What Are the Indications for Spinal Fusion Surgery in Scheuermann Kyphosis?

BACKGROUND: Surgical indications for Scheuermann kyphosis are variable. We sought to evaluate the characteristics of patients undergoing operative versus nonoperative treatment of Scheuermann kyphosis to better understand current practices and the factors which contribute to the decision for surgical management. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort study. We evaluated consecutive patients presenting with Scheuermann kyphosis. Patients underwent either surgical or nonoperative management according to surgeon and patient discretion. Preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (Scoliosis Research Society and Spinal Appearance Questionnaire scores), demographics, and radiographic characteristics were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 150 patients with Scheuermann kyphosis were enrolled, with 77 choosing nonoperative treatment and 73 treated operatively. Compared with the nonoperative cohort, patients treated operatively were older (16.3±2.0 vs. 15.1±2.2, P=0.0004), and had higher body mass index (26.3±7.2 vs. 22.7±6.5, P=0.003), had greater T2-T12 kyphosis (71±14 degrees vs. 61±12 degrees, P<0.001), increased pelvic incidence (46 vs. 41 degrees, P=0.03) and pelvic tilt (10 vs. 3 degrees, P=0.03). There was no detected difference in maximal sagittal Cobb angle in the operative versus nonoperative patients (73±11 vs. 70±12 degrees, P=0.11). Functionally, the operative patients had worse Scoliosis Research Society pain scores (3.7±0.9 vs. 4.1±0.7, P=0.0027) and appearance scores (2.9±0.7 vs. 3.4±0.8, P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing surgical management of Scheuermann disease were more likely to have large body mass index and worse pain scores. Other factors beyond radiographic measurement likely contribute to the decision for surgical management of Scheuermann kyphosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Which Malpositioned Pedicle Screws Should Be Revised?

BACKGROUND: Up to 10% of free-hand pedicle screws are malpositioned, and 1 in 300 patients may undergo return to surgery for revision of malpositioned screws. The indications for revision of asymptomatic malpositioned screws have not been carefully examined in the literature. We sought to evaluate the threshold among spinal deformity surgeons for revision of malpositioned screws. METHODS: Twelve experienced spine surgeons reviewed x-ray and computed tomographic images of 32 malpositioned pedicle screws with variable degrees of anterior, medial, and lateral breeches. The surgeons were asked whether based on the image they would revise the screw: (1) intraoperatively before rod placement; (2) intraoperatively after rod placement; (3) in clinic with an asymptomatic patient. For each scenario, we assumed stable neuromonitoring and no neurological changes. Agreement and multirater κ was calculated. RESULTS: There was good agreement as to which screws were malpositioned (80% agreement, κ=0.703). After the rod was placed or postoperatively (scenarios 2 and 3), surgeons less frequently recommended screw revision, and there was greater variability among the surgeons' recommendations. For return to surgery from clinic for asymptomatic screw revision, % agreement was only 65% (κ=0.477). The majority recommended revision surgery for screws which approached the dura (10/12) or the aorta (7/12 surgeons). Half of the surgeons recommended revision surgery for an asymptomatic screw if the entire screw diameter was in the canal. Revision surgery was not recommended for asymptomatic patients with screws partially violating the canal (<½ the screw diameter), malpositioned laterally in the rib head, or with small anterior cortical violations remote from a vascular structure. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability of opinion among surgeons regarding which malpositioned screws can be safely observed in an asymptomatic patient. Given the frequency of malpositioned screws and morbidity of surgical return to surgery, more long-term data are needed to develop practice guidelines for determining which screws require revision surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Thoracic Volume Modeling: The Effect of Surgical Correction.

