Sebastian, Arjun

OBJECTIVE Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists are established therapeutics for weight loss that are increasingly used for BMI optimization prior to spine surgery. However, emerging evidence has suggested that GLP-1 agonists might reduce bone mineral density (BMD), increasing the risk of postoperative biomechanical complications. CT-based Hounsfield units (HUs) have gained popularity as a method for measuring spinal BMD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of GLP-1 agonist–induced weight loss on spinal BMD as measured by opportunistic CT-based HUs. METHODS Patients who were treated with any GLP-1 agonist (2017–2022) for > 3 months were retrospectively identified. Patient body weight (BW), BMI, and HU measurements in the L1 vertebral body were measured before and after GLP-1 therapy. Patients were grouped according to the percentage of weight loss during GLP-1 therapy. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the mean changes in spinal HUs across the groups. RESULTS Among the 102 included patients, the mean ± standard error of the mean BW reduction was 14.5 ± 2.5 kg over 15.9 ± 1.2 months of GLP-1 agonist therapy. Of these, 7 patients (6.9%) lost > 20% BW (mean decrease of 31.9 ± 7.0 HU, p = 0.011), 14 (13.7%) lost 15%–20% BW (mean decrease of 19.1 ± 8.3 HU, p = 0.038), 14 (13.7%) lost 10%–15% BW (mean decrease of 12.2 ± 5.1 HU, p = 0.036), 24 (23.5%) lost 5%–10% BW (mean decrease of 15.7 ± 3.3 HU, p < 0.0001), 26 (25.5%) lost < 5% BW (mean decrease of 14.7 ± 6.0 HU, p = 0.022), and 17 (16.7%) gained BW during GLP-1 therapy (mean decrease of 6.3 ± 5.0 HU, p = 0.229). One-way ANOVA testing did not show a significant difference in HU reduction across the weight loss groups (F = 1.12, p = 0.355). In addition, there was a significant correlation between the decrease in L1 HUs and the duration of GLP-1 therapy (r = −0.38, p = 0.0001) but not the amount of weight loss (r = −0.18, p = 0.070). In the multivariate analysis, the duration of GLP-1 therapy (p = 0.032) was a significant independent predictor of vertebral HU reduction, but the amount of weight loss (p = 0.664) was not. CONCLUSIONS Despite similar pretreatment BW and HU measurements, all weight loss groups had significant decreases in vertebral HUs following GLP-1 agonist therapy, with a significant correlation observed between HU reduction and treatment duration. This suggests that long-term GLP-1 agonist therapy can significantly diminish spinal BMD regardless of the amount of weight loss achieved.

OBJECTIVE Proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) affects 5%–61% of patients following thoracolumbar fusion. Many patients are asymptomatic, but a plurality require surgical revision at a cost of $75,000 per case. This analysis sought to analyze the degree to which bone quality and paraspinal muscle sarcopenia influence PJK failure mode. METHODS Patients undergoing thoracolumbar instrumented fusion with an upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) at the thoracolumbar junction (T10–L2) were identified and data were gathered on surgery, bone quality, pre- and postoperative sagittal alignment, and paraspinal muscle cross-sectional area (CSA). PJK was defined as a ≥ 10° increase in proximal junctional angle from the first postoperative radiograph. PJK was classified as discoligamentous failure (type 1), bone failure (type 2), or screw-bone interface failure (type 3) according to the Yagi-Boachie system. Bone quality was assessed by Hounsfield units (HUs) and the vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score at the UIV. RESULTS One hundred fifty patients were identified (median age 67 years, 53.3% female), 46 of whom experienced PJK (22 type 1, 13 type 2, 11 type 3). The median time to onset was most rapid for type 2 events (2.6 months). There were no differences between patients experiencing PJK versus controls regarding bone quality (HUs or VBQ score) or paraspinal muscle CSA on univariate comparison. However, subdivision by PJK type showed patients experiencing bone failure (type 2) PJK had significantly lower HUs at the UIV and UIV+1 relative to those experiencing type 1 PJK or no PJK (all p < 0.05). The VBQ score trended toward being significant, with a higher VBQ score (worse bone quality) in those suffering type 2 PJK, but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.07). Patients experiencing discoligamentous failure PJK (type 1) had small multifidus CSA (390 mm 2 ) relative to patients experiencing type 2 (516 mm 2 ) or type 3 (440 mm 2 ) PJK and patients who did not experience PJK (481 mm 2 ), although the difference did not reach statistical significance. On time-to-event analysis, low HUs of the UIV/UIV+1 predicted type 2 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.70–0.93; p = 0.002) and type 2/3 PJK (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78–0.96; p = 0.006) but not type 1 PJK. Low UIV multifidus CSA trended toward being a significant predictor of type 1 PJK (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69–1.05; p < 0.10). CONCLUSIONS The combination of underlying bone quality and paraspinal musculature CSA at the UIV appeared to influence failure mode among patients who underwent lumbosacral instrumented fusion terminating at the thoracolumbar junction.

