Citations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nongeneral anesthesia (non-GA) spine surgery is growing in popularity and has facilitated earlier postoperative recovery, reduced cost, and fewer complications compared with spine surgery under general anesthesia (GA). Changes in reimbursement policies have been demonstrated to correlate with clinical practice; however, they have yet to be studied for GA vs non-GA spine procedures. We aimed to investigate trends in physician reimbursement for GA vs non-GA spine surgery in the United States. METHODS: We queried the ACS-NSQIP for GA and non-GA (regional, epidural, spinal, and anesthesia care/intravenous sedation) spine surgeries during 2011–2020. Work relative value units per operative hour (wRVUs/h) were retrieved for decompression or stabilization of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed using all baseline variables. RESULTS: We included 474 706 patients who underwent spine decompression or stabilization procedures. GA was used in 472 248 operations, whereas 2458 operations were non-GA. The proportion of non-GA spine operations significantly increased during the study period. Operative times ( P < .001) and length of stays ( P < .001) were shorter in non-GA when compared with GA procedures. Non-GA lumbar procedures had significantly higher wRVUs/h when compared with the same procedures performed under GA (decompression; P < .001 and stabilization; P = .039). However, the same could not be said about cervicothoracic procedures. Lumbar decompression surgeries using non-GA witnessed significant yearly increase in wRVUs/h ( P < .01) contrary to GA ( P = .72). Physician reimbursement remained stable for procedures of the cervical or thoracic spine regardless of the anesthesia. CONCLUSION: Non-GA lumbar decompressions and stabilizations are associated with higher and increasing reimbursement trends (wRVUs/h) compared with those under GA. Reimbursement for cervical and thoracic surgeries was equal regardless of the type of anesthesia and being relatively stable during the study period. The adoption of a non-GA technique relative to the GA increased significantly during the study period.

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objective: To perform a systematic review of the clinical symptoms, radiographic findings, and outcomes after spinal decompression in B-cell lymphoma. Summary of Background Data: B-cell lymphoma is a potential cause of spinal cord compression that presents ambiguously with nonspecific symptoms and variable imaging findings. Surgical decompression is a mainstay for both diagnosis and management, especially in patients with acute neurological deficits; however, the efficacy of surgical intervention compared with nonoperative management is still unclear. Methods: The databases of Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews were queried for all articles reporting spinal B-cell lymphoma. Data on presenting symptoms, treatments, survival outcomes, and histologic markers were extracted. Using the R software “survival” package, we generated bivariate and multivariate Cox survival regression models and Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: In total, 65 studies were included with 72 patients diagnosed with spinal B-cell lymphoma. The mean age was 56.22 (interquartile range: 45.00–70.25) with 68% of patients being males and 4.2% of patients being immunocompromised. Back pain was the most common symptom (74%), whereas B symptoms and cauda equina symptoms were present in 6% and 29%, respectively. The average duration of symptoms before presentation was 3.81 months (interquartile range: 0.45–3.25). The most common location was the thoracic spine (53%), with most lesions being hyperintense (28%) on T2 magnetic resonance imaging. Surgical resection was performed in 83% of patients. Symptoms improved in 91% of patients after surgery and in 80% of patients treated nonoperatively. For all 72 patients, the overall survival at 1 and 5 years was 85% (95% CI: 0.749–0.953; n = 72) and 66% (95% CI: 0.512–0.847; n = 72), respectively. Conclusion: Although surgery is usually offered in patients with acute spinal cord compression from B-cell lymphoma, chemotherapy and radiation alone offer a hopeful alternative to achieve symptomatic relief, particularly in patients who are unable to undergo surgery.

