Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 78
Filtrar
1.
Neurosurg Focus ; 48(5): E2, 2020 May 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32357320

RESUMO

The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), formerly known as the National Neurosurgery Quality Outcomes Database (N2QOD), was established by the NeuroPoint Alliance (NPA) in collaboration with relevant national stakeholders and experts. The overarching goal of this project was to develop a centralized, nationally coordinated effort to allow individual surgeons and practice groups to collect, measure, and analyze practice patterns and neurosurgical outcomes. Specific objectives of this registry program were as follows: "1) to establish risk-adjusted national benchmarks for both the safety and effectiveness of neurosurgical procedures, 2) to allow practice groups and hospitals to analyze their individual morbidity and clinical outcomes in real time, 3) to generate both quality and efficiency data to support claims made to public and private payers and objectively demonstrate the value of care to other stakeholders, 4) to demonstrate the comparative effectiveness of neurosurgical and spine procedures, 5) to develop sophisticated 'risk models' to determine which subpopulations of patients are most likely to benefit from specific surgical interventions, and 6) to facilitate essential multicenter trials and other cooperative clinical studies." The NPA has launched several neurosurgical specialty modules in the QOD program in the 7 years since its inception including lumbar spine, cervical spine, and spinal deformity and cerebrovascular and intracranial tumor. The QOD Spine modules, which are the primary subject of this paper, have evolved into the largest North American spine registries yet created and have resulted in unprecedented cooperative activities within our specialty and among affiliated spine care practitioners. Herein, the authors discuss the experience of QOD Spine programs to date, with a brief description of their inception, some of the key achievements and milestones, as well as the recent transition of the spine modules to the American Spine Registry (ASR), a collaboration between the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS).

2.
Neurosurg Focus ; 48(5): E5, 2020 May 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32357321

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Return to work (RTW) and satisfaction are important outcome measures after surgery for degenerative spine disease. The authors queried the prospective Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) to determine if RTW correlated with patient satisfaction. METHODS: The QOD was queried for patients undergoing surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The primary outcome of interest was correlation between RTW and patient satisfaction, as measured by the North American Spine Society patient satisfaction index (NASS). Secondarily, data on satisfied patients were analyzed to see what patient factors correlated with RTW. RESULTS: Of 608 total patients in the QOD spondylolisthesis data set, there were 292 patients for whom data were available on both satisfaction and RTW status. Of these, 249 (85.3%) were satisfied with surgery (NASS score 1-2), and 224 (76.7%) did RTW after surgery. Of the 68 patients who did not RTW after surgery, 49 (72.1%) were still satisfied with surgery. Of the 224 patients who did RTW, 24 (10.7%) were unsatisfied with surgery (NASS score 3-4). There were significantly more people who had an NASS score of 1 in the RTW group than in the non-RTW group (71.4% vs 42.6%, p < 0.05). Failure to RTW was associated with lower level of education, worse baseline back pain (measured with a numeric rating scale), and worse baseline disability (measured with the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]). CONCLUSIONS: There are a substantial number of patients who are satisfied with surgery even though they did not RTW. Patients who were satisfied with surgery and did not RTW typically had worse preoperative back pain and ODI and typically did not have a college education. While RTW remains an important measure after surgery, physicians should be mindful that patients who do not RTW may still be satisfied with their outcome.

