Citations

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.

Background: The purpose of this study was to report on 2-year results of vertebral body tethering (VBT), performed under a Food and Drug Administration protocol, to obtain insight into outcomes and complications. Methods: Forty prospectively enrolled patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who had a Sanders score of ≤4 or a Risser score of ≤2 underwent VBT for curves between 40° and 70°. Surgical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes were reviewed at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Results: Mean age at surgery was 13 (range, 10 to 16) years. The 40 patients were 90% female; 95% White, 2.5% other, and 2.5% unreported; and 92.5% non-Hispanic, 5% Hispanic, and 2.5% unreported. A mean of 8 (range, 5 to 12) levels were instrumented. Most patients were at Sanders 4 (65%) and Risser 0 (63%). Mean length of stay was 3 ± 1 days, estimated blood loss was 236 ± 158 (range, 25 to 740) mL, and operative time was 4.4 ± 1.4 hours. Mean correction of the major curve was 44% (range, 22% to 95%) on the 3-month standing radiograph, 49% at 1 year, and 46% (range, −10% to 93%) at 2 years. The mean major Cobb angle improved from 51° ± 8° (range, 40° to 70°) preoperatively to 27° ± 11° (range, 3° to 56°) at 2 years. Success at 2 years, defined by a Cobb angle of <35° and no reoperation, was seen in 30 patients (75%) and was associated with a mean Cobb angle of <35° on the first postoperative standing radiograph (p < 0.001). Twelve patients (30%) demonstrated improvement in the curve with growth. By 2 years, 2 (5%) of the patients underwent repeat surgery (1 release for overcorrection, 1 lumbar VBT for lumbar curve progression after thoracic VBT). The Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) satisfaction score improved 2 years following surgery (p < 0.001), but other SRS domains only remained stable over time. Beyond 2 years, 1 additional lumbar tether was required after thoracic VBT, 1 implant was removed, and 3 fusions were performed, for a 10% fusion rate and overall 20% reoperation rate at a mean of 3.8 ± 1.1 years of follow-up. The rate of cord breakage in the study population was 20%. Conclusions: In skeletally immature patients treated in the U.S. under a prospective Investigational Device Exemption, there was a 75% rate of successful outcomes at 2 years. Most correction was obtained at the time of surgery, and inadequate intraoperative curve correction was associated with a higher Cobb angle on the first postoperative standing radiograph and failure by 2 years. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

OBJECTIVE Hounsfield units (HUs) may better predict biomechanical complications of instrumented fusion than conventional bone quality measures. Typically, noncontrast axial slices are used. This study aims to address the influence of reconstruction plane and contrast administration on measured HUs in patients undergoing lumbar spine imaging. METHODS Patients without prior spine surgery, infection, or tumor were identified for 3 groups: 1) 150 patients with high-resolution noncontrast lumbar CT, 2) 109 patients with noncontrast and contrast-enhanced lumbar CT, and 3) 100 patients with noncontrast lumbar CT and lumbar CT myelograms. Noncontrast HU measures in group 1 were compared between axial, sagittal, and coronal reconstructions. HU measures for groups 2 and 3 were compared on axial slice averages. HU measures between groups were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to investigate the presence of a statistically significant difference between groups (α = 0.05). Linear regression was also used to determine the degree of correlation between HU measures on noncontrast axial CT slices and HU measures on other sequences. RESULTS The mean patient age was 58.8 ± 15.9 years for group 1 (54.0% male), 65.5 ± 15.9 years for group 2 (61.5% male), and 65.2 ± 14.2 years (53.5% male) for group 3. Comparison of HU measures in group 1 showed significant differences across measurement modalities with the exception of axial average versus coronal average measures (p = 0.257) and sagittal average versus midsagittal measures (p = 0.726). There were significant differences in average axial HUs for each vertebral body between contrast and noncontrast lumbar CT and between CT myelography and noncontrast CT. Linear regression analysis demonstrated an extremely high correlation between measures for all methodologies (r2 = 0.950–0.986, all p < 0.001), and between contrast-enhanced and noncontrast studies (r2 = 0.870, p < 0.001). Measurements on CT myelography were significantly correlated with those in noncontrast studies, although to a lesser degree (r2 = 0.745, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS HU measures on noncontrast CT appear similar across multiple different planes, suggesting that a simpler methodology such as single-slice measurement on midsagittal reconstruction may allow for more rapid assessment of underlying bone quality. Consistent with prior work, contrast-enhanced CT sequences appear to reliably mirror underlying bone quality, although CT myelogram measures may vary in a more unpredictable way that precludes their use to interpret underlying bone quality. HU measures on contrast-enhanced studies are on average greater, suggesting the need for higher cutoff values.

