Citations

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risks and benefits of removing painful pelvic/iliac screws in spine fusion surgery patients. METHODS A retrospective review identified patients who had traditional iliac and S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screws removed for pain. The minimum follow-up was 24 months. RESULTS Fifty-two patients (75% women) were included with a mean age of 63 years, BMI of 28, and follow-up of 65 months. Most of the removed screws were S2AI (83%) compared with traditional iliac screws (17%). Forty-three patients (83%) had improvement in their pelvic screw related–pain following removal. Eight patients (15%) experienced lumbosacral mechanical complications following pelvic screw removal including sacral fracture (n = 3, 6%) and/or L4–5 or L5–S1 rod fracture (n = 7, 13%). On multivariable analysis, risk factors for mechanical complications following pelvic screw removal included a longer fusion construct (OR 1.34, p = 0.035), greater postoperative L4–S1 lordosis (OR 1.14, p = 0.04, ideal cutoff > 40°), and lack of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP; OR 0.03, p = 0.02). Ten patients (19%) underwent subsequent SI joint fusion following pelvic screw removal, and higher standing pelvic incidence (OR 1.10, p = 0.03) was the only independent predictor of SI fusion. CONCLUSIONS Removal of painful pelvic screws resulted in a high rate of postoperative pain relief, albeit with a risk of lumbosacral mechanical complications and subsequent SI joint fusion. Patients at risk for lumbosacral mechanical complications following pelvic screw removal included those with longer fusion constructs, more lordosis from L4 to S1 (> 40°), and lack of BMP. Patients at risk for receiving an instrumented SI joint fusion following pelvic screw removal included those with a higher pelvic incidence.

Study Design Retrospective Cohort Study. Objectives To determine if 3D printed porous titanium (Ti) cages compared to non-porous polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages predicted improved fusion rate or clinical outcomes after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Methods All adult patients who underwent one- and two-level TLIF for degenerative conditions by a single surgeon at an academic center between 2017-2021 were retrospectively identified. Patients were dichotomized into porous Ti and non-porous PEEK interbody cage groups. Fusion status was assessed by at 6-months and 1-year postoperatively by CT Bridwell scale and flexion/extension X-Rays. Postoperative complications (CT-based subsidence, adjacent segment disease, reoperation rates) and interval changes in lumbar radiographic alignment at short- and long-term follow-up were determined. Univariate and multivariate analysis compared patient and surgical factors, fusion rates, alignment, and complications across interbody groups. Results A total of 136 patients with 169 unique fusion levels (125 Ti cages, 44 PEEK cages) met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Ti relative to PEEK interbodies had significantly decreased surface area and increased height and lordosis. Ti cage use was associated with greater subsidence ( P < 0.001) but did not independently predict maximum subsidence on regression ( P = 0.109). In the overall cohort, there were no significant differences in fusion rates or lumbopelvic alignment between interbody groups. Reoperation (Ti: 10.9% vs PEEK: 28.6%, P = 0.026) and reoperation for pseudoarthrosis (Ti: 2.0% vs PEEK: 11.4%, P = 0.038) was significantly more likely in the PEEK relative to the Ti group. Conclusions Use of 3D printed porous Ti cages relative to non-porous PEEK cages may mitigate pseudoarthrosis related reoperation after TLIF.

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°.

OBJECTIVE Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) offers both indirect decompression and segmental correction through restoration of disc height. However, stresses exerted on the vertebral endplates by the interbody device can result in implant subsidence and loss of correction. The present time-to-event analysis aimed to identify predictors of interbody subsidence. METHODS Patients who underwent 1- or 2-level TLIF were identified. Data on demographics, surgical details, preoperative bone quality using CT-based Hounsfield units (HU), and pre- and postoperative lumbopelvic parameters were collected. Univariable analyses were conducted to identify predictors of subsidence (≥ 2-mm intrusion of interbody into cranial or caudal vertebrae) and significant subsidence (≥ 4-mm intrusion). Multivariable Cox regression was performed to identify independent predictors of subsidence, expressed as hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS A total of 198 patients treated at 241 levels were included (median age 66.6 years, IQR 59.5, 73.7 years; 56.6% were women). In 92 levels (38.2%) there was some subsidence and in 25 (10.4%) there was significant subsidence. Implanted levels demonstrating subsidence (≥ 2 mm) were associated with lower HU in cranial and caudal vertebrae; had interbodies positioned farther from the anterior apophyseal ring; were implanted with taller, more lordotic interbodies; and underwent greater disc height restoration. Those showing significant subsidence (≥ 4 mm) were similarly associated with lower HU in the cranial and caudal vertebrae; had interbodies positioned farther from the anterior apophyseal ring of the caudal vertebrae; and underwent greater disc height restoration. Multivariable Cox regression showed that time to subsidence was predicted by greater implant height (HR 1.20/mm, 95% CI 1.05–1.38; p = 0.009), greater postoperative disc height (HR 1.21/mm, 95% CI 1.09–1.34; p < 0.001), and greater disc height restoration (HR 1.11/mm, 95% CI 1.04–1.19; p = 0.002). The time-to-subsidence analysis for significant (≥ 4 mm) subsidence showed that it was predicted by lower HU in the cranial vertebrae (HR 0.98/unit, 95% CI 0.97–0.99; p = 0.001); increasing number of levels instrumented (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04–1.52; p = 0.016); and greater disc height restoration (HR 1.33/mm, 95% CI 1.18–1.51; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS This time-to-event analysis suggests that interbody subsidence following TLIF is best predicted by implantation of a taller interbody and aggressive disc height restoration. Significant subsidence is similarly predicted by aggressive disc height restoration along with poor baseline bone quality. The results suggest the need to balance aggressive correction at the time of surgery against the increased risk of subsequent interbody subsidence.

