Management of Anticoagulation/Antiplatelet Medication and Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Elective Spine Surgery: Concise Clinical Recommendations Based on a Modified Delphi Process.

STUDY DESIGN: Delphi method. OBJECTIVE: To gain consensus on the following questions: (1) When should anticoagulation/antiplatelet (AC/AP) medication be stopped before elective spine surgery?; (2) When should AC/AP medication be restarted after elective spine surgery?; (3) When, how, and in whom should venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis be started after elective spinal surgery? SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: VTE can lead to significant morbidity after adult spine surgery, yet postoperative VTE prophylaxis practices vary considerably. The management of preoperative AC/AP medication is similarly heterogeneous. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Delphi method of consensus development consisting of three rounds (January 26, 2021, to June 21, 2021). RESULTS: Twenty-one spine surgeons were invited, and 20 surgeons completed all rounds of questioning. Consensus (>70% agreement) was achieved in 26/27 items. Group consensus stated that preoperative Direct Oral Anticoagulants should be stopped two days before surgery, warfarin stopped five days before surgery, and all remaining AC/AP medication and aspirin should be stopped seven days before surgery. For restarting AC/AP medication postoperatively, consensus was achieved for low-risk/medium-risk/high-risk patients in 5/5 risk factors (VTE history/cardiac/ambulation status/anterior approach/operation). The low/medium/high thresholds were POD7/POD5/POD2, respectively. For VTE chemoprophylaxis, consensus was achieved for low-risk/medium-risk/high-risk patients in 12/13 risk factors (age/BMI/VTE history/cardiac/cancer/hormone therapy/operation/anterior approach/staged separate days/staged same days/operative time/transfusion). The one area that did not gain consensus was same-day staged surgery. The low-threshold/medium-threshold/high-threshold ranges were postoperative day 5 (POD5) or none/POD3-4/POD1-2, respectively. Additional VTE chemoprophylaxis considerations that gained consensus were POD1 defined as the morning after surgery regardless of operating finishing time, enoxaparin as the medication of choice, and standardized, rather than weight-based, dose given once per day. CONCLUSIONS: In the first known Delphi study to address anticoagulation/antiplatelet recommendations for elective spine surgery (preoperatively and postoperatively); our Delphi consensus recommendations from 20 spine surgeons achieved consensus on 26/27 items. These results will potentially help standardize the management of preoperative AC/AP medication and VTE chemoprophylaxis after adult elective spine surgery.

The Ideal Threshold of Hemoglobin A1C in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Elective Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) with surgical site infection (SSI) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and to identify optimal HbA1c thresholds to minimize the risk of SSI and maximize PROs. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Diabetes mellitus has been associated with worsened outcomes following spine surgery. HbA1c, a surrogate of glycemic control, is an important assessment tool in diabetic patients. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data was undertaken. Diabetic patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression surgery between October 2010 and May 2021 were included. HbA1c, demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative data were collected. Primary outcomes included: 1) SSI, and 2) PROs, including the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-back/leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included: complications, readmissions, and reoperations within 90-days postoperatively. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was set at a 30% improvement from baseline PROs. RESULTS: Of 1819 patients who underwent lumbar decompression surgery, 368 patients had diabetes mellitus, and 177 had a documented preoperative HbA1c value. Of patients with available HbA1c values, the mean age was 62.5±12.3, the mean HbA1c value was 7.2±1.5%, and SSI occurred in 3 (1.7%) patients only, which prevented further analysis of SSI and HbA1c. A significant association was seen with a higher HbA1c and failure to achieve NRS-Back pain MCID30 [Odds ratio(OR)=0.53, 95% confidence interval(CI) 0.42-0.78; P =0.001] and ODI MCID30 (OR=0.58, 95%CI 0.44-0.77; P =0.001), but not NRS-Leg pain MCID30 (OR=1.29, 95%CI 0.86-1.93; P =0.208). ROC-curve analysis and Youden's index revealed an HbA1c threshold of 7.8 for NRS-Back pain MCID30 (AUC=0.65, P <0.001) and 7.5 for ODI MCID30 (AUC=0.65, P =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression surgery, HbA1c levels above 7.8 and 7.5 were associated with less improvement of NRS-Back and ODI scores at 12-months postoperatively, respectively. To optimize PROs, We recommend a preoperative HbA1c of 7.5 or below for diabetic patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression surgery.

Do Adult Spinal Deformity Patients Undergoing Surgery Continue to Improve From 1-Year to 2-Years Postoperative?