BACKGROUND: Scoliosis has been shown to have detrimental effects on pulmonary function, traditionally measured by pulmonary function tests, which is theorized to be correlated to the distortion of the spine and thorax. The changes in thoracic volume with surgical correction have not been well quantified. This study seeks to define the effect of surgical correction on thoracic volume in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. METHODS: Images were obtained from adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis enrolled in a multicenter database (Prospective Pediatric Scoliosis Study). A convenience sample of patients with Lenke type 1 curves with a complete data set meeting specific parameters was used. Blender v2.63a software was used to construct a 3-dimensional (3D) computational model of the spine from 2-dimensional calibrated radiographs. To accomplish this, the 3D thorax model was deformed to match the calibrated radiographs. The thorax volume was then calculated in cubic centimeters using Mimics v15 software. RESULTS: The results using this computational modeling technique demonstrated that surgical correction resulted in decreased curve measurement as determined by Cobb method, and increased postoperative thoracic volume as expected. Thoracic volume significantly increased by a mean of 567 mm (P<0.001). The percent change in thoracic volume after surgical correction averaged 40% (range, 3% to 87%). The smaller the baseline volume, the greater the change in volume postoperatively (r=-0.86).Evaluation of postoperative data demonstrated that spinal curve measurement as determined by Cobb method was significantly reduced from a mean of 69 degrees (range, 50 to 96 degrees) preoperatively to 27 degrees (range, 13 to 33 degrees) postoperatively (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrates methodologic plausibility for measuring 3D changes in thoracic volumes using 2-dimensional imaging. This is an assessment of the novel modeling technique, to be used in larger future studies to assess clinical significance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3-retrospective comparison of prospectively collected data.

Minimally invasive versus open sacroiliac joint fusion: are they similarly safe and effective?

BACKGROUND: The sacroiliac joint has been implicated as a source of chronic low back pain in 15% to 30% of patients. When nonsurgical approaches fail, sacroiliac joint fusion may be recommended. Advances in intraoperative image guidance have assisted minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques using ingrowth-coated fusion rods; however, how these techniques perform relative to open anterior fusion of the sacroiliac joint using plates and screws is not known. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared estimated blood loss (EBL), surgical time, length of hospital stay (LOS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between patients undergoing MIS and open sacroiliac joint fusion. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 63 patients (open: 36; MIS: 27) who underwent sacroiliac joint fusion with minimum 1-year followup at our institution from 2006 to 2011. Of those, 10 in the open group had incomplete records. All patients had sacroiliac joint dysfunction confirmed by image-guided intraarticular anesthetic sacroiliac joint injection and had failed nonoperative treatment. Patients were matched via propensity score, adjusting for age, sex, BMI, history of spine fusion, and preoperative ODI scores, leaving 22 in each group. Nine patients were not matched. We reviewed patient medical records to obtain EBL, length of surgery, LOS, and pre- and postoperative ODI scores. Mean followup was 13 months (range, 11-33 months) in the open group and 15 months (range, 12-26 months) in the MIS group. RESULTS: Patients in the open group had a higher mean EBL (681 mL versus 41 mL, p < 0.001). Mean surgical time and LOS were shorter in the MIS group than in the open group (68 minutes versus 128 minutes and 3.3 days versus 2 days, p < 0.001 for both). With the numbers available, mean postoperative ODI scores were not different between groups (47% versus 54%, p = 0.272). CONCLUSIONS: EBL, surgery time, and LOS favored the MIS sacroiliac fusion group. With the numbers available, ODI scores were similar between groups, though the study size was relatively small and it is possible that the study was underpowered on this end point. Because the implants used for these procedures make assessment of fusion challenging with available imaging techniques, we do not know how many patients' sacroiliac joints successfully fused, so longer followup and critical evaluation of outcomes scores over time are called for. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The accuracy of navigation and 3D image-guided placement for the placement of pedicle screws in congenital spine deformity.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of congenital spine deformity has high surgical risk due to abnormal anatomy and dysmorphic pedicles. We hypothesized that an image-guided navigation system would result in a low rate of screw revision due to malposition. METHODS: From 2007 to 2010, 142 screws were placed in 14 consecutive patients with congenital spine deformity using an intraoperative computer tomography (CT) (O-arm) and image-guided navigation system (Stealth). Mean age was 8.8 years (range, 1 to 18 y). Deformities included scoliosis (12), kyphosis (1), and spinal dysgenesis (1). Screws were placed from T2 to S1. An intraoperative CT verified screw position. Need for intraoperative screw revision is the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Of the 142 screws placed, 1 required revision intraoperatively due to malposition (99.3% screw accuracy rate). The screw was at L3 and was successfully redirected. There were no complications due to screw malposition. This navigated congenital screw accuracy rate (99.3%) is higher than the 94.9% accuracy rate reported for non-navigated screws in all children undergoing pedicle screw fixation in a recent systematic literature review and higher than the reported 96.4% accuracy rate for navigated pedicle screws in children. Kosmopoulos and colleagues found a lower accuracy rate (86.6%) in adult non-navigated screws (P<0.0001) and adult navigated screws (93.7%). Of note, 9 pedicles were noted on navigation to be absent. Despite the goal of bilateral screw placement at each fusion level, 31 of 173 pedicles were left unfilled due to technical impossibility based on intraoperative CT imaging. This represents an 18% screw dropout rate. CONCLUSIONS: CT-guided navigation resulted in the successful placement of 142 pedicle screws in patients with congenital deformity and altered anatomy, which represents a 99.3% screw accuracy rate. This is comparable with the screw accuracy rate of 93.7% reported for adult navigated pedicle screws. Further, navigation prevented attempts of screw placement at levels with absent or impassable pedicles. Image-guided navigation and intraoperative CT are valuable tools for the safe placement of pedicle screws in patients with significant congenital spine deformity and altered anatomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, Case Series.

