Surgical versus conservative treatment for odontoid fractures in older people: an international prospective comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for odontoid fractures in older people remains debated. Odontoid fractures are increasingly relevant to clinical practice due to ageing of the population. METHODS: An international prospective comparative study was conducted in fifteen European centres, involving patients aged ≥55 years with type II/III odontoid fractures. The surgeon and patient jointly decided on the applied treatment. Surgical and conservative treatments were compared. Primary outcomes were Neck Disability Index (NDI) improvement, fracture union and stability at 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes were Visual Analogue Scale neck pain, Likert patient-perceived recovery and EuroQol-5D-3L at 52 weeks. Subgroup analyses considered age, type II and displaced fractures. Multivariable regression analyses adjusted for age, gender and fracture characteristics. RESULTS: The study included 276 patients, of which 144 (52%) were treated surgically and 132 (48%) conservatively (mean (SD) age 77.3 (9.1) vs. 76.6 (9.7), P = 0.56). NDI improvement was largely similar between surgical and conservative treatments (mean (SE) -11 (2.4) vs. -14 (1.8), P = 0.08), as were union (86% vs. 78%, aOR 2.3, 95% CI 0.97-5.7) and stability (99% vs. 98%, aOR NA). NDI improvement did not differ between patients with union and persistent non-union (mean (SE) -13 (2.0) vs. -12 (2.8), P = 0.78). There was no difference for any of the secondary outcomes or subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcome and fracture healing at 52 weeks were similar between treatments. Clinical outcome and fracture union were not associated. Treatments should prioritize favourable clinical over radiological outcomes.

Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Compared with Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy: Two-Year Results of the FACET Randomized Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: Posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) is a valid alternative to anterior discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) as a surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy, but the quality of evidence has been limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of these treatments after 2 years of follow-up. We hypothesized that posterior surgery would be noninferior to anterior surgery. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial assessed patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy in 9 Dutch hospitals with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The primary outcomes measured reduction of cervical radicular pain and were the success ratio based on the Odom criteria, and arm pain and decrease in arm pain, evaluated with the visual analog scale, with a 10% noninferiority margin, which represents the maximum acceptable difference between the new treatment (posterior surgery) and the standard treatment (anterior surgery), beyond which the new treatment would be considered clinically unacceptable. The secondary outcomes were neck pain, Neck Disability Index, Work Ability Index, quality of life, complications (including reoperations), and treatment satisfaction. Generalized linear mixed effects modeling was used for analyses. The study was registered at the Overview of Medical Research in the Netherlands (OMON), formerly the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5536). RESULTS: From January 2016 to May 2020, 265 patients were randomized (132 to the posterior surgery group and 133 to the anterior surgery group). Among these, 25 did not have the allocated intervention; 11 of these 25 patients had symptom improvement, and the rest of the patients did not have the intervention due to various reasons. At the 2-year follow-up, of 243 patients, primary outcome data were available for 236 patients (97%). Predicted proportions of a successful outcome were 0.81 after posterior surgery and 0.74 after anterior surgery (difference in rate, -0.06 [1-sided 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.02]), indicating the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The between-group difference in arm pain was -2.7 (1-sided 95% CI, 7.4) and the between-group difference in the decrease in arm pain was 1.5 (1-sided 95% CI, 8.2), both confirming the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The secondary outcomes demonstrated small between-group differences. Serious surgery-related adverse events occurred in 9 patients (8%) who underwent posterior surgery, including 9 reoperations, and 11 patients (9%) who underwent anterior surgery, including 7 reoperations (difference in reoperation rate, -0.02 [2-sided 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.05]). CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrated that, after a 2-year follow-up, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery with regard to the success rate and arm pain reduction in patients with cervical radiculopathy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Accurate placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws using a handheld iOS-based navigation device: a prospective intra-patient agreement study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate pedicle screw placement is a challenge with reported misplacement rates of 10% and higher. A handheld navigation device (HND) may provide accuracy equal to CT-based navigation (CT-Nav) but without the cost and complexity. OBJECTIVE: To study the accuracy of a handheld navigation device for pedicle screw placement. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective cross-sectional study with consistently applied reference standard enrolled 20 patients undergoing 92 pedicle screw placements. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent pedicle screw placement between May 2022 and September 2022. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pedicle screw placement accuracy per Gertzbein-Robbins. METHODS: Once the screw pilot hole was established, the proposed trajectory of the HND was compared with that proposed by CT-Nav. Postoperatively, screw accuracy was graded according to Gertzbein-Robbins by a blinded radiologist based on CT scans. Accuracy was compared between the two systems and published control for fluoroscopy assisted and CT-Nav placement using Bayesian posterior distribution. RESULTS: The trajectory proposed by the HND and CT-Nav were in agreement in 98.9% (95% Exact CI; 94.09%-99.97%). The HND accuracy was 98.9% with 91 screws rated "A" and 1 rated "C". Noninferiority to fluoroscopic placement was achieved because the one-sided normal-approximation 95% CI Lower Bound (LB) of 95.3% is greater than the Performance Goal (PG) of 83.4%. Posthoc analysis demonstrated that the probability of superiority of the HND relative to the historical accuracy rate of 91.5% for fluoroscopy assisted procedures is >0.999 and that the HND's accuracy rate is within 4.5% of CT-Nav of 95.5% is >0.999. No adverse events or intra-operative complications associated with HND were observed. There was 1 (1.1%) intra-operative repositioning and no reoperations for any reason. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy rate of the HND was 98.9%, and the proposed trajectory matched with CT-Nav in 98.9% of the time. This is superior to the historical published accuracy rate for fluoroscopy-assisted procedures and equivalent to the historical published accuracy rate for CT-Nav. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch trial register NL74268.058.20.

