Citations

Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective The impact of paraspinal sarcopenia following fusions that extend to the upper thoracic spine remain unknown. The purpose of the present study was to assess the impact of sarcopenia on the development of PJK and PJF following spine fusion surgery from the upper thoracic spine to the pelvis. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent spine fusion surgery that extended caudally to the pelvis and terminated cranially between T1-6. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: (1) patients without PJK or PJF and (2) patients with PJK and/or PJF. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine risk factors for the development of proximal junctional complications. Results We identified 81 patients for inclusion in this study. Mean HU at the UIV was 186.1 ± 47.5 in the cohort of patients without PJK or PJF, which was substantially higher than values recorded in the PJK/PJF subgroup (142.4 ± 40.2) ( P < 0.001). Severe multifidus sarcopenia was identified at a higher rate in the subgroup of patients who developed proximal junction pathology (66.7%) than in the subgroup of patients who developed neither PJK nor PJF (7.4%; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated both low HU at the UIV and moderate-severe multifidus sarcopenia to be risk factors for the development of PJK and PJF. Conclusions Severe paraspinal sarcopenia and diminished bone density at the UIV impart an increased risk of developing PJK and PJF in following thoracolumbar fusions from the upper thoracic spine to the pelvis.

OBJECTIVE Deficiency in patient education has been correlated with increased disease-related morbidity and decreased access to care. However, the associations between educational level, preoperative disease severity, and postoperative outcomes in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis have yet to be explored. METHODS The spondylolisthesis dataset of the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD)—a cohort with prospectively collected data by the SpineCORe study team of the 12 highest enrolling sites with an 81% follow-up at 5 years —was utilized and stratified for educational level. Patients were classified into three categories (high school or less, graduate, or postgraduate). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) documented at baseline and follow-up included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, EQ-5D in quality-adjusted life years, and numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain. Disease severity was measured with PROMs. Postoperatively, patients also completed the North American Spine Society assessment to measure their satisfaction with surgery. Multivariable regression analysis was used to compare education level with disease severity and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS A total of 608 patients underwent analysis, with 260 individuals (42.8%) at an educational level of high school or less. On univariate analysis, baseline disease severity was worse among patients with lower levels of education. On multivariable regression analysis, patients with postgraduate level of education had significantly lower ODI scores (β = −3.75, 95% CI −7.31 to −0.2, p = 0.039) compared to graduates, while the other PROMs were not associated with significant differences at baseline. Five years postoperatively, patients from various educational backgrounds exhibited similar rates of minimal clinically important differences in PROMs. Nevertheless, patients with the lowest educational level had higher ODI scores (27.1, p < 0.01), lower EQ-5D scores (0.701, p < 0.01), and higher NRS leg pain (3.0, p < 0.01) and back pain (4.0, p < 0.01) scores compared to those with graduate or postgraduate levels of education. The odds for postoperative satisfaction were also comparable between cohorts at 5 years (reference, graduate level; high school or less, OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.46–1.64, p = 0.659; postgraduate, OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7–3.65, p = 0.262). CONCLUSIONS Lower patient education level was associated with a greater baseline disease severity in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Surgery demonstrated similar benefits irrespective of educational background; however, individuals with lower educational level reported lower outcomes overall. This emphasizes the need for enhanced health literacy to mitigate disparities for reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE The role of interbodies in lumbar arthrodesis has been insufficiently supported by evidence, impacting clinical decision-making and occasionally insurance coverage. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes between lumbar arthrodesis with a synthetic interbody spacer (cage) versus structural bone graft alone (autograft or allograft) in patients with degenerative spine disease. METHODS A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies directly comparing outcomes of lumbar interbody arthrodesis with and without interbody cage use. The outcomes of individual studies were synthesized in meta-analyses using random-effects models. RESULTS Twenty studies with 1508 patients (769 with an interbody cage and 739 without an interbody cage) were included. Interbody cage placement was associated with a significantly greater increase in disc height after surgery (4.0 mm vs 3.4 mm, p < 0.01). There was a significantly greater reduction of back pain (visual analog scale [VAS] score) in cases in which an interbody cage was used (5.4 vs 4.7, p = 0.03). Fusion rates were 5.5% higher in the cage group (96.3% vs 90.8%) and reached statistical significance (p = 0.03). No statistically significant differences were identified between the two groups regarding all-cause reoperation rates, complication rates, or improvement in Oswestry Disability Index score or leg pain (VAS score). CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that implantation of an interbody cage is associated with higher rates of fusion, more effective maintenance of disc height, and greater improvement of back pain. This study underlines the clinical value of interbody cages in lumbar arthrodesis for patients with degenerative spine disease.

