Incidence of Intraoperative Cardiothoracic Intervention During Open Surgery Following Acute Posterior Sternoclavicular Joint Injury: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Acute posterior sternoclavicular joint injuries are rare but potentially lethal injuries-signs of mediastinal compression range from nonspecific to neurovascular compromise. Currently, orthopaedic experts recommend a cardiothoracic surgeon be placed on standby during open surgery for potential intraoperative complications. However, few studies have reported on how often cardiothoracic intervention is required. METHODS: First, we identified patients in our institution by CPT codes 23530, 23525, and 23532 from January 1, 2002 to May 1, 2023. Demographic variables and intraoperative cardiothoracic intervention rates were collected. Second, we systematically reviewed the literature to identify articles on acute posterior sternoclavicular injury using PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases (through August 20, 2023). Exclusion criteria included conservative treatment, successful closed reduction, chronic injury (>6 wk) cadaver studies, reviews, and nonavailable text. RESULTS: Thirteen local patients underwent open surgery for an acute posterior sternoclavicular joint injury, 11 males and 2 females with an average age of 18.2 years old (range: 15 to 32.4). The most common mechanism of injury was sports (n=9; 69.2%). Four (30.8%) patients had physical or radiographic evidence of mediastinal compression. No patients required intraoperative cardiothoracic intervention in our institution. The literature search yielded 132 articles and 512 open surgeries for acute posterior sternoclavicular joint injuries. Four patients required intraoperative cardiothoracic intervention, all of whom presented with polytrauma and/or clinical or radiographic signs of neurovascular compromise, giving a combined overall rate of 0.76%. CONCLUSIONS: Expert opinion commonly recommends cardiothoracic backup during open surgery for acute posterior sternoclavicular joint injuries. On the basis of our local data and systematic literature review, we found an overall cardiothoracic intervention rate of 0.76%. In the presence of polytrauma and/or findings of neurovascular compromise, we suggest having cardiothoracic surgery on close standby during the procedure. However, a patient with an isolated acute posterior sternoclavicular joint injury and no clinical or radiographic findings of neurovascular compromise does not appear to require a cardiothoracic surgeon on standby. Ultimately, the decision to involve cardiothoracic backup during open surgery for an acute posterior sternoclavicular injury should be made on a case-by-case basis after a thorough physical and radiographic evaluation of the patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Navigated versus conventional pediatric spinal deformity surgery: Navigation independently predicts reoperation and infectious complications.

Context: Literature on treating pediatric spinal deformity with navigation is limited, particularly using large nationally represented cohorts. Further, the comparison of single-institution data to national-level database outcomes is also lacking. Aim: (1) To compare navigated versus conventional posterior pediatric deformity surgery based on 30-day outcomes and perioperative factors using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database and (2) to compare the outcomes of the NSQIP navigated group to those of fluoroscopy-only and navigated cases from a single-institution. Settings and Design: Retrospective cohort study. Subjects and Methods: Pediatric patients who underwent posterior deformity surgery with and without navigation were included. Primary outcomes were 30-day readmission, reoperation, morbidity, and complications. The second part of this study included AIS patients < 18 years old at a single institution between 2015 and 2019. Operative time, length of stay, transfusion rate, and complication rate were compared between single-institution and NSQIP groups. Statistical Analysis Used: Univariate analyses with independent t-test and Chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used. Multivariate analyses through the application of binary logistic regression models. Results: Part I of the study included 16,950 patients, with navigation utilized in 356 patients (2.1%). In multivariate analysis, navigation predicted reoperation, deep wound infection, and sepsis. After controlling for operative year, navigation no longer predicted reoperation. In Part II of the study, 288 single institution AIS patients were matched to 326 navigation patients from the NSQIP database. Operative time and transfusion rate were significantly higher for the NSQIP group. Conclusions: On a national scale, navigation predicted increased odds of reoperation and infectious-related events and yielded greater median relative value units (RVUs) per case but had longer operating room (OR) time and fewer RVUs-per-minute. After controlling for operative year, RVUs-per-minute and reoperation rates were similar between groups. The NSQIP navigated surgery group was associated with significantly higher operative time and transfusion rates compared to the single-institution groups.

