Carlson, Bayard C.

Background: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a viable option for patients with symptomatic knee arthritis isolated to 1 compartment. Previous articles have suggested that mobile-bearing UKA should not be performed in patients without bone-on-bone arthritis. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and survivorship of mobile-bearing UKA in patients with severe osteoarthritis with bone-on-bone contact and patients with severe osteoarthritis but without bone-on-bone contact. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a single surgeon’s experience with medial compartment mobile-bearing UKA in 219 patients (271 knees) who underwent the procedure between 2007 and 2015. Anteroposterior and posteroanterior radiographs were reviewed, and arthritis was graded using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grading system. Only patients with grade D (severe arthritis) were studied. Of the patients who had grade-D arthritis, there were 81 patients (94 knees) with bone-on-bone arthritis and 82 patients (91 knees) without bone-on-bone contact. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Knee Society pain and function scores. Survivorship free of revision in these 2 groups was determined using Kaplan-Meier curves at 8 years. Results: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of age (p = 0.91), sex (p = 0.21), or body mass index (p = 0.63). At the time of the final follow-up, there was no significant difference in Knee Society pain scores (p = 0.59) or Knee Society function scores (p = 0.9) between the 2 groups. There were 5 revisions in the group with bone-on-bone contact and 2 revisions in the group without bone-on-bone contact. The survivorship free of revision at 8 years was 95% for the group with bone-on-bone contact and 98% for the group without bone-on-bone contact (p = 0.45). Conclusions: Patients with severe knee arthritis (IKDC grade D) without bone-on-bone contact had similar outcomes of mobile-bearing UKA compared with patients with bone-on-bone contact. UKA is a safe and reliable option in patients with severe osteoarthritis who do not have bone-on-bone contact on preoperative radiographs and it should therefore not be considered a contraindication for mobile-bearing UKA as long as the patient’s symptoms are severe enough to warrant surgical intervention. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Mini We compared the sensitivity and specificity of peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing–sonication technique for the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII). Lower thresholds of sonicate fluid culture positivity showed increased sensitivity with maintained specificity. We recommend a threshold of 20 CFU/10 mL for sonicate culture positivity for the diagnosis of SII. Study Design. This is a retrospective study comparing the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII) by peri-implant tissue culture to vortexing–sonication of retrieved spinal implants. Objective. We hypothesized that vortexing–sonication would be more sensitive than peri-implant tissue culture. Summary of Background Data. We previously showed implant vortexing–sonication followed by culture to be more sensitive than standard peri-implant tissue culture for diagnosing of SII. In this follow-up study, we analyzed the largest sample size available in the literature to compare these two culture methods and evaluated thresholds for positivity for sonicate fluid for SII diagnosis. Methods. We compared peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing–sonication technique which samples bacterial biofilm on the surface of retrieved spinal implants. We evaluated different thresholds for sonicate fluid positivity and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the two culture methods for the diagnosis of SII. Results. A total of 152 patients were studied. With more than 100 colony forming units (CFU)/10 mL as a threshold for sonicate fluid culture positivity, there were 46 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 65.2% and 79.6%; the specificities were 88.7% and 93.4%, respectively. With more than 50 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 50 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 68.0% and 76.0%; the specificities were 92.2% for both methods. Finally, with more than or equal to 20 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 52 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 69.2% and 82.7%; the specificities were 94.0% and 92.0%, respectively. Conclusion. Implant sonication followed by culture is a sensitive and specific method for the diagnosis of SII. Lower thresholds for defining sonicate fluid culture positivity allow for increased sensitivity with a minimal decrease in specificity, enhancing the clinical utility of implant sonication. Level of Evidence: 4