Study Design: Retrospective observational study of consecutive patients Objective: The purpose of the study was to evaluate VBQ as a predictor of interbody subsidence and to determine threshold values that portend increased risk of subsidence. Summary of Background Data: Many risk factors have been reported for the subsidence of interbody cages in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). MRI Vertebral Bone Quality (VQB) is a relatively new radiographic parameter that can be easily obtained from preoperative MRI and has been shown to correlate with measurements of bone density such as DXA and CT Hounsfield Units. Methods: All patients who underwent 1- to 3-level ACDF using titanium interbodies with anterior plating between the years 2018 and 2020 at our tertiary referral center were included. Subsidence measurements were performed by 2 independent reviewers on CT scans obtained 6 months postoperatively. VBQ was measured on pre-operative sagittal T1 MRI by 2 independent reviewers, and values were averaged. Results: Eight-five fusion levels in 44 patients were included in the study. There were 32 levels (38%) with moderate subsidence and 12 levels with severe subsidence (14%). The average VBQ score in those patients with severe subsidence was significantly higher than those without subsidence (3.80 vs. 2.40, P<0.01). A threshold value of 3.2 was determined to be optimal for predicting subsidence (AUC=0.99) and had a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 94.1% in predicting subsidence. Conclusions: VBQ strongly correlates with the subsidence of interbody grafts after ACDF. A threshold VBQ score value of 3.2 has excellent sensitivity and specificity for predicting subsidence. Spine surgeons can use VBQ as a readily available screening tool to identify patients at higher risk for subsidence. Level of Evidence: Level—IV

OBJECTIVE Use of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)—an osteoinductive agent commonly used in lumbar arthrodesis—is off-label for cervical arthrodesis. This study aimed to identify the effect of BMP use on clinical and radiological outcomes in instrumented cervical arthrodesis. METHODS A comprehensive systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies directly comparing outcomes between cervical arthrodeses with and without using BMP. Outcomes were analyzed separately for cases of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical fusion (PCF). RESULTS A total of 20 studies with 5828 patients (1948 with BMP and 3880 without BMP) were included. In the ACDF cases, BMP use was associated with higher fusion rates (98.9% vs 93.6%, risk difference [RD] 8%; risk ratio [RR] 1.12, p = 0.02), lower reoperation rates (2.2% vs 3.1%, RD 3%; RR 0.48, p = 0.04), and higher risk of dysphagia (24.7% vs 8.1%, RD 11%; RR 1.93, p = 0.02). No significant differences in the Neck Disability Index, neck pain, or arm pain scores were associated with the use of BMP. On subgroup meta-analysis of ACDF cases, older age (≥ 50 years) and higher BMP dose (≥ 0.9 mg/level) were associated with significantly higher fusion rates and relatively lower risk for dysphagia, whereas arthrodesis of fewer segments (< 2 levels) showed significantly higher dysphagia rates without a significant increase in fusion rates. In the PCF cases, the use of BMP was not associated with significant differences in fusion (p = 0.38) or reoperation (p = 0.61) rates but was associated with significantly higher blood loss during surgery (mean difference 146.7 ml, p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Use of BMP in ACDF offers higher rates of augmented fusion and lower rates of all-cause reoperation but with an increased risk of dysphagia. The benefit of fusion outweighs the risk of dysphagia with a higher BMP dose in older patients being operated on for < 2 levels. The use of BMP in PCF seems to have a less important effect on clinical and radiological outcomes.