), and temporary neurologic deficits (22.0%). Eight patients underwent further revision surgery at an average of 7.4 months after initial revision. CONCLUSIONS: There are multiple surgical techniques to address symptomatic flatback syndrome in patients with previous Harrington rod instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. At an average of 27.7 months follow-up, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch and C7 sagittal vertical axis can be successfully corrected and maintained. However, complication and reoperation rates remain high.

High-Frequency Impulse Therapy for Treatment of Chronic Back Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to examine high-frequency impulse therapy (HFIT) impact on pain and function among patients undergoing care for chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: A pilot randomized-controlled trial of HFIT system versus sham was conducted across 5 orthopedic and pain center sites in California, USA. Thirty-six patients seeking clinical care for CLBP were randomized. Primary outcome was function measured by the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Secondary outcomes were function (Timed Up and Go [TUG] and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), pain (Numerical Rating Scale [NRS]), quality of life (Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]), and device use. Patients were assessed at baseline and every week for 4 weeks of follow-up. Mann-Whitney U-test was used to analyze changes in each outcome. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the effect of treatment over time. RESULTS: The average age of subjects was 53.9 ± 15.7 (mean ± SD) years, with 12.1 ± 8.8 years of chronic low back pain. Patients who received an HFIT device had a significantly higher 6MWT score at weeks 2 [Cohen's d (95% CI): 0.33 (0.02, 0.61)], 3 [0.32 (0.01, 0.59)] and 4 [0.31 (0.01, 0.60)], respectively, as compared to their baseline scores (p < 0.05). Patients in the treatment group had significantly lower TUG scores at week 3 [0.30 (0.04, 0.57)] and significantly lower NRS scores at weeks 2 [0.34 (0.02, 0.58)] and 4 [0.41 (0.10, 0.67)] (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A larger-scale RCT can build on the findings of this study to test whether HFIT is effective in reducing pain and improving function in CLBP patients. This study shows encouraging evidence of functional improvement and reduction in pain in subjects who used HFIT. The efficacy and minimally invasive nature of HFIT is anticipated to substantially improve the management of CLBP patients.

Patients Undergoing 3-Level-or-Greater Decompression-Only Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Have Similar Outcomes to Those Undergoing Single-Level Surgery at 2 Years.

BACKGROUND: Stability following multilevel decompressive laminectomy without fusion has been debated using in vitro biomechanical and radiographic models. However, there is a lack of information regarding clinical outcomes for these patients. The aim of the present study was to determine the association between clinical outcomes and number of levels decompressed via laminectomy for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent a primary lumbar laminectomy between 2009 and 2015 by senior orthopedic spine surgeons for lumbar spinal stenosis. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the number of decompression levels: single level or 3 or more levels. Patient-reported outcomes were obtained in the form of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for the back and leg, 12-Item Short Form Mental and Physical Survey scores, and Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Mental and Physical Survey scores. RESULTS: Overall, 138 consecutive patients were assessed, of which 106 underwent a single-level and 32 underwent a 3-or-more-level laminectomy. Average follow-up was 24.2 months. There were no significant differences in the preoperative VAS back, VAS leg, or ODI scores between the single-level laminectomy and 3-or-more-level laminectomy groups. Both groups of patients experienced significant improvements in these clinical outcomes postoperatively with no clinically significant difference in the degree of improvement. Reoperation rates were low and similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing decompression of 3 or more levels present with similar postoperative outcomes to those who undergo a single-level decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Under specific clinical and radiographic criteria, a multilevel decompression of 3 or more levels may be a safe and effective procedure with acceptable outcomes at 2 years after surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

An Investigation of a Novel Dural Repair Device for Intraoperative Incidental Durotomy Repair.

Incidental durotomies, or dural tears, can be very difficult and time consuming to repair properly when they are encountered in confined spaces. A novel dural repair device was developed to address these situations. In this paper, the novel device was assessed against the use of traditional tools and techniques for dural repairs in two independent studies using an intricate clinical simulation model. The aim was to examine the results of the two assessments and link the outcomes to the clinical use of the novel device in the operating room. The novel device outperformed conventional techniques as measured by dural repair time, CSF leak pressure and nerve root avoidance in the simulation. The results were generally replicable clinically, however, numerous additional clinical scenarios were also encountered that the simulation model was unable to capture due to various inherent limitations. The simulation model design, potential contributors to watertightness, clinical experiences, and limitation are discussed.