Acinetobacter baumannii is not associated with osteomyelitis in a rat model: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (MDR AB) with and without Staphylococcus aureus (SA) is a commonly isolated organism in infected segmental bone defects in combat-related trauma in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although MDR AB in visceral infections is a therapeutic challenge, control of infection appears more common for combat-related osteomyelitis. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Using a rat model, we explored the virulence of MDR AB in segmental bone defects alone and in combination with SA. METHODS: Segmental defects in 60 rat femurs were created, stabilized, and inoculated with MDR AB alone and 60 with MDR AB and SA. We performed qualitative and quantitative bacteriology and radiographic assessments at 2, 4, and 8 weeks for MDR AB and at 1, 2, and 3 weeks for MDR AB and SA. RESULTS: Quantitative bacteriology revealed a 3- to 5-log decrease in MDR AB from the initial inoculum. After polymicrobial inoculation, only 10 of 60 animals had positive cultures for MDR AB, whereas 59 of 60 animals had positive cultures for SA. Recovered SA were 2 to 5 log greater than the initial inoculum, while there again was a 3- to 5-log decrease in MDR AB. MDR AB alone did not cause bony lysis, but there was radiographic evidence of new bone formation in 67% of the segmental defects. Osteolysis was noted with MDR AB and SA. CONCLUSIONS: MDR AB did not appear to cause or contribute to clinically apparent osteomyelitis in this pilot study. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Resolution of infections in combat-related segmental bone defects inoculated with MDR AB may be attributable to low virulence. Additional studies are needed to confirm low virulence and bone formation with MDR AB.

Expandable Technology Improves Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Disc Disease.

