Antibiotic prophylaxis in penetrating traumatic brain injury: analysis of a single-center series and systematic review of the literature.

PURPOSE: Penetrating traumatic brain injury (pTBI) is an acute medical emergency with a high rate of mortality. Patients with survivable injuries face a risk of infection stemming from foreign body transgression into the central nervous system (CNS). There is controversy regarding the utility of antimicrobial prophylaxis in managing such patients, and if so, which antimicrobial agent(s) to use. METHODS: We reviewed patients with pTBI at our institution and performed a PRISMA systematic review to assess the impact of prophylactic antibiotics on reducing risk of CNS infection. RESULTS: We identified 21 local patients and 327 cases in the literature. In our local series, 17 local patients received prophylactic antibiotics; four did not. Overall, five of these patients (24%) developed a CNS infection (four and one case of intraparenchymal brain abscess and meningitis, respectively). All four patients who did not receive prophylactic antibiotics developed an infection (three with CNS infections; one superficial wound infection) compared to two of 17 (12%) patients who did receive prophylactic antibiotics. Of the 327 pTBI cases reported in the literature, 216 (66%) received prophylactic antibiotics. Thirty-eight (17%) patients who received antibiotics developed a CNS infection compared to 21 (19%) who did not receive antibiotics (p = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Although our review of the literature did not reveal any benefit, our institutional series suggested that patients with pTBI may benefit from prophylactic antibiotics. We propose a short antibiotic course with a regimen specific to cases with and without the presence of organic debris.

A transpedicular approach to complex ventrally situated thoracic intradural extramedullary tumors: technique, indications, and multiinstitutional case series.

OBJECTIVE: Ventrally situated thoracic intradural extramedullary tumors are surgically challenging and difficult to access, and they may be complicated by extensive adhesions and calcifications. Selecting an approach for adequate ventral access is key to complete resection and optimization of outcomes. The authors present a case series of patients who underwent resection of ventral thoracic intradural extramedullary tumors and discuss indications and considerations for this technique. Additionally, they describe the use of a posterolateral transpedicular approach for resection of ventral thoracic intradural extramedullary tumors compared with other techniques, and they summarize the literature supporting its application. METHODS: From May 2017 to August 2020, 5 patients with ventral thoracic intradural extramedullary tumors underwent resection at one of the two academic institutions. RESULTS: Patient ages ranged from 47 to 75 (mean 63.4) years. All tumors were diagnosed as meningiomas or schwannomas by histological examination. Three of the 5 patients had evidence of partial or extensive tumor calcification. Four of the 5 patients underwent an initial posterolateral transpedicular approach for resection, with positive radiographic and clinical outcomes from surgery. One patient initially underwent an unsuccessful traditional direct posterior approach and required additional resection 2 years later after interval disease progression. There were no postoperative wound infections, CSF leaks, or other complications related to the transpedicular approach. CONCLUSIONS: Posterolateral transpedicular tumor resection is a safe technique for the treatment of complex ventrally situated thoracic intradural extramedullary tumors compared with the direct posterior approach. Anecdotally, this approach appears to be particularly beneficial in patients with calcified tumors.

Existing clinical evidence on the use of cellular bone matrix grafts in spinal fusion: updated systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal fusion surgery is increasingly common; however, pseudarthrosis remains a common complication affecting as much as 15% of some patient populations. Currently, no clear consensus on the best bone graft materials to use exists. Recent advances have led to the development of cell-infused cellular bone matrices (CBMs), which contain living components such as mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Relatively few clinical outcome studies on the use of these grafts exist, although the number of such studies has increased in the last 5 years. In this study, the authors aimed to summarize and critically evaluate the existing clinical evidence on commercially available CBMs in spinal fusion and reported clinical outcomes. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE and PubMed electronic databases for peer-reviewed, English-language original articles (1970-2020) in which the articles' authors studied the clinical outcomes of CBMs in spinal fusion. The US National Library of Medicine electronic clinical trials database (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) was also searched for relevant ongoing clinical trials. RESULTS: Twelve published studies of 6 different CBM products met inclusion criteria: 5 studies of Osteocel Plus/Osteocel (n = 354 unique patients), 3 of Trinity Evolution (n = 114), 2 of ViviGen (n = 171), 1 of map3 (n = 41), and 1 of VIA Graft (n = 75). All studies reported high radiographic fusion success rates (range 87%-100%) using these CBMs. However, this literature was overwhelmingly limited to single-center, noncomparative studies. Seven studies disclosed industry funding or conflicts of interest (COIs). There are 4 known trials of ViviGen (3 trials) and Bio4 (1 trial) that are ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: CBMs are a promising technology with the potential of improving outcome after spinal fusion. However, while the number of studies conducted in humans has tripled since 2014, there is still insufficient evidence in the literature to recommend for or against CBMs relative to cheaper alternative materials. Comparative, multicenter trials and outcome registries free from industry COIs are indicated.