Feasibility and outcomes of ERAS protocol in elective cT4 colorectal cancer patients: results from a single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Programs of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery reduces morbidity and shorten recovery in patients undergoing colorectal resections for cancer. Patients presenting with more advanced disease such as T4 cancers are frequently excluded from undergoing ERAS programs due to the difficulty in applying established protocols. The primary aim of this investigation was to evaluate the possibility of applying a validated ERAS protocol in patients undergoing colorectal resection for T4 colon and rectal cancer and to evaluate the short-term outcome. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. All patients with a clinical diagnosis of stage T4 colorectal cancer undergoing surgery between November 2016 and January 2020 were treated following the institutional fast track protocol without exclusion. Short-term postoperative outcomes were compared to those of a control group treated with conventional care and that underwent surgical resection for T4 colorectal cancer at the same institution from January 2010 to October 2016. Data from both groups were collected retrospectively from a prospectively maintained database. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were diagnosed with T4 cancer, 49 patients were included in the ERAS cohort and 33 in the historical conventional care cohort. Both, the mean time of tolerance to solid food diet and postoperative length of stay were significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the control group (3.14 ± 1.76 vs 4.8 ± 1.52; p < 0.0001 and 6.93 ± 3.76 vs 9.50 ± 4.83; p = 0.0084 respectively). No differences in perioperative complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this cohort study from a single-center registry support the thesis that the adoption of the ERAS protocol is effective and applicable in patients with colorectal cancer clinically staged T4, reducing significantly their length of stay and time of tolerance to solid food diet, without affecting surgical postoperative outcomes.

Reasons for revision following stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are alternative and less invasive techniques to stabilize the spine and indirectly decompress the neural elements compared with open posterior approaches. While reoperation rates have been described for open posterior lumbar surgery, there are sparse data on reoperation rates following these less invasive procedures without direct posterior decompression. This study aimed to evaluate the overall rate, cause, and timing of reoperation procedures following anterior or lateral lumbar interbody fusions without direct posterior decompression. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients indicated for an ALIF or LLIF for lumbar spine at a single academic institution. Patients who underwent concomitant posterior fusion or direct decompression surgeries were excluded. Rates, causes, and timing of reoperations were analyzed. Patients who underwent a revision decompression were matched with patients who did not require a reoperation, and preoperative imaging characteristics were analyzed to assess for risk factors for the reoperation. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 529 patients with an average follow-up of 2.37 years; 40.3% (213/529) and 67.3% (356/529) of patients had a minimum of 2 years and 1 year of follow-up, respectively. The total revision rate was 5.7% (30/529), with same-level revision in 3.8% (20/529) and adjacent-level revision in 1.9% (10/529) of patients. Same-level revision patients had significantly shorter time to revision (7.14 months) than adjacent-level revision patients (31.91 months) (p < 0.0001). Fifty percent of same-level revisions were for a posterior decompression. After further analysis of decompression revisions, an increased preoperative canal area was significantly associated with a lower risk of further decompression revision compared to the control group (p = 0.015; OR 0.977, 95% CI 0.959-0.995). CONCLUSIONS: There was a low reoperation rate after anterior or lateral lumbar interbody fusions without direct posterior decompression. The majority of same-level reoperations were due to a need for further decompression. Smaller preoperative canal diameters were associated with the need for revision decompression.

Screening policies, preventive measures and in-hospital infection of COVID-19 in global surgical practices.

BACKGROUND: In a surgical setting, COVID-19 patients may trigger in-hospital outbreaks and have worse postoperative outcomes. Despite these risks, there have been no consistent statements on surgical guidelines regarding the perioperative screening or management of COVID-19 patients, and we do not have objective global data that describe the current conditions surrounding this issue. This study aimed to clarify the current global surgical practice including COVID-19 screening, preventive measures and in-hospital infection under the COVID-19 pandemic, and to clarify the international gaps on infection control policies among countries worldwide. METHODS: During April 2-8, 2020, a cross-sectional online survey on surgical practice was distributed to surgeons worldwide through international surgical societies, social media and personal contacts. Main outcome and measures included preventive measures and screening policies of COVID-19 in surgical practice and centers' experiences of in-hospital COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed by country's cumulative deaths number by April 8, 2020 (high risk, >5000; intermediate risk, 100-5000; low risk, <100). RESULTS: A total of 936 centers in 71 countries responded to the survey (high risk, 330 centers; intermediate risk, 242 centers; low risk, 364 centers). In the majority (71.9%) of the centers, local guidelines recommended preoperative testing based on symptoms or suspicious radiologic findings. Universal testing for every surgical patient was recommended in only 18.4% of the centers. In-hospital COVID-19 infection was reported from 31.5% of the centers, with higher rates in higher risk countries (high risk, 53.6%; intermediate risk, 26.4%; low risk, 14.8%; P < 0.001). Of the 295 centers that experienced in-hospital COVID-19 infection, 122 (41.4%) failed to trace it and 58 (19.7%) reported the infection originating from asymptomatic patients/staff members. Higher risk countries adopted more preventive measures including universal testing, routine testing of hospital staff and use of dedicated personal protective equipment in operation theatres, but there were remarkable discrepancies across the countries. CONCLUSIONS: This large international survey captured the global surgical practice under the COVID-19 pandemic and highlighted the insufficient preoperative screening of COVID-19 in the current surgical practice. More intensive screening programs will be necessary particularly in severely affected countries/institutions. STUDY REGISTRATION: Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04344197.

