Bumpass, David B.

Study Design: Retrospective multicenter case series study. Objective: Because cervical dural tears are rare, most surgeons have limited experience with this complication. A multicenter study was performed to better understand the presentation, treatment, and outcomes following cervical dural tears. Methods: Multiple surgeons from 23 institutions retrospectively identified 21 rare complications that occurred between 2005 and 2011, including unintentional cervical dural tears. Demographic data and surgical history were obtained. Clinical outcomes following surgery were assessed, and any reoperations were recorded. Neck Disability Index (NDI), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), Nurick classification (NuC), and Short-Form 36 (SF36) scores were recorded at baseline and final follow-up at certain centers. All data were collected, collated, and analyzed by a private research organization. Results: There were 109 cases of cervical dural tears among 18 463 surgeries performed. In 101 cases (93%) there was no clinical sequelae following successful dural tear repair. There were statistical improvements ( P < .05) in mJOA and NuC scores, but not NDI or SF36 scores. No specific baseline or operative factors were found to be associated with the occurrence of dural tears. In most cases, no further postoperative treatments of the dural tear were required, while there were 13 patients (12%) that required subsequent treatment of cerebrospinal fluid drainage. Analysis of those requiring further treatments did not identify an optimum treatment strategy for cervical dural tears. Conclusions: In this multicenter study, we report our findings on the largest reported series (n = 109) of cervical dural tears. In a vast majority of cases, no subsequent interventions were required and no clinical sequelae were observed.

Study Design: Multicenter retrospective case series and review of the literature. Objective: To determine the rate of esophageal perforations following anterior cervical spine surgery. Methods: As part of an AOSpine series on rare complications, a retrospective cohort study was conducted among 21 high-volume surgical centers to identify esophageal perforations following anterior cervical spine surgery. Staff at each center abstracted data from patients’ charts and created case report forms for each event identified. Case report forms were then sent to the AOSpine North America Clinical Research Network Methodological Core for data processing and analysis. Results: The records of 9591 patients who underwent anterior cervical spine surgery were reviewed. Two (0.02%) were found to have esophageal perforations following anterior cervical spine surgery. Both cases were detected and treated in the acute postoperative period. One patient was successfully treated with primary repair and debridement. One patient underwent multiple debridement attempts and expired. Conclusions: Esophageal perforation following anterior cervical spine surgery is a relatively rare occurrence. Prompt recognition and treatment of these injuries is critical to minimizing morbidity and mortality.

Study Design: Multi-institutional retrospective case series of 8887 patients who underwent anterior cervical spine surgery. Objective: Anterior decompression from discectomy or corpectomy is not without risk. Surgical morbidity ranges from 9% to 20% and is likely underreported. Little is known of the incidence and effects of rare complications on functional outcomes following anterior spinal surgery. In this retrospective review, we examined implant extrusions (IEs) following anterior cervical fusion. Methods: A retrospective multicenter case series study involving 21 high-volume surgical centers from the AOSpine North America Clinical Research Network. Medical records for 17 625 patients who received cervical spine surgery (levels from C2 to C7) between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2011, were reviewed to identify occurrence of 21 predefined treatment complications. Results: Following anterior cervical fusion, the incidence of IE ranged from 0.0% to 0.8% across 21 institutions with 11 cases reported. All surgeries involved multiple levels, and 7/11 (64%) involved either multilevel corpectomies or hybrid constructs with at least one adjacent discectomy to a corpectomy. In 7/11 (64%) patients, constructs ended with reconstruction or stabilization at C7. Nine patients required surgery for repair and stabilization following IE. Average length of hospital stay after IE was 5.2 days. Only 2 (18%) had residual deficits after reoperation. Conclusions: IE is a very rare complication after anterior cervical spine surgery often requiring revision. Constructs requiring multilevel reconstruction, especially at the cervicothoracic junction, have a higher risk for failure, and surgeons should proceed with caution in using an anterior-only approach in these demanding cases. Surgeons can expect most patients to regain function after reoperation.