3.
J Neurooncol ; 2020 May 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32363470

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a common and aggressive malignancy associated with poor prognosis. Characteristics and treatment of long-term survivors are of particular interest in efforts to improve outcomes. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine trends and prognostic factors for 3-year survival from a national database. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients diagnosed with cranial GBM from 2004 to 2013 and with 3-year follow-up. Trends in 3-year and overall survival, patient characteristics, tumor properties, and treatment modalities were examined. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to investigate the association of these factors with 3-year survival. Predictor importance analysis was conducted using a metric defined as Wald χ2 penalized by degrees of freedom. RESULTS: A total of 88,919 GBM patients with 3-year follow-up were identified. Overall, 8757 (9.8%) patients survived ≥ 3 years. Three-year survival significantly improved from 8.0 to 10.5% (p < 0.001) from 2004 to 2013. Trimodal treatment administration also significantly increased from 38.7 to 55.9% (p < 0.001). During this span, patients increasingly presented as older (p = 0.040), without private insurance (p < 0.001), and with a higher comorbidity index (p < 0.001). On multivariable regression, factors such as trimodal treatment (p < 0.001), younger age (p < 0.001), and MGMT methylation (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with increased odds of 3-year survival. Predictor importance analysis indicated that MGMT methylation, age, and treatment modality were the most significant relative determinants of 3-year survival. CONCLUSION: These findings illustrate an improved 3-year survival rate for GBM patients from 2004 to 2013 with a concurrent increase in trimodal treatment administration despite more adverse patient presenting characteristics.

4.
J Neurosurg Spine ; : 1-11, 2020 May 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32384269

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar decompression without arthrodesis remains a potential treatment option for cases of low-grade spondylolisthesis (i.e., Meyerding grade I). Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have recently been increasingly used because of their touted benefits including lower operating time, blood loss, and length of stay. Herein, the authors analyzed patients enrolled in a national surgical registry and compared the baseline characteristics and postoperative clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients undergoing open versus MIS lumbar decompression. METHODS: The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database for patients with grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis undergoing a surgical intervention between July 2014 and June 2016. Among more than 200 participating sites, the 12 with the highest enrollment of patients into the lumbar spine module came together to initiate a focused project to assess the impact of fusion on PROs in patients undergoing surgery for grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis. For the current study, only patients in this cohort from the 12 highest-enrolling sites who underwent a decompression alone were evaluated and classified as open or MIS (tubular decompression). Outcomes of interest included PROs at 2 years; perioperative outcomes such as blood loss and complications; and postoperative outcomes such as length of stay, discharge disposition, and reoperations. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients undergoing decompression were selected, of whom 71 (50.7%) underwent MIS and 69 (49.3%) underwent an open decompression. On univariate analysis, the authors observed no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of PROs at 2-year follow-up, including back pain, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index score, EQ-5D score, and patient satisfaction. On multivariable analysis, compared to MIS, open decompression was associated with higher satisfaction (OR 7.5, 95% CI 2.41-23.2, p = 0.0005). Patients undergoing MIS decompression had a significantly shorter length of stay compared to the open group (0.68 days [SD 1.18] vs 1.83 days [SD 1.618], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this multiinstitutional prospective study, the authors found comparable PROs as well as clinical outcomes at 2 years between groups of patients undergoing open or MIS decompression for low-grade spondylolisthesis.

5.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg ; 195: 105821, 2020 May 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32388145

RESUMO

Heterotopic Ossification (HO) refers to the formation of bone within soft tissue. Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) has been shown to be associated with development of HO. However, risk factors for HO following SCI are unknown. In light of this knowledge gap, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize available evidence and elucidate risk factors associated with heterotopic ossification. An electronic literature search was conducted using five databases. Studies containing SCI patients, with a proportion diagnosed with HO, were included. Meta-analyses were performed to assess the association between following risk factors and development of HO: sex, type of injury, spasticity, pressure ulcer, injury level, urinary tract infection (UTI), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), number of smokers, and pneumonia. Nine studies with 2,115 patients were included. It was found that males (Odds Ratio [95% Confidence Interval]: 2.25 [1.61, 3.13]), smokers (2.88 [1.62, 5.11]), patients with complete injury (3.61 [2.29, 5.71]), pneumonia (2.86 [2.18, 3.75]), pressure ulcers (2.45 [1.89, 3.18]), UTI (3.84 [2.63, 5.62]) and spasticity (2.12 [1.67, 2.68]) had significantly higher odds of developing HO after spinal cord injury. In contrast, location of injury (Cervical vs. thoracic injury; (1.03 [0.72, 1.49]) and DVT (1.37 [0.91, 2.07]) were not associated with development of HO. Pooled results from existing literature on HO development show that several factors are significantly associated with development of HO. Given the complexity of SCI management, the results might have a positive impact on the clinical practice by leading to an effective screening aproach.

