Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-01-11DOI: 10.1177/21925682241226658
Joonghyun Ahn, Kee-Yong Ha, Yong-Chan Kim, Ki-Tack Kim, Sung-Min Kim, Taeyoung Ko, Sang-Il Kim, Young-Hoon Kim
Study design: Retrospective comparative study.
Objectives: To investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes after anterior column realignment (ACR) through pre-posterior release-anterior-posterior surgery (PAP) and minimally invasive surgery -lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LLIF) using hybrid anterior-posterior surgery (AP).
Methods: A total of 91 patients who underwent ACR with long fusions from T10 vertebra to the sacropelvis with a follow-up period of at least 2 years after corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity were included and divided into two groups by surgical method: AP and PAP. AP was performed in 26 and PAP in 65 patients. Clinical outcomes and radiological parameters were investigated and compared. A further comparison was conducted after propensity score matching between the groups.
Results: The more increase of LL and decrease of PI-LL mismatch were observed in the PAP group than in the AP group postoperatively. After propensity score matching, total operation time and intraoperative bleeding were greater, and intensive care unit care and rod fracture were more frequent in the PAP group than in the AP group with statistical significance. Reoperation rate was higher in PAP (29.2%) than in AP (16.7%) without statistical significance.
Conclusions: PAP provides a more powerful correction for severe sagittal malalignment than AP procedures. AP results in less intraoperative bleeding, operation time, and postoperative complications. Therefore, this study does not suggest that one treatment is superior to the other.
Level of evidence: III.
研究设计回顾性比较研究:通过前路松解-前路-后路手术(PAP)和微创手术-侧腰椎椎体间融合术(MIS-LLIF),研究前路柱矫正(ACR)术后的临床和放射学结果:共纳入91例接受了从T10椎体到骶椎体的ACR长融合术的成人脊柱畸形矫正术后随访至少2年的患者,并按手术方法分为两组:AP组和PAP组。26 名患者接受了 AP 手术,65 名患者接受了 PAP 手术。对临床结果和放射学参数进行了调查和比较。在对两组进行倾向评分匹配后,又进行了进一步比较:结果:与 AP 组相比,PAP 组术后 LL 增加更多,PI-LL 不匹配减少更多。倾向得分匹配后,PAP 组的总手术时间和术中出血量更多,重症监护室护理和杆骨折的发生率高于 AP 组,差异有统计学意义。PAP组的再手术率(29.2%)高于AP组(16.7%),但无统计学意义:结论:与 AP 相比,PAP 能更有效地矫正严重的矢状不齐。AP术中出血少、手术时间短、术后并发症少。因此,本研究并不表明一种治疗方法优于另一种治疗方法:证据等级:III。
{"title":"Anterior Column Realignment Through Open Pre-posterior Release-Anterior-Posterior Fusion Versus Hybrid Minimally Invasive-Anterior-Posterior Fusion for Dynamic Sagittal Imbalance of the Spine.","authors":"Joonghyun Ahn, Kee-Yong Ha, Yong-Chan Kim, Ki-Tack Kim, Sung-Min Kim, Taeyoung Ko, Sang-Il Kim, Young-Hoon Kim","doi":"10.1177/21925682241226658","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241226658","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective comparative study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes after anterior column realignment (ACR) through pre-posterior release-anterior-posterior surgery (PAP) and minimally invasive surgery -lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LLIF) using hybrid anterior-posterior surgery (AP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 91 patients who underwent ACR with long fusions from T10 vertebra to the sacropelvis with a follow-up period of at least 2 years after corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity were included and divided into two groups by surgical method: AP and PAP. AP was performed in 26 and PAP in 65 patients. Clinical outcomes and radiological parameters were investigated and compared. A further comparison was conducted after propensity score matching between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The more increase of LL and decrease of PI-LL mismatch were observed in the PAP group than in the AP group postoperatively. After propensity score matching, total operation time and intraoperative bleeding were greater, and intensive care unit care and rod fracture were more frequent in the PAP group than in the AP group with statistical significance. Reoperation rate was higher in PAP (29.2%) than in AP (16.7%) without statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PAP provides a more powerful correction for severe sagittal malalignment than AP procedures. AP results in less intraoperative bleeding, operation time, and postoperative complications. Therefore, this study does not suggest that one treatment is superior to the other.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"48-58"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572164/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139416825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objectives: Imaging changes in the vertebral body after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) are determined to be trabecular bone remodeling (TBR). This study aimed to investigate the influence of cage materials on TBR and segment stabilization in PLIF by studying image changes.