A Review of Inpatient Opioid Consumption and Discharge Prescription Patterns After Orthopaedic Procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Tailoring opioid prescriptions to inpatient use after orthopaedic procedures may effectively control pain while limiting overprescription but may not be common in the current orthopaedic practice. METHODS: A retrospective review identified opioid-naïve patients admitted after any orthopaedic procedure. Daily and total prescription quantities as well as patient-specific factors were collected. The total opioids used the day before discharge was compared with the total opioids prescribed for the day after discharge. Refill rates were then compared between patients whose daily discharge prescription regimen far exceeded or approximated their predischarge opioid consumption. RESULTS: Six hundred thirteen patients were included (ages 18 to 95 years). The total opioids prescribed for the 24 hours after discharge significantly exceeded the opioids consumed the 24 hours before discharge for each orthopaedic subspecialty. The excessive-prescription group (409 patients) received greater daily opioid (120 oral morphine equivalents [OMEs] versus 60 OMEs; P < 0.01) and total opioid (750 OMEs versus 512.5 OMEs; P < 0.01) at discharge but was more likely to refill their opioid prescription within 30 days of discharge (27.6% versus 20.1%; P = 0.043). DISCUSSION: Opioid regimens prescribed after an orthopaedic surgery frequently exceed inpatient opioid use. Opioid regimens that approximate inpatient use may help curb overprescription and are not associated with higher refill rates compared with more excessive prescriptions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Cohort Study.

A Goal-directed Quality Improvement Initiative to Reduce Opioid Prescriptions After Orthopaedic Procedures.

Orthopaedic surgeons are increasingly aware of deleterious effects of the opioid epidemic and the association between overprescription and diversion toward nonmedical opioid use or substance abuse. Opiate prescriptions at the time of hospital discharge have been identified as target for intervention. This study describes the successful outcome of a goal-directed intervention aimed at decreasing opioid overprescription by providing routine feedback to providers regarding their prescribing patterns. METHODS: The amount of opioid medications, quantified as oral morphine equivalents (OMEs), provided to opioid-naive adult patients on discharge after orthopaedic surgery was prospectively collected. As part of an institutional quality improvement initiative, medical providers received reports every 2 months detailing median discharge OMEs prescribed, trended over time. After 6 months, a retrospective comparison was done between preintervention and intervention patient cohorts. RESULTS: There were 401 patients in the preintervention cohort and 429 patients in the intervention cohort. Both groups were similar in regard to age, sex, rates of depression, surgical time, length of stay, orthopaedic subspecialty, and inpatient opioid requirement before discharge. Patients in the intervention cohort were prescribed markedly fewer opioid medications by 25%, equivalent to 20 tablets of 5-mg oxycodone IR (450 versus 600 OMEs, P < 0.001). Despite these opioid medications, opioid refill rates during the first 90 days after discharge did not markedly change between groups. DISCUSSION: It is critical to judiciously treat postoperative pain while avoiding opioid overprescription. This study demonstrated the outcome of a goal-directed initiative to decrease overprescription of opioid medications. The initiative reduced discharge opioid prescriptions yet did not increase the risk of requiring a prescription refill in the postoperative period. This indicates that such an approach can result in opioid reduction, while still providing appropriate care and pain control for patients.

Local Application of Vancomycin in Spine Surgery Does Not Result in Increased Vancomycin-Resistant Bacteria-10-Year Data.

STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the microbial flora in surgical spine infections and their antibiotic resistance patterns across time and determine the correlation between vancomycin application in the wound and vancomycin-resistant microbes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies show a reduction in surgical site infections with intrawound vancomycin placement. No data are available on the potential negative effects of this intervention, in particular, whether there would be a resultant increase in vancomycin-resistant organisms or bacterial resistance profiles. METHODS: All culture-positive surgical site infections at a single institution were analyzed from 2007 to 2017. Each bacterium was assessed independently for resistance patterns. The two-tailed Fisher exact test was used to determine the correlation between vancomycin application and the presence of vancomycin-resistant bacteria, polymicrobial infections, or gram-negative bacterial infections. RESULTS: One hundred and eight bacteria were isolated from 113 surgical site infections from 2007 to 2017. The most common organisms were staphylococcus with varying resistance patterns and Escherichia coli. Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium was isolated in three infections. Out of the 4,878 surgical cases from 2011 to 2017, vancomycin was placed in 48.3%, and no vancomycin in 51.7%. There were 33 infections (1.4%) in the vancomycin group and 20 infections (0.8%) in the no-vancomycin group (χ2 = 0.0521). There was no correlation between vancomycin application in the wound and vancomycin-resistant microbes (χ2 = 0.2334) and polymicrobial infections (χ2 = 0.1328). There was an increased rate of gram-negative organisms in infections after vancomycin application in the wound versus no vancomycin (χ2 = 0.0254). CONCLUSIONS: Topical vancomycin within the surgical site is not correlated with vancomycin-resistant bacteria. However, there was an increased incidence of gram-negative organisms in infections after vancomycin application in the wound versus no vancomycin. Continued surveillance with prospectively collected randomized data is necessary to better understand bacterial evolution against current antimicrobial techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Idiopathic stroke after syndromic and neuromuscular scoliosis surgery: a case report and literature review.

Children with syndromic and neuromuscular scoliosis undergoing corrective surgery experience higher complication rates than those with idiopathic scoliosis. A rare but devastating complication is stroke, which occurs in 0.57% of operations for neuromuscular scoliosis but accounts for 7.6% of deaths. Comorbidities associated with non-idiopathic scoliosis that increase risk of stroke include hypercoagulability, cardiac dysfunction, and contractures, which interfere with positioning and risk vascular compromise. Syndromic and neuromuscular diseases may predispose patients to intraoperative dural tears, either primarily (e.g., dural ectasia) or secondarily, in particular due to severity of deformity. We present the case of a perioperative, idiopathic stroke in a 15-year-old boy with scoliosis in the setting of neurofibromatosis type I, reviewing possible causes as well as strategies for preoperative assessment and postoperative monitoring.

Spinal tuberculosis: a comprehensive review for the modern spine surgeon.

Nearly one-third of the human population is infected with tuberculosis. Of those with active disease, approximately 10% are impacted by skeletal tuberculosis. Though, traditionally a disease of the developing world and susceptible populations, with the rise of immigration, patients may present in developed countries. The microbe responsible is the mycobacterium tuberculosis complex bacillus. The infection begins in the anterior vertebral bodies. The natural history and presentation are notable for cold abscesses causing mass effect, early or late neurological deficit, and kyphotic deformity of the spine caused by anterior vertebral body destruction. The disease can be diagnosed with laboratory studies and characteristic imaging findings, but tissue diagnosis with cultures, histology, and polymerase chain reaction is the gold standard. The cornerstone of medical management is multidrug chemotherapy to minimize relapse and drug resistance, and can be curative for spinal tuberculosis with minimal residual kyphosis. Surgical management is reserved for patients presenting with neurological deficits or severe kyphosis. The mainstays of surgical management are debridement, correction of spinal deformity and stable fusion. With appropriate and timely management, clinical outcomes of the treatment of spinal tuberculosis are overall excellent.

An Analysis of Implant Retention and Antibiotic Suppression in Instrumented Spine Infections: A Preliminary Data Set of 67 Patients.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether patients can be taken off suppressive antibiotics with infected retained instrumentation. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the perioperative course and antibiotic regimen that led to the clinical intervention of patients with infected spinal instrumentation. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients with spine instrumentation who suffered surgical site infections (SSI) requiring debridement were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were grouped into 4 cohorts based on their clinical intervention: removal of instrumentation, reinstrumentation, retention of instrumentation with continued antibiotic suppression, and retention of instrumentation with no antibiotic suppression. Patient factors, infection factors, debridement, and antibiosis were compared. RESULTS: Of the 67 patients with SSI after spine surgery and instrumentation, 19 (28%) had their instrumentation removed, 6 (9%) had their instrumentation exchanged, 25 (37%) had their instrumentation retained and were on antibiotic suppression, and 17 (25%) had their instrumentation retained without any suppression. Those who had their instrumentation removed had a later presentation of their infection averaging 85 days (range 6-280 days) postoperatively. There was an earlier presentation for those who retained their implants, with suppression averaging 19 days (range 9-39) and no suppression averaging 29 days (range 6-90 days) post operatively (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: None of the patients with retained instrumentation without suppression had recurrence of infections after long-term follow-up. Lifelong antibiotic suppression may not be required with SSI that present early after early aggressive debridement. Patients with infections detected later are difficult to treat without removal of their original instrumentation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study presents the outcomes of surgical and antibiotic factors in patients with infected spinal instrumentation.