Study Design. Retrospective cohort study of the Own the Bone database which is a fracture liaison service designed to improve recognition and treatment of osteoporosis. Objective. To use the Own the Bone (OTB) database to 1) examine the specific demographics of patients presenting with a low-energy clinical vertebral fracture (VFX) and 2) compare demographic and fracture-specific risk factors between patients with clinical VFX versus patients with nonvertebral low-energy fracture (NVFX). Summary of Background Data. Large database studies have described risk factors for developing VFX. It is well described that a history of previous VFX portends an increased risk of future VFX. Few studies have reported cohorts from a fracture liaison service such as the OTB initiative. Methods. 35,039 unique cases of fragility fracture occurred between 2009 and 2016 and were included in analysis. VFX accounted for 3395 (9.9%) of the presenting fractures at OTB enrollment. The demographics, lifestyle factors, medication use, and fracture-specific data for patients in the OTB registry with vertebral fractures were summarized and then statistically compared to those with nonvertebral fragility fractures. Results. The majority of VFX patients were Caucasian, postmenopausal women (74.4%). There was an increased likelihood of presenting with a vertebral fracture in patients who sustained a previous VFX after the age of 50, while patients who sustained a prior nonvertebral fracture (NVFX) were more likely to present with a subsequent NVFX. After controlling for patients with a history of fracture after the age of 50, VFX patients (vs. NVFX) were more likely to be age 70–79, class 1 obesity, with a history of taking anti-osteoporotic prescription medications. Conclusions. Multiple factors were associated with a significantly increased risk of VFX compared with NVFX. Understanding the risk factors unique to fragility VFX is a critical component for targeting “at-risk” patients and preventing future osteoporosis-related fractures and their consequences. Level of Evidence: 4

Introduction: Osteopenia and osteoporosis are common conditions in the United States. The health consequences of low bone density can be dire, from poor surgical outcomes to increased mortality rates following a fracture. Significance: This article highlights the impact low bone density has on spine health in terms of vertebral fragility fractures and its adverse effects on elective spine surgery. It also reviews the clinical importance of bone health assessment and optimization. Results: Vertebral fractures are the most common fragility fractures with significant consequences related to patient morbidity and mortality. Additionally, a vertebral fracture is the best predictor of a subsequent fracture. These fractures constitute sentinel events in osteoporosis that require further evaluation and treatment of the patient’s underlying bone disease. In addition to fractures, osteopenia and osteoporosis have deleterious effects on elective spine surgery from screw pullout to fusion rates. Adequate evaluation and treatment of a patient’s underlying bone disease in these situations have been shown to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion: With an increased understanding of the prevalence of low bone mass and its consequences as well an understanding of how to identify these patients and appropriately intervene, spine surgeons can effectively decrease the rates of adverse health outcomes related to low bone mass.

Case: We present 2 cases of postoperative seroma formation following posterior cervical fusion with the use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2). Conclusion: Although some who advocate for the off-label use of rhBMP-2 in patients undergoing posterior cervical spine fusion believe it to be safe, relatively little has been published regarding complication rates. We believe that rhBMP-2 carries a risk of seroma formation in patients who undergo posterior cervical fusion, which necessitates the use of a postoperative drain. Surgeons should have a low threshold for obtaining postoperative magnetic resonance imaging in a symptomatic patient.

Background: Redislocation of the native hip is rare. An anterior fulcrum between the proximal part of the femur and the pelvis must be present for a posterior dislocation to occur. The purpose of this study is to describe the cases of 9 patients with posterior redislocation or recurrent subluxation of the native hip that was treated with hip preservation surgery. Methods: We retrospectively identified the cases of 9 patients, from 2 institutions, who had undergone hip preservation surgery for the management of posterior redislocation or recurrent subluxation of the native hip after a dislocation. The mean number of dislocations prior to surgery was 3.2 (range, 1 to 7). Pelvic radiographs were used to classify the acetabular morphology, sufficiency of acetabular containment, and structural anatomy of the proximal part of the femur. Radiographic identification of impinging structures was used to guide surgical treatment, which involved either femoral correction alone or the combination of femoral correction and an anteverting periacetabular osteotomy. Results: At a mean follow-up of 73.8 months (range, 10 to 192 months), there had been no subsequent episodes of dislocation or subluxation in any of the hips treated with correction of the anatomic pivot point. An algorithmic approach is presented. Conclusions: In patients who have episodes of redislocation or recurrent subluxation of the native hip, the identification of anatomic abnormalities that create a fulcrum between the proximal part of the femur and the pelvis is critical for making appropriate treatment decisions. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.