Rubber Bullet Induced Traumatic Brain Injury.

ABSTRACT: Rubber bullets have long been known to cause, on rare occasions, traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, neurosurgical literature on this occurrence is limited, and no focused review of this injury pattern has been conducted. The authors present the case of a 28-year-old male struck by a rubber bullet in the left periorbital region, causing TBI in addition to complete left visual loss and complex facial fractures. After developing a cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, the patient was taken to the operating room for combined neurosurgical-craniofacial intervention. Utilizing frameless intraoperative computation tomography navigation assistance, a successful repair was made of both the patient's CSF leak and complex craniofacial injuries. TBI due to a rubber bullet is a rare but severe occurrence. Unfortunately, much of the limited literature on this topic is bereft of demographic, clinical course, injury pattern, and imaging data. Presented here is the first operative case report of TBI due to a rubber bullet. Volume rendered imaging is provided to demonstrate the extent of trauma incurred. Additionally, a methodology for frameless intraoperative computation tomography navigation assistance is shared for consideration, as it served as a helpful adjunct for a combined intracranial-craniofacial surgical repair. The experience of treating the patient's traumatic CSF leak in the context of severe craniofacial and ophthalmologic injuries highlights the need for a multidisciplinary surgical approach that may arise when treating patients with TBI due to a rubber bullet.

A brief history of endoscopic spine surgery.

Few neurosurgeons practicing today have had training in the field of endoscopic spine surgery during residency or fellowship. Nevertheless, over the past 40 years individual spine surgeons from around the world have worked to create a subfield of minimally invasive spine surgery that takes the point of visualization away from the surgeon's eye or the lens of a microscope and puts it directly at the point of spine pathology. What follows is an attempt to describe the story of how endoscopic spine surgery developed and to credit some of those who have been the biggest contributors to its development.

Technical considerations in transforaminal endoscopic spine surgery at the thoracolumbar junction: report of 3 cases.

OBJECTIVE In this study the authors describe the technical considerations and feasibility of transforaminal discectomy and foraminoplasty for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy in patients who have herniated discs at the thoracolumbar junction. METHODS After institutional review board approval, charts from 3 consecutive patients with lumbar radiculopathy and T12-L1 herniated discs who underwent endoscopic procedures between 2006 and 2014 were reviewed. RESULTS Consecutive cases (n = 1316) were reviewed to determine the incidence and success of surgery performed at the T12-L1 level. Only 3 patients (0.23%) treated with endoscopic surgery for their herniated discs had T12-L1 herniated discs; the rest were lumbar or lumbosacral herniations. For patients with T12-L1 disc herniations, the average preoperative visual analog scale score was 8.3 (indicated in the questionnaire as describing severe and constant pain). The average 1-year postoperative visual analog scale score was 1.7 (indicated in the questionnaire as mild and intermittent pain). CONCLUSIONS Transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and foraminotomy can be used as a safe yet minimally invasive technique for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy in the setting of a thoracolumbar disc herniation.

Perineural tumor spread of bladder cancer causing lumbosacral plexopathy: an anatomic explanation.

We present two cases of biopsy-proven neoplastic lumbosacral plexopathy from perineural spread of bladder cancer: one patient presented with predominantly sciatic nerve involvement and the second predominantly with obturator nerve involvement. These two patterns of perineural spread from bladder cancer were supported by imaging in our cases and solidified by review of the literature. Based on the innervation of the bladder, we provide an anatomic explanation for this observation. To our best knowledge, such an anatomic, mechanistic basis for perineural tumor spread in bladder cancer has not yet been described.