Methods: This was a retrospective study reviewing 101 cases who underwent one-level PLIF with three-dimensional porous titanium (3DTi) cages (53 patients) or polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) cages (48 patients). Computed tomography images obtained 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively were examined for TBR, vertebral endplate cyst formation as an instability sign, cage subsidence, and clear zone around pedicle screw (CZPS).
Results: No significant differences in the TBR-positivity rates were observed between the two cages at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. However, all 3DTi cage segments that were TBR-positive at 3 months postoperatively showed no CZPS and fewer final instability segments than the TBR-negative segments (0% vs 9%). In contrast, although the PEEK cage segments that were TBR-positive at 3 months postoperatively were not associated with future segmental stabilization, those that were TBR-positive at 1 year postoperatively had fewer final instability segments than the TBR-negative segments (0% vs 33%).
Conclusions: The 3DTi cage segments with TBR 3 months postoperatively showed significant final segmental stabilization, whereas TBR at 1 year rather than 3 months postoperatively was useful in determining final segmental stabilization for the PEEK cage segments. The timing of TBR, a new osseointegration assessment, were associated with the cage material.
{"title":"Trabecular Bone Remodeling after Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison of the Osseointegration in Three-Dimensional Porous Titanium Cages and Polyether-Ether-Ketone Cages.","authors":"Naoki Segi, Hiroaki Nakashima, Sadayuki Ito, Jun Ouchida, Ryotaro Oishi, Ippei Yamauchi, Yuichi Miyairi, Yoshinori Morita, Tomohiro Matsumoto, Shunsuke Kanbara, Keigo Ito, Shiro Imagama","doi":"10.1177/21925682241255686","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241255686","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Imaging changes in the vertebral body after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) are determined to be trabecular bone remodeling (TBR). This study aimed to investigate the influence of cage materials on TBR and segment stabilization in PLIF by studying image changes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective study reviewing 101 cases who underwent one-level PLIF with three-dimensional porous titanium (3DTi) cages (53 patients) or polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) cages (48 patients). Computed tomography images obtained 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively were examined for TBR, vertebral endplate cyst formation as an instability sign, cage subsidence, and clear zone around pedicle screw (CZPS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences in the TBR-positivity rates were observed between the two cages at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. However, all 3DTi cage segments that were TBR-positive at 3 months postoperatively showed no CZPS and fewer final instability segments than the TBR-negative segments (0% vs 9%). In contrast, although the PEEK cage segments that were TBR-positive at 3 months postoperatively were not associated with future segmental stabilization, those that were TBR-positive at 1 year postoperatively had fewer final instability segments than the TBR-negative segments (0% vs 33%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 3DTi cage segments with TBR 3 months postoperatively showed significant final segmental stabilization, whereas TBR at 1 year rather than 3 months postoperatively was useful in determining final segmental stabilization for the PEEK cage segments. The timing of TBR, a new osseointegration assessment, were associated with the cage material.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"66-75"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571954/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140943382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1177/21925682241229665
Hanbo Chen, Amol J Ghia, Pejman J Maralani, Chetan Bettegowda, Stefano Boriani, Nicolas Dea, Charles G Fisher, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Ziya L Gokaslan, Ilya Laufer, Aron Lazary, Jeremy Reynolds, Jorrit-Jan Verlaan, Laurence D Rhines, Arjun Sahgal
Study design: Narrative review of existing literature.
Objectives: Significant technological advancements in radiotherapy planning and delivery have enabled new radiotherapy techniques for the management of spine tumors. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive summary of these treatment techniques for practicing spine surgeons.
Methods: A narrative review of the existing literature on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and particle beam therapy (PBT) for the treatment of spine tumors was performed. The characteristics, implementation and evidence supporting these strategies in the management of primary spinal neoplasms were summarized.