Introduction: Bone health optimization is a key component of the preoperative management of spine surgery patients, as poor bone quality increases the odds of mechanical complications. The present study aimed to achieve the following: (1) compare the relative efficacy of current osteoporosis medications in improving bone quality; (2) identify factors influencing treatment response in preoperative spine surgery patients. Methods: Patients treated at a single, multisite institution who received osteoporosis treatment were identified. Data were gathered on pre- and post-treatment lumbar spine Hounsfield Unit (HU) measurements, patient demographics, frailty scores (modified Frailty Index/mFI, risk analysis index/RAI), and pharmacologic treatment details. The primary outcome was a ≥7 point improvement in lumbar HU, and baseline and logistic regression models were utilized to identify factors associated with this improvement. Medications were grouped as anabolic (teriparatide, romosozumab) and antiresorptive (denosumab, alendronate) therapies. Results: A total of 267 patients were included (median age: 74 years; IQR [66–81]; 67.3% female), with 127 (47.6%) improving by ≥7 HU. The treatment agents used were alendronate (95), denosumab (113), romosozumab (31), and teriparatide (28). Univariable comparisons revealed significant differences across medication groups in age (p < 0.001), sex (p < 0.001), mFI (p < 0.001), RAI (p = 0.004), BMI (p < 0.001), pre-treatment HU (p = 0.022), and treatment duration (p < 0.001). The highest HU improvement rates (ΔHU ≥ 7) were observed in patients receiving the anabolic medications romosozumab (67.7%) and teriparatide (60.7%). Univariable logistic regression identified male sex (OR 0.54, p = 0.019), higher pre-treatment HU (OR 0.99, p = 0.006), and longer treatment duration (OR 0.97, p = 0.003) as factors associated with lower odds of HU improvement. Only romosozumab was associated with significantly higher odds of HU improvement relative to alendronate (OR 3.02, p = 0.012). In our multivariable analysis, male sex (OR 0.53, p = 0.028) and higher pre-treatment HU (OR 0.99, p = 0.002) remained significant predictors of HU improvement. However, medication type was not significant in the multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Our study highlights that male sex and higher pre-treatment HU were independently associated with lower odds of HU improvement, while medication type was not a significant predictor. Additionally, anabolic agents offered superior improvement relative to antiresorptive therapies.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine independent risk factors for vertebral compression fracture (VCF) following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in metastatic spine disease. METHODS Patients treated with SBRT for spinal metastasis at a single tertiary care center between 2008 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients with CT scans obtained within 1 year of SBRT completion were included. Variables collected included demographics, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), primary tumor pathology, Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini (WBB) classification, chemoradiation treatment details, and bone quality as assessed by Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT. HUs were measured for the medullary bone of the metastatic level, the tumor, and the vertebral bodies cephalad and caudal to the metastasis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of post-SBRT pathological fracture. RESULTS A total of 292 patients (mean age 66 years) with 392 unique lesions were included. The most common pathologies were prostate (n = 193), kidney/renal cell (n = 46), and lung (n = 33). The most common tumor levels were thoracic (n = 206 lesions) and lumbar (n = 128 lesions). SBRT was generally delivered in 1–3 fractions with doses ranging from 16 to 24 Gy in 1 fraction and 24–36 Gy in 3 fractions. Of the 392 lesions, 73 suffered VCF: 21 (29%) with < 25% height loss, 15 (21%) with 25%–40% height loss, and 37 (51%) with > 40% height loss. On univariate analysis, patients with VCF had lower average HUs (156 ± 52 vs 202 ± 89, p < 0.001), more WBB sectors involved (3 ± 2 vs 3 ± 1, p < 0.001), higher SINSs (8 ± 3 vs 6 ± 2, p < 0.001), were more commonly female (33% vs 22%, p = 0.05), and more commonly had nonprostate pathology (67% vs 47%, p = 0.003). VCF rates were similar between moderate (< 20 Gy in 1 fraction, < 30 Gy in 3 or 5 fractions) and high-dose (> 20 Gy in 1 fraction, > 30 Gy in 3 or 5 fractions) radiation schema (15% VCF vs 16% no VCF, respectively; p = 0.99). On multivariable logistic regression, independently significant predictors of VCF were HUs ≤ 229 (OR 6, p < 0.001), affected levels ≥ 3 WBB segments (OR 3, p < 0.001), and an SINS ≥ 8 (OR 2, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Low pre-radiation HUs, involvement of more WBB sectors, and a higher SINS were independent predictors of VCF following SBRT for metastatic spine disease.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) allows for direct and indirect decompression and segmental lordosis in sagittal plane correction. This study compares the effectiveness of “Bullet” type and “Banana” type devices for sagittal plane correction. METHODS: Patients who underwent 1-level or 2-level TLIF for degenerative pathology at a single tertiary care center were identified. Details were extracted on demographics, interbody dimensions, and preoperative and postoperative lumbopelvic parameters from upright radiographs. Cages were categorized as “Bullet” or “Banana” type based on morphology and manufacturer description of optimal position. Univariable comparisons between levels treated with “Bullet” and “Banana” type interbodies were performed. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis and change in segmental lordosis. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety eight unique patients (median 66.6 years; [IQR 59.5, 73.7]; 56.6% female) were included with 241 levels treated, of which 114 (52.7%) were treated with “Banana” type interbodies and 127 (47.3%) with “Bullet” type. “Banana” type interbodies afforded both greater postoperative segmental lordosis (8.1 [6.2, 10.7] vs 7.5 [5.2, 9.6]; P = .048) and greater increase in segmental lordosis (3.3 [0.7, 7.0] vs 2.3 [0.1, 4.2]; P = .015). On multivariable linear regression, only preoperative segmental lordosis (β = 0.322 per degree; [0.244, 0.399]; P < .001), implant listed lordosis (β = 0.146 per degree; 95% CI [0.048, 0.244]; P = .004), preoperative pelvic incidence (0.072 per degree; [0.034, 0.111]; P < .001), and use of bilateral TLIF windows (β = 3.133; [1.213, 5.053]; P = .001) were predictive of postoperative segmental lordosis. CONCLUSION: The present analysis suggests that baseline lumbopelvic anatomy, interbody lordosis, and the use of bilateral TLIF windows are the most important predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis. Use of “Banana” vs “Bullet” type interbodies was not predictive of segmental lordosis achieved on immediate postoperative upright radiographs. Further work is merited to determine whether the 2 interbody types demonstrate differences regarding subsidence risk or maintenance of correction.