Lumbar Decompression With and Without Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis With Spondylolisthesis: A Cost Utility Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Markov model. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of lumbar decompression alone (DA) with lumbar decompression with fusion (DF) for the management of adults undergoing surgery for lumbar stenosis with associated degenerative spondylolisthesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Rates of lumbar fusion have increased for all indications in the United States over the last 20 years. Recent randomized controlled trial data, however, have suggested comparable functional outcomes and lower reoperation rates for lumbar decompression and fusion as compared with DA in the treatment of lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multistate Markov model was constructed from the US payer perspective of a hypothetical cohort of patients with lumbar stenosis with associated spondylolisthesis requiring surgery. Data regarding clinical improvement, costs, and reoperation were generated from contemporary randomized trial evidence, meta-analyses of recent prospective studies, and large retrospective cohorts. Base case, one-way sensitivity analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted, and the results were compared with a WTP threshold of $100,000 (in 2022 USD) over a two-year time horizon. A discount rate of 3% was utilized. RESULTS: The incremental cost and utility of DF relative to DA were $12,778 and 0.00529 aggregated quality adjusted life years. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2,416,281 far exceeded the willingness to pay threshold of $100,000. In sensitivity analysis, the results varied the most with respect to rate of improvement after DA, rate of improvement after lumbar decompression and fusion, and odds ratio of reoperation between the two groups. Zero percent of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses achieved cost-effectiveness at the willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of contemporary surgical data, DF is not cost-effective compared with DA in the surgical management of lumbar stenosis with associated spondylolisthesis over a two-year time horizon.

Natural language processing augments comorbidity documentation in neurosurgical inpatient admissions.

OBJECTIVE: To establish whether or not a natural language processing technique could identify two common inpatient neurosurgical comorbidities using only text reports of inpatient head imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A training and testing dataset of reports of 979 CT or MRI scans of the brain for patients admitted to the neurosurgery service of a single hospital in June 2021 or to the Emergency Department between July 1-8, 2021, was identified. A variety of machine learning and deep learning algorithms utilizing natural language processing were trained on the training set (84% of the total cohort) and tested on the remaining images. A subset comparison cohort (n = 76) was then assessed to compare output of the best algorithm against real-life inpatient documentation. RESULTS: For "brain compression", a random forest classifier outperformed other candidate algorithms with an accuracy of 0.81 and area under the curve of 0.90 in the testing dataset. For "brain edema", a random forest classifier again outperformed other candidate algorithms with an accuracy of 0.92 and AUC of 0.94 in the testing dataset. In the provider comparison dataset, for "brain compression," the random forest algorithm demonstrated better accuracy (0.76 vs 0.70) and sensitivity (0.73 vs 0.43) than provider documentation. For "brain edema," the algorithm again demonstrated better accuracy (0.92 vs 0.84) and AUC (0.45 vs 0.09) than provider documentation. DISCUSSION: A natural language processing-based machine learning algorithm can reliably and reproducibly identify selected common neurosurgical comorbidities from radiology reports. CONCLUSION: This result may justify the use of machine learning-based decision support to augment provider documentation.

Microbubble Contrast-Enhanced Transcutaneous Ultrasound Enables Real-Time Spinal Cord Perfusion Monitoring Following Posterior Cervical Decompression.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound imaging is inexpensive, portable, and widely available. The development of a real-time transcutaneous spinal cord perfusion monitoring system would allow more precise targeting of mean arterial pressure goals following acute spinal cord injury (SCI). There has been no prior demonstration of successful real-time cord perfusion monitoring in humans. METHODS: Four adult patients who had undergone posterior cervical decompression and instrumentation at a single center were enrolled into this prospective feasibility study. All participants had undergone cervical laminectomies spanning ≥2 contiguous levels ≥2 months prior to inclusion with no history of SCI. The first 2 underwent transcutaneous ultrasound without contrast and the second 2 underwent contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with intravenously injected microbubble contrast. RESULTS: Using noncontrast ultrasound with or without Doppler (n = 2), the dura, spinal cord, and vertebral bodies were apparent however ultrasonography was insufficient to discern intramedullary perfusion or clear white-gray matter differentiation. With application of microbubble contrast (n = 2), it was possible to quantify differential spinal cord perfusion within and between cross-sectional regions of the cord. Further, it was possible to quantify spinal cord hemodynamic perfusion using CEUS by measuring peak signal intensity and the time to peak signal intensity after microbubble contrast injection. Time-intensity curves were generated and area under the curves were calculated as a marker of tissue perfusion. CONCLUSIONS: CEUS is a viable platform for monitoring real-time cord perfusion in patients who have undergone prior cervical laminectomies. Further development has the potential to change clinical management acute SCI by tailoring treatments to measured tissue perfusion parameters.