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate clinical improvement as measured by patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the 1 to 2-year interval. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort. METHODS: A single-institution registry of ASD patients undergoing surgery was queried for patients with ≥6 level fusions. Demographics and radiographic variables were collected. PROs collected were the ODI and SRS-22r scores at: preoperative, 1-year and 2-years. Outcome measures of clinical improvement during the 1-2 year time interval were: 1) group medians, 2) percent minimum clinically important difference (MCID), and 3) percent minimal symptom scale (MSS)(ODI < 20 or SRS-pain + function >8). Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, chi-squared tests, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: 157 patients undergoing ASD surgery with minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Mean age was 53.2 and mean instrumented levels was 13.1. Preoperative alignment was: Neutral Alignment (NA) 49%, Coronal Malalignment (CM) 17%, Sagittal Malalignment (SM 17%), and Combined Coronal/Sagittal Malalignment (CCSM) 18%. Preoperative to 1-year, and preoperative to 2-years, all ODI/SRS-22r significantly improved (P < .001). In all patients, the only significant improvement in PROs between 1-and 2-year postoperative were those reaching ODI MCID (69% 1-year vs. 84% 2-years; P < .001). Subgroup analysis: ≥55 years had an improved median ODI (18 vs. 8; P = .047) and an improved percent achieving ODI MCID (73% vs. 84%, P = .048). CCSM patients experienced significant improvement in SRS-appearance score (75% vs. 100%; P = .050), along with those with severe preoperative SM >7.5 cm (73% vs. 100%; P = .032). CONCLUSIONS: Most ASD patients experience the majority of PRO improvement by 1-year postoperative. However, subsets of patients that may continue to improve up to 2-years postoperative include patients ≥55 years, combined coronal/sagittal malalignment, and those with severe sagittal malalignment ≥7.5 cm.

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Tritanium Posterolateral Cage (vs. Propensity-Matched Cohort of PEEK Cage).

Introduction: Surgical management of degenerative lumbar spine disorders is effective at improving patient pain, disability, and quality of life; however, obtaining a durable posterolateral fusion after decompression remains a challenge. Interbody fusion technologies are viable means of improving fusion rates in the lumbar spine, specifically various graft materials including autograft, structural allograft, titanium, and polyether ether ketone. This study assesses the effectiveness of Tritanium posterolateral cage in the treatment of degenerative disk disease. Methods: Nearest-neighbor 1:1 matched control transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with PEEK vs. Tritanium posterior lumbar (PL) cage interbody fusion patients were identified using propensity scoring from patients that underwent elective surgery for degenerative disk diseases. Line graphs were generated to compare the trajectories of improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from baseline to 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The nominal data were compared via the χ2 test, while the continuous data were compared via Student's t-test. Results: The two groups had no difference regarding either the 3- or 12-month Euro-Qol-5D (EQ-5D), numeric rating scale (NRS) leg pain, and NRS back pain; however, the Tritanium interbody cage group had better Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores compared to the control group of the PEEK interbody cage at both 3 and 12 months (p=0.013 and 0.048). Conclusions: Our results indicate the Tritanium cage is an effective alternative to the previously used PEEK cage in terms of PROs, surgical safety, and radiological parameters of surgical success. The Tritanium cohort showed better ODI scores, higher fusion rates, lower subsidence, and lower indirect costs associated with surgical management, when compared to the propensity-matched PEEK cohort.

Intrathecal Fentanyl With a Myofascial Plane Block in Open Lumbar Surgeries: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Acute postoperative pain control after lumbar surgery is imperative to minimizing long-term narcotic use and associated adverse sequela. The safety of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain management in spine surgery has been investigated; however, to date, no studies have investigated the safety of intrathecal fentanyl with a myofascial plane (MP) block in lumbar procedures. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety profile of intrathecal fentanyl with a MP block administered during lumbar surgery and the subsequent utilization of postoperative intravenous opioids. METHODS: An intraoperative intrathecal injection of fentanyl and a MP block was administered in 40 patients undergoing open lumbar reconstructive surgery. The procedure performed was an open decompression with lumbar total joint reconstruction at 1 to 3 lumbar levels. Postoperative complications including urinary retention, respiratory depression, and need for IV opioid use were recorded. RESULTS: Postoperatively, none of the study patients required IV opioid medication for supplemental pain control. Thirty-six patients (85%) were discharged same day or before 23 hours postoperatively. No intrathecal fentanyl-related perioperative complications were noted. None of the 40 listed patients experienced urinary retention or delayed respiratory depression. One patient (2%) experienced orthostatic hypotension at postoperative day 1, which resolved on discontinuation of oral oxycodone. CONCLUSION: Intrathecal fentanyl and MP block may be a safe option for perioperative pain control and may reduce the need for supplemental intravenous opioids without increased risk of respiratory depression, urinary retention, or other side effects. Further studies are necessary to compare the efficacy of intrathecal fentanyl with other analgesia techniques.