6.
Gene ; 750: 144634, 2020 Mar 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32240779

RESUMO

Lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a multifaceted progressive condition and often accompanied by disc herniation (DH) and/or degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). Given the high prevalence of the disease (up to 20% according to some estimates) and the high costs associated with its care, there is a need to explore novel therapies such as regenerative medicine. Exploring these novel therapies first warrants investigation of molecular pathways underlying these disorders. Here, we show results from next generation RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) on mRNA isolated from 10 human nucleus pulposus (NP) samples of lumbar degenerated discs (DH and DS; n = 5 for each tissue) and other musculoskeletal tissues (Bone, cartilage, growth plate, and muscle; n = 7 for each tissue). Pathway and network analyses based on gene ontology (GO) terms were used to identify the biological functions of differentially expressed mRNAs. A total of 701 genes were found to be significantly upregulated in lumbar NP tissue compared to other musculoskeletal tissues. These differentially expressed mRNAs were primarily involved in DNA damage, immunity and G1/S transition of mitotic cell cycle. Interestingly, DH-specific signaling genes showed major network in chemotactic (e.g., CXCL10, CXCL11, IL1RL2 and IL6) and matrix-degrading pathway (e.g., MMP16, ADAMTSL1, 5, 8, 12, and 15), while DS-specific signaling genes were found to be those involved in cell adhesion (e.g., CDH1, EPHA1 and EFNA2) and inflammatory cytokines (e.g., CD19, CXCL5, CCL24, 25 and XCL2). Our findings provide new leads for therapeutic drug discovery that would permit optimization of medical or pharmacological intervention for cases of lumbar DDD.

7.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg ; 193: 105737, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32169744

RESUMO

Heterotopic ossification(HO) is a common complication following spinal cord injury(SCI); however, its underlying pathophysiology remains relatively unknown. Although there are options for treating HO, prophylactic treatment is limited. Additionally, evidence supporting the effectiveness of these prophylactic treatments is scarce. Electronic literature search was conducted using four databases. Studies comparing prophylactic medication for HO versus placebo for patients with acute spinal cord injury were included. A meta-analysis comparing the incidence of HO between the two groups was conducted, with a subgroup analysis of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and non-NSAIDs. A total of 5 studies and 815 patients were included. Overall incidence of HO was 9.73 % (n = 25) in the medication group versus 16.5 %(n = 92) in the placebo group. However, the two groups do not statistcally differ(p = 0.21). In the subgroup analysis for NSAIDs, those who received prophylactic treatment with NSAIDs had a lower incidence of HO compared to those who received placebo (RR[95 % CI]:0.32[0.15, 0.68]; p = 0.003). As for studies that used bisphosphonates, a statistically significant difference in incidence of HO was not found (RR[95 % CI]:1.30[0.52, 3.24];p = 0.58) and the overall evidence was inconclusive. In present systematic review and meta-analysis comparing prophylactic medications to placebo for prevention of HO, we found similar incidence rates for both groups. However, subgroup analysis showed a significantly lower incidence rate for those who recevied NSAIDs for HO prophylaxis. Altough this finding is promising for secondary prevention of HO among patients suffering from SCI, further prospective studies with longer follow-ups are required to assess other appropriate medications for HO prevention.

8.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg ; 193: 105765, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32200215