Clinical Utility of An Intervertebral Motion Metric for Deciding on the Addition of Instrumented Fusion in Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective single-arm clinical study. OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical utility of an intervertebral motion metric by determining the proportion of patients for whom it changed their surgical treatment plan from decompression only to decompression with fusion or vice versa. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) from degenerative spondylolisthesis is commonly treated with decompression only or decompression with additional instrumented fusion. An objective diagnostic tool capable of establishing abnormal motion between lumbar vertebrae to guide decision-making between surgical procedures is needed. To this end a metric, based on the vertebral sagittal plane translation-per-degree-of-rotation (TPDR) calculated from flexion-extension radiographs, was developed. METHODS: First, spine surgeons documented their intended surgical plan. Subsequently, the participants' flexion-extension radiographs were taken. From these the TPDR was calculated and reported as a Sagittal Plane Shear Index (SPSI). The SPSI metric of the spinal level intended to treat was used to decide if the intended surgical plan needed to be changed or not. RESULTS: SPSI was determined for 75 participants. Of these, 51 (68%) had an intended surgical plan of decompression only and 24 (32%) decompression with fusion. In 63% of participants the SPSI was in support of their intended surgical plan. For 29% of participants the surgeon changed the surgical plan after the SPSI metric became available to them. A suggested change in surgical plan was overruled in 8% of participants. The final surgical plan was decompression only for 59 (79%) and decompression with fusion for 16 (21%) participants. CONCLUSION: The 29% change in intended surgical plans suggested that SPSI was considered by spine surgeons as an adjunct metric in deciding whether to perform decompression only or or to add instrumented fusion. This change exceeded the a priori defined 15% considered necessary to show potential clinical utility of SPSI.

