Posterior percutaneous endoscopic versus traditional surgery for cervical disc herniation: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.

BACKGROUND: Posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical diskectomy (P-PECD) can be used posterior microdiscectomy for cervical disc herniation. But only some small sample sizes of clinical studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of P-PECD. This study aim to evaluated the efficacy and safety of P-PECD compared with traditional open surgery. METHODS: We will search the following seven electronic databases from their initiation to the May 1, 2020: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) and Wanfang database. All randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials and retrospective case controls that compared the efficacy and safety of P-PECD and traditional open surgery in the treatment of cervical disc herniation will be included. The pooled odds ratio with 95% credible intervals (CIs) was used for the dichotomous variables. The mean difference with 95% CIs was used for the continuous variables. All analyses were conducted by Comprehensive Meta Analysis 2.0. A 2-tailed P value < 0.05 is considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The results of systematic review and meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: Our study will provide clarity regarding for clinicians to choices best surgical approach for patients with cervical disc herniation. Any changes that need to be made during the process of this study will be explained in the final full-text publication. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020164011.

Comparison of 2-year follow-up results of the hybrid surgery using Mobi-C combined with ROI-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of contiguous two-level cervical degenerative disc diseases.

Although the Mobi-C artificial disc and the ROI-C cervical cage have been widely used in the treatment of cervical degenerative disc diseases (CDDD), few reports addressed the features of combined application of both devices. This study is aimed at comparing the clinical and radiological outcomes of treating contiguous two-level CDDD using Mobi-C and ROI-C combined in a hybrid surgery (HS) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using ROI-C. We reviewed ninety-one patients who underwent HS (n = 48) or ACDF (n = 43) surgery for symptomatic contiguous two-level CDDD. >2 years' clinical and radiological outcomes were reviewed and evaluated retrospectively. At the last follow-up, significant improvement in the mean VAS, JOA, and NDI scores was found both in the HS and ACDF groups (p < 0.05), while the differences between groups were not significant (p > 0.05). The global range of motion (ROM) in the HS group was significantly larger than that in the ACDF group (p < 0.05). The local lordosis improved significantly after surgery in all patients (p < 0.05). Bone resorption and heterotopic ossification (HO) were found after surgery. The result showed that, for the selected patients, HS may provide an alternative approach for the treatment of contiguous two-level CDDD. HS also offers the benefit of both greater global ROM and greater ROM at the Mobi-C index level. Some degree of bone resorption may be an integral component in the early stage of bony fusion in the cage index level. Further studies and long-term follow-up are still needed.

Intraoperative neuromonitoring for one-level lumbar discectomies is low yield and cost-ineffective.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative neuromonitoring is a common, well-established modality used in spine surgery to prevent intraoperative neural injury. Neuromonitoring use in lumbar discectomy, however, is based on surgeon preference, without evidence-based data. The purpose of this research was to determine intraoperative utility and overall cost effectiveness of neuromonitoring for lumbar discectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed adult patients who underwent a lumbar discectomy, with at least 1 month of follow-up at a single tertiary care center. Patient age, sex, body mass index (BMI), lumbar level operated, and operative time and cost were collected. Neuromonitoring and operative reports were reviewed for any electromyography (EMG) abnormalities noted intraoperatively, pre- and post-operative motor exam and post-operative pain relief were collected. RESULTS: Ninety-one (47 with and 44 without neuromonitoring) lumbar discectomy cases were reviewed. There was no significant difference between mean age, sex, and BMI between the two groups. There was a significant (p = 0.006) increase in operating room time (174 min; with vs. 144 min; without neuromonitoring). Neuromonitoring was associated with a significant (p = 0.006) overall operative cost ($21,949; with vs. $18,064; without). Of the 47 cases with neuromonitoring; one had abnormal intraoperative EMG activity, which returned to normal by case conclusion. No patient in either group demonstrated new post-operative motor weakness. There was no difference in the number of patients who endorsed post-operative pain relief between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Neuromonitoring for lumbar discectomy confers greater operative time and cost, without any difference in neurological outcome.