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Patients with a comorbid mental illness have been observed to have worse outcomes following surgery. However, little is known about the effects of mental disorders on patient outcomes following spinal surgery. In the current study, we sought to investigate the characteristics of patients with mental illness, particularly anxiety, major depressive disorder, concurrent anxiety and schizophrenia, and the impact of these comorbid conditions on outcomes of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using a national administrative database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Readmissions Database (NRD) was queried for patients undergoing an ACDF between 2012 and September 30th, 2015. The presence of anxiety, major depressive disorder, concurrent anxiety and schizophrenia were captured using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to establish an association between a mental comorbidity and risk of 30- and 90- day readmission. RESULTS: A total of 139,877 patients undergoing elective ACDF between 2012-2015 were identified, of which 15,927 (11.39 %) had anxiety, 514 (0.38 %) had major depressive disorder, 248 (0.18 %) had concurrent anxiety and major depressive disorder, and 287 (0.21 %) had schizophrenia. Upon multivariable analysis of procedural related readmissions, adjusting for an array of patient and hospital related factors, patients with schizophrenia, compared to controls, had a significantly higher risk of 30-day readmission (OR 2.62, 95 %CI 1.42-4.84, p = 0.002); moreover, schizophrenia (OR = 1.92, 95 % CI 1.13-3.25, p = 0.016) anxiety (OR = 1.13, 95 %CI 1.02-1.26, p = 0.023) were also associated with significantly higher risk of 90-day readmission. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that mental illness comorbidities may be associated with increased rates of procedure related readmission and longer length of stay following elective ACDF.

9.
J Neurosurg ; : 1-13, 2020 Mar 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32168482

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The nature of the volume-outcome relationship in cases with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains unclear, with considerable interhospital variation in patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to understand the state of the volume-outcome relationship at different levels of trauma centers in the United States. METHODS: The authors queried the National Trauma Data Bank for the years 2007-2014 for patients with severe TBI. Case volumes for each level of trauma center organized into quintiles (Q1-Q5) served as the primary predictor. Analyzed outcomes included in-hospital mortality, total hospital length of stay (LOS), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Multivariable regression models were performed for in-hospital mortality, overall complications, and total hospital and ICU LOSs to adjust for possible confounders. The analysis was stratified by level designation of the trauma center. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.001 to avoid a type I error due to a large sample size. RESULTS: A total of 122,445 patients were included. Adjusted analysis did not demonstrate a significant relationship between increasing hospital volume of severe TBI cases and in-hospital mortality, complications, and nonhome hospital discharge disposition among level I-IV trauma centers. However, among level II trauma centers, hospital LOS was longer for the highest volume quintile (adjusted mean difference [MD] for Q5: 2.83 days, 95% CI 1.40-4.26 days, p < 0.001, reference = Q1). For level III and IV trauma centers, both hospital LOS and ICU LOS were longer for the highest volume quintile (adjusted MD for Q5: LOS 4.6 days, 95% CI 2.3-7.0 days, p < 0.001; ICU LOS 3.2 days, 95% CI 1.6-4.8 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Higher volumes of severe TBI cases at a lower level of trauma center may be associated with a longer LOS. These results may assist policymakers with target interventions for resource allocation and point to the need for careful prehospital decision-making in patients with severe TBI.

10.
World Neurosurg ; 2020 Feb 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113995

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Regional differences in outcomes after spine surgery are poorly understood. We assessed disability and quality-of-life outcomes by geographic region in the United States using the NeuroPoint Alliance Quality Outcomes Database. METHODS: We queried the prospective Quality Outcomes Database patient registry to identify patients who underwent elective 1- or 2-level lumbar surgery for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis from July 2014 through June 2016. Primary outcome measures included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D) reported at 24 months postoperatively. Differences in EQ-5D and ODI were compared across geographic regions of the United States (Northeast, Midwest, South, West). RESULTS: We identified 608 patients from 12 centers who underwent surgery. Of these, 517 (85.0%) had ODI data and 492 (80.9%) had EQ-5D data at 24 months. Southern states had the largest representation (304 patients; 5 centers), followed by Northeastern (114 patients; 3 centers), Midwestern (96 patients; 2 centers), and Western (94 patients; 2 centers) states. Baseline ODI scores were significantly different among regions, with the South having the greatest baseline disability burden (Northeast: 40.9 ± 16.9, South: 51.2 ± 15.8, Midwest: 40.9 ± 17.8, West: 45.0 ± 17.1, P < 0.001). The change in ODI at 24 months postoperatively was significantly different among regions, with the South showing the greatest ODI improvement (Northeast: -21.1 ± 18.2, South: -26.5 ± 20.2, Midwest: -18.2 ± 22.9, West: -21.7 ± 19.6, P < 0.001). All regions had ≥60% achievement of the minimum clinically important difference in ODI at 24 months postoperatively. No regional differences were observed for EQ-5D. CONCLUSION: Significant regional variation exists for disability outcomes, but not quality of life, at 24 months after spinal surgery for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis.