Minimally Invasive Versus Standard Surgery in Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients: A Comparative Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospective case-control study. OBJECTIVE: To compare minimally invasive scoliosis surgery (MIS) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) in a large group of patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: MIS, has been shown to have benefits over standard PSF in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). METHODS: Radiographic, clinical, and operative review of a multi-institutional prospective database from 2013 to 2018. MIS patients with minimum 2-year XR follow up were compared with open PSF technique patients. RESULTS: Four hundred eighty five patients were included; 192 MIS and 293 PSF. Preoperative Cobb (P = 0.231) and kyphosis were similar (P = 0.501). Cobb correction was comparable (P = 0.46), however percent improvement in thoracic kyphosis was significantly higher in MIS (P < 0.001). MIS had significantly lower blood loss (P < 0.001), transfusions (P < 0.001), fixation points (P < 0.001), opioid consumption (P = 0.001), and hospital stay (P < 0.001). Operative time was shorter (P = 0.001) and 30-day complications rate was similar (P = 0.81). CONCLUSION: This is the largest study comparing the surgical outcomes of MIS and PSF. MIS patients benefit from increased kyphosis, fewer transfusion, lower opioid consumption, and shorter hospital stay with similar Cobb correction. Increased postoperative kyphosis is likely from muscle sparing dissection in MIS.Level of Evidence: 3.

Are All Hardware Removals Equal?

The objective of this study is to report operative time and associated complications of six types of implants and to determine if surgeons are adequately compensated. Hardware removals were analyzed from 2014-2019. Implants were flexible nails, intramedullary rigid nails, long plates, screw(s), single guided-growth plates, and multiple guided-growth plates. Patient demographics, operative time, blood loss, complications, and relative value units (RVU)/min were collected. RVU/min was used to maximize rate. In total, 392 patients were analyzed. Long plate removals took significantly longer than screw removal, therefore RVU/min was significantly lower (p < 0.001). Long plate removals also took significantly longer, and RVU/min was significantly lower compared to guided-growth plate removal (p < 0.001). Intramedullary nails took significantly longer compared to flexible nails, nearly double the RVU/min (p = 0.02). The results from this study indicate that the RVU/ minute for these six different types of implant removals are not equal. Surgeons can use this data to set up their schedule to ensure maximum utilization. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 30(1):020-023, 2021).

Risk factors for reoperation after lumbar total disc replacement at short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The reoperation rate following TDR (Total Disc replacement) has been established at short- and mid-term time points through the Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption (FDA IDE) trials. However, these trials include highly selected centers and surgeons with strict governance of indications. The utilization of TDR throughout the community needs further analysis. PURPOSE: To identify the risk factors for lumbar spine reoperation in patients undergoing lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) at short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This study is a multi-center retrospective cohort study utilizing the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. PATIENT SAMPLE: We identified 1,368 patients who underwent an elective primary lumbar TDR in New York State between January 1, 2005 and September 30, 2013. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary functional outcome of interest was lumbar reoperation, specifically the evaluation of independent risk factors for lumbar reoperation at a minimum of 2 years, with sub-analyses performed at 5 and ten years. METHODS: International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision codes were utilized to identify patients undergoing a primary lumbar TDR. We excluded patients with primary/revision lumbar fusion procedures and revision disc replacement procedures. Hospital academic status was determined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Unique encrypted patient identifiers allowed for longitudinal follow-up for reoperation. Logistic regression models compared reoperation and no-reoperation cohorts, and were performed on sub-analyses for significant univariate predictors of reoperation. RESULTS: Between January 2005 and September 2013, 1368 patients underwent a primary lumbar TDR. Reoperation occurred in 8.8% by 2 years, 15.8% by 5 years, and 19.5% by ten years. Diabetics were more likely to have reoperations (7.5% vs 3.8%, p=.013). Teaching hospitals experienced a decreased reoperation rate compared to nonteaching hospitals at 2-year (5.0% vs 10.5%, p=.002), 5-year (10.7% vs 17.9%, p=.002) and 10-year (11.7% vs 21.9%, p=.045) follow-up. Lumbar fusion was the most common reoperation (14.2%). CONCLUSION: We identified an 8.8% reoperation rate after inpatient lumbar TDR at 2-years, 15.8% at 5-years, and 19.5% at 10-years. When stratifying by teaching status, reoperation rates at teaching centers align with those reported in FDA IDE studies. Diabetes was the only patient factor influencing reoperation rate. There is a growing consensus that lumbar TDR is a durable and appropriate surgical option for lumbar degenerative disc disease. Proper indications are crucial to obtaining good outcomes with lumbar TDR.