Changing Trends and Challenges of Spine Surgery in a Developing Country.

BACKGROUND: Spine conditions are common and the surgery is evolving even in developed economies. This study aims to review the changing trends and challenges of spine surgery, particularly from a low-income country. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients who were surgically treated for spine conditions in Enugu, Nigeria. Patient records from 2006 to 2016 were reviewed. Relevant clinical information was extracted from the operation theater logbooks and patient case files. RESULTS: A total of 463 spine surgical procedures were carried out on the same number of patients. The number of treated patients has been on the increase and shows a male predominance. Pediatric spine cases accounted for 1.5%, adult/middle aged patients accounted for 77.8%. Degenerative conditions, trauma, and neoplasms were the most frequent indications for operation, accounting for 52.3%, 30.5%, and 11.4%, respectively. The most commonly operated region was cervical and lumbar regions among male (49.3%) and female (51.8%) patients, respectively. Spine fixation was required in 137 patients (29.6%). A paradigm shift from trauma to degenerative conditions among patients was noted after 2010. Prior to 2009, spine wiring techniques were the most common spine stabilizing method, but from 2011 to 2013 anterior cervical discectomy and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion predominated, and thereafter pedicle screws predominated. Cost implications, lack of trained personnel, and lack of and basic equipment pose significant challenges to spine care. CONCLUSIONS: The trend in spinal surgery has improved rapidly and consistently in Nigeria over the 10 years of the study and is related to increasing expertise, more available facilities, and implant availability.

Assessment of the Reliability of the Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing as an Outcome Measure in Patients Undergoing Revision Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is one of the most common complications of anterior cervical spine surgery, and there is a need to establish that the means of testing for it are reliable and valid. The objective of this study was to measure observer variability of the fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) test, specifically when used for evaluation of dysphagia in patients undergoing revisionary anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: Images from patients undergoing revision ACDF at a single institution were collected from May 1, 2010, through July 1, 2014. Two senior certified speech pathologists independently evaluated the swallowing function of patients preoperatively and at 2 weeks postoperatively. Their numeric evaluations of the Rosenbeck Penetration-Aspiration Scale and the Swallowing Performance Scale during the FEES were then compared for interrater reliability. RESULTS: Positive agreement between raters was 94% for the preoperative Penetration-Aspiration Scale (prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted κ, 0.77). The postoperative Penetration-Aspiration Scale showed reliability coefficients for κ, Kendall's W, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.34 (fair agreement), 0.70 (extremely strong agreement), and 0.35 (poor agreement), respectively. The preoperative Swallowing Performance Scale showed strong agreement, with a Kendall's W coefficient of 0.68, and fair reliability, with an ICC of 0.40. The postoperative Swallowing Performance Scale indicated extremely strong agreement between raters, with a Kendall's W of 0.82, and good agreement, with an ICC of 0.53. CONCLUSIONS: The FEES test appears to be a reliable assessor of dysphagia in patients undergoing ACDF and may be a useful measure for exploring outcomes in this population.

Three-Dimensional, High-Definition Exoscopic Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Valid Alternative to Microscope-Assisted Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) remains one of the most commonly taught procedures during residency and one of the most frequently performed by neurosurgeons. Neurosurgeons use microscopes to perform surgery and to train other surgeons. Although the microscope provides excellent illumination and magnification, its use will be limited to 2 people: the surgeon and the assistant. Consequently, the scrub nurse and residents watching 2-dimensional images on monitors will have a reduced perception of the surgical field depth and anatomical details. The exoscope has been introduced as an alternative to microscopes and endoscopes. We used a 3-dimensional (3D), high-definition exoscope (3D Vitom [Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany]) in 2 patients undergoing 2-level ACDF for cervical myeloradiculopathy. METHODS: The exoscope was used during soft tissue dissection, discectomy, osteophytectomy, and cage insertion. Microsurgical drilling of the posterior osteophytes, which will usually require adequate magnification and proper microscope angulation, was also performed using the exoscope. RESULTS: The exoscope provided a 3D view of the surgical field similar to that provided by a microscope and allowed us to effectively and safely perform the required surgical steps. The main advantage of 3D exoscope-assisted surgery, compared with microscope-assisted surgery, is the possibility to generate videos with a similar view and image quality as perceived by the surgeon. Therefore, the didactic capabilities of exoscopic videos are greater than those provided by microscopic videos. Exoscopes are also smaller compared with microscopes, allowing for comfortable use from the early surgical steps to device implantation. CONCLUSION: We believe that exoscope-assisted surgery could become a safe and effective alternative to microscope-assisted surgery in ACDF.