11.
J Neurosurg Spine ; : 1-9, 2020 Feb 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32109871

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Loss to follow-up has been shown to bias outcomes assessment among studies utilizing clinical registries. Here, the authors analyzed patients enrolled in a national surgical registry and compared the baseline characteristics of patients captured with those lost to follow-up at 2 years. METHODS: The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database for patients with grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis undergoing a surgical intervention between July 2014 and June 2016. Only those patients enrolled in a multisite study investigating the impact of fusion on clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients with grade I spondylolisthesis were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 608 patients enrolled in the study undergoing 1- or 2-level decompression (23.0%, n = 140) or 1-level fusion (77.0%, n = 468), 14.5% (n = 88) were lost to follow-up at 2 years. Patients who were lost to follow-up were more likely to be younger (59.6 ± 13.5 vs 62.6 ± 11.7 years, p = 0.031), be employed (unemployment rate: 53.3% [n = 277] for successful follow-up vs 40.9% [n = 36] for those lost to follow-up, p = 0.017), have anxiety (26.1% [n = 23] vs 16.3% [n = 85], p = 0.026), have higher back pain scores (7.4 ± 2.9 vs 6.6 ± 2.8, p = 0.010), have higher leg pain scores (7.4 ± 2.5 vs 6.4 ± 2.9, p = 0.003), have higher Oswestry Disability Index scores (50.8 ± 18.7 vs 46 ± 16.8, p = 0.018), and have lower EQ-5D scores (0.481 ± 0.2 vs 0.547 ± 0.2, p = 0.012) at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: To execute future, high-quality studies, it is important to identify patients undergoing surgery for spondylolisthesis who might be lost to follow-up. In a large, prospective registry, the authors found that those lost to follow-up were more likely to be younger, be employed, have anxiety disorder, and have worse PRO scores.

12.
World Neurosurg ; 137: 443-450.e13, 2020 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31926357

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There have been several clinical trials as well as observational studies that have compared the outcomes of different cervical disc replacement (CDR) devices with anterior cervical disc replacement and fusion (ACDF). Although the results of these studies have provided sufficient evidence for the safety of CDR, there is still a lack of consensus in terms of longer-term outcomes, with studies providing equivocal results for the 2 procedures. In the current study, we used a novel methodology, a meta-epidemiologic study, to investigate the impact of study characteristics on the observed effects in the literature on CDR and ACDF. METHODS: Data were abstracted from available meta-analyses regarding author, study author, year, intervention events, control events, and sample size, as well as year and geographic location of each study within the meta-analyses. We grouped the studies based on median year of publication as well as the region of the submitting author(s). Odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and standard errors of individual studies were calculated based on the number of events and sample size for each arm (ACDF or CDR). Further, results of outcomes from individual studies were pooled and a meta-analysis was conducted. Ratio of odds ratio (ROR) was used to assess the impact of each of these factors on estimates of the study for CDR versus ACDF. RESULTS: A total of 13 meta-analyses were analyzed after exclusions. Using the results from 10 meta-analyses, we found that studies published before 2012 reported significantly lower odds of a reoperation after CDR (vs. ACDF), compared with studies published after 2012 (ROR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.67; P < 0.001). We did not observe a significant impact of study year on difference in estimates between CDR and ACDF for adjacent segment disease (ROR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.64-1.55; P = 0.465). The region of submitting author was also found to have no impact on results of published studies. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that there may be a publication bias regarding the year of publication, with earlier studies reporting lower reoperation rates for CDR compared with ACDF.