Results: The clinical effectiveness of SBRT for the control and symptom palliation of metastatic spinal tumors are well demonstrated in multiple clinical trials. Risks such as fracture, radiculopathy and plexopathy exist after spine SBRT, necessitating an individualized approach in a well experienced multidisciplinary setting. SBRT should be considered a key component of a well-rounded treatment plan for metastatic spine tumors in combination with surgery, vertebral augmentation, and drug therapy, where indicated, to achieve optimal patient outcomes. Additionally, PBT and SBRT are also leading to promising results for primary spine tumors, though comparative effectiveness studies and prospective clinical trials are required to establish these modalities more formally as alternatives to conventionally fractionated photon radiotherapy.
Conclusions: SBRT and PBT are emerging as effective and well tolerated treatment options for primary and metastatic spine tumors. Additional investigation is needed to personalize these treatment options and further strengthen these approaches as key components in a multidisciplinary approach to the management of spinal neoplasms.
{"title":"Advanced Radiotherapy Technologies in Spine Tumors: What the Surgeon Needs to Know.","authors":"Hanbo Chen, Amol J Ghia, Pejman J Maralani, Chetan Bettegowda, Stefano Boriani, Nicolas Dea, Charles G Fisher, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Ziya L Gokaslan, Ilya Laufer, Aron Lazary, Jeremy Reynolds, Jorrit-Jan Verlaan, Laurence D Rhines, Arjun Sahgal","doi":"10.1177/21925682241229665","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241229665","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Narrative review of existing literature.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Significant technological advancements in radiotherapy planning and delivery have enabled new radiotherapy techniques for the management of spine tumors. The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive summary of these treatment techniques for practicing spine surgeons.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A narrative review of the existing literature on stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and particle beam therapy (PBT) for the treatment of spine tumors was performed. The characteristics, implementation and evidence supporting these strategies in the management of primary spinal neoplasms were summarized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The clinical effectiveness of SBRT for the control and symptom palliation of metastatic spinal tumors are well demonstrated in multiple clinical trials. Risks such as fracture, radiculopathy and plexopathy exist after spine SBRT, necessitating an individualized approach in a well experienced multidisciplinary setting. SBRT should be considered a key component of a well-rounded treatment plan for metastatic spine tumors in combination with surgery, vertebral augmentation, and drug therapy, where indicated, to achieve optimal patient outcomes. Additionally, PBT and SBRT are also leading to promising results for primary spine tumors, though comparative effectiveness studies and prospective clinical trials are required to establish these modalities more formally as alternatives to conventionally fractionated photon radiotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SBRT and PBT are emerging as effective and well tolerated treatment options for primary and metastatic spine tumors. Additional investigation is needed to personalize these treatment options and further strengthen these approaches as key components in a multidisciplinary approach to the management of spinal neoplasms.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":"15 1_suppl","pages":"104S-119S"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726527/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142970461","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1177/21925682231222012
Sze Kiat Tan, Chetan Bettegowda, Stephen Yip, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence Rhines, Jeremy Reynolds, Aron Lazary, Ilya Laufer, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Nicolas Dea, J J Verlaan, Ziya L Gokaslan, Charles G Fisher, Stefano Boriani, Riccardo Cecchinato, Matthew L Goodwin, C Rory Goodwin, Raphaële Charest-Morin
Study design: Narrative review.
Objectives: This article aims to provide a narrative review of the current state of research for liquid biopsy in spinal tumors and to discuss the potential application of liquid biopsy in the clinical management of patients with spinal tumors.
Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases, and the review was limited to articles of English language. All the relevant articles which were identified to be related to liquid biomarker study in spinal tumors, were studied in full text.
Results: Liquid biopsy has revolutionized the field of precision medicine by guiding personalized clinical management of cancer patients based on the liquid biomarker status. In recent years, more research has been done to investigate its potential utilization in patients with tumors from the spine. Herein, we review the liquid biomarkers that have been proposed in different spine malignancies including chordoma, chondrosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, osteosarcoma, astrocytoma and ependymoma. We also discuss the wide window of opportunity to utilize these liquid biomarkers in diagnosis, treatment response, monitoring, and detection of minimal residual disease in patients with spinal tumors.
Conclusions: Liquid biomarkers, especially blood-derived circulating tumor DNA, has a promising clinical utility as they are disease-specific, minimally invasive, and the procedure is repeatable. Prospective studies with larger populations are needed to fully establish its use in the setting of spinal tumors.