Low-Threshold-For-Surgery Versus Primarily-Conservative Treatment for Odontoid Fractures in the Elderly: Evaluating Practice Variation in The Netherlands.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Odontoid fractures are the most common cervical spine fractures in the elderly. The optimal treatment remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare results of a low-threshold-for-surgery strategy (surgery for dislocated fractures in relatively healthy patients) to a primarily-conservative strategy (for all patients). METHODS: Patient records from 5 medical centers were reviewed for patients who met the selection criteria (e.g. age ≥55 years, type II/III odontoid fractures). Demographics, fracture types/characteristics, fracture union/stability, clinical outcome and mortality were compared. The influence of age on outcome was studied (≥55-80 vs ≥80 years). RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were included: 120 treated with low-threshold-for-surgery (of which 22 primarily operated, and 23 secondarily) vs 53 treated primarily-conservative. No differences in demographics and fracture characteristics between the groups were identified. Fracture union (53% vs 43%) and fracture stability (90% vs 85%) at last follow-up did not differ between groups. The majority of patients (56%) achieved clinical improvement compared to baseline. Analysis of differences in clinical outcome between groups was infeasible due to data limitations. In both strategies, patients ≥80 years achieved worse union (64% vs 30%), worse stability (97% vs 77%), and - as to be expected - increased mortality <104 weeks (2% vs 22%). CONCLUSIONS: Union and stability rates did not differ between the treatment strategies. Advanced age (≥80 years) negatively influenced both radiological outcome and mortality. No cases of secondary neurological deficits were identified, suggesting that concerns for the consequences of under-treatment may be unjustified.

Cost effectiveness of implanting a prosthesis after anterior cervical discectomy for radiculopathy: results of the NECK randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In the treatment of cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc, potential surgical treatments include: anterior cervical discectomy (ACD), ACD and fusion using a cage (ACDF), and anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA). Previous publications yielded comparable clinical and radiological outcome data for the various implants, but research on their comparative costutility has been inconclusive. PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost utility of ACD, ACDF, and ACDA. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: About 109 patients with cervical radiculopathy randomized to undergo ACD, ACDF, or ACDA as part of the NEtherlands Cervical Kinetics trial. OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) estimated from patient-reported utilities using the EuroQol-5D questionnaire and EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS), measured at baseline, 2, 4, 8, 12, 26, 52, and 104 weeks postprocedure. Societal costs including admissions to hospital (related and otherwise), GP visits, specialist visits, physical therapy, medications, home care, aids, informal care, productivity losses, and out of pocket condition-related expenses. METHODS: The cost utility of the competing strategies over 1 and 2 years was assessed following a net benefit (NB) approach, whereby the intervention with the highest NB among competing strategies is preferred. Cost effectiveness acceptability curves were produced to reflect the probability of each strategy being the most cost effective across various willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. Five sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of results. RESULTS: ACDF was more likely to be the most cost-effective strategy at WTP thresholds of €20,000 to 50,000/QALY in all but one of the analyses. The mean QALYs during the first year were 0.750, 0.817, and 0.807 for ACD, ACDF, and ACDA, respectively, with no significant differences between groups. Total healthcare costs over the first year were significantly higher for ACDA, largely due to the higher surgery and implant costs. The total societal costs of the three strategies were €12,173 for ACD, €11,195 for ACDF, and €13,746 for ACDA, with no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that ACDF is likely to be more cost-effective than ACDA or ACD at most WTP thresholds, and this conclusion is robust to most sensitivity analyses conducted. It is demonstrated that the difference in costs is mainly caused by the initial surgical costs and that there are only minimal differences in other costs during follow-up. Since clinical data are comparable between the groups, it is to the judgment of the patient and surgeon which intervention is applied.