13.
World Neurosurg ; 136: e398-e406, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31931235

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Preoperative laboratory tests are varied in their administration among physicians, and previous studies have published conflicting reports on their utility. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a commonly performed spine surgery, and patients often undergo preoperative testing. We sought to assess the relationship between preoperative laboratory values and risk for adverse postoperative outcomes after ACDF. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried from 2012 to 2017 to identify patients undergoing elective ACDF. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the association between abnormal laboratory test values and adverse 30-day outcomes. Relative predictor importance was determined using an importance metric defined as Wald χ2 penalized by degrees of freedom. RESULTS: A total of 47,111 patients were included. On multivariable analysis, high creatinine (P = 0.030), anemia (P < 0.001), hyponatremia (P = 0.034), and leukocytosis (P < 0.001) were found to be significantly associated with any 30-day complications. Anemia (P < 0.001), hypernatremia (P = 0.028), hyponatremia (P = 0.016), and leukocytosis (P < 0.001) were found to be significantly associated with serious 30-day complications. High creatinine (P = 0.027), anemia (P < 0.001), hyponatremia (P = 0.047), and leukocytosis (P = 0.004) were found to be significantly associated with 30-day unplanned readmissions. High blood urea nitrogen (P = 0.007), high creatinine (P = 0.028), anemia (P < 0.001), low platelet count (P < 0.001), hyponatremia (P < 0.001), and leukocytosis (P < 0.001) were found to be significantly associated with nonhome discharge. Predictor importance analysis revealed that abnormal preoperative laboratory values were important determinants in predicting these 30-day outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses indicate that abnormal preoperative laboratory values are associated with increased risk for adverse outcomes after elective ACDF and can be used in predictive analyses of outcomes.


Assuntos
Discotomia/efeitos adversos , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças da Coluna Vertebral/cirurgia , Fusão Vertebral/efeitos adversos , Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/estatística & dados numéricos , Testes Diagnósticos de Rotina , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Sistema de Registros , Medição de Risco , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
14.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 95(2): 406-414, 2020 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31785831

RESUMO

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition with limited pharmacological treatment options to restore function. Regenerative approaches have recently attracted interest as an adjuvant to current standard of care. Adipose tissue-derived (AD) mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) represent a readily accessible cell source with high proliferative capacity. The CELLTOP study, an ongoing multidisciplinary phase 1 clinical trial conducted at Mayo Clinic (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03308565), is investigating the safety and efficacy of intrathecal autologous AD-MSCs in patients with blunt, traumatic SCI. In this initial report, we describe the outcome of the first treated patient, a 53-year-old survivor of a surfing accident who sustained a high cervical American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grade A SCI with subsequent neurologic improvement that plateaued within 6 months following injury. Although he improved to an American Spinal Injury Association grade C impairement classification, the individual continued to be wheelchair bound and severely debilitated. After study enrollment, an adipose tissue biopsy was performed and MSCs were isolated, expanded, and cryopreserved. Per protocol, the patient received an intrathecal injection of 100 million autologous AD-MSCs infused after a standard lumbar puncture at the L3-4 level 11 months after the injury. The patient tolerated the procedure well and did not experience any severe adverse events. Clinical signs of efficacy were observed at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months following the injection in both motor and sensory scores based on International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury. Thus, in this treated individual with SCI, intrathecal administration of AD-MSCs was feasible and safe and suggested meaningful signs of improved, rather than stabilized, neurologic status warranting further clinical evaluation.

15.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg ; 188: 105585, 2020 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31756619