BACKGROUND: Static interbody spacers are standard of care for minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS LLIF). However, placement of large static interbody spacers typically requires multiple trialing, endplate preparation, and forceful impaction. A lateral expandable interbody spacer with adjustable lordosis can be inserted at a reduced height, to optimize the endplate-to-endplate fit. This study describes radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients treated using lateral titanium expandable interbody spacers with adjustable lordosis using MIS LLIF. METHODS: This is a single-surgeon, retrospective, institutional review board-exempt chart review of 24 consecutive patients who underwent MIS LLIF at 1-2 contiguous level(s) using expandable spacers with adjustable lordosis. Radiographic and clinical functional outcomes were collected and compared at preoperative and postoperative time points up to 24 months. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used when appropriate. Statistical results were significant if P < .05. RESULTS: Twenty-four consecutive patients were evaluated with an average age of 57.8 ± 12.6 years; 45.8% were female. Visual analog scale for back pain improved by 7.3 ± 1.0 points, whereas Oswestry Disability Index scores improved by a mean of 67.5 ± 11.3 points at 24 months (P < .001). Lumbar lordosis improved by a mean of 6.3 ± 10.1° at 24 months (P < .001). There were 29 spinal levels, with 41.4% at L4-5 and 34.5% at L3-4. Anterior, middle, and posterior disc height significantly increased at 24 months by means of 4.5 ± 2.9 mm, 4.0 ± 2.8 mm, and 2.6 ± 1.9 mm, respectively (P < .001). Neuroforaminal height significantly improved by 3.3 ± 3.9 mm at 24 months (P < .001). Segmental lordosis improved by 3.6 ± 3.0° at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed significant positive clinical and radiographic outcomes for patients who underwent MIS LLIF using expandable interbody spacers with adjustable lordosis. Correction of sagittal alignment was achieved and maintained up to 2-year follow-up. The use of expandable spacers with adjustable lordosis was shown to be safe and effective in this cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Comparative Effectiveness of Laterally Placed Expandable versus Static Interbody Spacers: A 1-Year Follow-Up Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. PURPOSE: This study compared the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients treated with expandable and static interbody spacers following minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LLIF) with 12-month follow-up. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: A common surgical option for the treatment of degenerative disk disease (DDD) is MIS-LLIF using static or expandable spacers to restore disk height (DH), neuroforaminal height (NH), and segmental lordosis. Static spacers may require excessive trialing and aggressive impaction, potentially leading to endplate disruption and subsidence. Expandable spacers allow for in situ expansion to help address complications associated with static spacers. METHODS: This is an Institutional Review Board-exempt review of 69 patients (static, n=32; expandable, n=37) diagnosed with DDD who underwent MIS-LLIF at 1-2 contiguous level(s) using static or expandable spacers. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were collected and compared at pre- and postoperative time points up to 12 months. RESULTS: The expandable group had a significantly higher mean change in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months vs. static (∆VAS at 12 months: expandable, 6.7±1.3; static, 5.1±2.6). Mean improvement of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at 3, 6, and 12 months were significantly better for the expandable group vs. static (∆ODI at 12 months: expandable, 63.2±13.2; static, 29.8±23.4). Mean DH and NH significantly increased at final follow-up for both groups, with no significant difference in DH improvement between groups. The expandable mean NH improvement at 6 weeks and 6 months was significantly greater vs. static. Segmental lordosis significantly improved in the expandable group at all time intervals vs static. Subsidence rate at 12 months was significantly lower in the expandable group (1/46, 2.2%) vs. static (12/37, 32.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Expandable spacers resulted in a significantly lower subsidence rate, improve segmental lordosis, and VAS and ODI outcomes at 12 months vs. static.

Navigated robot-guided pedicle screws placed successfully in single-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

Minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion has distinct advantages over traditional posterior approaches. When posterior stabilization is needed, percutaneous placement of pedicle screws from the lateral decubitus position may potentially increase safety and improve operative efficiency by precluding the need for repositioning. However, safe placement of pedicle screws in the lateral position remains technically challenging. This study describes the pedicle screw placement of single-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SP-LLIF) cases in which navigated robotic assistance was used. A single-surgeon, single-site, retrospective Institutional Review Board-exempt review of the first 55 SP-LLIF navigated robot-assisted spine surgery cases performed by the lead author was conducted. An orthopaedic surgeon evaluated screw placement using plain film radiographs. In addition, pedicle screw malposition, reposition, and return to operating room (OR) rates were collected. In the first 55 SP-LLIF cases, 342 pedicle screws were placed. The average patient age and body mass index were 67 years and 29.5 kg/m2, respectively. Of the 342 screws placed, 4% (14/342) were placed manually without the robot, due to surgeon discretion. Of the 328 screws placed with the robot, 2% (7/328) were repositioned based on the surgeon's discretion, resulting in a 98% navigated robot-assisted pedicle screw placement success rate. In this cohort there were no revisions due to malpositioned screws. No complications due to screw placement were reported. This study demonstrates a high level (98%) of successful surgeon-assessed pedicle screw placement in minimally invasive navigated robot-assisted SP-LLIF, with no malpositions requiring a return to the OR.