Outpatient versus inpatient lumbar decompression surgery: a matched noninferiority study investigating clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Spine surgery represents an ideal target for healthcare cost reduction efforts, with outpatient surgery resulting in significant cost savings. With an increased focus on value-based healthcare delivery, lumbar decompression surgery has been increasingly performed in the outpatient setting when appropriate. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes following outpatient and inpatient lumbar decompression surgery. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing elective one- or two-level lumbar decompression (laminectomy or laminotomy with or without discectomy) for degenerative spine disease. Patients were grouped as outpatient if they had a length of stay (LOS) < 24 hours and as inpatient if they stayed in the hospital ≥ 24 hours. Patients with ≥ 72-hour stay were excluded from the comparative analysis to increase baseline comparability between the two groups. To create two highly homogeneous groups, optimal matching was performed at a 1:1 ratio between the two groups on 38 baseline variables, including demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, indications, and operative details. Outcomes of interest were readmissions and reoperations at 30 days and 3 months after surgery, overall satisfaction, and decrease in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back pain, and leg pain at 3 months after surgery. Satisfaction was defined as a score of 1 or 2 in the North American Spine Society patient satisfaction index. Noninferiority of outpatient compared with inpatient surgery was defined as risk difference of < 1.5% at a one-sided 97.5% confidence interval. RESULTS: A total of 18,689 eligible one- and two-level decompression surgeries were identified. The matched study cohorts consisted of 5016 patients in each group. Nonroutine discharge was slightly less common in the outpatient group (0.6% vs 0.3%, p = 0.01). The 30-day readmission rates were 4.4% and 4.3% for the outpatient and inpatient groups, respectively, while the 30-day reoperation rates were 1.4% and 1.5%. The 3-month readmission rates were 6.3% for both groups, and the 3-month reoperation rates were 3.1% for the outpatient cases and 2.9% for the inpatient cases. Overall satisfaction at 3 months was 88.8% for the outpatient group and 88.4% for the inpatient group. Noninferiority of outpatient surgery was documented for readmissions, reoperations, and patient-reported satisfaction from surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient lumbar decompression surgery demonstrated slightly lower nonroutine discharge rates in comparison with inpatient surgery. Noninferiority in clinical outcomes at 30 days and 3 months after surgery was documented for outpatient compared with inpatient decompression surgery. Additionally, outpatient decompression surgery performed noninferiorly to inpatient surgery in achieving patient satisfaction from surgery.

Optimal hemoglobin A1C target in diabetics undergoing elective cervical spine surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a well-established risk factor for suboptimal outcomes following cervical spine surgery. Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), a surrogate for long-term glycemic control, is a valuable assessment tool in diabetic patients. PURPOSE: In patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery, we sought to identify optimal HbA1c levels to: (1) maximize 1-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and (2) predict the occurrence of medical and surgical complications. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data was performed in a single academic center. PATIENT SAMPLE: Diabetic patients undergoing elective anterior cervical fusion and posterior cervical laminectomy and fusion (PCLF) between October 2010-March 2021 were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-Neck pain, NRS-Arm pain, and Neck Disability Index (NDI). Secondary outcomes included surgical site infection (SSI), complications, readmissions, and reoperations within 90-days postoperatively. METHODS: HbA1c, demographic, comorbidity, and perioperative variables were gathered in diabetic patients only. PROs were analyzed as continuous variables and minimum clinically difference (MCID) was set at 30% improvement from baseline. RESULTS: Of 1992 registry patients undergoing cervical surgery, 408 diabetic patients underwent cervical fusion surgery. Anterior: A total of 259 diabetic patients underwent anterior cervical fusion, 141 of which had an available HbA1c level within one year prior to surgery. Mean age was 55.8±10.1, and mean HbA1c value was 7.2±1.4. HbA1c levels above 6.1 were associated with failure to achieve MCID for NDI (AUC=0.77, 95%CI 0.70-0.84, p<.001), and HbA1c levels above 6.8 may be associated with increased odds of reoperation (AUC=0.61, 95%CI 0.52-0.69, p=.078). Posterior: A total of 149 diabetic patients underwent PCLF, 65 of which had an available HbA1c level within 1 year. Mean age was 63.6±9.2, and mean HbA1c value was 7.2±1.5. Despite a low AUC for NRS-Arm pain and readmission, HbA1c levels above 6.8 may be associated with failure to achieve MCID for NRS-Arm pain (AUC=0.61, 95%CI 0.49-0.73, p=.094), and HbA1c levels above 7.6 may be associated with higher readmission rate (AUC=0.63, 95%CI 0.50-0.75, p=.185). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of diabetic patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery, HbA1c levels above 6.1 were associated with decreased odds of achieving MCID for NDI in anterior cervical fusion surgery. Though only moderate associations were seen for the select outcomes of reoperation (6.8), readmission (7.6), and MCID for NRS-Arm pain (6.8), preoperative optimization of HbA1c using these levels as benchmarks should be considered to reduce the risk of complications and maximize PROs for patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery.