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between posterior foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients presenting with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database was queried for patients who had undergone ACDF or posterior foraminotomy for radiculopathy. To create two highly homogeneous groups, optimal individual matching was performed at a 5:1 ratio between the two groups on 29 baseline variables (including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, underlying pathologies, and levels treated). Outcomes of interest were length of stay, reoperations, patient-reported satisfaction, increase in EQ-5D score, and decrease in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores for arm and neck pain as long as 1 year after surgery. Noninferiority analysis of achieving patient satisfaction and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in PROs was performed with an accepted risk difference of 5%. RESULTS A total of 7805 eligible patients were identified: 216 of these underwent posterior foraminotomy and were matched to 1080 patients who underwent ACDF. The patients who underwent ACDF had more underlying pathologies, lower EQ-5D scores, and higher NDI and neck pain scores at baseline. Posterior foraminotomy was associated with shorter hospitalization (0.5 vs 0.9 days, p < 0.001). Reoperations within 12 months were significantly more common among the posterior foraminotomy group (4.2% vs 1.9%, p = 0.04). The two groups performed similarly in PROs, with posterior foraminotomy being noninferior to ACDF in achieving MCID in EQ-5D and neck pain scores but also having lower rates of maximal satisfaction at 12 months (North American Spine Society score of 1 achieved by 65.2% posterior foraminotomy patients vs 74.6% of ACDF patients, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS The two procedures were found to be offered to different populations, with ACDF being selected for patients with more complicated pathologies and symptoms. After individual matching, posterior foraminotomy was associated with a higher reoperation risk within 1 year after surgery compared to ACDF (4.2% vs 1.9%). In terms of 12-month PROs, posterior foraminotomy was noninferior to ACDF in improving quality of life and neck pain. The two procedures also performed similarly in improving NDI scores and arm pain, but ACDF patients had higher maximal satisfaction rates.

OBJECTIVE Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) can cause significant difficulty with driving and a subsequent reduction in an individual’s quality of life due to neurological deterioration. The positive impact of surgery on postoperative patient-reported driving capabilities has been seldom explored. METHODS The CSM module of the Quality Outcomes Database was utilized. Patient-reported driving ability was assessed via the driving section of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) questionnaire. This is an ordinal scale in which 0 represents the absence of symptoms while driving and 5 represents a complete inability to drive due to symptoms. Patients were considered to have an impairment in their driving ability if they reported an NDI driving score of 3 or higher (signifying impairment in driving duration due to symptoms). Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to evaluate mediators of baseline impairment and improvement at 24 months after surgery, which was defined as an NDI driving score < 3. RESULTS A total of 1128 patients who underwent surgical intervention for CSM were included, of whom 354 (31.4%) had baseline driving impairment due to CSM. Moderate (OR 2.3) and severe (OR 6.3) neck pain, severe arm pain (OR 1.6), mild-moderate (OR 2.1) and severe (OR 2.5) impairment in hand/arm dexterity, severe impairment in leg use/walking (OR 1.9), and severe impairment of urinary function (OR 1.8) were associated with impaired driving ability at baseline. Of the 291 patients with baseline impairment and available 24-month follow-up data, 209 (71.8%) reported postoperative improvement in their driving ability. This improvement seemed to be mediated particularly through the achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in neck pain and improvement in leg function/walking. Patients with improved driving at 24 months noted higher postoperative satisfaction (88.5% vs 62.2%, p < 0.01) and were more likely to achieve a clinically significant improvement in their quality of life (50.7% vs 37.8%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Nearly one-third of patients with CSM report impaired driving ability at presentation. Seventy-two percent of these patients reported improvements in their driving ability within 24 months of surgery. Surgical management of CSM can significantly improve patients’ driving abilities at 24 months and hence patients’ quality of life.