Navigated robotic assistance results in improved screw accuracy and positive clinical outcomes: an evaluation of the first 54 cases.

Computer-aided navigation and robotic guidance systems have become widespread in their utilization for spine surgery. A recent innovation combines these two advances, which theoretically provides accuracy in spinal screw placement. This study describes the cortical and pedicle screw accuracy for the first 54 cases where navigated robotic assistance was used in a surgical setting. This is a retrospective chart review of the initial 54 patients undergoing spine surgery with pedicle and cortical screws using robotic guidance with navigation. A computed tomography (CT)-based Gertzbein and Robbins System (GRS) was used to classify pedicle screw accuracy. Screw tip, tail, and angulation offsets were measured using image overlay analysis. Screw malposition, reposition, and return to operating room rates were collected. 1 of the first 54 cases was a revision surgery and was excluded from the study. Ten screws were placed without the robot due to surgeon discretion and were excluded for the data analysis of 292 screws. Only 0.68% (2/292) of the robot-assisted screws was repositioned based on surgeon discretion. Based on the GRS CT-based grading, 98.3% (287/292) were graded A or B, 1.0% (3/292) screws were graded C, and only 0.7% (2/292) screws was graded D. The average offset from preoperative plan to actual final placement was 1.9 mm from the tip, 2.3 mm from the tail, and 2.8° of angulation. In the first 53 cases, 292 screws placed with navigated robotic assistance resulted in a high level of accuracy (98.3%), adequate screw offsets from planned trajectory, and zero complications.

Robotic-assisted navigated minimally invasive pedicle screw placement in the first 100 cases at a single institution.

Proper pedicle screw placement is an integral part of spine fusion requiring expertly trained spine surgeons. Advances in medical imaging guidance have improved accuracy. There is high interest in the emerging field of robot-assisted spine surgery; however, safety and accuracy studies are needed. This study describes the pedicle screw placement of the first 100 cases in which navigated robotic assistance was used in a private practice clinical setting. A single-surgeon, single-site retrospective Institutional Review Board-exempt review of the first 100 navigated robot-assisted spine surgery cases was performed. An orthopaedic surgeon evaluated screw placement using plain film radiographs. In addition, pedicle screw malposition, reposition, and return to operating room (OR) rates were collected. Results demonstrated a high level (99%) of successful surgeon assessed pedicle screw placement in minimally invasive navigated robot-assisted spine surgery, with no malpositions requiring return to the OR.

Navigated robotic assistance improves pedicle screw accuracy in minimally invasive surgery of the lumbosacral spine: 600 pedicle screws in a single institution.

BACKGROUND: In the emerging field of robot-assisted spine surgery, radiographic evaluation of pedicle screw accuracy in the surgical setting is of high interest. Advances in medical imaging have improved the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, from fluoroscopy-guided to computer-aided navigation. METHODS: A retrospective, institutional review board-exempt review of the first 106 navigated robot-assisted spine surgery cases was performed. Radiographic evaluation of preoperative and postoperative computerized tomography (CT) scans were collected. RESULTS: In the first 106 cases, 630 lumbosacral pedicle screws were placed. Thirty screws were placed in five patients without the robot because of surgeon discretion. Of the 600 pedicle screws inserted by navigated robotic guidance, only 1.5% (9/600) were repositioned intraoperatively. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a high level of accuracy (98.2%) in terms of grade A or B pedicle screw breach scores in the clinical use of navigated, robot-assisted surgery in its first 101 cases.