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Overlapping surgery, accepted by many as two distinct operations occurring at the same time but without coincident critical portions, has been said to improve patient access to surgical care. With recent controversy, some are opposed to this practice due to concerns regarding its safety. In this manuscript, we sought to investigate the perceptions of overlapping surgery among neurosurgical leadership and the association of these perceptions with neurosurgical case volume. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a self-administered survey of neurosurgery department chair and residency program directors of institutions participating in the Vizient Clinical Database/Resource (CDB/RM), an administrative database of 117 United States (US) medical centers and their 300 affiliated hospitals. We queried participants regarding yearly departmental case-volume, frequency of overlapping surgery in daily practice and the degree of overlapping they find acceptable. RESULTS: Of the 236 surveys disseminated, a total of 70 responses were received with a response rate of 29.7.%, which is comparable to previously reported response rates among neurosurgeons and other physicians. Our respondents consisted of 43 of 165 chairs (26.1.%) and 27 of 66 program directors (40.0.%) representing 64 unique hospitals/institutions out of 216 (29.6.%). Based on the responses to question involving case volume, we divided our responders into high volume hospitals (HVH) (n = 44; > 2000 cases per year) and low volume hospitals (LVH) (N = 26). More HVH were found to have frequent occurrence of overlapping surgery (50% weekly and 20.9.% daily vs LVH's 26.9.% weekly and 3.8.% daily, p = 0.003) and considered two overlapping surgeries without overlap of critical portion as acceptable (38.6.% vs 26.9.%, p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey results showed that neurosurgical departments with high-volume practices were more likely to practice overlapping surgery on a regular basis and to view it as an acceptable practice. The association between overlapping surgery and the volume-outcome relationship should be further evaluated.

16.
World Neurosurg ; 134: 201-210, 2020 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31655232

RESUMO

Facet joint osteoarthritis/arthropathy of the spine is a common cause of back and neck pain that frequently overlaps clinically with other diseases of the spine. Because of the possible overlap, it is crucial to have an accurate diagnostic strategy, especially when determining the management approach. Various strategies have been suggested and adopted, with several these still being used in clinics. Over the years, because of the disadvantages of single-modality imaging methods (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, single-photon emission computed tomography), the interest in radiologic examination started to move toward hybrid imaging techniques. Although the data are mixed, many initial studies have shown promise. However, there are relatively few data with comparative medial branch blocks, and further investigation is needed. Given the advantages and disadvantages of these new techniques, the imaging results have to be interpreted within clinical context and with consideration of the current state of knowledge in the decision-making process.

17.
World Neurosurg ; 134: 598-613.e5, 2020 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31627001

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. Although comparison of the 2 techniques has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of all artificial discs between each has not been performed. The objective of the present study was to examine the long-term outcomes of 5 artificial discs. METHODS: An electronic literature search was conducted for studies of CDR devices for all years available. Only articles in English were included. Heterotopic ossification, adjacent segment disease, and reoperation comprised the primary outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with effect size (ES) and 95% confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each device. RESULTS: Sixty-five studies (n = 5785) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the incidence of grade III/IV heterotopic ossification showed a significant variability between the 5 devices (P < 0.001) with ProDisc-C (ES, 38%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24%-54%) having the highest incidence rate. Overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 14% (95% CI, 7%-23%) with significant associated heterogeneity (P < 0.001). Regarding 2-year reoperation risk, the overall incidence rate was 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%), with nonsignificant variability between devices (P = 0.63). The highest rate was observed in the Discover group (ES, 4%; 95% CI, 0%-13%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that surgical and clinical outcomes may differ among different CDR devices. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision making to specific patient profiles. Future multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study.

18.
Epilepsy Behav ; 103(Pt A): 106843, 2020 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31882325

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The choice of subdural grid (SDG) or stereoelectroencephalography (sEEG) for patients with epilepsy can be complex and in some cases overlap. Comparing postoperative pain and narcotics consumption with SDG or sEEG can help develop an intracranial monitoring strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed for adult patients undergoing SDG or sEEG monitoring. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) was used for pain assessment. Types and dosage of the opioids were calculated by converting into milligram morphine equivalents (MME). Narcotic consumption was analyzed at the following three time periods: I. the first 24 h of implantation; II. from the second postimplantation day to the day of explantation; and III. the days following electrode removal to discharge. RESULTS: Forty-two patients who underwent SDG and 31 patients who underwent sEEG implantation were analyzed. After implantation, average NRS was 3.7 for SDG and 2.2 for sEEG (P < .001). After explantation, the NRS was 3.5 for SDG and 1.4 in sEEG (P < .001). Sixty percent of SDG patients and 13% of sEEG patients used more than one opioid in period III (P < .001). The SDG group had a significantly higher MME throughout the three periods compared with the sEEG group: period I: 448 (SDG) vs. 205 (sEEG) mg, P = .002; period II: 377 (SDG) vs. 102 (sEEG) mg, P < .001; and period III: 328 (SDG) vs. 75 (sEEG) mg; P = .002. Patients with the larger SDG implantation had the higher NRS (P = .03) and the higher MME at period I (P = .019). There was no correlation between the number of depth electrodes and pain control in patients with sEEG. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing sEEG had significantly less pain and required fewer opiates compared with patients with SDG. These differences in perioperative pain may be a consideration when choosing between these two invasive monitoring options.