{"title":"Liquid Biopsy for Spinal Tumors: On the Frontiers of Clinical Application.","authors":"Sze Kiat Tan, Chetan Bettegowda, Stephen Yip, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence Rhines, Jeremy Reynolds, Aron Lazary, Ilya Laufer, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Nicolas Dea, J J Verlaan, Ziya L Gokaslan, Charles G Fisher, Stefano Boriani, Riccardo Cecchinato, Matthew L Goodwin, C Rory Goodwin, Raphaële Charest-Morin","doi":"10.1177/21925682231222012","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682231222012","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Narrative review.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This article aims to provide a narrative review of the current state of research for liquid biopsy in spinal tumors and to discuss the potential application of liquid biopsy in the clinical management of patients with spinal tumors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases, and the review was limited to articles of English language. All the relevant articles which were identified to be related to liquid biomarker study in spinal tumors, were studied in full text.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Liquid biopsy has revolutionized the field of precision medicine by guiding personalized clinical management of cancer patients based on the liquid biomarker status. In recent years, more research has been done to investigate its potential utilization in patients with tumors from the spine. Herein, we review the liquid biomarkers that have been proposed in different spine malignancies including chordoma, chondrosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, osteosarcoma, astrocytoma and ependymoma. We also discuss the wide window of opportunity to utilize these liquid biomarkers in diagnosis, treatment response, monitoring, and detection of minimal residual disease in patients with spinal tumors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Liquid biomarkers, especially blood-derived circulating tumor DNA, has a promising clinical utility as they are disease-specific, minimally invasive, and the procedure is repeatable. Prospective studies with larger populations are needed to fully establish its use in the setting of spinal tumors.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":"15 1_suppl","pages":"16S-28S"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726521/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142970467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1177/21925682241237486
Owen P Leary, Aayush Setty, Jung Ho Gong, Rohaid Ali, Jared S Fridley, Charles G Fisher, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence D Rhines, Jeremy J Reynolds, Áron Lazáry, Ilya Laufer, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Nicolas Dea, Jorrit-Jan Verlaan, Chetan Bettegowda, Stefano Boriani, Addisu Mesfin, Alessandro Luzzati, John H Shin, Riccardo Cecchinato, Francis J Hornicek, Matthew L Goodwin, Ziya L Gokaslan
Study design: Narrative Review.
Objective: Contextualized by a narrative review of recent literature, we propose a wound complication prevention and management algorithm for spinal oncology patients. We highlight available strategies and motivate future research to identify optimal and individualized wound management for this population.
Methods: We conducted a search of recent studies (2010-2022) using relevant keywords to identify primary literature in support of current strategies for wound complication prevention and management following spine tumor surgery. When primary literature specific to spine tumor cases was not available, data were extrapolated from studies of other spine surgery populations. Results were compiled into a proposed clinical algorithm to guide practice considering available evidence.
Results: Based on available literature, we recommend individualized stratification of patients according to identifiable risk factors for wound complication and propose several interventions which might be employed preventatively, including intrawound antibiotic administration, negative pressure wound therapy, and primary flap closure of the surgical wound. Of these, the available evidence, weighing possible risks vs benefits, most strongly favors primary flap closure of surgical wounds, particularly for patients with multiple risk factors. A secondary algorithm to guide management of wound complications is also proposed.
Conclusions: Wound complications such as SSI and dehiscence remain a significant source of morbidity following spine tumor surgery. Triaging patients on an individualized basis according to risk factors for complication may aid in selecting appropriate prophylactic strategies to prevent these complications. Future research in this area is still needed to strengthen recommendations.
