Pirris, Stephen

OBJECTIVE The global need for neurosurgical care is significant and often unmet. Building partnerships between high-income countries (HICs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) can help bridge the gap. Six features of sustainable global surgical partnerships have been identified; however, their application in neurosurgery has not been studied. The authors analyzed how the 6 pillars of sustainability are applied to neurosurgical partnerships established by the Neurosurgery Outreach Foundation (NOF) with hospitals in LMICs in Asia. METHODS NOF is an all-volunteer, nonprofit US foundation with the mission to advance neurosurgical care in underserved communities through education, service, and support. The authors examined the NOF programs and identified the characteristics associated with the 6 pillars of sustainability, which are community engagement, multidisciplinary collaboration, education and training, outcome measurement, multisource funding, and bilateral authorship. The authors discuss how these pillars contribute to the establishment of sustainable partnerships. RESULTS From 2010 to 2024, NOF has established partnerships at 4 sites: Cebu, Manila, and Davao, the Philippines; and Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Partnerships were established with tertiary or quaternary government hospitals to develop neurosurgical programs tailored to the needs of each site and remained sustained and active. Educational surgical missions were in-person outreach activities conducted annually or biennially and were supplemented with online or remote collaboration. The 5 pillars of sustainable partnerships present at all sites include community engagement, multidisciplinary collaboration, education and training, outcome measurement, and multisource funding. The sixth pillar, bilateral authorship, was present at University of the Philippines–Philippine General Hospital in Manila. CONCLUSIONS Using the 6 pillars of sustainable global partnerships, neurosurgical partnerships can be developed and maintained by all-volunteer nonprofit organizations such as NOF. Incorporating these pillars during the planning and executing of global neurosurgical partnerships are essential for long-term success.

Background: The comparative effectiveness of decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty versus decompression plus instrumented lumbar spinal fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis is unknown. Methods: In this randomized, controlled, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial, we assigned patients who had single-level lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis to undergo decompression plus lumbar facet arthroplasty (arthroplasty group) or decompression plus fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome was a predetermined composite clinical success score. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain, Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), Short Form (SF)-12, radiographic parameters, surgical variables, and complications. Results: A total of 321 adult patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion, with 219 patients assigned to undergo facet arthroplasty and 102 patients assigned to undergo fusion. Of these, 113 patients (51.6%) in the arthroplasty group and 47 (46.1%) in the fusion group who had either reached 24 months of postoperative follow-up or were deemed early clinical failures were included in the primary outcome analysis. The arthroplasty group had a higher proportion of patients who achieved composite clinical success than did the fusion group (73.5% versus 25.5%; p < 0.001), equating to a between-group difference of 47.9% (95% confidence interval, 33.0% to 62.8%). The arthroplasty group outperformed the fusion group in most patient-reported outcome measures (including the ODI, VAS back pain, and all ZCQ component scores) at 24 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in surgical variables or complications, except that the fusion group had a higher rate of developing symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration. Conclusions: Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and grade-I degenerative spondylolisthesis, lumbar facet arthroplasty was associated with a higher rate of composite clinical success than fusion was at 24 months postoperatively. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Degenerative spine disease is a leading cause of disability, with increasing prevalence in the older patients. While age has been identified as an independent predictor of outcomes, its predictive value is limited for similar older patients. Here, we aimed to determine the most predictive frailty score of adverse events in patients aged 80 and older undergoing instrumented lumbar fusion. METHODS: We proceeded with a multisite (3 tertiary academic centers) retrospective review including patients undergoing instrumented fusion aged 80 and older from January 2010 to present. A composite end point encompassing 30-day return to operating room, readmission, and mortality was created. We estimated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for frailty scores (Modified Frailty Index-5 [MFI-5], Modified Frailty Index-11 [MFI-11], and Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]) in relation to that composite score. In addition, we estimated the association between each score and the composite end point by means of logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients with an average age of 85 years at the time of surgery were included. We observed a 30-day readmission rate of 11.1%, reoperation of 3.9%, and mortality of 0.6%. The overall rate of the composite end point at 30 days was 25 (15.1%). The AUC for MFI-5 was 0.597 (0.501-0.693), for MFI-11 was 0.620 (0.518-0.723), and for CCI was 0.564 (0.453-0.675). The association between the scores and composite end point did not reach statistical significance for MFI-5 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.45 [0.98-2.15], P = .061) and CCI (OR = 1.13 [0.97-1.31], P = .113) but was statistically significant for MFI-11 (OR = 1.46 [1.07-2.00], P = .018). CONCLUSION: This is the largest study comparing frailty index scores in octogenarians undergoing instrumented lumbar fusion. Our findings suggest that while MFI-11 score correlated with adverse events, the predictive ability of existing scores remains limited, highlighting the need for better approaches to identify select patients at age extremes.

A 68-year-old female had a three-week history of severe low back pain radiating down the posterior left buttocks and left leg exacerbated by standing and walking. Lumbar spine MRI revealed cystic mass with similar intensity to cerebrospinal fluid located on dorsolateral left side of the sacral spinal canal inferior to the S1 pedicle. There was compression of left exiting S1 and traversing S2 nerve roots. Neurosurgery consult was requested to evaluate the cystic mass in the sacral spinal canal. After clinical evaluation, an unusually located synovial cyst was thought possible. Cyst contents were heterogeneous, suggestive of small hemorrhage and acute clinical history seemed reasonable. Left S1 and partial left S2 hemilaminectomy was performed and an epidural, partially hemorrhagic cyst was removed. There was no obvious connection to the ipsilateral L5-S1 facet joint. Pathology revealed synovial cyst, and the patient’s leg pain was improved postoperatively. This synovial cyst was unusual as it had no connection with the facet joint intraoperatively and its location in the sacral canal was uncommon.