OBJECTIVE Unplanned returns to the operating room (RORs) constitute an important quality metric in surgical practice. In this study, the authors present a methodology to compare a department’s unplanned ROR rates with national benchmarks in the context of large-scale quality of care surveillance. METHODS The authors identified unplanned RORs within 30 days from the initial surgery at their institution during the period 2014–2018 using an institutional documentation platform that facilitates the collection of reoperation information by providers in the clinical setting. They divided the procedures into 28 groups by Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revision codes. They estimated national benchmarks of unplanned RORs for these procedure groups via querying the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) registry during the period 2014–2018. Finally, they numerically assessed the unplanned ROR rates at their institution compared with those calculated from the ACS NSQIP registry. RESULTS Using the above methodology, the authors were able to classify 12,575 of the cases performed in their department during the period of interest, including 6037 (48%) cranial cases and 6538 (52%) spinal or peripheral nerve cases. Among those, 161 (1.3%) presented with complications that required an unplanned ROR within 30 days from the initial surgery. The respective cumulative unplanned ROR rate in the ACS NSQIP registry during the same timeframe was 3.6%. Among 15 categories of cranial procedures, the cumulative unplanned ROR rate was 1.3% in the authors’ department and 5.6% in the ACS NSQIP registry. Among 13 categories of spinal and peripheral nerve procedures, the cumulative unplanned ROR rate was 1.3% in the authors’ department and 2.8% in the ACS NSQIP registry. Unplanned ROR rates at the authors’ institution were lower than the national average for each of the 28 procedure groups of interest. Yearly analysis of institutional ROR rates for the five most commonly performed procedures showed lower reoperation rates compared with the national benchmarks. CONCLUSIONS Using an institutional documentation tool and a widely available national database, the authors developed a reproducible and standardized method of comparing their department’s outcomes with national benchmarks per procedure subgroup. This methodology accommodates longitudinal quality surveillance across the different subspecialties in a neurosurgical department and may illuminate potential shortcomings of care delivery in the future.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) offers the advantage of motion preservation in the treatment of focal cervical pathology. At present, implant sizing is performed using subjective tactile feedback and imaging of trial cages. This study aims to construct interpretable machine learning (IML) models to accurately predict postoperative range of motion (ROM) and identify the optimal implant sizes that maximize ROM in patients undergoing CDA. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent CDA for single-level disease from 2012 to 2020 were identified. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes were collected, including symptoms, examination findings, subsidence, and reoperation. Affected disk height, healthy rostral disk height, and implant height were collected at sequential time points. Linear regression and IML models, including bagged regression tree, bagged multivariate adaptive regression spline, and k-nearest neighbors, were used to predict ROM change. Model performance was assessed by calculating the root mean square error (RMSE) between predicted and actual changes in ROM in the validation cohort. Variable importance was assessed using RMSE loss. Area under the curve analyses were performed to identify the ideal implant size cutoffs in predicting improved ROM. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included. The average RMSE between predicted and actual ROM was 7.6° (range: 5.8-10.1) in the k-nearest neighbors model, 7.8° (range: 6.5-10.0) in the bagged regression tree model, 7.8° (range: 6.2-10.0) in the bagged multivariate adaptive regression spline model, and 15.8° (range: 14.3-17.5°) in a linear regression model. In the highest-performing IML model, graft size was the most important predictor with RMSE loss of 6.2, followed by age (RMSE loss = 5.9) and preoperative caudal disk height (RMSE loss = 5.8). Implant size at 110% of the normal adjacent disk height was the optimal cutoff associated with improved ROM. CONCLUSION: IML models can reliably predict change in ROM after CDA within an average of 7.6 degrees of error. Implants sized comparably with the healthy adjacent disk may maximize ROM.