Cost-effectiveness of a Bone-anchored Annular Closure Device Versus Conventional Lumbar Discectomy in Treating Lumbar Disc Herniations.

STUDY DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis of an annular closure device (ACD) based on data from a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) OBJECTIVE.: The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of a novel ACD in a patient population at high risk for recurrent herniation following discectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar disc herniation patients with annular defect widths ≥6 mm are at high risk for recurrent herniation following limited discectomy. Recurrent herniation is associated with worse clinical outcomes and greater healthcare costs. A novel ACD may reduce the incidence of recurrent herniation and the associated burdens. METHODS: A decision analytical modeling approach with a Markov method was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the ACD versus conventional discectomy. Health states were created by projecting visual analogue scale (VAS) onto Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Direct costs were calculated based on Humana and Medicare 2014 claims to represent private and public payer data, respectively. Indirect costs were calculated for lost work days using 2016 US average annual wages. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was compared to willingness-to-pay thresholds. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Patients with the ACD had less symptomatic reherniations, reoperations, and complications and gained 0.0328 QALYs within the first 2 years. Total direct medical costs for the ACD group were similar to control. When productivity loss was considered, using the ACD became $2076 cheaper, per patient, than conventional discectomy. Based on direct costs alone, the ICER comparing ACD to control equaled $6030 per QALY. When indirect costs are included, the ICER became negative, which indicates that superior quality of life was attained at less cost. CONCLUSION: For lumbar disc herniations patients with annular defects ≥6 mm, the ACD was, at 2 years, a highly cost-effective surgical modality compared to conventional lumbar discectomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Relationships Between Expertise, Crew Familiarity and Surgical Workflow Disruptions: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Teamwork is an essential factor in reducing workflow disruption (WD) in the operating room. Team familiarity (TF) has been recognized as an antecedent to surgical quality and safety. To date, no study has examined the link between team members' role and expertise, TF and WD in surgical setting. This study aimed to examine the relationships between expertise, surgeon-scrub nurse familiarity and WD. METHODS: We observed a convenience sample of 12 elective neurosurgical procedures carried out by 4 surgeons and 11 SN with different levels of expertise and different degrees of familiarity between surgeons and SN. We calculated the number of WD per unit of coding time to control for the duration of operation. We explored the type and frequency of WD, and the differences between the surgeons and SN. We examined the relationships between duration of WD, staff expertise and surgeon-scrub nurse familiarity. RESULTS: 9.91% of the coded surgical time concerned WD. The most frequent causes of WD were distractions (29.7%) and colleagues' interruptions (25.2%). This proportion was seen for SN, whereas teaching moments and colleagues' interruptions were the most frequent WD for surgeons. The WD was less high among expert surgeons and less frequent when surgeon was familiar with SN. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of WD during surgical time can compromise surgical quality and patient safety. WD seems to decrease in teams with high levels of surgeon-scrub nurse familiarity and with development of surgical expertise. Favoring TF and giving feedback to the team about WD issues could be interesting ways to improve teamwork.

A Comparison of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty and Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Patients with Two-Level Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: 5-Year Follow-Up Results.