Comparative Effectiveness of Expandable Versus Static Interbody Spacers via MIS LLIF: A 2-Year Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of expandable interbody spacers to static interbody spacers. METHODS: This is a retrospective, institutional review board-exempt chart review of 62 consecutive patients diagnosed with degenerative disc disease who underwent minimally invasive spine surgery lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS LLIF) using static or expandable spacers. There were 27 patients treated with static spacers, and 35 with expandable spacers. Radiographic and clinical functional outcomes were collected. Statistical results were significant if P < .05. RESULTS: Mean improvement in visual analogue scale back and leg pain scores was significantly greater in the expandable group compared to the static group at 6 and 24 months by 42.3% and 63.8%, respectively (P < .05). Average improvement in Oswestry Disability Index scores was significantly greater in the expandable group than the static group at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months by 28%, 44%, 59%, 53%, and 89%, respectively (P < .05). For disc height, the mean improvement from baseline to 24 months was greater in the static group compared to the expandable group (P < .05). Implant subsidence was significantly greater in the static group (16.1%, 5/31 levels) compared with the expandable group (6.7%, 3/45 levels; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed positive clinical and radiographic outcomes for patients who underwent MIS LLIF with expandable spacers compared to those with static spacers. Sagittal correction and pain relief was achieved and maintained through 24-month follow-up. The expandable group had a lower subsidence rate than the static group.

Does the accuracy of pedicle screw placement differ between the attending surgeon and resident in navigated robotic-assisted minimally invasive spine surgery?

Robotic assistance with integrated navigation is an area of high interest for improving the accuracy of minimally invasive pedicle screw placement. This study analyzes the accuracy of pedicle screw placement between an attending spine surgeon and a resident by comparing the left and right sides of the first 101 consecutive cases using navigated robotic assistance in a private practice clinical setting. A retrospective, Institutional Review Board-exempt review of the first 106 navigated robot-assisted spine surgery cases was performed. One attending spine surgeon and one resident performed pedicle screw placement consistently on either the left or right side (researchers were blinded). A CT-based Gertzbein and Robbins system (GRS) was used to classify pedicle screw accuracy, with grade A or B considered accurate. There were 630 consecutive lumbosacral pedicle screws placed. Thirty screws (5 patients) were placed without the robot due to surgeon discretion. Of the 600 pedicle screws inserted by navigated robotic guidance (101 patients), only 1.5% (9/600) were repositioned intraoperatively. Based on the GRS CT-based grading of pedicle breach, 98.67% (296/300) of left-side screws were graded A or B, 1.3% (4/300) were graded C, and 0% (0/300) were graded D. For the right-side screws, 97.67% (293/300) were graded A or B, 1.67% (5/300) were graded C, and 0.66% (2/300) were graded D. This study demonstrated a high level of accuracy (based on GRS) with no significant differences between the left- and right-side pedicle screw placements (98.67% vs. 97.67%, respectively) in the clinical use of navigated, robot-assisted surgery.

Pedicle screw accuracy in clinical utilization of minimally invasive navigated robot-assisted spine surgery.

In the emerging field of robot-assisted spine surgery, the radiographic evaluation of pedicle screw accuracy in clinical application is an area of high interest. This study describes the pedicle screw accuracy of the first 56 consecutive cases in which navigated robotic assistance was used in a private practice clinical setting. A retrospective, Institutional Review Board-exempt review of the first 56 navigated robot-assisted spine surgery cases was performed. Pedicle screw malposition, reposition, and return to operating room (OR) rates were collected. A CT-based Gertzbein and Robbins system (GRS) was used to classify pedicle screw accuracy. In the first 56 robotic cases, 356 total pedicle screws were placed. Eight screws were placed without the robot due to surgeon discretion. Of the 348 pedicle screws inserted by navigated robotic guidance, only 2.6% (9/348) were repositioned, resulting in a 97.4% (339/348) successful screw placement rate. The average age was 64, and 48% were female. Average body mass index was 31 kg/m2. Based on the GRS CT-based grading, 97.7% (340/348) were graded A or B, 1.7% (6/348) screws were graded C, and only 0.6% (2/348) of screws were graded D. Two complications, explantation of interbody and vacuum-assisted wound closure, were reported as requiring a return to the OR, but these were not related to robotic guidance or pedicle screws. This study demonstrated a high level of accuracy (97.7%) in the first 56 cases using navigated, robot-assisted surgery based on the GRS. There were two non-screw-related complications requiring return to the operating room.