Excision of a supergiant spinal schwannoma: illustrative case.

BACKGROUND: The authors report on a patient who presented with an extremely large presacral schwannoma and subsequent mass effect-induced hydronephrosis and kidney failure. To the authors' knowledge, this case represents the largest radiographically verified spinal schwannoma in the medical literature. The tumor presented here was more than three times as large as a typical giant schwannoma. While smaller presacral schwannomas are usually uncomplicated surgical cases, the supergiant schwannomas described here create significant surgical challenges. OBSERVATIONS: The extremely large size of this nerve sheath tumor introduced a level of surgical complexity not seen in most spinal schwannoma cases. The authors hope that this case informs surgeons regarding the approach to excision of giant spinal schwannomas. LESSONS: The resection of giant spinal schwannomas is likely to involve one or more lengthy surgeries, and the resection volume can be limited by excessive bleeding. Physicians approaching these large, benign spinal tumors should be aware of the challenges of surgery duration and hemostasis before approaching a tumor of this kind. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE24224.

Social determinants of health and outcome disparities in spine tumor surgery. Part 2: Neighborhood disadvantage and long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Neighborhood-level resource disadvantage has been previously shown to predict extent of resection, oncological follow-up, adjuvant treatment, and clinical trial participation for malignancies, including glioblastoma. The authors aimed to characterize the association between neighborhood disadvantage and long-term outcomes after spine tumor surgery. METHODS: The authors analyzed all patients who underwent surgery for primary or secondary (all metastatic pathologies) spine tumors at a single spinal oncology specialty center in the United States from 2015 to 2022. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a validated metric compositing 17 social determinants of health variables that ranges continuously from 0% (higher advantage) to 100% (higher disadvantage), was used to quantify neighborhood disadvantage. Patient addresses were matched to ADI on the basis of the census block of residence. Subsequently, the study population was dichotomized into advantaged (ADI 0%-33%) and disadvantaged (ADI 34%-100%) cohorts. The primary endpoint was functional status, as defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status Scale grade, with secondary endpoints including inpatient outcomes, mortality, readmissions, reoperations, and clinical research participation. Multivariable logistic, gamma log-link, and Cox regression adjusted for 14 confounders, including patient and oncological characteristics, general and tumor-related presenting severity, and treatment. RESULTS: In total, 237 patients underwent spine tumor surgery from 2015 to 2022, with an average age of 53.9 years, and 57.0% had primary tumors whereas 43.0% had secondary tumors; 55.3% (n = 131) were classified by ADI into the disadvantaged cohort. This cohort had higher rates of ambulation deficits on presentation (39.1% vs 23.5%, p = 0.015) and nonelective surgery (35.1% vs 23.6%, p = 0.030). Postoperatively, disadvantaged patients exhibited higher odds of residual tumor (OR 2.55, p = 0.026), especially for secondary tumors (OR 4.92, p = 0.045). Patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods additionally exhibited significantly higher odds of poor functional status at follow-up (OR 3.94, p = 0.002). Postoperative survival was 74.7% (mean follow-up 17.6 months), with the disadvantaged cohort experiencing significantly shorter survival (HR 1.92, p = 0.049). Moreover, this population had higher odds of readmission (OR 1.92, p = 0.046) and, for primary tumors, reoperation (OR 9.26, p = 0.005). Elective participation in prospective clinical research was lower among the disadvantaged cohort (OR 0.45, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood disadvantage predicts higher rates of residual tumor, readmission, and reoperation, as well as poorer functional status, shorter postoperative survival, and decreased elective research participation. The ADI may be used to risk stratify spine oncology patients and guide targeted interventions to ameliorate neurosurgical disparities and to reduce barriers to research participation.

Social determinants of health and outcome disparities in spine tumor surgery. Part 1: An analysis of 6.6 million nationwide admissions.