OBJECTIVE: To present a long-term clinical and radiographic comparison between the Prestige LP cervical disc replacement and the Zero-P spacer cervical disc fusion in the treatment of patients with symptomatic 2-level cervical degenerative disease. METHODS: In total, 36 patients in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) group and 24 patients in the cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) group were analyzed before surgery and at 1 week and 3, 6, 12, 24, and 60 months after surgery. Clinical assessments included the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, visual analog scale, and Neck Disability Index scores. Radiographic assessments included cervical lordosis, range of motion (ROM) of the total cervical spine, functional spinal unit (FSU), and superior and inferior adjacent segments. Complications including heterotopic ossification and adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD) at 5-year follow-up were collected as well. RESULTS: Mean follow-up period was 65.6 months. Both the ACDF and CDA groups showed significant clinical improvements in terms of Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, visual analog scale, and Neck Disability Index (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between groups at the last follow-up period. A significant increase of cervical lordosis was observed in the CDA group after surgery whereas a significant difference was not observed between groups. ROM of the total cervical spine and FSU were maintained during the follow-up, and a significant decrease was observed in the ACDF group after surgery (P < 0.05). The ROM of the superior adjacent segment did not show any difference whereas the ROM of the inferior adjacent segment in the ACDF group presented a significant increase at 6 months and 1 year after surgery and a significant decrease at the last follow-up period. A total of 8 (33.3%) patients in the CDA group had an occurrence of heterotopic ossification. ASD was observed in 2 (8.3%) patients who underwent CDA surgery and 8 (22.2%) patients who underwent ACDF surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Prestige-LP and ZERO-P Spacer implantations is safe and effective. At 5 years after surgery, CDA with Prestige-LP is superior in terms of ROM of the total cervical spine, FSU, and inferior adjacent segment. It also has a relatively low occurrence rate of ASD. This procedure may be a suitable choice for the treatment of contiguous 2-level CDDD.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with stand-alone anchored cages versus posterior laminectomy and fusion for four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study with 2-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) remains controversial. Posterior approach is most commonly used, but complicated with insufficient decompression and postoperative axial neck pain. The anterior approach is effective in neural decompression with less surgical trauma. However, the profile of the plate or the possible construct failure may cause dysphagia after surgery. Recently, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with self-anchored cage is reported to have a superior result over ACDF with anterior plates and screws in three-level CSM. The purpose of the study is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of ACDF using stand-alone anchored cages to that of laminectomy with fusion (LF) for treating four-level CSM. METHODS: Twenty-six patients underwent four-level ACDF (Group A) and 32 patients with four-level LF (Group B) were retrospectively reviewed and followed-up for 24 months. Clinical efficacy was evaluated by comparing pre- and post-operative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores. Operative time, blood loss, fusion, lordosis change and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: There was significantly less blood loss in Group A (163.4 ± 72.1 ml) than Group B (241.0 ± 112.3 ml) (P < 0.05). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in JOA and NDI scores after surgery with similar operative time. Improvements in cervical lordosis and fused segment lordosis were more pronounced in Group A (11.3 ± 5.9°, 9.7 ± 5.3°) than Group B (5.8 ± 4.6°, 5.5 ± 4.5°) (P < 0.05). Loss of lordosis in the cervical spine and fused segment was more prominent in Group A (11.7 ± 2.2°, 6.7 ± 3.2°) than Group B (7.5 ± 3.8°, 3.7 ± 3.4°) (P < 0.05) at the final follow-up. Complication rate in Group A and Group B was 57.69 and 18.75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ACDF using a stand-alone anchored cage showed similar clinical results to LF for the treatment of four-level CSM, with better lordosis correction and less blood loss. However, ACDF was associated with more loss of lordosis after surgery and more non-unions.

