Citations

OBJECTIVE Scoliosis is a degenerative disease with a 3D deformity in the alignment of the spinal column. Surgical spinal correction outcomes are heavily dependent on the surgeon’s expertise and use of visual cues because of time requirements, lack of automation, and radiation exposure associated with current intraoperative measurement techniques. In this study, the authors sought to validate a novel, nonradiographic, and semiautomated device that measures spinal alignment intraoperatively using deep learning and computer vision. METHODS To obtain spinal alignment metrics intraoperatively, the surgeon placed 3D-printed markers made of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) plastic at designated locations in the surgical field. With the high-definition camera of the device, the surgeon can take an image of the markers in the surgical field. Images are processed through a computer vision model that detects the location of the markers and calculates the Cobb angle and coronal plumb line. The marker detection model was trained on 100 images and tested on 130 images of the ABS markers in various conditions. To verify the Cobb angle calculation, 50 models of angle templates from 0° to 180° in 3.6735° increments were created for testing. To verify the plumb line calculation, 21 models of plumb line measurements from −10 to +10 cm in increments of 1 cm were created for testing. A validation study was performed on a scoliotic cadaver model, and the radiographic calculations for Cobb angle and plumb line were compared with the device’s calculations. RESULTS The area under the curve for the marker detection model was 0.979 for Cobb angle white, 0.791 for Cobb angle black, and 1 for the plumb line model. The average absolute difference between expected and measured Cobb angles on the verification models was 1.726° ± 1.259°, within the clinical acceptable error of 5°. The average absolute difference between the expected and measured plumb lines on the verification models was 0.415 ± 0.255 cm. For the cadaver validation study, the differences between the radiographic and device calculations for the Cobb angle and plumb line were 2.78° and 0.29 cm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The authors developed and validated a nonradiographic, semiautomated device that utilizes deep learning and computer vision to measure spinal metrics intraoperatively.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to analyze risk factors and avoidance techniques for proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF) in the upper thoracic spine with an emphasis on bone mineral density (BMD) as estimated by Hounsfield units (HU). METHODS A retrospective chart review identified patients at least 50 years of age who underwent instrumented fusion extending from the pelvis to an upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) between T1 and T6 and had a preoperative CT, pre- and postoperative radiographs, and a minimum follow-up of 12 months. HU were measured in the UIV, the vertebral body cephalad to the UIV (UIV+1), and the L3 and L4 vertebral bodies. Numerous perioperative variables were collected, including basic demographics, smoking and steroid use, preoperative osteoporosis treatment, multiple frailty indices, use of a proximal junctional tether, UIV soft landing, preoperative dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, spinopelvic parameters, UIV screw tip distance to the superior endplate, UIV pedicle screw/pedicle diameter ratio, lumbar lordosis distribution, and postoperative spinopelvic parameters compared with age-adjusted normal values. RESULTS Eighty-one patients were included in the study (21 men and 60 women) with a mean (SD) age of 66 years (6.9 years), BMI of 29 (5.5), and follow-up of 38 months (25 months). Spinal fusion constructs at the time of surgery extended from the pelvis to a UIV of T1 (5%), T2 (15%), T3 (25%), T4 (33%), T5 (21%), and T6 (1%). Twenty-seven patients (33%) developed PJK and/or PJF; 21 (26%) had PJK and 15 (19%) had PJF. Variables associated with PJK/PJF with p < 0.05 were included in the multivariable analysis, including HU at the UIV/UIV+1, HU at L3/L4, DXA femoral neck T-score, UIV screw tip distance to the superior endplate, UIV pedicle screw/pedicle diameter ratio, and postoperative lumbar lordosis distribution. Multivariable analysis (area under the curve = 0.77) demonstrated HU at the UIV/UIV+1 to be the only independent predictor of PJK and PJF with an OR of 0.96 (p = 0.005). Patients with < 147 HU (n = 27), 147–195 HU (n = 27), and > 195 HU (n = 27) at the UIV/UIV+1 had PJK/PJF rates of 59%, 33%, and 7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In patients with upper thoracic–to-pelvis spinal reconstruction, lower HU at the UIV and UIV+1 were independently associated with PJK and PJF, with an optimal cutoff of 159 HU that maximizes sensitivity and specificity.