Pseudarthrosis of the Cervical Spine.

Pseudarthrosis of the cervical spine represents a common and challenging problem for spine surgeons. Rates vary greatly from as low as 0%-20% to >60% and depend heavily on patient factors, approach, and number of levels. While some patients remain asymptomatic from pseudarthrosis, many require revision surgery due to instability, continued neck pain, or radiculopathy/myelopathy. We aimed to provide a practical, narrative review of cervical pseudarthrosis to address the following areas: (1) definitions, (2) incidence, (3) risk factors, (4) presentation and workup, (5) treatment decision-making, and (6) postoperative care. It is our hope the current review provides a concise summary for how to diagnose and treat challenging cervical nonunions.

Minimally invasive versus open lumbar spinal fusion: a matched study investigating patient-reported and surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: With the expanding indications for and increasing popularity of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for lumbar spinal fusion, large-scale outcomes analysis to compare MIS approaches with open procedures is warranted. METHODS: The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database for patients who underwent elective lumbar fusion for degenerative spine disease. They performed optimal matching, at a 1:2 ratio between patients who underwent MIS and those who underwent open lumbar fusion, to create two highly homogeneous groups in terms of 33 baseline variables (including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, indications, and operative details). The outcomes of interest were overall satisfaction, decrease in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and back and leg pain, as well as hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, reoperations, and incidental durotomy rate. Satisfaction was defined as a score of 1 or 2 on the North American Spine Society scale. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in ODI was defined as ≥ 30% decrease from baseline. Outcomes were assessed at the 3- and 12-month follow-up evaluations. RESULTS: After the groups were matched, the MIS and open groups consisted of 1483 and 2966 patients, respectively. Patients who underwent MIS fusion had higher odds of satisfaction at 3 months (OR 1.4, p = 0.004); no difference was demonstrated at 12 months (OR 1.04, p = 0.67). Lumbar stenosis, single-level fusion, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System grade, and absence of spondylolisthesis were most prominently associated with higher odds of satisfaction with MIS compared with open surgery. Patients in the MIS group had slightly lower ODI scores at 3 months (mean difference 1.61, p = 0.006; MCID OR 1.14, p = 0.0495) and 12 months (mean difference 2.35, p < 0.001; MCID OR 1.29, p < 0.001). MIS was also associated with a greater decrease in leg and back pain at both follow-up time points. The two groups did not differ in operative time and incidental durotomy rate; however, LOS was shorter for the MIS group. Revision surgery at 12 months was less likely for patients who underwent MIS (4.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who underwent lumbar fusion for degenerative spinal disease, MIS was associated with higher odds of satisfaction at 3 months postoperatively. No difference was demonstrated at the 12-month follow-up. MIS maintained a small, yet consistent, superiority in decreasing ODI and back and leg pain, and MIS was associated with a lower reoperation rate.