Background/Objectives: Both poor bone quality and paraspinal sarcopenia have been suggested as risk factors for proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) at the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) following long-segment thoracolumbar fusion. Methods: Adults ≥50 with a T1-6 UIV were identified, and data were gathered on pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters, bone quality (using Hounsfield units and vertebral bone quality score), and paraspinal cross-sectional area at L3 and the UIV. PJK was defined by a ≥10° increase in the proximal junctional angle. Cox regressions were performed to identify PJK risk factors; PJK was subdivided into types 1–3 based on the Yagi–Boachie classification. Results: In total, 15/76 patients (median age 66; 72.4% female) experienced PJK; 10 experienced type 1, 4 experienced type 2, and one experienced type 3. Univariable Cox regression showed that PJK was negatively correlated with total paraspinal muscle CSA at the UIV (HR 0.74/100 mm2; 95% CI [0.57, 0.6]; p = 0.02). Lower total paraspinal CSA at L3 (HR 0.94/100 mm2; p = 0.07) and higher postoperative global tilt (HR 1.03; p = 0.09) also trended toward significance. Similarly, type 1 PJK was predicted by smaller total paraspinal CSA at the UIV (HR 0.64/100 mm2; [0.45, 0.92]; p = 0.02). Paraspinal CSA was not predictive of type 2 PJK, but lower HU at the UIV and UIV + 1 trended toward significance (HR 0.98/unit; p = 0.16). A comparison of type 1 and 2 PJK showed a higher average of paraspinal CSA and a lower average of HU at the UIV. Conclusions: Global alignment and paraspinal sarcopenia were most predictive of PJK, though paraspinal sarcopenia was only predictive of type 1. Type 2 may be better predicted by bone quality.