Comparative surgical outcomes of navigated vs non-navigated posterior spinal fusions in ankylosing spondylitis patients.

INTRODUCTION: Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) patients with acute spinal fractures represent a challenge for practicing spine surgeons due to difficult operative anatomy and susceptibility to complications. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does intraoperative CT-navigation improve outcomes in patients with ankylosing spondylitis undergoing surgery? METHODS: A retrospective review was carried out at our centre from 05/2016-06/2021 to identify AS patients presenting with a traumatic spinal fracture, managed surgically with posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Cohorts were categorised and compared for outcomes based on those who underwent PSF with intraoperative CT-navigation versus those surgically managed with traditional intraoperative fluoroscopy. RESULTS: 37 AS patients were identified. 29/37 (78.4%) underwent PSF. Intraoperative navigation was used in 14 (48.3%) cases. Mean age of the entire cohort was 67.6 years. No difference existed between the navigated and non-navigated groups for mean levels fused (5.35 vs 5.07; p â€‹= â€‹0.31), length of operation (217.9mins vs 175.3mins; p â€‹= â€‹0.07), overall length-of-stay (12 days vs 21.9 days; p â€‹= â€‹0.16), patients requiring HDU (3/14 vs 5/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.09) or ICU (5/14 vs 9/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.10), postoperative neurological improvement (1/14 vs 1/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.48) or deterioration (1/14 vs 0/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.15), intraoperative complications (2/14 vs 3/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.34), postoperative complications 4/14 vs 4/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.46), revision surgeries (3/14 vs 1/15; p â€‹= â€‹0.16) and 30-day mortality (0/14 vs 0/15). CONCLUSION: This is the first study that compares surgical outcomes of navigated vs non-navigated PSFs for AS patients with an acute spinal fracture. Although limited by its retrospective design and sample size, this study highlights the non-inferiority of intraoperative navigation as a surgical aid in a challenging cohort.

The efficacy of anchored stand-alone spacers in comparison to conventional cage and plate in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials for clinical and radiological outcomes.

Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is commonly performed with cage and plate constructs to stabilise diseased or injured cervical segments. Despite it being a commonly performed procedure, there are notable rates of associated morbidity reported in the literature. Stand-alone spacers represent a novel form of instrumentation to conventional cage and plate constructs. Research question: Do stand-alone spacers have improved operative characteristics and postoperative outcomes in ACDF cohorts when compared to cage and plate constructs? Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of PubMed/Medline, Embase and Google Scholar databases per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes guidelines. Studies of interest included cage and plate instrumentation versus anchored stand-alone spacers for patients undergoing ACDF. Pre- and post-operative clinical and radiological outcomes were collated and compared for significance between cohorts. Results: 10 RCTs were identified and included with 779 patients total. Mean age of the entire cohort was 50.1 years. 62% (483/779) of the cohort were male. 384 patients underwent ACDF with stand-alone cage, while 395 had ACDF with conventional cage and plate. Stand-alone spacers significantly outperformed conventional instrumentation in terms of estimated blood loss (p < 0.01), total postoperative complications (p < 0.01), dysphagia rates (p = 0.04) and adjacent segment disease (p = 0.04). Non-inferiority was evident in both patient reported outcome measures and radiological outcomes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis highlights the efficacy of stand-alone spacers for the management of primarily cervical spondylitic disease for both single-level and multi-level pathology, and thus presents an attractive alternative to conventional instrumentation for patients undergoing ACDF surgery.