OBJECTIVE The authors sought to determine how the temporal proximity of lumbar epidural spinal injection prior to surgery impacts clinical outcomes (e.g., 30-day readmission, postoperative complications, CSF leak) in patients undergoing lumbar decompression without fusion. METHODS The authors queried their institutional registry to identify patients who underwent elective lumbar decompression for spondylotic pathology between January 2019 and March 2022 at multiple centers within the same hospital network. Patients were divided into groups based on the time between their surgical date and the most recent preoperative spinal injection: group 1, patients with duration < 1 month; group 2, 1–3 months; and group 3, no spinal injection within 3 months. Primary outcomes of interest were the length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, rate of intraoperative CSF leak, and rates of reoperation and hospital readmission. For patients in groups 1 and 2, the authors also recorded the number of injections within 12 months prior to surgery to better understand the effect of multiple recent injections. The independent Student t-test and Pearson’s chi-square test were mainly performed for univariate analyses of the continuous and categorical variables, respectively. RESULTS A total of 121 and 283 patients received a spinal injection at < 1 month and 1–3 months prior to surgery, respectively, and were separately matched in a 3:1 ratio with 2562 patients with no history of preoperative spinal injection within 3 months before surgery. Among the matched cohorts, patients who received spinal injections < 1 month before lumbar decompression had significantly higher risks of 30-day complication (7.4% vs 0.8%, OR 9.6, p < 0.001), 30-day readmission (5.8% vs 2.2%, OR 3.5, p = 0.049), and 90-day readmission (9.1% vs 2.8%, OR 3.5, p = 0.003) than patients with no history of spinal injection. However, compared with patients with no history of spinal injection, the patients who received spinal injections 1–3 months before surgery were not at higher risk for postoperative complications or readmission. The CSF leak rates were significantly different between the three patient cohorts (10.7% vs 6.7% vs 4.9% for the < 1 month, 1–3 months, and no injection cohorts, respectively; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Lumbar decompression within 1 month of preoperative spinal injection was associated with higher risks of readmission and postoperative complications, including CSF leak. However, with the exception of CSF leak, these risks were no longer observed when spinal injection occurred 1–3 months prior to lumbar decompression.

Background: Spinal synovial cysts are cystic dilatations of synovial sheaths that extrude into the spinal canal. Despite their generally benign behavior, they can cause severe symptoms due to compression of neural structures. They are most commonly found in the lumbar spine and are rare in the cervical region, especially at the atlanto-occipital junction. Case Description: A 65-year-old presented with neck pain and headaches. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a degenerative cyst within the anterior foramen magnum causing anterior spinal cord and brainstem compression. Multiple surgical treatment options were discussed, and he was prescribed methylprednisolone and immobilization of his cervical spine with a rigid collar. One month later, the patient reported dramatic improvement of his symptoms, and no surgery was performed. One year later, his pain had remained much improved with the continued use of the collar and pain management (i.e., using anti-inflammatories and muscle relaxants). The 1-year follow-up MRI showed the atlanto-occipital cyst compressing the cervicomedullary junction had completely resolved along with the brainstem compression. Conclusion: A 65-year-old presented with myelopathy attributed to a large anterior foramen magnum atlanto-occipital cyst compressing the cord. Conservative management for 1 month with a rigid cervical collar and steroids resulted in marked neurological improvement; at 1 year follow-up, the patient was markedly improved with an MR that demonstrated spontaneous cyst regression.

BACKGROUND: Incidental durotomy is a known complication of spinal surgery. Persistent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak after unrecognized durotomy may lead to prolonged hospitalization and significant morbidity. If initial bed rest fails, the surgeon must choose between nontargeted methods such as oversewing the wound and lumbar drain placement or return to the operating room. OBJECTIVE: To report the novel use of color flow doppler (CFD) in conjunction with ultrasound (US) to localize the point of CSF leak, assist with aspiration of the pseudomeningocele, and direct the application of fibrin sealant or epidural blood patch. METHODS: This article includes a description of the technique as a technical note. RESULTS: A 72-year-old man underwent L2-5 laminectomies for spinal stenosis. During the index operation, a durotomy occurred and was repaired primarily. The patient subsequently developed leg weakness, back pain, and bulging of the incision. Using CFD, the site of durotomy was determined. Under direct visualization, 34 mL of CSF was aspirated from the pseudomeningocele and 20 mL of fibrin sealant was placed opposing the durotomy. At 2-month follow-up, CFD confirmed absent flow and MRI demonstrated pseudomeningocele resolution. CONCLUSION: This article represents the first report highlighting the utility of CFD US to guide epidural patch placement for postsurgical CSF leaks. CFD allows localization of the durotomy and direct application of blood or fibrin sealant, potentially increasing the success rate of epidural blood patch in postoperative patients. This approach is less invasive than revision surgery and does not require the prolonged hospitalization of lumbar drainage or other nontargeted interventions.