Expandable spacers provide better functional outcomes than static spacers in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

BACKGROUND: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is an effective and frequently performed surgical treatment of chronic lower back pain. Expandable interbody spacers are designed to create greater disc height through in situ expansion. It remains unclear whether the benefits of expandable technology will translate into clinical benefits. The current study compares expandable to static interbody spacers. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 99 patients (48 static and 51 expandable) at a single site. Radiographs were collected preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively. Standard of care at this site requires radiographs to be taken past 3 months only if patients are suffering from a severe recurrence of symptoms. Patient reported outcomes, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS), were collected preoperatively, at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Patients were contacted by the surgeon and patient reported outcomes were collected at a final time point. Average final follow-up for was 67.1±16.3 months and for expandable patients it was 43.0±4.2 months. RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively and at final follow-up, patients treated with expandable interbody spacers had significantly lower average ODI scores than patients with static interbody spacers. Both groups reported significant reductions in VAS scores through all follow-up. At 4 years postoperative 8 static group patients and 3 expandable group patients returned for recurrence of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Expandable interbody spacers in this study were found to be comparable to static interbody spacers, with improvements in VAS and ODI scores.

Oswestry Disability Index: Is Telephone Administration Valid?

Background: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is among the most widely used patient reported outcome measures for the assessment of spinal conditions. Traditionally, the ODI has been administered in outpatient clinics on a face-to-face basis, which can be expensive and time consuming. Furthermore, the percentage of patients lost to clinical follow-up is high, particularly after 2-5 years. Thus, telephonic administration of the ODI, if valid, could be a convenient way of capturing patient outcomes and increasing follow-up rates. The objective of this study was to validate telephonic administration of the ODI compared to face-to-face administration. Methods: A convenience sample of individuals with and without back pain in an academic medical center were recruited for this study. Face-to-face administration of the ODI was completed and retested 24 hours later via phone. Test-retest reliability was determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: 22 individuals completed the ODI questionnaire face-to-face, then via telephone 24 hours later. There was a mean 2% (± 3) intra-rater ODI score difference (range: 0% to 12%). The intraclass correlation coefficient overall was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.99, p<0.001) with a range of 0.95 to 1.0, revealing near-perfect test-retest reliability. Conclusions: Administration of the ODI questionnaire over the phone has excellent test-retest reliability when compared to face-to-face administration. Telephone administration is a convenient and reliable option for obtaining follow-up outcomes data. Clinical Relevance: Telephonic administration of the ODI is scientifically valid, and should be an accepted method of data collection for state-level and national-level outcomes projects.

Implant Density at the Apex Is More Important Than Overall Implant Density for 3D Correction in Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Using Rod Derotation and En Bloc Vertebral Derotation Technique.

STUDY DESIGN: Biomechanical analysis of 3D correction and bone-screw forces through numerical simulations of scoliosis instrumentation with different pedicle screw patterns. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of different screw densities and distributions on 3D correction and bone-screw forces in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) instrumentation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Instrumentation constructs with various numbers of pedicle screws and patterns have been proposed for thoracic AIS instrumentation. However, systematic biomechanical studies have not yet been completed on the appropriate screw patterns for optimal 3D correction. METHODS: Patient-specific biomechanical models of the spine were created for 10 AIS cases (Lenke 1). For each case, surgical instrumentation patterns were computationally simulated using respectively a reference screw pattern (two screws per level fused) and six alternative screw patterns with fewer screws. Simulated surgical maneuvers and model definition were unchanged between simulations except the number and distribution of screws. 3D correction and bone-screw forces were compared. RESULTS: A total of 140 posterior instrumentations were computationally simulated. Mean corrections in the coronal and sagittal planes with alternative screw patterns were within 4° to the reference pattern. Increasing screw density in the apical region from one to two screws per level improved percent apical vertebral rotation (AVR) correction (r = 0.887, P < 0.05). Average bone-screw force associated with the reference screw pattern was 243N ±â€Š54N and those with the alternative screw patterns were 11% to 48% lower. CONCLUSION: Compared with the reference maximal screw density pattern, alternative screw patterns allowed similar corrections in the coronal and sagittal planes. AVR correction was strongly correlated with screw density in the apical region; AVR correction varied significantly with screw patterns of the same overall screw density when an en bloc vertebral derotation technique was simulated. High screw density tended to overconstrain the instrumented spine and resulted in higher forces at the bone-screw interface. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Current Evidence Regarding the Diagnostic Methods for Pediatric Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Report From the Scoliosis Research Society Evidence Based Medicine Committee.