OBJECTIVE: Earlier research has demonstrated that social determinants of health (SDoH) impact neurosurgical access and outcomes, but these trends are less characterized for spine tumors relative to intracranial tumors. The authors aimed to elucidate the association between SDoH and outcomes for a nationwide cohort of spine tumor surgery admissions. METHODS: The authors identified all admissions with a spine tumor diagnosis in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2002 to 2019. Four SDoH were analyzed: race and ethnicity, insurance, household income, and safety-net hospital (SNH) treatment. Hospitals in the top quartile of safety-net burden (in terms of percentage of patients receiving Medicaid or uninsured) were categorized as SNHs. Multivariable regression queried the association between 22 variables and 5 perioperative outcomes: mortality, discharge disposition, complications, length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. Interaction term analysis with hospitalization year was used to assess longitudinal changes in outcome disparities. Finally, the authors constructed random forest machine learning models to assess the impact of SDoH variables on prognostic accuracy and to quantify the relative importance of predictors for disposition. RESULTS: Of 6,593,392 total admissions with spine tumors, 219,380 (3.3%) underwent surgery. Non-White race (OR 0.80-0.91, p < 0.001) and nonprivate insurance (OR 0.76-0.83, p < 0.001) were associated with lower odds of receiving surgery. Among surgical admissions, presenting severity, including of myelopathy and plegia, was elevated among non-White, nonprivate insurance, and low-income admissions (all p < 0.001). Black race (OR 0.70, p < 0.001), Medicare (OR 0.70, p < 0.001), Medicaid (OR 0.90, p < 0.001), and lower income (OR 0.88-0.93, all p < 0.001) were associated with decreased odds of favorable discharge disposition. Increased LOS and costs were observed among non-White (+6%-10% in LOS and +5%-9% in costs, both p < 0.001) and Medicaid (+16% in LOS and +6% in costs, both p < 0.001) admissions. SNH treatment was also associated with higher mortality (OR 1.49, p < 0.001) and complication (OR 1.20, p < 0.001) rates. From 2002 to 2019, disposition improved annually for Medicaid patients (OR 1.03 per year, p = 0.022) but worsened for Black patients (OR 0.98 per year, p = 0.046). Random forest models identified household income as the most important predictor of discharge disposition. CONCLUSIONS: For spine tumor admissions, SDoH predicted surgical intervention, presenting severity, and perioperative outcomes. Over 2 decades, disparities improved for Medicaid patients but worsened for Black patients. Finally, SDoH significantly improve prognostic accuracy for outcomes after spine tumor surgery. Further study toward ameliorating patient disparities for this population is warranted.

Early Outcomes of Muscle Flap Closures in Posterior Thoracolumbar Fusions: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgery closure with muscle flaps after complex spinal reconstruction has become increasingly common. Existing evidence for this practice consists of small, uncontrolled, single-center cohort studies. We aimed to compare 30-day postoperative wound-related complication rates between flap closure and traditional closure after posterior thoracolumbar fusions (PTLFs) for non-infectious, non-oncologic pathologies using a national database. METHODS: We performed a propensity-matched analysis using the 2012-2020 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset to compare 30-day outcomes between PTLFs with flap closure versus traditional closure. RESULTS: A total of 100,799 PTLFs met our inclusion criteria. The use of flap closure with PTLF remained low but more than doubled from 2012 to 2020 (0.38% vs. 0.97%; P = 0.002). A higher proportion of flap closures had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classifications and higher number of operated spine levels (all P < 0.001). We included 1907 PTLFs (630 for flap closure; 1257 for traditional closure) in the propensity-matched cohort. Unadjusted 30-day wound complication rates were 1.7% for flap and 2.1% for traditional closure (P = 0.76). After adjusting for operative time, wound complication, readmission, reoperation, mortality, and non-wound complication were not associated flap use (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Plastic surgery closure was performed in patients with a higher comorbidity burden, suggesting consultation in sicker patients. Although higher rates of wound and non-wound complications were expected for the flap cohort, our propensity-matched cohort analysis of flap closure in PTLFs resulted in non-inferior odds of wound complications compared to traditional closure. Further study is needed to assess long-term complications in prophylactic flap closure in complex spine surgeries.