Clinical outcome in decompression alone versus decompression and instrumented fusion in patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: In the surgical treatment of isthmic spondylolisthesis, it is debatable whether instrumented fusion is mandatory in addition to decompression. The objective of this prospective cohort study was to assess the long-term effect of decompression alone compared with decompression and instrumented fusion in patients who underwent the intervention of their own preference. The results were compared with those in patients who underwent randomly assigned treatment. METHODS: The authors performed a prospective observational multicenter cohort study, including 91 patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis assigned to undergo either decompression alone (n = 44) or decompression and fusion (n = 47). The main outcomes were the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) scores and the patient's perceived recovery at the 2-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes were visual analog scale (VAS) leg pain and back pain scores and the reoperation rate. A meta-analysis was performed for data from this cohort study (n = 91) and from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) previously reported by the authors (n = 84). Subgroup analyses were performed on these combined data for age, sex, weight, smoking, and Meyerding grade. RESULTS: At the 12-week follow-up, improvements of RDQ scores were comparable for the two procedures (decompression alone [D group] 4.4, 95% CI 2.3-6.5; decompression and fusion [DF group] 5.8, 95% CI -4.3 to 1.4; p = 0.31). Likewise, VAS leg pain scores (D group 35.0, 95% CI 24.5-45.6; DF group 47.5, 95% CI 37.4-57.5; p = 0.09) and VAS back pain scores (D group 23.5, 95% CI 13.3-33.7; DF group 34.0, 95% CI 24.1-43.8; p = 0.15) were comparable. At the 2-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of scores for RDQ (difference -3.1, 95% CI -6.4 to 0.3, p = 0.07), VAS leg pain (difference -7.4, 95% CI -22.1 to 7.2, p = 0.31), and VAS back pain (difference -11.4, 95% CI -25.7 to 2.9, p = 0.12). In contrast, patient-perceived recovery from leg pain was significantly higher in the DF group (79% vs 51%, p = 0.02). Subgroup analyses did not demonstrate a superior outcome for decompression alone compared with decompression and fusion. Nine patients (20.5%) underwent reoperation in total, all in the D group. The meta-analysis including both the cohort and RCT populations yielded an estimated pooled mean difference in RDQ of -3.7 (95% CI -5.94 to -1.55, p = 0.0008) in favor of decompression and fusion at the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis, at the 2-year follow-up, patients who underwent decompression and fusion showed superior functional outcome and perceived recovery compared with those who underwent decompression alone. No subgroups benefited from decompression alone. Therefore, decompression and fusion is recommended over decompression alone as a primary surgical treatment option in isthmic spondylolisthesis.

Noninferiority of Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy vs Anterior Cervical Discectomy With Fusion for Procedural Success and Reduction in Arm Pain Among Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy at 1 Year: The FACET Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The choice between posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) and anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) for cervical foraminal radiculopathy remains controversial. Objective: To investigate the noninferiority of posterior vs anterior surgery in patients with cervical foraminal radiculopathy with regard to clinical outcomes after 1 year. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter investigator-blinded noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 2016 to May 2020 with a total follow-up of 2 years. Patients were included from 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. Of 389 adult patients with 1-sided single-level cervical foraminal radiculopathy screened for eligibility, 124 declined to participate or did not meet eligibility criteria. Patients with pure axial neck pain without radicular pain were not eligible. Of 265 patients randomized (132 to posterior and 133 to anterior), 15 were lost to follow-up and 228 were included in the 1-year analysis (110 in posterior and 118 in anterior). Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to posterior foraminotomy or anterior cervical discectomy with fusion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were proportion of success using Odom criteria and decrease in arm pain using a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100 with a noninferiority margin of 10% (assuming advantages with posterior surgery over anterior surgery that would justify a tolerable loss of efficacy of 10%). Secondary outcomes were neck pain, disability, quality of life, work status, treatment satisfaction, reoperations, and complications. Analyses were performed with 2-proportion z tests at 1-sided .05 significance levels with Bonferroni corrections. Results: Among 265 included patients, the mean (SD) age was 51.2 (8.3) years; 133 patients (50%) were female and 132 (50%) were male. Patients were randomly assigned to posterior (132) or anterior (133) surgery. The proportion of success was 0.88 (86 of 98) in the posterior surgery group and 0.76 (81 of 106) in the anterior surgery group (difference, -0.11 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI, -0.01) and the between-group difference in arm pain was -2.8 (1-sided 95% CI, -9.4) at 1-year follow-up, indicating noninferiority of posterior surgery. Decrease in arm pain had a between-group difference of 3.4 (1-sided 95% CI, 11.8), crossing the noninferiority margin with 1.8 points. All secondary outcomes had 2-sided 95% CIs clustered around 0 with small between-group differences. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery for patients with cervical radiculopathy regarding success rate and arm pain at 1 year. Decrease in arm pain and secondary outcomes had small between-group differences. These results may be used to enhance shared decision-making. Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register Identifier: NTR5536.