19.
J Neurooncol ; 146(2): 303-310, 2020 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31873874

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Surgical resection of high-grade brainstem gliomas is challenging and treatment mostly involves radiation and chemotherapy. In this study, we utilized registry data to determine prognostic features and impact of chemotherapy and radiation on overall survival. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried from 2006 to 2015 for adult cases with histologically confirmed high-grade brainstem glioma. Covariates including patient demographics, comorbidities, tumor characteristics and treatment parameters were captured. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify predictors of survival. RESULTS: A total of 422 patients were analyzed. Most patients (66.6%) underwent postoperative radiation with chemotherapy, 9.2% underwent radiation alone, while the remaining had no postoperative treatment (24.2%). Overall median survival was 9.8 months (95% CI 8.8-12). Survival was longer (p < 0.001) in the radiation + chemotherapy group (median: 14.2 months, 95% CI 11.7-17.1) compared to radiation alone (median: 5.7 months, 95% CI 3.7-12) and no postoperative treatment (median: 1.8 months, 95% CI 1.4-4) groups. In multivariable analysis, increasing age was associated with worse survival (HR: 1.87, 95% CI 1.47-2.37, p < 0.001), whereas radiation + chemotherapy was associated with lower mortality compared to radiation alone (HR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = 0.038). In subgroup analysis, postoperative chemotherapy with radiation was associated with significant survival benefit compared to radiation alone for grade IV (HR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.28-0.76, p = 0.003), but not for grade III tumors (HR: 0.87, 95% CI 0.48-1.58, p = 0.65). CONCLUSION: Analysis from a national registry illustrated the effectiveness of radiation with chemotherapy for adult patients with high-grade brainstem gliomas, particularly grade IV. Further research should identify specific patient profiles and molecular subgroups that are more likely to benefit from multimodality therapy.

20.
Neurosurgery ; 86(1): 46-60, 2020 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31225602

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Use of large databases such as the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) has become increasingly common in neurosurgical research. OBJECTIVE: To perform a critical appraisal and evaluation of the methodological reporting for studies in neurosurgical literature that utilize the ACS-NSQIP database. METHODS: We queried Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed databases for all neurosurgical studies utilizing the ACS-NSQIP. We assessed each study according to number of criteria fulfilled with respect to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement, REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Health Data (RECORD) Statement, and Journal of American Medical Association-Surgical Section (JAMA-Surgery) Checklist. A separate analysis was conducted among papers published in core and noncore journals in neurosurgery according to Bradford's law. RESULTS: A total of 117 studies were included. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) scores for number of fulfilled criteria for STROBE Statement, RECORD Statement, and JAMA-Surgery Checklist were 20 (IQR:19-21), 9 (IQR:8-9), and 6 (IQR:5-6), respectively. For STROBE Statement, RECORD Statement, and JAMA-Surgery Checklist, item 9 (potential sources of bias), item 13 (supplemental information), and item 9 (missing data/sensitivity analysis) had the highest number of studies with no fulfillment among all studies (56, 68, 50%), respectively. When comparing core journals vs noncore journals, no significant difference was found (STROBE, P = .94; RECORD, P = .24; JAMA-Surgery checklist, P = .60). CONCLUSION: While we observed an overall satisfactory reporting of methodology, most studies lacked mention of potential sources of bias, data cleaning methods, supplemental information, and external validity. Given the pervasive role of national databases and registries for research and health care policy, the surgical community needs to ensure the credibility and quality of such studies that ultimately aim to improve the value of surgical care delivery to patients.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA