Citations

OBJECTIVEAggressive sacral tumors often require en bloc resection and lumbopelvic reconstruction. Instrumentation failure and pseudarthrosis remain a clinical concern to be addressed. The objective in this study was to compare the biomechanical stability of 3 distinct techniques for sacral reconstruction in vitro.METHODSIn a human cadaveric model study, 8 intact human lumbopelvic specimens (L2–pelvis) were tested for flexion-extension range of motion (ROM), lateral bending, and axial rotation with a custom-designed 6-df spine simulator as well as axial compression stiffness with the MTS 858 Bionix Test System. Biomechanical testing followed this sequence: 1) intact spine; 2) sacrectomy (no testing); 3) Model 1 (L3–5 transpedicular instrumentation plus spinal rods anchored to iliac screws); 4) Model 2 (addition of transiliac rod); and 5) Model 3 (removal of transiliac rod; addition of 2 spinal rods and 2 S-2 screws). Range of motion was measured at L4–5, L5–S1/cross-link, L5–right ilium, and L5–left ilium.RESULTSFlexion-extension ROM of the intact specimen at L4–5 (6.34° ± 2.57°) was significantly greater than in Model 1 (1.54° ± 0.94°), Model 2 (1.51° ± 1.01°), and Model 3 (0.72° ± 0.62°) (p < 0.001). Flexion-extension at both the L5–right ilium (2.95° ± 1.27°) and the L5–left ilium (2.87° ± 1.40°) for Model 3 was significantly less than the other 3 cohorts at the same level (p = 0.005 and p = 0.012, respectively). Compared with the intact condition, all 3 reconstruction groups statistically significantly decreased lateral bending ROM at all measured points. Axial rotation ROM at L4–5 for Model 1 (2.01° ± 1.39°), Model 2 (2.00° ± 1.52°), and Model 3 (1.15° ± 0.80°) was significantly lower than the intact condition (5.02° ± 2.90°) (p < 0.001). Moreover, axial rotation for the intact condition and Model 3 at L5–right ilium (2.64° ± 1.36° and 2.93° ± 1.68°, respectively) and L5–left ilium (2.58° ± 1.43° and 2.93° ± 1.71°, respectively) was significantly lower than for Model 1 and Model 2 at L5–right ilium (5.14° ± 2.48° and 4.95° ± 2.45°, respectively) (p = 0.036) and L5–left ilium (5.19° ± 2.34° and 4.99° ± 2.31°) (p = 0.022). Last, results of the axial compression testing at all measured points were not statistically different among reconstructions.CONCLUSIONSThe addition of a transverse bar in Model 2 offered no biomechanical advantage. Although the implementation of 4 iliac screws and 4 rods conferred a definitive kinematic advantage in Model 3, that model was associated with significantly restricted lumbopelvic ROM.

Study Design: Multicenter retrospective study. Objectives: To investigate the risk of symptomatic recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (RLNP) following cervical spine surgery, to examine risk factors for its development, and to report its treatment and outcomes. Methods: A multicenter study from 21 high-volume surgical centers from the AOSpine North America Clinical Research Network was performed. Each center screened for rare complications following cervical spine surgery, including RLNP. Patients were included if they underwent cervical spine surgery (levels from C2 to C7) between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2011. Data were analyzed with regard to complication treatment and outcome. Cases were compared to a control group from the AOSpine CSM and CSM-I studies. Results: Three centers reported 19 cases of RLNP from a cohort of 1345 patients. The reported incidence of RLNP ranged from 0.6% to 2.9% between these 3 centers. Fifteen patients (79%) in the RLNP group were approached from the left side. Ten patients (52.6%) required treatment for RLNP—6 required medical therapy (steroids), 1 interventional treatment (injection laryngoplasty), and 3 conservative therapy (speech therapy). When examining outcomes, 73.7% (14/19) of cases resolved completely, 15.8% (3/19) resolved with residual effects, and in 10.5% (2/19) of cases this could not be determined. Conclusions: In this multicenter study examining rare complications following cervical spine surgery, the risk of RLNP after cervical spine surgery ranged from 0.6% to 2.9% between centers. Though rare, it was found that 16% of patients may experience partial resolution with residual effects, and 74% resolve completely.