Optimizing surgical management of facet cysts of the lumbar spine: systematic review, meta-analysis, and local case series of 1251 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar facet cysts (LFCs) can cause neurological dysfunction and intractable pain. Surgery is the current standard of care for patients in whom conservative therapy fails, those with neurological deficits, and those with evidence of spinal instability. No study to date has comprehensively examined surgical outcomes comparing the multiple surgical treatment options for LFCs. Therefore, the authors aimed to perform a combined analysis of cases both in the literature and of patients at a single institution to compare the outcomes of various surgical treatment options for LFC. METHODS: The authors performed a literature review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and meta-analysis of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and reviewed all studies from database inception published until February 3, 2023. Studies that did not contain 3 or more cases, clearly specify follow-up durations longer than 6 months, or present new cases were excluded. Bias was evaluated using Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias in Nonrandomised Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I). The authors also reviewed their own local institutional case series from 2015 to 2020. Primary outcomes were same-level cyst recurrence, same-level revision surgery, and perioperative complications. ANOVA, common and random-effects modeling, and Wald testing were used to compare treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 1251 patients were identified from both the published literature (29 articles, n = 1143) and the authors' institution (n = 108). Patients were sorted into 5 treatment groups: open cyst resection (OCR; n = 720), tubular cyst resection (TCR; n = 166), cyst resection with arthrodesis (CRA; n = 165), endoscopic cyst resection (ECR; n = 113), and percutaneous cyst rupture (PCR; n = 87), with OCR being the analysis reference group. The PCR group had significantly lower complication rates (p = 0.004), higher recurrence rates (p < 0.001), and higher revision surgery rates (p = 0.001) compared with the OCR group. Patients receiving TCR (3.01%, p = 0.021) and CRA (0.0%, p < 0.001) had significantly lower recurrence rates compared with those undergoing OCR (6.36%). The CRA group (6.67%) also had significantly lower rates of revision surgery compared with the OCR group (11.3%, p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: While PCR is less invasive, it may have high rates of same-level recurrence and revision surgery. Recurrence and revision rates for modalities such as ECR were not significantly different from those of OCR. While concomitant arthrodesis is more invasive, it might lead to lower recurrence rates and lower rates of subsequent revision surgery. Given the limitations of our case series and literature review, prospective, randomized studies are needed.

Performance of ChatGPT and GPT-4 on Neurosurgery Written Board Examinations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Interest surrounding generative large language models (LLMs) has rapidly grown. Although ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), a general LLM, has shown near-passing performance on medical student board examinations, the performance of ChatGPT or its successor GPT-4 on specialized examinations and the factors affecting accuracy remain unclear. This study aims to assess the performance of ChatGPT and GPT-4 on a 500-question mock neurosurgical written board examination. METHODS: The Self-Assessment Neurosurgery Examinations (SANS) American Board of Neurological Surgery Self-Assessment Examination 1 was used to evaluate ChatGPT and GPT-4. Questions were in single best answer, multiple-choice format. χ 2 , Fisher exact, and univariable logistic regression tests were used to assess performance differences in relation to question characteristics. RESULTS: ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) and GPT-4 achieved scores of 73.4% (95% CI: 69.3%-77.2%) and 83.4% (95% CI: 79.8%-86.5%), respectively, relative to the user average of 72.8% (95% CI: 68.6%-76.6%). Both LLMs exceeded last year's passing threshold of 69%. Although scores between ChatGPT and question bank users were equivalent ( P = .963), GPT-4 outperformed both (both P < .001). GPT-4 answered every question answered correctly by ChatGPT and 37.6% (50/133) of remaining incorrect questions correctly. Among 12 question categories, GPT-4 significantly outperformed users in each but performed comparably with ChatGPT in 3 (functional, other general, and spine) and outperformed both users and ChatGPT for tumor questions. Increased word count (odds ratio = 0.89 of answering a question correctly per +10 words) and higher-order problem-solving (odds ratio = 0.40, P = .009) were associated with lower accuracy for ChatGPT, but not for GPT-4 (both P > .005). Multimodal input was not available at the time of this study; hence, on questions with image content, ChatGPT and GPT-4 answered 49.5% and 56.8% of questions correctly based on contextual context clues alone. CONCLUSION: LLMs achieved passing scores on a mock 500-question neurosurgical written board examination, with GPT-4 significantly outperforming ChatGPT.