Is it Better to Stop at C2 or C3/4 in Elective Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: (a) Compare operative variables, complications, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with an upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) of C2 versus C3/4, and (b) assess outcomes based on C2 screw type. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: When performing elective posterior cervical laminectomy and fusion (PCLF), spine surgeons must choose the upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) at the subaxial cervical spine (C3/4) versus C2. Differences in long-term complications and PROs remain unknown. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective cohort study from a prospective registry was conducted. All patients undergoing elective, degenerative PCLF from December 2010 to June 2018 were included. Patients were divided into a UIV of C2 versus C3/4. Groups were 2:1 propensity matched for fusion extending to the thoracic spine. Demographics, operative, perioperative, complications, and 1-year PRO data were collected. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen patients underwent elective PCLF and were successfully propensity matched (39 C2 vs. 78 C3/4). Groups were similar in fusion extending to the thoracic spine (P = 0.588). Expectedly, the C2 group had more levels fused (5.63 ±â€Š1.89) compared with the C3/4 group (4.50 ±â€Š0.91) (P = 0.001). The C2 group had significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001), yet no differences were seen in estimated blood loss (EBL) (P = 0.494) or length of stay (LOS) (P = 0.424). Both groups significantly improved all PROs at 1-year (EQ-5D; NRS-NP/AP; NDI). Both groups had the same percentage of surgical adverse events at 6.8% (P = 1.00). Between C2 screw type, no differences were seen in operative time, EBL, LOS, complications, or PROs. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing elective PCLF, those instrumented to C2 had only longer operative times compared with those stopping at C3/4. No differences were seen in EBL, LOS, 1-year PROs, and complications. Type of C2 screw had no impact on outcomes. Besides increased operative time, instrumenting to C2 had no detectable difference on surgical outcomes or adverse event rates.Level of Evidence: 3.

Role of psychosocial factors on the effect of physical activity on physical function in patients after lumbar spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the longitudinal postoperative relationship between physical activity, psychosocial factors, and physical function in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: We enrolled 248 participants undergoing surgery for a degenerative lumbar spine condition. Physical activity was measured using a triaxial accelerometer (Actigraph GT3X) at 6-weeks (6wk), 6-months (6M), 12-months (12M) and 24-months (24M) following spine surgery. Physical function (computerized adaptive test domain version of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) and psychosocial factors (pain self-efficacy, depression and fear of movement) were assessed at preoperative visit and 6wk, 6M, 12M and 24M after surgery. Structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques were utilized to analyze data, and results are represented as standardized regression weights (SRW). Overall SRW were computed across five imputed datasets to account for missing data. The mediation effect of each psychosocial factor on the effect of physical activity on physical function were computed [(SRW for effect of activity on psychosocial factor X SRW for effect of psychosocial factor on function) ÷ SRW for effect of activity on function]. Each SEM model was tested for model fit by assessing established fit indexes. RESULTS: The overall effect of steps per day on physical function (SRW ranged from 0.08 to 0.19, p<0.05) was stronger compared to the overall effect of physical function on steps per day (SRW ranged from non-existent to 0.14, p<0.01 to 0.3). The effect of steps per day on physical function and function on steps per day remained consistent after accounting for psychosocial factors in each of the mediation models. Depression and fear of movement at 6M mediated 3.4% and 5.4% of the effect of steps per day at 6wk on physical function at 12M, respectively. Pain self-efficacy was not a statistically significant mediator. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that the relationship between physical activity and physical function is stronger than the relationship of function to activity. However, future research is needed to examine whether promoting physical activity during the early postoperative period may result in improvement of long-term physical function. Since depression and fear of movement had a very small mediating effect, additional work is needed to investigate other potential mediating factors such as pain catastrophizing, resilience and exercise self-efficacy.

Impact of predominant symptom location among patients undergoing cervical spine surgery on 12-month outcomes: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of the type of pain presentation on outcomes of spine surgery remains elusive. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of predominant symptom location (predominant arm pain vs predominant neck pain vs equal neck and arm pain) on postoperative improvement in patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database cervical spine module was queried for patients undergoing 1- or 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative spine disease. RESULTS: A total of 9277 patients were included in the final analysis. Of these patients, 18.4% presented with predominant arm pain, 32.3% presented with predominant neck pain, and 49.3% presented with equal neck and arm pain. Patients with predominant neck pain were found to have higher (worse) 12-month Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (coefficient 0.24, 95% CI 0.15-0.33; p < 0.0001). The three groups did not differ significantly in odds of return to work and achieving minimal clinically important difference in NDI score at the 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis from a national spine registry showed significantly lower odds of patient satisfaction and worse NDI score at 1 year after surgery for patients with predominant neck pain when compared with patients with predominant arm pain and those with equal neck and arm pain after 1- or 2-level ACDF. With regard to return to work, all three groups (arm pain, neck pain, and equal arm and neck pain) were found to be similar after multivariable analysis. The authors' results suggest that predominant pain location, especially predominant neck pain, might be a significant determinant of improvement in functional outcomes and patient satisfaction after ACDF for degenerative spine disease. In addition to confirmation of the common experience that patients with predominant neck pain have worse outcomes, the authors' findings provide potential targets for improvement in patient management for these specific populations.