Background Chronic daily headache (CDH) affects 2% to 4% of the North American and European population. Various pathways lead to this condition, although chronification of migraine and the occurrence of central sensitization in tension headache are the 2 most common. Medication overuse headaches complicate a substantial portion of other primary headaches that have become chronic and often make their treatment more complex and less successful. Methods/Results A 10‐step process to help primary care providers evaluate and treat CDH patients begins with excluding secondary headache disorders, then moves on to classification of the primary underlying headache disorder. Next, the exacerbating factors, as well as relevant comorbid conditions, are identified. The patient's current acute therapy is examined, and attempts are made to identify and resolve medication overuse if present. Past preventive therapies are reviewed, allowing for thoughtful design of a headache action plan with preventive, acute, and lifestyle components. Patients are asked to keep a headache diary, used to initiate a cycle of continuous improvement in a patient's response to acute and preventive therapeutic approaches. Conclusions A systematic approach and partnership with patients often make it possible to convert CDH to episodic headache that is responsive to both acute and preventive therapies.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to report the long-term clinical outcomes following 3- and 4-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS A retrospective review of all adult neurosurgical patients undergoing elective ACDF for degenerative disease at a single institution between 1996 and 2013 was performed. Patients who underwent first-time 3- or 4-level ACDF were included; patients with previous cervical spine surgery, those undergoing anterior/posterior approaches, and those with corpectomy were excluded. Outcome measures included perioperative complication rates, fusion rates, need for revision surgery, Nurick Scores, Odom's criteria, symptom resolution, neck visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and persistent narcotics usage. RESULTS Seventy-one patients who underwent 3-level ACDF and 26 patients who underwent 4-level ACDF were identified and followed for an average of 7.6 ± 4.2 years. There was 1 case (3.9%) of deep wound infection in the 4-level group and 1 case in the 3-level group (1.4%; p = 0.454). Postoperatively, 31% of patients in the 4-level group complained of dysphagia, compared with 12.7% in the 3-level group (p = 0.038). The fusion rate was 84.6% after 4-level ACDF and 94.4% after 3-level ACDF (p = 0.122). At last follow-up, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the 4-level group continued to have axial neck pain (53.8%) than in the 3-level group (31%; p = 0.039); the daily oral morphine equivalent dose was significantly higher in the 4-level group (143 ± 97 mg/day) than in the 3-level group (25 ± 10 mg/day; p = 0.030). Outcomes based on Odom's criteria were also different between cohorts (p = 0.044), with a significantly lower proportion of patients in the 4-level ACDF group experiencing an excellent/good outcome. CONCLUSIONS In this study, patients who underwent 4-level ACDF had significantly higher rates of dysphagia, postoperative neck pain, and postoperative narcotic usage when compared with patients who underwent 3-level ACDF. Pseudarthrosis and deep wound infection rates were also higher in the 4-level group, although this did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, a smaller proportion of patients achieved a good/excellent outcome in the 4-level group than in the 3-level group. These findings suggest a significant increase of perioperative morbidity and worsened outcomes for patients who undergo 4- versus 3-level ACDF.

OBJECT While extent of resection has been shown to correlate with outcomes after myxopapillary ependymoma (MPE) resection, the effect of capsular violation has not been well studied. The role of adjuvant radiation also remains controversial. In this paper the authors' goals were to evaluate outcomes following resection of MPE based on intraoperative capsular violation and to explore the role of adjuvant radiotherapy in cases of capsular violation. METHODS A retrospective review of patients undergoing resection of MPE at 2 academic institutions between 1990 and 2013 was performed. Cases with dissemination at presentation, less than 12 months of follow-up, or incomplete records were excluded. Extent of resection was defined as en bloc if all visible tumor was removed without capsular violation, gross-total resection (GTR) if all visible tumor was removed, but with capsular violation, and subtotal resection (STR) if a known residual was left at the time of surgery. Postoperative MR images were reviewed to confirm the extent of resection. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall recurrence rates. The effects of extent of resection, capsular violation, and adjuvant radiotherapy on recurrence rates and PFS were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier statistics. Associations between recurrence and preoperative variables were evaluated using Fisher exact methods and t-tests where appropriate. RESULTS Of the 107 patients reviewed, 58 patients (53% were male) met inclusion criteria. The mean age at surgery was 40.8 years (range 7–68 years). The median follow-up was 51.5 months (range 12–243 months). Extent of resection was defined as en bloc in 46.5% (n = 27), GTR in 34.5% (n = 20), and STR in 18.9% (n = 11). No recurrences were noted in the en bloc group, compared with 15% (n = 3) and 45% (n = 5) in the GTR and STR groups. En bloc resection was achieved most frequently in tumors involving the conus. Twelve patients (20%) underwent adjuvant radiotherapy following either STR or GTR. The overall recurrence rate was 13.8% (n = 8), and the 5-year PFS was 81%. Capsular violation was associated with a higher recurrence rate (p = 0.005). Adjuvant radiotherapy showed a nonsignificant trend of lower recurrence rates (16.7% vs 31.6%, p = 0.43) and longer PFS at 5 years (83.3% vs 49.9%, p = 0.16) in cases of capsular violation. CONCLUSIONS A strong correlation between capsular violation and recurrence was found following removal of MPE and should be assessed when defining extent of resection in future studies. Although the use of adjuvant radiotherapy in cases of capsular violation showed a trend toward improved PFS, further investigation is needed to establish its role as salvage therapy also appears to be effective at halting disease progression.