OBJECTIVE Pelvic incidence (PI) is a key parameter of sagittal alignment. While conventionally held to be fixed, increasing evidence suggests PI may be variable. This study aimed to identify predictors of change in PI with patient position and to assess the association of preoperative radiographic characteristics and intraoperative maneuvers with postoperative PI. METHODS Patients who underwent thoracolumbosacral fusion were identified, and data were gathered on preoperative spinopelvic parameters, patient demographic characteristics, and operative details. Preoperative spinopelvic parameters were measured on upright, supine, and prone radiographs. Univariable comparisons of PI between the different patient positions were performed. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify variables independently correlated with PI on 6-week postoperative radiographs. Change in PI was defined as ≥ 5° change between positions. RESULTS In total, 138 patients were identified (mean ± SD age 66.0 ± 8.7 years; 38.4% male). Statistically significant differences in PI were noted between preoperative standing and supine (mean −3.2° ± 4.2°, p < 0.001), preoperative supine and prone (3.5° ± 4.7°, p < 0.001), preoperative and 6-week postoperative standing (1.5° ± 6.2°, p = 0.01), and immediate and 6-week upright (1.1° ± 3.9°, p = 0.007) radiographs. Univariable comparisons showed PI decrease from standing to supine was predicted only by weight (87.0 ± 15.0 vs 81.1 ± 19.3 kg, p = 0.04); there were no significant predictors of increase in PI from standing to prone. Increase in PI from preoperative to 6-week standing radiographs was predicted by lower preoperative PI class (p < 0.001), L5/S1 interbody placement (74.4% vs 52.0%, p = 0.02), and change in PI from preoperative standing to supine (12.8% vs 39.8%, p = 0.002) and from standing to prone (51.3% vs 13.3%, p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that 6-week postoperative PI was associated with only preoperative supine PI (B = 0.293, 95% CI 0.10–0.48, p = 0.003) and prone PI (B = 0.647, 95% CI 0.44–0.85, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS There are position-dependent changes in PI among patients without prior pelvic fixation. Statistically significant changes in PI are seen even after pelvic fixation with a single S2-alar-iliac screw bilaterally. Postoperative PI was best predicted by preoperative PI on supine and prone radiographs rather than upright radiographs, suggesting that preoperative prone and supine radiographs may provide surgeons with the best information for achieving PI–lumbar lordosis mismatch < 10°.

Study design. Retrospective observational study of consecutive patients. Objective. The purpose of the study is to determine if a surgeon’s qualitative assessment of bone intraoperatively correlates with radiologic parameters of bone strength. Summary of Background Data. Preoperative radiologic assessment of bone can include modalities such as computed tomography (CT) Hounsfield units (HUs), dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) bone mineral density with trabecular bone score (TBS) and magnetic resonance imaging vertebral bone quality (VBQ). Quantitative analysis of bone with screw insertional torque and pull-out strength measurement has been performed in cadaveric models and has been correlated to these radiologic parameters. However, these quantitative measurements are not routinely available for use in surgery. Surgeons anecdotally judge bone strength, but the fidelity of the intraoperative judgment has not been investigated. Methods. All adult patients undergoing instrumented posterior thoracolumbar spine fusion by one of seven surgeons at a single center over a 3-month period were included. Surgeons evaluated the strength of bone based on intraoperative feedback and graded each patient’s bone on a 5-point Likert scale. Two independent reviewers measured preoperative CT HUs and magnetic resonance imaging VBQ. Bone mineral density, lowest T-score, and TBS were extracted from DXA within 2 years of surgery. Results. Eighty-nine patients were enrolled and 16, 28, 31, 13, and 1 patients had Likert grade 1 (strongest bone), 2, 3, 4, and 5 (weakest bone), respectively. The surgeon assessment of bone correlated with VBQ (τ=0.15, P=0.07), CT HU (τ=−0.31, P<0.01), lowest DXA T-score (τ=−0.47, P<0.01), and TBS (τ=−0.23, P=0.06). Conclusion. Spine surgeons’ qualitative intraoperative assessment of bone correlates with preoperative radiologic parameters, particularly in posterior thoracolumbar surgeries. This information is valuable to surgeons as this supports the idea that decisions based on feel in surgery have a statistical foundation.

Study Design: Retrospective, single institution, multisurgeon case control series. Objective: To determine whether there are differences in reoperation rates or outcomes for patients undergoing 2-level posterolateral fusion (PLF) augmented by a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) at only one of the levels or at both. Methods: A total of 416 patients were identified who underwent 2-level PLF with a TLIF at either one of those levels (n = 183) or at both (n = 233) with greater than 1-year follow-up. Demographic, surgical, radiographic, and clinical data was reviewed for each patient. These included age, sex, race, body mass index, smoking status, Charleston Comorbidity Index, operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, and patient-reported outcome measures. Results: Each cohort underwent 24 reoperations. Although the number of overall reoperations was not significantly different ( P > .05), among the reoperation types, there were significantly more reoperations for adjacent segment disease in the 2-level group compared to the 1-level group (19 vs 12, P = .04). There was no difference in reoperation for pseudarthrosis between the groups ( P > .05). Although both groups experienced significant improvements in Oswestry Disability Index ( P < .001) and Short Form–12 health questionnaire ( P < .001), there were no differences between improvements for 1- versus 2-level cohorts. Conclusions: For patients undergoing 2-level PLF in the setting of a TLIF, using a TLIF at one versus both levels does not seem to influence reoperation rates or outcomes. However, reoperation rates for adjacent segment disease are increased in the setting of a 2-level PLF augmented by a 2-level TLIF.