BACKGROUND: There has recently been increasing interest in the use of spinal anesthesia (SA) for spine surgery. The literature that compared spine surgery under SA vs general anesthesia (GA) focused on safety, perioperative outcomes, and costs. OBJECTIVE: To test if SA is associated with less postoperative fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and better quality of life in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery compared with GA. METHODS: We conducted a prospective nonrandomized study in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery under SA or GA by a single surgeon. Fatigue was assessed with the fatigue visual analog scale scale (0-10) and Chalder Fatigue Scale, quality of life with Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short Form (SF-12), and differences in cognition with Mini-Mental State Examination. Patients were baselined before surgery and assessed again 1 mo after surgery. RESULTS: Fifty patients completed the study, 25 underwent surgery under SA and 25 under GA. The groups were homogeneous for baseline clinical characteristics, with no differences in preoperative fatigue, quality of life, and cognition. At 1 mo after surgery, SA compared with GA had better fatigue scores: fatigue visual analog scale (2.9 ± 1.5 vs 5.9 ± 2.3 [ P < .0001]) and Chalder Fatigue Scale (11.2 ± 3.1 vs 16.9 ± 3.9 [ P < .0001]). One month postoperatively, we observed a significant difference in the SF-12 physical component, with SA having 38.8 ± 8.9 vs 29.4 ± 10.3 ( P = .002). We did not observe significant postoperative differences in the SF-12 mental component or Mini-Mental State Examination. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that SA offers unique patient-centered advantages to GA for elective spine surgery. One month after surgery, patients who received SA had less postoperative fatigue and better quality of life.

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 IntroductionRadiotherapy is considered standard of care for adjuvant peri-operative treatment of many spinal tumors, including those with instrumented fusion. Unfortunately, radiation treatment has been linked to increased risk of pseudoarthrosis. Newerfocused radiotherapy strategies with enhanced conformalitycould offer improved fusion rates for these patients, but this has not been confirmed.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of patients at three tertiary care academic institutions withprimary and secondary spinal malignancies that underwent resection, instrumented fusion, and peri-operative radiotherapy. Two board certified neuro-radiologists used theLenke fusion score to grade fusion status at6 and 12-months after surgery. Secondary outcomes includedclinical pseudoarthrosis, wound complications, and the effect of radiation timing, radiobiological dose delivered, the use of photons versus protons, tumor type, tumor location,and use of autograft on fusion outcomes.ResultsAfter reviewof 1252 spinal tumor patients, there were 60 patients with at least 6 months follow-up that were included in our analyses. Twenty-five of these patients received focused radiotherapy,20 patients received conventional radiotherapy, and 15 patients were treated with protons. There was no significant difference between the groups for covariates such assmoking status,obesity, diabetes, intraoperative use of autograft, and use of peri-operative chemotherapy. There was a significantly higher rate of fusion for patients treated with focused radiotherapy compared to those treated with conventional radiotherapy at 6-months (64.0% versus 30.0%, Odds ratio: 4.15, p=0.036) and 12-months (80.0% versus 42.1%, OR: 5.50, p=0.022). There was a significantly higher rate of clinical pseudoarthrosis in the conventional radiotherapy cohortcompared to patients in the focused radiotherapy cohort (19.1% versus 0%,p=0.037). There was no difference in fusion outcomes for any of the secondary outcomes except for use of autograft. The use ofintra-operative autograft was associated with an improved fusion at 12-months (66.7% versus 37.5%, OR: 3.33, p=0.043). ConclusionFocused radiotherapy may be associated withan improved rate of fusion and clinical pseudoarthrosis when compared to conventional radiation delivery strategiesin patients with spinal tumors.Use of autograft at the time of surgery may be associated with improved 12-month fusion rates.Further large-scale prospective and randomized controlled studies are needed to better stratify the effects of radiation delivery modality in these patients.

OBJECTIVE High-grade spinal glioma (HGSG) is a rare but aggressive tumor that occurs in both adults and children. Histone H3 K27M mutation correlates with poor prognosis in children with diffuse midline glioma. However, the role of H3 K27M mutation in the prognosis of adults with HGSG remains unclear owing to the rarity of this mutation, conflicting reports, and the absence of multicenter studies on this topic. METHODS The authors studied a cohort of 30 adult patients with diffuse HGSG who underwent histological confirmation of diagnosis, surgical intervention, and treatment between January 2000 and July 2020 at six tertiary academic centers. The primary outcome was the effect of H3 K27M mutation status on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Thirty patients (18 males and 12 females) with a median (range) age of 50.5 (19–76) years were included in the analysis. Eighteen patients had H3 K27M mutation–positive tumors, and 12 had H3 K27M mutation–negative tumors. The median (interquartile range) PFS was 3 (10) months, and the median (interquartile range) OS was 9 (23) months. The factors associated with increased survival were treatment with concurrent chemotherapy/radiation (p = 0.006 for PFS, and p ≤ 0.001 for OS) and American Spinal Injury Association grade C or better at presentation (p = 0.043 for PFS, and p < 0.001 for OS). There were no significant differences in outcomes based on tumor location, extent of resection, sex, or H3 K27M mutation status. Analysis restricted to HGSG containing necrosis and/or microvascular proliferation (WHO grade IV histological features) revealed increased OS for patients with H3 K27M mutation–positive tumors (p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS Although H3 K27M mutant–positive HGSG was associated with poor outcomes in adult patients, the outcomes of patients with H3 K27M mutant–positive HGSG were somewhat more favorable compared with those of their H3 K27M mutant–negative HGSG counterparts. Further preclinical animal studies and larger clinical studies are needed to further understand the age-dependent effects of H3 K27M mutation.