BACKGROUND: Management of degenerative disease of the spine has evolved to favor minimally invasive techniques, including nonrobotic-assisted and robotic-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Value-based spending is being increasingly implemented to control rising costs in the US healthcare system. With an aging population, it is fundamental to understand which procedure(s) may be most cost-effective. OBJECTIVE: To compare robotic and nonrobotic MIS-TLIF through a cost-utility analysis. METHODS: We considered direct medical costs related to surgical intervention and to the hospital stay, as well as 1-yr utilities. We estimated costs by assessing all cases involving adults undergoing robotic surgery at a single institution and an equal number of patients undergoing nonrobotic surgery, matched by demographic and clinical characteristics. We adopted a willingness to pay of $50 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Uncertainty was addressed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Costs were estimated based on a total of 76 patients, including 38 undergoing robot-assisted and 38 matched patients undergoing nonrobot MIS-TLIF. Using point estimates, robotic surgery was projected to cost $21 546.80 and to be associated with 0.68 QALY, and nonrobotic surgery was projected to cost $22 398.98 and to be associated with 0.67 QALY. Robotic surgery was found to be more cost-effective strategy, with cost-effectiveness being sensitive operating room/materials and room costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis identified robotic surgery as cost-effective in 63% of simulations. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that at a willingness to pay of $50 000/QALY, robotic-assisted MIS-TLIF was cost-effective in 63% of simulations. Cost-effectiveness depends on operating room and room (admission) costs, with potentially different results under distinct neurosurgical practices.

OBJECTIVE Awake transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a novel technique for performing spinal fusions in patients under conscious sedation. Whether awake TLIF can reduce operative times and decrease the hospital length of stay (LOS) remains to be shown. In this study, the authors sought to assess the differences in clinical outcomes between patients who underwent awake TLIF and those who underwent TLIF under general anesthesia by using institutional experience at the Mayo Clinic and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. METHODS Chart review was performed for a consecutive series of patients who underwent single-level minimally invasive surgery (MIS)–TLIF performed by a single surgeon (K.A.I.) at a single institution. Additionally, the NSQIP database was queried from 2016 to 2019 for patients who underwent awake TLIF as well as propensity score–matched patients who underwent TLIF under general anesthesia. RESULTS A total of 20 patients at Mayo Clinic underwent awake single-level MIS-TLIF. The mean operative time was 122 ± 16.68 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 39 ± 30.24 ml. No intraoperative complications were reported. A total of 96 patients who underwent TLIF (24 awake and 72 under general anesthesia) were analyzed from the NSQIP database. The mean LOS was less in the awake cohort (1.4 ± 1.381 days) than the general anesthesia cohort (3 ± 2.274 days) (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS Evidence from the authors’ institutional experience and national analysis has demonstrated that awake MIS-TLIF is efficient and can reduce hospital LOS.