STUDY DESIGN: Structured literature review. OBJECTIVES: The Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) requested an assessment of the current state of peer-reviewed evidence regarding pediatric lumbar spondylolisthesis with the goal of identifying what is known and what gaps remain in further understanding the diagnostic methods for pediatric spondylolisthesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spondylolisthesis in the lumbar spine is common among children and adolescents and no formal synthesis of the published literature regarding diagnostic methods has been previously performed. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed. Abstracts were reviewed and data from included studies were analyzed by the committee. From 6600 initial citations with abstract, 663 articles underwent full-text review. The best available evidence for the clinical questions regarding diagnostic methods was provided by 26 included studies. Six of the studies were graded as Level III (retrospective comparative), and represent the current best available evidence whereas 20 of the studies were graded as Level IV (retrospective case series) evidence. No Level V (expert opinion) studies were included in the final list. None of the studies were graded as Level I or Level II. RESULTS: Plain radiography is the workhorse imaging modality for diagnosing spondylolisthesis. No association between radiologic grade of spondylolisthesis and clinical presentation were noted; however, grade III and IV slips more often required surgery, and increasing slip angles were associated with worse baseline outcome scores. There is Level III evidence that the Meyerding grade appears to be more accurate for measuring slip percentage whereas the Lonstein Slip angle and Dubousset Lumbosacral Kyphosis angles are the best for measuring lumbosacral kyphosis in spondylolisthesis. In addition, higher sacral table index, pelvic incidence, sacral slope, and lower sacral table angle were associated with spondylolisthesis. True incidence could not be determined by the current literature available. However, studies in adolescent athletes demonstrated an incidence of 6% to 7% across studies. CONCLUSIONS: The current "best available" evidence to guide the diagnosis and characterization of pediatric spondylolisthesis is presented. Future studies are needed to provide more high-quality evidence to answer these clinically relevant questions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, review of Level III studies.

Predictive Value and Interrater Reliability of Radiographic Factors in Neurofibromatosis Patients With Dystrophic Scoliosis.

BACKGROUND: Scoliosis in patients with neurofibromatosis type I (NF1) can manifest as dystrophic or nondystrophic curves. Dystrophic scoliosis is rapidly progressive, rendering treatment challenging. Radiographic characteristics have been reported to predict dystrophic scoliosis, but their reliability and predictive value have not been well described. The purpose of this study is to assess the interobserver reliability for eight radiographic characteristics of dystrophic scoliosis and to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of these characteristics relative to the gold standard of a definitive clinical diagnosis. METHODS: Spine radiographs of 122 NF1 patients from multiple institutions were graded by five spine surgeons as dystrophic or nondystrophic, based on eight radiographic characteristics of dystrophic modulation: rib penciling, vertebral rotation, scalloping, wedging, spindling of transverse processes, short sharp angular curve, widened interpedicular distance, and atypical location. The curves were classified by each submitting institution as dystrophic or nondystrophic based on clinical outcome. Interobserver reliability analysis was performed using Fleiss kappa. RESULTS: For the 122 cases, the interrater agreement among the five readers for the diagnosis of dystrophic scoliosis was good at 0.61. The agreement for individual radiographic characteristic ranged from 0.62 for wedging to 0.14 (poor) for scalloping. Surgeons underestimated the number of dystrophic curves, rating from 45% to 67% of the curve patterns as dystrophic, compared to the gold standard, which revealed 68% of the curves to be dystrophic. On multivariate analysis, rib penciling, vertebral rotation, vertebral wedging, and atypical location were significantly associated with true dystrophic status (odds ratios of 2.4, 3.0, 2.4, and 3.0, respectively). CONCLUSION: Overall dystrophic diagnosis can be assessed by radiographic characteristics. Better understanding of the predictive value of specific radiographic features may assist in early diagnosis of patients with dystrophic NF and assist surgeons in identifying dystrophic curve patterns and instituting prompt, appropriate treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.