Long-Term Motor versus Sensory Lumbar Plexopathy After Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Single-Center Experience, Intraoperative Neuromonitoring Results, and Multivariate Analysis of Patient-Level Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Although lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is an effective surgical option for lumbar arthrodesis, postoperative plexopathies are a common complication. We characterized post-LLIF plexopathies in a large cohort and analyzed potential risk factors for each. METHODS: A single-institutional cohort who underwent LLIF between May 2015 and December 2019 was retrospectively reviewed for postoperative lumbar plexopathies. Plexopathies were divided based on sensory and motor symptoms and duration, as well as by laterality relative to the surgical approach. We assessed these subgroups for associations with patient and surgical characteristics as well as psoas dimensions. We then evaluated risk of developing plexopathies after intraoperative neuromonitoring observations. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients were included. The overall rate of LLIF-induced sensory or motor lumbar plexopathy was 37.8% (48/127). Of all cases, 42 were ipsilateral to the surgical approach (33.1%); conversely, 6 patients developed contralateral plexopathies (4.7%). Most (31/48; 64.6%) resolved with a follow-up interval of 402 days in the plexopathy group. Of ipsilateral cases, 24 patients experienced persistent (>90 days) postoperative sensory symptoms (18.9%), whereas 20 experienced persistent weakness (15.7%). More levels fused predicted persistent sensory symptoms (odds ratio, 1.714 [1.246-2.359]; P = 0.0085), whereas surgical duration predicted persistent weakness (odds ratio, 1.004 [1.002-1.006]; P = 0.0382). Psoas anatomic variables were not significantly associated with plexopathy. Nonresolution of intraoperative evoked motor potential alerts was a significant risk factor for developing plexopathies (relative risk, 2.29 [1.17-4.45]). CONCLUSIONS: Post-LLIF plexopathies are common but usually resolve. Surgical complexity and unresolved neuromonitoring alerts are possible risk factors for persistent plexopathy.

Performance of ChatGPT, GPT-4, and Google Bard on a Neurosurgery Oral Boards Preparation Question Bank.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: General large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), have demonstrated the capability to pass multiple-choice medical board examinations. However, comparative accuracy of different LLMs and LLM performance on assessments of predominantly higher-order management questions is poorly understood. We aimed to assess the performance of 3 LLMs (GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Google Bard) on a question bank designed specifically for neurosurgery oral boards examination preparation. METHODS: The 149-question Self-Assessment Neurosurgery Examination Indications Examination was used to query LLM accuracy. Questions were inputted in a single best answer, multiple-choice format. χ 2 , Fisher exact, and univariable logistic regression tests assessed differences in performance by question characteristics. RESULTS: On a question bank with predominantly higher-order questions (85.2%), ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) and GPT-4 answered 62.4% (95% CI: 54.1%-70.1%) and 82.6% (95% CI: 75.2%-88.1%) of questions correctly, respectively. By contrast, Bard scored 44.2% (66/149, 95% CI: 36.2%-52.6%). GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 demonstrated significantly higher scores than Bard (both P < .01), and GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5 ( P = .023). Among 6 subspecialties, GPT-4 had significantly higher accuracy in the Spine category relative to GPT-3.5 and in 4 categories relative to Bard (all P < .01). Incorporation of higher-order problem solving was associated with lower question accuracy for GPT-3.5 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80, P = .042) and Bard (OR = 0.76, P = .014), but not GPT-4 (OR = 0.86, P = .085). GPT-4's performance on imaging-related questions surpassed GPT-3.5's (68.6% vs 47.1%, P = .044) and was comparable with Bard's (68.6% vs 66.7%, P = 1.000). However, GPT-4 demonstrated significantly lower rates of "hallucination" on imaging-related questions than both GPT-3.5 (2.3% vs 57.1%, P < .001) and Bard (2.3% vs 27.3%, P = .002). Lack of question text description for questions predicted significantly higher odds of hallucination for GPT-3.5 (OR = 1.45, P = .012) and Bard (OR = 2.09, P < .001). CONCLUSION: On a question bank of predominantly higher-order management case scenarios for neurosurgery oral boards preparation, GPT-4 achieved a score of 82.6%, outperforming ChatGPT and Google Bard.

Patterns in Decompression and Fusion Procedures for Patients With Lumbar Stenosis After Major Clinical Trial Results, 2016 to 2019.