Background Identifying a microorganism in patients with native vertebral osteomyelitis presents diagnostic challenges. Microorganism identification through culture-based methods is constrained by prolonged processing times and sensitivity limitations. Despite the availability of molecular diagnostic techniques for identifying microorganisms in native vertebral osteomyelitis, there is considerable variability in reported sensitivity and specificity across studies, leading to uncertainty in their clinical utility. Questions/purposes What are the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios for 16S broad-range PCR followed by Sanger sequencing (16S) and metagenomic next-generation sequencing (NGS) for detecting bacteria in native vertebral osteomyelitis? Methods On June 29, 2023, we searched Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and Scopus for results from January 1970 to June 2023. Included studies involved adult patients with suspected native vertebral osteomyelitis undergoing molecular diagnostics—16S bacterial broad-range PCR followed by Sanger sequencing and shotgun or targeted metagenomic NGS—for bacteria detection. Studies involving nonnative vertebral osteomyelitis and cases of brucellar, tubercular, or fungal etiology were excluded. The reference standard for the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis was a composite clinical- and investigator-defined native vertebral osteomyelitis diagnosis. Diagnostic performance was assessed using a bivariate random-effects model. Risk of bias and diagnostic applicability were evaluated using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. After a manual screening of 3403 studies, 10 studies (5 on 16S, 5 on NGS) were included in the present analysis, from which 391 patients were included from a total of 958 patients overall. Quality assessment via QUADAS-2 criteria showed moderate risk of bias and good applicability. Results 16S showed 78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95% CI 31% to 96%) sensitivity and 94% (95% CI 73% to 99%) specificity, whereas NGS demonstrated 82% (95% CI 63% to 93%) sensitivity and 71% (95% CI 37% to 91%) specificity. In addition, the diagnostic ORs were 59 (95% CI 9 to 388) and 11 (95% CI 4 to 35) for 16S and NGS, respectively. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves showed high test performance for 16S (area under the curve for 16S 95% [95% CI 93% to 97%] and for NGS 89% [95% CI 86% to 92%]). Certainty in estimates was moderate because of sample size limitations. Conclusion This meta-analysis found moderate-to-high diagnostic performance of molecular methods on direct patient specimens for the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis. When used as a complementary test to microbiological analyses, a positive 16S result rules in the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis, while further studies are needed to understand the role of NGS in the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis. When available, these tests should be used in addition to conventional microbiology, especially in complex cases with extensively negative standard microbiological test results, to detect fastidious bacteria or to confirm the causative bacteria when their isolation and pathogenicity are unclear. A large sample size is needed in future research to understand the use of these techniques as standalone tests for diagnosis. Level of Evidence Level III, diagnostic study.

The incidence of culture-negative NVO (CN-NVO) cases is increasing, presenting significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to the inability to isolate causative organisms with conventional microbiological methods. Factors influencing the diagnosis of CN-NVO include prior antimicrobial therapy, low pathogen burden, fastidious or intracellular organisms, technical issues, and non-infectious mimickers. Diagnosis often relies on imaging modalities like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy, though these methods can sometimes fail to yield positive microbiological results. Advanced diagnostic tools, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), and cell-free DNA analysis, may be necessary to identify the pathogen. The causative pathogen cannot be isolated in some patients, among which an empirical antimicrobial therapy should be initiated. This narrative review discusses the management, monitoring, surgical indications, and outcomes for patients with CN-NVO.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Objective: To evaluate for areas of consensus and divergence of opinion within the spine community regarding the management of cervical spondylotic conditions and acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS) and the influence of the patient's age, disease severity, and myelomalacia. Summary of Background Data: There is ongoing disagreement regarding the indications for, and urgency of, operative intervention in patients with mild degenerative myelopathy, moderate to severe radiculopathy, isolated axial symptomatology with evidence of spinal cord compression, and ATCCS without myelomalacia. Methods: A survey request was sent to 330 attendees of the Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS) 2021 Annual Meeting to assess practice patterns regarding the treatment of cervical stenosis, myelopathy, radiculopathy, and ATCCS in 16 unique clinical vignettes with associated MRIs. Operative versus nonoperative treatment consensus was defined by a management option selected by >80% of survey participants. Results: Overall, 116 meeting attendees completed the survey. Consensus supported nonoperative management for elderly patients with axial neck pain and adults with axial neck pain without myelomalacia. Operative management was indicated for adult patients with mild myelopathy and myelomalacia, adult patients with severe radiculopathy, elderly patients with severe radiculopathy and myelomalacia, and elderly ATCCS patients with pre-existing myelopathic symptoms. Treatment discrepancy in favor of nonoperative management was found for adult patients with isolated axial symptomatology and myelomalacia. Treatment discrepancy favored operative management for elderly patients with mild myelopathy, adult patients with mild myelopathy without myelomalacia, elderly patients with severe radiculopathy without myelomalacia, and elderly ATCCS patients without preceding symptoms. Conclusions: Although there is uncertainty regarding the treatment of mild myelopathy, operative intervention was favored for nonelderly patients with evidence of myelomalacia or radiculopathy and for elderly patients with ATCCS, especially if pre-injury myelopathic symptoms were present. Level of Evidence: Level V.