Lumbar Discectomy Outcomes by Specialty: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of 7464 Patients from the ACS-NSQIP Database.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of surgeon specialty on 30-day postoperative complication rates for single-level lumbar discectomies. METHODS: All patients who underwent single-level lumbar discectomy between 2005 and 2014 were reviewed from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. Propensity score matching and univariate binary regression was used to determine whether surgeon subspecialty had an influence on 30-day postoperative complications. RESULTS: Of the 28,863 patients who underwent single-level lumbar discectomies during 2005-2014, 12,659 patients met inclusion criteria. Orthopedic surgeons performed 3733 operations (29.4%), and neurosurgeons performed 8926 operations (70.6%). A propensity-score matched sample of 7464 total cases (3732 orthopedic surgeon, 3732 neurosurgeon) was analyzed for the effect of surgeon specialty on 30-day outcomes. After propensity matching, orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons were similar in all postoperative outcomes, except for a slightly higher frequency of blood transfusions (0.3%, n = 11) in orthopedic versus neurosurgery patients (0.1%, n = 3; P = 0.032), although this did not remain significant after Bonferroni adjustment. Mean operative time was slightly longer for neurosurgeons (83.7 minutes) versus orthopedic surgeons (72.5 minutes; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality, readmission, or reoperation rates. CONCLUSIONS: Single-level lumbar discectomies hold a low complication profile and show equivalent outcomes for both orthopedic and neurological surgeons, although neurosurgeons may exhibit a slightly longer mean operative time. In propensity score-matched cohorts, orthopedic surgeons had slightly higher rates of blood transfusions, although the number was small and did not remain significant after Bonferroni adjustment.

What are the Rates, Reasons, and Risk Factors of 90-day Hospital Readmission After Lumbar Discectomy?: An Institutional Experience.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To report the rate, reasons, and risk factors for 90-day readmissions after lumbar discectomy at an academic medical center. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Several studies have reported complications and readmissions after spine surgery; however, only one previous study has focused specifically on lumbar discectomy. As the patient profile and morbidity of various spine procedures is different, focus on procedure-specific complications and readmissions will be beneficial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent lumbar discectomy for unrelieved symptoms of prolapsed intervertebral disk and had at least 90 days of follow-up at an academic institution (2013-2014) were included. Retrospective review of electronic medical record was performed to record demographic and clinical profile of patients. Details of lumbar discectomy, index hospital stay, discharge disposition, hospital readmission within 90 days, reason for readmission and treatment given have been reported. Risk factors for hospital readmission were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 356 patients with a mean age of 45.0±13.8 years were included. The 90-day readmission rate was 5.3% (19/360) of which two-third patients were admitted within 30 days giving a 30-day readmission rate of 3.7% (13/356). The top 2 primary reasons for readmission included back and/or leg pain, numbness, or tingling (42.9%), and persistent cerebrospinal fluid leak or seroma (25.0%). On adjusted analysis, risk factors associated with higher risk of readmission included incidental durotomy [odds ratio (OR), 26.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5.3-129.9] and discharge to skilled nursing facility/inpatient rehabilitation (OR, 25.2; 95% CI, 2.7-235.2). Increasing age was a negative predictor of readmission (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Incidental durotomy, younger age, and discharge to nursing facility were associated with higher risk of 90-day hospital readmission after lumbar discectomy. As compared with extensive spine procedures, patient comorbidity burden may not be as significant in predicting readmission after this relatively less invasive procedure.

Comparison of Multilevel Cervical Disc Replacement and Multilevel Anterior Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review of Biomechanical and Clinical Evidence.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to comprehensively compare the clinical and biomechanical efficiency of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) for treatment of multilevel cervical disc disease using a meta-analysis and systematical review. METHODS: A literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for articles published between January 1960 and December 2017. Both clinical and biomechanical parameters were analyzed. Statistical tests were conducted by Revman 5.3. Nineteen studies including 10 clinical studies and 9 biomechanical studies were filtered out. RESULTS: The pooled results for clinical efficiency showed that no significant difference was observed in blood loss (P = 0.09; mean difference [MD], 7.38; confidence interval [CI], -1.16 to 15.91), hospital stay (P = 0.33; MD, -0.25; CI, -0.76 to 0.26), Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores (P = 0.63; MD, -0.11; CI, -0.57 to 0.34), visual analog scale (P = 0.08; MD, -0.50; CI, -1.06 to 0.05), and Neck Disability Index (P = 0.33; MD, -0.55; CI, -1.65 to 0.56) between the 2 groups. Compared with ACDF, ACDR did show increased surgical time (P = 0.03; MD, 31.42; CI, 2.71-60.14). On the other hand, ACDR showed increased index range of motion (ROM) (P < 0.00001; MD, 13.83; CI, 9.28-18.39), lower rates of adjacent segment disease (ASD) (P = 0.001; odds ratio [OR], 0.27; CI, 0.13-0.59), complications (P = 0.006; OR, 0.62; CI, 0.45-0.87), and rate of subsequent surgery (P < 0.00001; OR, 0.25; CI, 0.14-0.44). As for biomechanical performance, ACDR maintained index ROM and avoided compensation in adjacent ROM and tissue pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Multilevel ACDR may be an effective and safe alternative to ACDF in terms of clinical and biomechanical performance. However, further multicenter and prospective studies should be conducted to obtain a stronger and more reliable conclusion.