How Many Steps Per Day During the Early Postoperative Period are Associated With Patient-Reported Outcomes of Disability, Pain, and Opioid Use After Lumbar Spine Surgery?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether early postoperative walking is associated with "best outcome" and no opioid use at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery and establish a threshold for steps/day to inform clinical practice. DESIGN: Secondary analysis from randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Two academic medical centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 248 participants undergoing surgery for a degenerative lumbar spine condition (N=248). A total of 212 participants (mean age, 62.8±11.4y, 53.3% female) had valid walking data at baseline. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back and leg pain (Brief Pain Inventory), and opioid use (yes vs no) were assessed at baseline and 1 year after surgery. "Best outcome" was defined as Oswestry Disability Index ≤20, back pain ≤2, and leg pain ≤2. Steps/day (walking) was assessed with an accelerometer worn for at least 3 days and 10 h/d at 6 weeks after spine surgery, which was considered as study baseline. Separate multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the association between steps/day at 6 weeks and "best outcome" and no opioid use at 1-year. Receiver operating characteristic curves identified a steps/day threshold for achieving outcomes. RESULTS: Each additional 1000 steps/d at 6 weeks after spine surgery was associated with 41% higher odds of achieving "best outcome" (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.74) and 38% higher odds of no opioid use (95% CI, 1.09-1.76) at 1 year. Walking ≥3500 steps/d was associated with 3.75 times the odds (95% CI, 1.56-9.02) of achieving "best outcome" and 2.37 times the odds (95% CI, 1.07-5.24) of not using opioids. CONCLUSIONS: Walking early after surgery may optimize patient-reported outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. A 3500 steps/d threshold may serve as an initial recommendation during early postoperative counseling.

Safety and feasibility of an early telephone-supported home exercise program after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a case series.

Objective: To describe the safety, feasibility, and preliminary outcomes of an early telephone-supported home exercise program (HEP) performed within the first 6 weeks after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery.Methods: Eight patients (mean ± SD age = 53.4 ± 14.9 years, 5 females) were enrolled in this case series. Immediately after surgery, patients began a 6-week HEP including daily walking, deep breathing, distraction techniques, and cervical and upper body exercises. The HEP was supported by weekly telephone calls by a physical therapist. Safety for performing early exercise was examined with radiographic imaging at 6 months. Adverse events were assessed through weekly calls with a physical therapist. HEP adherence and acceptability data were obtained by patient self-report. Clinical measures were assessed preoperatively, at 6 weeks and at 6 months, and included the Neck Disability Index, Numeric Rating Scale for pain, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, and accelerometry for physical activity.Results: Early radiographic imaging showed no signs of nonunion at 6 months. There were no reports of serious adverse events. At 6 months, all patients reported clinically significant changes in pain catastrophizing. Seven (88%) patients had clinically significant changes in disability and arm pain, six (75%) patients for neck pain and pain self-efficacy, and five (53%) patients for fear of movement. Only three (43%) of seven patients showed increased physical activity at 6 months.Conclusion: Based on this small case series, an early telephone-supported HEP appears safe for patients, feasible to implement, and promising for clinical benefits.

Bouncing back after lumbar spine surgery: early postoperative resilience is associated with 12-month physical function, pain interference, social participation, and disability.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Positive psychosocial factors early after surgery, such as resilience and self-efficacy, may be important characteristics for informing individualized postoperative care. PURPOSE: To examine the association of early postoperative resilience and self-efficacy on 12-month physical function, pain interference, social participation, disability, pain intensity, and physical activity after lumbar spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Pooled secondary analysis of prospectively collected trial data from two academic medical centers. PATIENT SAMPLE: Two hundred and forty-eight patients who underwent laminectomy with or without fusion for a degenerative lumbar condition. OUTCOME MEASURES: Physical function, pain inference, and social participation (ability to participate in social roles and activities) were measured using the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. The Oswestry Disability Index, Numeric Rating Scale, and accelerometer activity counts were used to measure disability, pain intensity, and physical activity, respectively. METHODS: Participants completed validated outcome questionnaires at 6 weeks (baseline) and 12 months after surgery. Baseline positive psychosocial factors included resilience (Brief Resilience Scale) and self-efficacy (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). Multivariable linear regression analyses were used to assess the associations between early postoperative psychosocial factors and 12-month outcomes adjusting for age, sex, study site, randomized group, fusion status, fear of movement (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), and outcome score at baseline. This study was funded by Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and Foundation for Physical Therapy Research. There are no conflicts of interest. RESULTS: Resilience at 6 weeks after surgery was associated with 12-month physical function (unstandardized beta=1.85 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29; 3.40]), pain interference (unstandardized beta=-1.80 [95% CI: -3.48; -0.12]), social participation (unstandardized beta=2.69 [95% CI: 0.97; 4.41]), and disability (unstandardized beta=-3.03 [95% CI: -6.04; -0.02]). Self-efficacy was associated with 12-month disability (unstandardized beta=-0.21 [95% CI: -0.37; -0.04]. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative resilience and pain self-efficacy were associated with improved 12-month patient-reported outcomes after spine surgery. Future work should consider how early postoperative screening for positive psychosocial characteristics can enhance risk stratification and targeted rehabilitation management in patients undergoing spine surgery.

Seated Lateral X-ray Is a Better Stress Radiograph of the Lumbar Spine Compared to Standing Flexion.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective lumbar radiograph analysis. OBJECTIVE: To compare changes in lumbar lordosis in standing flexion versus seated lateral radiographs. METHODS: Standing lateral, standing flexion, and seated lateral X-rays of the lumbar spine were obtained in patients presenting with low back pain. Trauma, tumor, and revision cases were excluded. Changes in global lumbar as well as segmental lordosis were measured in each position. RESULTS: Seventy adult patients were reviewed. Overall, the greatest changes in lordosis were seen at L4-S1 in both the seated and flexion X-rays (12.5° and 6.3°, respectively). Greater kyphosis was seen in seated versus flexion X-rays (21.6° vs 15.8°); changes in lordosis from L1-L3 were similar in both positions, with little change seen at these levels (approximately 5° to 7°). On subgroup analysis, these differences were magnified in analyzing only patients that moved at least 20° globally, and there were no significant differences between sitting and flexion in "stiff" patients that moved less than 20° globally. CONCLUSION: Greater lumbar kyphosis was seen in the seated position compared to standing flexion, especially from L4-S1. Given these results we suggest the use of seated lateral X-rays to dynamically assess the lumbar spine. These findings may also guide future research into the mechanism and clinical relevance of a stiff versus mobile lumbar spine, as well as into the sensitivity of seated X-rays in detecting instability.

Clinically Meaningful Improvement Following Cervical Spine Surgery: 30% Reduction Versus Absolute Point-change MCID Values.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of 30% reduction to established absolute point-change values for measures of disability and pain in patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recent studies recommend using a proportional change from baseline instead of an absolute point-change value to define minimum clinically important difference (MCID). METHODS: Analyses included 13,179 patients who underwent cervical spine surgery for degenerative disease between April 2013 and February 2018. Participants completed a baseline and 12-month follow-up assessment that included questionnaires to assess disability (Neck Disability Index [NDI]), neck and arm pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS-NP/AP], and satisfaction [NASS scale]). Participants were classified as met or not met 30% reduction from baseline in each of the respective measures. The 30% reduction in scores at 12 months was compared to a wide range of established absolute point-change MCID values using receiver-operating characteristic curves, area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and logistic regression analyses. These analyses were conducted for the entire patient cohort, as well as for subgroups based on baseline severity and surgical approach. RESULTS: Thirty percent reduction in NDI and NRS-NP/AP scores predicted satisfaction with more accuracy than absolute point-change values for the total population and ACDF and posterior fusion procedures (P < 0.05). The largest AUROC differences, in favor of 30% reduction, were found for the lowest disability (ODI 0-20%: 16.8%) and bed-bound disability (ODI 81%-100%: 16.6%) categories. For pain, there was a 1.9% to 11% and 1.6% to 9.6% AUROC difference for no/mild neck and arm pain (NRS 0-4), respectively, in favor of a 30% reduction threshold. CONCLUSION: A 30% reduction from baseline is a valid method for determining MCID in disability and pain for patients undergoing cervical spine surgery.Level of Evidence: 3.