Long-term results of the NECK trial-implanting a disc prosthesis after cervical anterior discectomy cannot prevent adjacent segment disease: five-year clinical follow-up of a double-blinded randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Motion preserving anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA) in patients with cervical radiculopathy was introduced to prevent symptomatic adjacent segment disease as compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term outcome in patients with cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc undergoing ACDA, ACDF or ACD (no cage, no plate) in terms of clinical outcome measured by the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Likewise, clinically relevant adjacent segment disease is assessed as a long-term result. STUDY DESIGN: Double-blinded randomized controlled trial. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 109 patients with one level herniated disc were randomized to one of the following treatments: ACDA, ACDF with intervertebral cage, ACD without cage. OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical outcome was measured by patients' self-reported NDI, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) neck pain, VAS arm pain, SF36, EQ-5D, perceived recovery and reoperation rate. Radiological outcome was assessed by radiographic cervical curvature and adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) parameters at baseline and up until five years after surgery. METHODS: To account for the correlation between repeated measurements of the same individual Generalized Estimated Equations (GEE) were used to calculate treatment effects, expressed in difference in marginal mean values for NDI per treatment group. RESULTS: Clinical outcome parameters were comparable in the ACDA and ACDF group, but significantly worse in the ACD group, though not reaching clinical relevance. Annual reoperation rate was 3.6% in the first two years after surgery, declined to 1.9% in the years thereafter. The number of reoperations for ASD was not lower in the ACDA group, while the number of reoperations at the index level was higher after ACD, when compared to ACDF and ACDA. CONCLUSIONS: A persisting absence of clinical superiority was demonstrated for the cervical disc prosthesis five years after surgery. Specifically, clinically relevant adjacent level disease was not prevented by implanting a prosthesis. Single level ACD without implanting an intervertebral device provided worse clinical outcome, which was hypothesized to be caused by delayed fusion. This stresses the need for focusing on timely fusion in future research.

The type of cervical disc herniation on MRI does not correlate to clinical outcomes.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the type of cervical disc herniation influences the severity of symptoms at the time of presentation, and the outcome after surgical treatment. METHODS: The type and extent of disc herniation at the time of presentation in 108 patients who underwent anterior discectomy for cervical radiculopathy were analyzed on MRI, using a four-point scale. These were dichotomized into disc bulge and disc herniation groups. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain in the neck and arm at baseline and two years postoperatively. The perceived recovery was also assessed at this time. RESULTS: At baseline, 46 patients had a disc bulge and 62 had a herniation. There was no significant difference in the mean NDI and SF-36 between the two groups at baseline. Those in the disc bulge group had a mean NDI of 44.6 (SD 15.2) compared with 43.8 (SD 16.0) in the herniation group (p = 0.799), and a mean SF-36 of 59.2 (SD 6.9) compared with 59.4 (SD 7.7) (p = 0.895). Likewise, there was no significant difference in the incidence of disabling arm pain in the disc bulge and herniation groups (84% vs 73%; p = 0.163), and no significant difference in the incidence of disabling neck pain in the two groups (70.5% (n = 31) vs 63% (n = 39); p = 0.491). At two years after surgery, no significant difference was found in any of the clinical parameters between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with cervical radiculopathy, the type and extent of disc herniation measured on MRI prior to surgery correlated neither to the severity of the symptoms at presentation, nor to clinical outcomes at two years postoperatively.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1242-1248.

The impact of mental health on outcome after anterior cervical discectomy: cohort study assessing the influence of mental health using predictive modelling.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are common mental disorders among patients with chronic pain. It is hypothesised that patients suffering from these disorders benefit less from cervical spine surgery than mentally healthy patients. Therefore, this study aimed to quantify the effect of mental health status on functional outcome after anterior cervical discectomy in a post hoc analysis on RCT data. METHODS: One hundred eight patients from the NECK trial, with radiculopathy due to a one-level herniated disc, underwent anterior cervical discectomy and were included into this analysis. Functional outcome was quantified using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and mental health status was measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) questionnaire. NDI differences were assessed using generalised estimated equations (GEE), crude means, a predictive linear mixed model (LMM) using baseline scores and over time with an explanatory LMM. RESULTS: At baseline, 24% and 32% of patients were respectively depressed and anxious and had statistically significant and clinically relevant higher NDI scores during follow-up. However, in those patients in which the HADS returned to normal during follow-up, NDI values decreased comparably to the non-depression or non-anxiety cases. Those patients that demonstrated persisting high HADS values had convincingly worse NDI scores. A predictive LMM showed that combining baseline NDI and HADS scores was highly predictive of NDI during follow-up. The R shiny application enabled the effective, visual communication of results from the predictive LMM. CONCLUSION: This study shows that mental health status and disability are strongly associated and provides insight into the size of the effect, as well as a way to use this relation to improve preoperative patient counselling. These findings give rise to the suggestion that incorporating mental health screening in the preoperative assessment of patients could help to adequately manage patients' expectations for functional recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register Number: NTR1289.

Intercostal lung herniation; a rare complication after mini-transthoracic approach (TTA) for thoracic disc herniation. Two case reports and review of literature.

BACKGROUND: Lung herniation is a rare condition, most often due to thoracic injury, but has also been described as a complication following cardiothoracic surgery. Here, we report two cases of post-surgical lung herniation following a neurosurgical mini-transthoracic (mini-TTA) for treatment of thoracic herniated discs. With this report we aim to make surgeons aware of this rare complication, review existing literature on surgical repairs and describe our novel correction technique using video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and a combination of mesh covering the muscle defect internally and nitinol rib plates for rib approximation on the outside of the thoracic cavity. CASE DESCRIPTION: Patient A was an 85-year-old man who presented with a subcutaneous swelling at the site of surgery following a left sided mini-TTA. Computed tomography (CT) revealed pulmonary tissue herniation. He underwent VATS guided reconstruction. Using two Ventralex meshes covering the defect on the inside and a NiTi-rib H-plate for rib approximation. Patient B was a 73-year-old woman who developed pulmonary complaints with a soft mass at the surgery site after a left sided mini-TTA. She also underwent VATS guided reconstruction. A large Sempramesh composite mesh and two NiTi-Rib H-plates were used. Recovery was uncomplicated and follow-up revealed no recurrence in both cases. CONCLUSION: These cases should make surgeons aware of the possibility of post-surgical development of lung herniation and describe successful correction using a combination of mesh material and NiTi-Rib H-plates through a VATS technique.

Interspinous process device versus conventional decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Interspinous process distraction devices (IPDs) can be implanted to treat patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication (INC) due to lumbar spinal stenosis. Short-term results provided evidence that the outcomes of IPD implantation were comparable to those of decompressive surgery, although the reoperation rate was higher in patients who received an IPD. This study focuses on the long-term results. METHODS: Patients with INC and spinal stenosis at 1 or 2 levels randomly underwent either decompression or IPD implantation. Patients were blinded to the allocated treatment. The primary outcome was the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) score at 5-year follow-up. Repeated measurement analysis was applied to compare outcomes over time. RESULTS: In total, 159 patients were included and randomly underwent treatment: 80 patients were randomly assigned to undergo IPD implantation, and 79 underwent spinal bony decompression. At 5 years, the success rates in terms of ZCQ score were similar (68% of patients who underwent IPD implantation had a successful recovery vs 56% of those who underwent bony decompression, p = 0.422). The reoperation rate at 2 years after surgery was substantial in the IPD group (29%), but no reoperations were performed thereafter. Long-term visual analog scale score for back pain was lower in the IPD group than the bony decompression group (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: IPD implantation is a more expensive alternative to decompressive surgery for INC but has comparable functional outcome during follow-up. The risk of reoperation due to absence of recovery is substantial in the first 2 years after IPD implantation, but if surgery is successful this positive effect remains throughout long-term follow-up. The IPD group had less back pain during long-term follow-up, but the clinical relevance of this finding is debatable.

Case report: Anterior midline decompression of a cervical epidural abscess: Technical note and case series of seven patients.

Background: A spinal epidural abscess (SEA) of the cervical spine is a relatively rare disease and is generally characterized by progressive neurological deterioration due to compression of the spinal cord. Up to 40% of cervical SEAs are located ventrally of the spinal cord. Urgent surgical intervention is warranted to decompress the spinal cord and collect material for cultures to guide antibiotic treatment. However, the optimal timing of the intervention is unclear, and the associated risk of spinal instability in the presence of an extensive infection is a significant clinical dilemma. Methods: In this paper, we present a novel surgical technique to treat a cervical SEA by anterior decompression through a linear transvertebral midline approach. This technique has the advantage of effectively draining the ventrally located SEA and obtaining material for bacteria culture while maintaining spinal stability without additional instrumentation. Results: This case study presents seven patients with cervical SEAs who were successfully treated with surgical decompression by this transvertebral linear midline technique and antibiotic treatment. Conclusion: Anterior decompression through a linear transvertebral midline approach for a ventrally located cervical SEA is a safe and pragmatic surgical procedure to achieve spinal cord decompression and collect bacteria culture without destabilizing the cervical spine.

The Clinical Relevance of the Cervical Disc Prosthesis: Combining Clinical Results of Two RCTs.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis was performed on data from 251 patients that were included in two randomized, double-blinded clinical trials comparing clinical results of anterior cervical discectomy and arthroplasty (ACDA) to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), and anterior cervical discectomy (ACD), for single-level disc herniation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate whether the ACDA procedure offers superior clinical results 2 years after surgery, to either ACDF or ACD without instrumentation, in the entire group of patients or in a particular subgroup of patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The cervical disc prosthesis was introduced to provide superior clinical outcomes after ACD. METHODS: Neck Disability Index (NDI), and subscales of the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) and McGill pain score were collected at baseline, 1 year and 2 years after surgery. Reoperations and complications were also evaluated. A preliminary subgroup analysis was performed for age, disc height, body mass index (BMI), smoking, and sex. RESULTS: The NDI decreased comparably in all treatment arms to circa 50% of the baseline value and marginal mean NDI differences varied from 0.4 to 1.1 on a 100 point NDI scale, with confidence intervals never exceeding the 20-point minimal clinical important difference (MCID). Secondary outcome parameters showed comparable results. Preliminary subgroup analysis could not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in NDI between treatments after 2 years. CONCLUSION: After combining data from two Randomized Controlled Trials it can be concluded that there is no clinical benefit for ACDA, when compared with ACDF or ACD 2 years after surgery. Preliminary subgroup analysis indicated outcomes were similar between treatment groups, and that no subgroup could be appointed that benefited more from either ACD, ACDF, or ACDA.Level of Evidence: 1.