A comparison of zero-profile anchored spacer (ROI-C) and plate fixation in 2-level noncontiguous anterior cervical discectomy and fusion- a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the classic surgical treatment for symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD). However, there is controversy over the best surgical management in patients with two noncontiguous symptomatic levels of CDDD. METHODS: From April 2011 to May 2014, 44 patients with two noncontiguous symptomatic levels of CDDD underwent skip-level ACDFs. In Group NoPlate, 23 cases underwent 2 noncontiguous levels of ACDF using zero-profile anchored spacer; and in Group Plate, 21 cases underwent 2 noncontiguous levels of ACDF using cages and plates. Operation-related paraeters for each group were recorded and compared. Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores at preoperation and postoperation were compared with at least a 2-year follow-up. Cervical lordosis was analyzed before surgery, 1 month after surgery, 3 months after surgery, and at final follow-up. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 35.4 ± 6.5 (range 24-48) months. Significant improvement on the JOA, NDI scores and cervical lordosis was noted in each group (p < 0.05), and there were no significant difference in terms of JOA, NDI scores, cervical lordosis and fusion rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). The operation time in Group NoPlate was significantly shorter than in Group Plate (p < 0.05), and the incidence of dysphagia and adjacent segment degeneration in Group NoPlate was significantly lower than in Group Plate (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: ROI-C and cages with plate fixation were both effective in two-level noncontiguous ACDF, and there were no significant difference in clinical outcomes, fusion rate, and cervical lordosis. However, ROI-C was associated with shorter operative time, lower incidence of dysphagia and adjacent segment degeneration.

Establishing benchmarks for the volume-outcome relationship for common lumbar spine surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The importance of surgeon volume as a quality measure has been defined for a number of surgical specialties. Meaningful procedural volume benchmarks have not been established, however, particularly with respect to lumbar spine surgery. PURPOSE: We aimed to establish surgeon volume benchmarks for the performance of four common lumbar spine surgical procedures (discectomy, decompression, lumbar interbody fusion, and lumbar posterolateral fusion). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of data in the Florida Statewide Inpatient Dataset (2011-2014) was carried out. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent one of the four lumbar spine surgical procedures under study comprised the study sample. OUTCOME MEASURE: The development of a complication or hospital readmission within 90 days of the surgical procedure was the surgical outcome. METHODS: For each specific procedure, individual surgeon volume was separately plotted against the number of complications and readmissions in a spline analysis that adjusted for co-variates. Spline cut-points were used to create a categorical variable of procedure volume for each individual procedure. Log-binomial regression analysis was then separately performed using the categorical volume-outcome metric for each individual procedure and for the outcomes of 90-day complications and 90-day readmissions. RESULTS: In all, 187,185 spine surgical procedures met inclusion criteria, performed by 5,514 different surgeons at 178 hospitals. Spline analysis determined that the procedure volume cut-point was 25 for decompressions, 40 for discectomy, 43 for interbody fusion, and 35 for posterolateral fusions. For surgeons who failed to meet the volume metric, there was a 63% increase in the risk of complications following decompressions, a 56% increase in the risk of complications following discectomy, a 15% increase in the risk of complications following lumbar interbody fusions, and a 47% increase in the risk of complications following posterolateral fusions. Findings were similar for readmission measures. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this work allow us to identify meaningful volume-based benchmarks for the performance of common lumbar spine surgical procedures including decompression, discectomy, and fusion-based procedures. Based on our determinations, readily achievable goals for individual surgeons would approximate an average of four discectomy and lumbar interbody fusion procedures per month, three posterolateral lumbar fusions per month, and at least one decompression surgery every other week.