Importance: Use of lumbar fusion has increased substantially over the last 2 decades. For patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis, 2 landmark prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2016 did not find clear evidence in favor of decompression with fusion over decompression alone in this population. Objective: To assess the national use of decompression with fusion vs decompression alone for the surgical treatment of lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis from 2016 to 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 121 745 hospitalized adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing 1-level decompression alone or decompression with fusion for the management of lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019. All data were obtained from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Analyses were conducted, reviewed, or updated on June 9, 2023. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome of this study was the use of decompression with fusion vs decompression alone. For the secondary outcome, multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate factors associated with the decision to perform decompression with fusion vs decompression alone. Results: Among 121 745 eligible hospitalized patients (mean age, 65.2 years [95% CI, 65.0-65.4 years]; 96 645 of 117 640 [82.2%] non-Hispanic White) with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis, 21 230 (17.4%) underwent decompression alone, and 100 515 (82.6%) underwent decompression with fusion. The proportion of patients undergoing decompression alone decreased from 2016 (7625 of 23 405 [32.6%]) to 2019 (3560 of 37 215 [9.6%]), whereas the proportion of patients undergoing decompression with fusion increased over the same period (from 15 780 of 23 405 [67.4%] in 2016 to 33 655 of 37 215 [90.4%] in 2019). In univariable analysis, patients undergoing decompression alone differed significantly from those undergoing decompression with fusion with regard to age (mean, 68.6 years [95% CI, 68.2-68.9 years] vs 64.5 years [95% CI, 64.3-64.7 years]; P < .001), insurance status (eg, Medicare: 13 725 of 21 205 [64.7%] vs 53 320 of 100 420 [53.1%]; P < .001), All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Group risk of death (eg, minor risk: 16 900 [79.6%] vs 83 730 [83.3%]; P < .001), and hospital region of the country (eg, South: 7030 [33.1%] vs 38 905 [38.7%]; Midwest: 4470 [21.1%] vs 23 360 [23.2%]; P < .001 for both comparisons). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.96 per year; 95% CI, 0.95-0.96 per year), year after 2016 (AOR, 1.76 per year; 95% CI, 1.69-1.85 per year), self-pay insurance status (AOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95), medium hospital size (AOR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.89), large hospital size (AOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67-0.86), and highest median income quartile by patient residence zip code (AOR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89) were associated with lower odds of undergoing decompression with fusion. Conversely, hospital region in the Midwest (AOR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.14-1.57) or South (AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.14-1.54) was associated with higher odds of undergoing decompression with fusion. Decompression with fusion vs decompression alone was associated with longer length of stay (mean, 2.96 days [95% CI, 2.92-3.01 days] vs 2.55 days [95% CI, 2.49-2.62 days]; P < .001), higher total admission costs (mean, $30 288 [95% CI, $29 386-$31 189] vs $16 190 [95% CI, $15 189-$17 191]; P < .001), and higher total admission charges (mean, $121 892 [95% CI, $119 566-$124 219] vs $82 197 [95% CI, $79 745-$84 648]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, despite 2 prospective RCTs that demonstrated the noninferiority of decompression alone compared with decompression with fusion, use of decompression with fusion relative to decompression alone increased from 2016 to 2019. A variety of patient- and hospital-level factors were associated with surgical procedure choice. These results suggest the findings of 2 major RCTs have not yet produced changes in surgical practice patterns and deserve renewed focus.

Time of Discharge and 30-Day Re-Presentation to an Acute Care Setting After Elective Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the consequence of efforts to increase patient throughput and decrease length of stay in the context of elective spine surgery is limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether early time of discharge results in increased rates of hospital readmission or return to emergency department for patients admitted after elective, posterior, lumbar decompression surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 779 patients admitted to hospital after undergoing elective, posterior, lumbar decompression surgery. Multiple logistic regression evaluated the relationship between time of discharge and the primary outcome of return to acute care within 30 days, while controlling for sociodemographic, procedural, and discharge characteristics. RESULTS: In multiple logistic regression, time of discharge earlier in the day was not associated with increased odds of return to acute care within 30 days (odds ratio [OR] 1.18, 95% CI 0.92-1.52, P = .19). Weekend discharge (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.04-3.79, P = .04) increased the likelihood of return to acute care. Surgeon experience (<1 year of attending practice, OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-1.00, P = .05 and 2-5 years of attending practice, OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.25-1.01, P = .054), weekend discharge (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.89, P = .02), and physical therapy evaluation (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.12-0.33, P < .001) decreased the likelihood of discharge before noon. CONCLUSION: Time of discharge is not associated with risk of readmission or presentation to the emergency department after elective lumbar decompression. Weekend discharge is independently associated with increased risk of readmission and decreased likelihood of prenoon discharge.