OBJECTIVE There has been increasing interest in the use of spinal anesthesia (SA) for spine surgery, especially within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols. Despite the wide adoption of SA by the orthopedic practices, it has not gained wide acceptance in lumbar spine surgery. Studies investigating SA versus general anesthesia (GA) in lumbar laminectomy and discectomy have found that SA reduces perioperative costs and leads to a reduction in analgesic use, as well as to shorter anesthesia and surgery time. The aim of this retrospective, case-control study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS)–transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) after administration of SA with those who underwent MIS-TLIF under GA. METHODS Overall, 40 consecutive patients who underwent MIS-TLIF by a single surgeon were analyzed; 20 patients received SA and 20 patients received GA. Procedure time, intraoperative adverse events, postoperative adverse events, postoperative length of stay, 3-hour postanesthesia care unit (PACU) numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, opioid medication, and time to first ambulation were collected for each patient. RESULTS The two groups were homogeneous for clinical characteristics. A decrease in total operating room (OR) time was found for patients who underwent MIS-TLIF after administration of SA, with a mean OR time of 156.5 ± 18.9 minutes versus 213.6 ± 47.4 minutes for patients who underwent MIS-TLIF under GA (p < 0.0001), a reduction of 27%. A decrease in total procedure time was also observed for SA versus GA (122 ± 16.7 minutes vs 175.2 ± 10 minutes; p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found in intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. There was a difference in the mean maximum NRS pain score during the first 3 hours in the PACU as patients who received SA reported a lower pain score compared with those who received GA (4.8 ± 3.5 vs 7.3 ± 2.7; p = 0.018). No significant difference was observed in morphine equivalents received by the two groups. A difference was also observed in the mean overall NRS pain score, with 2.4 ± 2.1 for the SA group versus 4.9 ± 2.3 for the GA group (p = 0.001). Patients who received SA had a shorter time to first ambulation compared with those who received GA (385.8 ± 353.8 minutes vs 855.9 ± 337.4 minutes; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS The results of this study have pointed to some important observations in this patient population. SA offers unique advantages in comparison with GA for performing MIS-TLIF, including reduced OR time and postoperative pain, and faster postoperative mobilization.

Abstract We present a surgical video illustrating the technique for en bloc resection of an intradural-extramedullary lumbar tumor. The patient is a 63-yr-old woman presenting with worsening bilateral leg pain. Imaging of her lumbar spine showed an enhancing, circumscribed intradural-extramedullary tumor compressing her cauda equina at the L2 level. With informed patient consent, an L1-L3 laminectomy was performed, and intraoperative ultrasound provided the tumor location in order to plan the dural opening as well as define the tumor boundaries with respect to the surrounding nerve roots. The nerve roots were found to be dorsal to the tumor on the ultrasound and appeared to be separate from the tumor capsule. After the dura was opened, the nerve roots were dissected from the tumor capsule and the filum was identified at its proximal and distal portions relative to the mass. The tumor appeared to be arising from the filum itself. Intraoperative electromyography monitoring and stimulation identified the motor roots around the filum and were dissected away. The filum was isolated and cut proximally in order to prevent upward displacement of the mass above the dural opening. The distal portion was then cut and the tumor was removed en bloc. The patient had good postoperative relief of her leg pain and no new neurologic or genitourinary complications. This case highlights the preoperative and intraoperative surgical planning as well as detailed technical aspects of en bloc intradural-extramedullary lumbar tumor resection with preservation of the tumor capsule in order to achieve gross total resection.

2072 Background: Human glioma stem cells and xenograft lines are common translational models in neuro-oncology but it has not been established if they are genetically and phenotypically comparable. This study aimed to determine if human glioma xenografts and stem cell-derived tumors had similar genotypes. Methods: Matched glioma stem cell cultures and subcutaneous xenograft lines were generated from four human glioblastoma specimens (BT114, BT116, BT120, BT132). Comparison was made between subcutaneous stem cell-derived tumors (flank) and xenografts established in nude mice. Copy number variation (CNV) and gene expression microarray studies were performed. Results: Various differences in copy number and gene expression were seen. Observed CNVs included regions within EGFR, myc, and p16 (INK). For example, EGFR copy number was two fold higher in xenografts vs. stem cell-derived tumor in one line (BT114). This difference was corroborated by western blot. Other differences included a heat shock protein homolog (DNAJA4), tetraspanin 13, and a p53 family target gene (ISG20L1). Two lines (BT114, BT116) had a greater than two fold increase in DNAJA4 expression in xenografts vs. stem cell-derived tumors (p = 0.04, 0.01). Two cell lines (BT116, BT120) had a two to eight fold increase in tetraspanin 13 expression in xenografts (p = 0.02, 0.05). However, neither copy number nor gene expression variations were consistent across all cell lines. Conclusions: Xenografts and glioma stem cell-derived tumors established from the same patient specimens have distinct genotypes. Further work is needed to establish if these differences are random or represent characteristic changes selected by different in vitro or in vivo pressures. However, these variations raise questions regarding which model is ideal for studying glioma biology, and which ones best replicate glioma characteristics in human patients.