Comparing Lumbar Disc Space Preparation With Fluoroscopy Versus Cone Beam-Computed Tomography and Navigation: A Cadaveric Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Cadaveric study. OBJECTIVE: This cadaveric study sought to evaluate the efficacy of disc space preparation with cone beam-computed tomography with navigation (CBCT+N) for instrument placement compared with instrument placement with conventional fluoroscopy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Disc space preparation from a transforaminal lumbar approach is challenging with respect to visualization, and surgeons currently rely on tactile feel and two-dimensional imaging in the operating room to assess instrument positioning. METHODS: Two orthopedic spine surgeons performed 40 disc space preparations after eight cadavers were randomly assigned to fluoroscopy versus CBCT+N. Digital images of each vertebral endplate were captured and the percent disc removed by area for the total disc and by quadrants was determined using digital imaging software. RESULTS: There were 20 lumbar disc levels prepared in the fluoroscopy group. There were 3 thoracolumbar, and 17 lumbar disc levels prepared in the experimental group. Percent disc removed relative to the total area of the disc, as determined by the digital imaging software, was higher in the CBCT+N group (P ≤ 0.0001). More disc was removed in both the anterior contralateral and posterior contralateral quadrants in the CBCT+N group (P = 0.0006 and P ≤ 0.0001 respectively). The intraclass correlation coefficient among blinded reviewers for percent disc removed was 0.759 (95% confidence interval, 0.587-0.866)]. There was no difference in time to complete disc space preparation, number of instrument passes, or number of endplate violations between the two groups (P = 0.28, P = 0.92, and P = 0.34 respectively). CONCLUSION: The results of this cadaveric investigation reveal that CBCT+N guidance may be used to assess instrument placement for interbody disc space preparation in a similar length of time, with no difference in instrument passes or endplate violations, in comparison with fluoroscopy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

Comparison of 7 Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The number of interventions on intervertebral discs rapidly increased and the treatment options for lumbar disc surgery quickly evolved. It is important that the safety and efficacy of all new innovative procedures be compared with currently accepted forms of treatment; however, the previous pairwise meta-analyses could not develop the hierarchy of these treatments. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study is to perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical results of 7 surgical interventions for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. STUDY DESIGN: Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for multiple treatment comparisons of lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: We performed a Bayesian-framework network meta-analysis of RCTs to compare 7 surgical interventions for people with lumbar disc herniation. The eligible RCTs were identified by searching Embase, Pubmed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google scholar. Data from 3 outcomes (success, complications, and reoperation rate) were independently extracted by 2 authors. RESULTS: A total of 29 RCTs including 3,146 participants were finally included into this article. Our meta-analysis provides hierarchies of these 7 interventions. For the success rate the rank probability (from best to worst): percutaneous endoscopic lumber discectomy (PELD) > standard open discectomy (SOD) > standard open microsurgical discectomy (SOMD) > chemonucleolysis (CN) > microendoscopic discectomy (MED) > percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) > automated percutaneous lumber discectomy (APLD). For the complication rate the rank probability (from best to worst): PELD > SOMD > SOD > MED > PLDD > CN > APLD. For the reoperation rate the rank probability (from best to worst): SOMD > SOD > MED > PLDD > PELD > CN > APLD. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this network meta-analysis include the range of study populations and inconformity of the follow-up times and outcome measurements. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides evidence that PELD might be the best choice to increase the success rate and decrease the complication rate, moreover SOMD might be the best option to drop the reoperation rate. APLD might lead to the lowest success rate and the highest complication and reoperation rate. Higher quality RCTs and direct head to head trials are needed to confirm these results.Key words: Lumbar disc herniation, discectomy, minimally invasive surgery, network meta-analysis.

Outpatient Lumbar Microdiscectomy in France: From an Economic Imperative to a Clinical Standard-An Observational Study of 201 Cases.

PURPOSE: The outpatient lumbar discectomy procedures have been established for more than 2 decades. However, especially in Europe, there are still obstacles to the development of these procedures, which may be related to medicoeconomic imperatives, and to several factors concerning both surgeons and patients. We describe our initial experience in introducing this method in our institution. METHODS: During a 3-year period, 201 patients met the criteria for ambulatory lumbar microdiscectomy. A dedicated fast-tracking unit provided preoperative patient education and immediate postoperative follow-up. A surgical consultation was organized 6 weeks after surgery, and a late satisfaction phone survey concerning ambulatory management was carried out after 6 months. RESULTS: The average total inpatient time was 10 hours and 12 minutes. One patient (0.5%) remained overnight because of an anxiety attack. No patients contacted the FT unit during the first night, and no complications occurred. All patients were reviewed in consultation around day 45: the average visual analog scale score was significantly reduced. At this early postoperative follow-up, 87.5% of patients were (very) satisfied with this procedure. At the day 180 survey, average visual analog scale scores were not significantly different from the day 45 data. In terms of return to normal activities of daily living, 120 patients (60%) had no limitation, 72 patients (36%) had minor or major limitations, and 8 (4%) were incapacitated. At this final evaluation, 8% of patients (n = 16) were very satisfied, 73% were satisfied (n = 146), 11% (n = 22) were partly satisfied, and 8% (n = 16) were not satisfied with the outpatient procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing hospitalization for lumbar discectomies to a few hours is not a reduction in the quality of care. It is not necessarily simple to overcome the resistances of all protagonists, but placing the patient as the main actor of an integrated management plan is the key to transforming a medicoeconomic incentive into a clinical success.

Volume-Outcome Relationship After 1 and 2 Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of surgeon volume on inpatient morbidity after 1- and 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2009 were extracted. All adult patients who underwent an elective 1- or 2-level ACDF for degenerative cervical spine disease were identified. Surgeon volume was analyzed as a continuous and categorical variable: very low (<12 procedures per year), low (12-23 procedures per year), medium (24-35 procedures per year), high (36-47 procedures per year), and very high (≥48 procedures per year). A multivariate logistical regression analysis was performed to calculate the adjusted odds ratios of overall in-hospital and surgical complication occurrence in relation to surgeon volume. RESULTS: Eleven thousand two hundred forty-nine admissions were analyzed. The overall complication rate was 4.7%, and the surgical complication rate was 1.2%. Following regression analysis, increasing surgeon volume (evaluated continuously) was independently associated with lower odds of overall complication (odds ratio [OR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-0.99; P < 0.001) and surgical complication development (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99; P = 0.004). Surgeons with very high volume (performing 48 or more procedures per year; 4 or more per month) showed a significant decrease in overall complications (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84; P = 0.003) and surgical complications (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.25-0.99; P = 0.041) when compared to surgeons with very low volume. CONCLUSION: In this study, increasing surgeon volume was independently associated with significantly lower odds of perioperative complications following 1- and 2-level ACDF. Performing 4 or more procedures per month was associated with the lowest complication rate.

Comparative Study of 2 Skin Incisions for Microscopic Lumbar Discectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Microscopic lumbar discectomy is a common minimally invasive surgery. A transverse skin incision has sound theoretical cosmetic advantages compared with the classic vertical incision. We compared transverse and vertical skin incisions for microscopic discectomy regarding cosmetic outcome, postoperative pain, and the provided surgical cutaneous inlet. METHODS: This prospective study enrolled 86 patients who were randomly assigned to a vertical incision group or a transverse incision group. The maximum surgical cutaneous inlet provided was measured in 2 diameters. Pain was recorded on postoperative days 1, 3, and 7 using a numeric patient rating scale from 0 to 10 with 0 indicating no pain. The cosmetic appearance of the wound was evaluated by a plastic surgeon and by the patients as excellent, very good, good, fair, and poor. RESULTS: Compared with vertical incisions, transverse incisions provide similar surgical cutaneous inlets, cause higher pain scores on postoperative days 1 and 3 but a similar score on postoperative day 7, and ensure significantly better wound cosmesis. CONCLUSIONS: Transverse skin incision for microscopic lumbar discectomy is an applicable alternative to classic midline or paramedian vertical incision with better esthetic results.