Decompression alone versus decompression and instrumented fusion for the treatment of isthmic spondylolisthesis: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The most advocated surgical technique to treat symptoms of isthmic spondylolisthesis is decompression with instrumented fusion. A less-invasive classical approach has also been reported, which consists of decompression only. In this study the authors compared the clinical outcomes of decompression only with those of decompression with instrumented fusion in patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis. METHODS: Eighty-four patients with lumbar radiculopathy or neurogenic claudication secondary to low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were randomly assigned to decompression only (n = 43) or decompression with instrumented fusion (n = 41). Primary outcome parameters were scores on the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), separate visual analog scales (VASs) for back pain and leg pain, and patient report of perceived recovery at 12-week and 2-year follow-ups. The proportion of reoperations was scored as a secondary outcome measure. Repeated measures ANOVA according to the intention-to-treat principle was performed. RESULTS: Decompression alone did not show superiority in terms of disability scores at 12-week follow-up (p = 0.32, 95% CI -4.02 to 1.34), nor in any other outcome measure. At 2-year follow-up, RDQ disability scores improved more in the fusion group (10.3, 95% CI 3.9-8.2, vs 6.0, 95% CI 8.2-12.4; p = 0.006, 95% CI -7.3 to -1.3). Likewise, back pain decreased more in the fusion group (difference: -18.3 mm, CI -32.1 to -4.4, p = 0.01) on a 100-mm VAS scale, and a higher proportion of patients perceived recovery as showing "good results" (44% vs 74%, p = 0.01). Cumulative probabilities for reoperation were 47% in the decompression and 13% in the fusion group (p < 0.001) at the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis, decompression with instrumented fusion resulted in comparable short-term results, significantly better long-term outcomes, and fewer reoperations than decompression alone. Decompression with instrumented fusion is a superior surgical technique that should in general be offered as a first treatment option for isthmic spondylolisthesis, but not for degenerative spondylolisthesis, which has a different etiology.

Delayed-onset white cord syndrome after anterior and posterior cervical decompression surgery for symptomatic ossification of spinal ligaments: illustrative cases.

BACKGROUND: White cord syndrome is an extremely rare complication of cervical decompressive surgery, characterized by serious postoperative neurological deficits in the absence of apparent surgical complications. It is named after the characteristic ischemic-edematous intramedullary T2-hyperintense signal on postoperative magnetic resonance imaging and is believed to be caused by ischemic-reperfusion injury. Neurological deficits typically manifest immediately after surgery, and delayed occurrence has been reported only once. OBSERVATIONS: The authors presented two cases of delayed white cord syndrome after anterior and posterior cervical decompression surgery for symptomatic ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament and ligamentum flavum, respectively. Neurological deficits manifested on postoperative day 2 (case 1) and day 8 (case 2). The patients' conditions were managed with high-dose corticosteroids, mean arterial pressure augmentation, and early physical therapy, after which they showed partial neurological recovery at discharge, which improved further by the 3-month follow-up visit. LESSONS: The authors' aim was to raise awareness among spine surgeons about this rare but severe complication of cervical decompressive surgery and to emphasize the mainstays of treatment based on current best evidence: high-dose corticosteroids, mean arterial pressure augmentation, and early physical therapy.

Prosthesis in Anterior Cervical Herniated Disc Approach Does Not Prevent Radiologic Adjacent Segment Degeneration.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using data from RCTs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to report on the incidence of radiological adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in patients with cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc that were randomized to receive cervical arthroplasty or arthrodesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical disc prostheses were introduced to prevent ASD in the postsurgical follow-up. However, it is still a controversial issue. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-three patients were included in two randomized, double-blinded trials comparing anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty (ACDA), with intervertebral cage (ACDF), or without intervertebral cage (ACD) for one-level disc herniation. Neutral lateral radiographs were obtained preoperatively, at 1- and 2-year follow-up after surgery. Radiological ASD was evaluated on X-ray and defined by a decrease in disc height and the presence of anterior osteophyte formation on both the superior and the inferior level in relation to the target level. RESULTS: Radiological ASD was present in 34% of patients at baseline and increased to 59% at 2-year follow-up in the arthrodesis groups (ACD and ACDF combined), and to 56% in the arthroplasty group. Progression of radiological ASD was present in 29% of patients in the arthrodesis group and in 31% of patients in the arthroplasty group for 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Radiological ASD occurs in a similar manner in patients who were subjected to arthrodesis in cervical radiculopathy and in patients who received arthroplasty to maintain motion. Current data tend to indicate that the advantage of cervical prosthesis in preventing radiological ASD is absent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.