A novel lumbar total joint replacement may be an improvement over fusion for degenerative lumbar conditions: a comparative analysis of patient-reported outcomes at one year.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Effective alternatives to lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions have remained elusive. Anterior total disc replacement does not address facet pathology or central/recess stenosis, resulting in limited indications. A posterior-based motion-preserving option that allows for neural decompression, facetectomy, and reconstruction of the disc and facets may have a role. PURPOSE: The purpose was to compare one-year patient-reported outcomes for a novel, all-posterior, lumbar total joint replacement (LTJR - replacing both the disc and facet joints) against transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative lumbar conditions warranting fusion (degenerative spondylolisthesis, recurrent disc herniation, severe foraminal stenosis requiring facet removal, and adjacent segment degeneration). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data comparing outcomes for LTJR patients to TLIF patients at an academic teaching hospital. PATIENT SAMPLE: Analysis was conducted on 156 adult TLIF patients who were propensity matched to the 52 LTJR patients for a total sample of 208. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for back and leg pain were compared preoperatively, 3 months and 1 year after surgery. METHODS: The implant is a motion-preserving lumbar reconstruction that replaces the function of both the disc and facets and is implanted using a bilateral transforaminal approach with complete facetectomies. Adult patients with degenerative lumbar pathology undergoing either LTJR or open TLIF were analyzed. These degenerative conditions included: grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis, recurrent disc herniation, adjacent segment disease, disc degeneration with severe foraminal stenosis). Trauma, tumor, grade 2 or higher spondylolisthesis, spinal deformity, and infection cases were excluded. Propensity score matching was performed to ensure parity between the cohorts. Multivariable regression analyses were done to compare the 1-year results as measured by 3 different standards to assess procedure success. RESULTS: At 3 months, both the LTJR and TLIF cohorts showed significant and similar improvements in ODI and NRS back and leg pain. At 1 year, the LTJR cohort showed continued improvement in ODI and NRS back pain, while the TLIF group showed a plateau for ODI, back and leg pain. In a series of three multivariable logistic regressions, LTJR was shown to provide 3.3 times greater odds of achieving the minimal clinical symptom state in disability and pain (ODI <20%, NRS back and leg pain <2) and 2.4 and 4.1 times greater odds of achieving substantial clinical benefit (18% reduction in ODI) and minimal clinically important difference (30% reduction in ODI) as compared to TLIF. CONCLUSIONS: Here we present a comparative analysis for the first 52 patients undergoing a novel, posterior-based LTJR for the lumbar spine versus TLIF for degenerative pathology. The approach for the LTJR allows for wide neural decompression, facetectomy, and complete discectomy, with the implant working to replace the function of the disc and facets to preserve motion. At 1 year, the LTJR cohort showed significant improvement in ODI and NRS back and leg pain as compared to TLIF. These results suggest that wide neural decompression combined with motion preservation using this novel LTJR may represent a viable alternative to TLIF for treating certain degenerative conditions. A prospective controlled trial is under development to further evaluate the efficacy, safety, and durability of this procedure.

Early postoperative physical activity and function: a descriptive case series study of 53 patients after lumbar spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective case series study was to compare changes in early postoperative physical activity and physical function between 6 weeks and 3 and 6 months after lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: Fifty-three patients (mean [95% confidence interval; CI] age = 59.2 [56.2, 62.3] years, 64% female) who underwent spine surgery for a degenerative lumbar condition were assessed at 6 weeks and 3- and 6-months after surgery. The outcomes were objectively-measured physical activity (accelerometry) and patient-reported and objective physical function. Physical activity was assessed using mean steps/day and time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) over a week. Physical function measures included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), Timed Up and Go (TUG), and 10-Meter Walk (10 MW). We compared changes over time in physical activity and function using generalized estimating equations with robust estimator and first-order autoregressive covariance structure. Proportion of patients who engaged in meaningful physical activity (e.g., walked at least 4400 and 6000 steps/day or engaged in at least 150 min/week in MVPA) and achieved clinically meaningful changes in physical function were compared at 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: After surgery, 72% of patients initiated physical therapy (mean [95%CI] sessions =8.5 [6.6, 10.4]) between 6 weeks and 3 months. Compared to 6 weeks post-surgery, no change in steps/day or time in MVPA/week was observed at 3 or 6 months. From 21 to 23% and 9 to 11% of participants walked at least 4400 and 6000 steps/day at 3 and 6 months, respectively, while none of the participants spent at least 150 min/week in MVPA at these same time points. Significant improvements were observed on ODI, SF-12, TUG and 10 MW (p <  0.05), with over 43 to 68% and 62 to 87% achieving clinically meaningful improvements on these measures at 3 and 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Limited improvement was observed in objectively-measured physical activity from 6 weeks to 6 months after spine surgery, despite moderate to large function gains. Early postoperative physical therapy interventions targeting physical activity may be needed.