{"title":"Prevention and Management of Posterior Wound Complications Following Oncologic Spine Surgery: Narrative Review of Available Evidence and Proposed Clinical Decision-Making Algorithm.","authors":"Owen P Leary, Aayush Setty, Jung Ho Gong, Rohaid Ali, Jared S Fridley, Charles G Fisher, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence D Rhines, Jeremy J Reynolds, Áron Lazáry, Ilya Laufer, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Nicolas Dea, Jorrit-Jan Verlaan, Chetan Bettegowda, Stefano Boriani, Addisu Mesfin, Alessandro Luzzati, John H Shin, Riccardo Cecchinato, Francis J Hornicek, Matthew L Goodwin, Ziya L Gokaslan","doi":"10.1177/21925682241237486","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241237486","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Narrative Review.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Contextualized by a narrative review of recent literature, we propose a wound complication prevention and management algorithm for spinal oncology patients. We highlight available strategies and motivate future research to identify optimal and individualized wound management for this population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a search of recent studies (2010-2022) using relevant keywords to identify primary literature in support of current strategies for wound complication prevention and management following spine tumor surgery. When primary literature specific to spine tumor cases was not available, data were extrapolated from studies of other spine surgery populations. Results were compiled into a proposed clinical algorithm to guide practice considering available evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on available literature, we recommend individualized stratification of patients according to identifiable risk factors for wound complication and propose several interventions which might be employed preventatively, including intrawound antibiotic administration, negative pressure wound therapy, and primary flap closure of the surgical wound. Of these, the available evidence, weighing possible risks vs benefits, most strongly favors primary flap closure of surgical wounds, particularly for patients with multiple risk factors. A secondary algorithm to guide management of wound complications is also proposed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Wound complications such as SSI and dehiscence remain a significant source of morbidity following spine tumor surgery. Triaging patients on an individualized basis according to risk factors for complication may aid in selecting appropriate prophylactic strategies to prevent these complications. Future research in this area is still needed to strengthen recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":"15 1_suppl","pages":"143S-156S"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726526/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142970484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-05-13DOI: 10.1177/21925682241255629
Yong Shen, Justin L Reyes, Zeeshan M Sardar
{"title":"Response to Letter to the Editor Regarding: Characteristics of Spinal Morphology According to the \"Current\" and \"Theoretical\" Roussouly Classification Systems in a Diverse, Asymptomatic Cohort: Multi-Ethnic Alignment Normative Study.","authors":"Yong Shen, Justin L Reyes, Zeeshan M Sardar","doi":"10.1177/21925682241255629","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241255629","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"286-287"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571292/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140916034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-06-13DOI: 10.1177/21925682241262691
Michael G Kontakis, Panagiotis Tsagkozis
Study design: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Objective: Scoring systems for metastatic disease of the spine are used to select patients for surgical treatment based on survival estimation, but it is unknown whether they can be used to predict the outcome of surgery. This study aims to investigate the association between two widely used prognostic scores and the neurologic function after surgery.
Methods: Retrospective analysis of 204 patients with thoracolumbar metastases treated with decompressive surgery at Karolinska University Hospital (2001-2020). Modified Bauer and Tokuhashi scores were categorized based on surgical indication, and post-operative neurological function was assessed using the Frankel scale at two different post-surgery intervals.
Results: Modified Bauer scores ≥2 yielded higher late follow-up Frankel scores (3.9 ± 1.1) than scores <2 (3.5 ± 1.1), P = .03. Modified Tokuhashi scores ≥9 correlated with higher Frankel scores (4.5 ± .9) than scores <9 (3.5 ± 1.1), P < .0001. Both scoring systems positively predicted neurological outcomes at late follow-up, with odds ratios of 1.6 (P = .03) for Bauer and 9.2 (P < .0001) for Tokuhashi. However, only Tokuhashi predicted ambulatory function at late follow-up (P < .0001), demonstrating its utility in prognosticating post-surgical mobility.
Conclusion: Higher modified Bauer and Tokuhashi scores were associated with better neurologic function at last follow-up, as well as greater likelihood of being able to walk again. The Tokuhashi score was found to be more accurate than the modified Bauer score in predicting the neurological outcome after surgery.
{"title":"Can Survival Scoring Systems for Spinal Metastases be Used to Predict Postoperative Neurologic Recovery? A Retrospective Study on 204 Patients With Thoracolumbar Metastases Treated at a Tertiary Center.","authors":"Michael G Kontakis, Panagiotis Tsagkozis","doi":"10.1177/21925682241262691","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241262691","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective Cohort Study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Scoring systems for metastatic disease of the spine are used to select patients for surgical treatment based on survival estimation, but it is unknown whether they can be used to predict the outcome of surgery. This study aims to investigate the association between two widely used prognostic scores and the neurologic function after surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective analysis of 204 patients with thoracolumbar metastases treated with decompressive surgery at Karolinska University Hospital (2001-2020). Modified Bauer and Tokuhashi scores were categorized based on surgical indication, and post-operative neurological function was assessed using the Frankel scale at two different post-surgery intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Modified Bauer scores ≥2 yielded higher late follow-up Frankel scores (3.9 ± 1.1) than scores <2 (3.5 ± 1.1), <i>P</i> = .03. Modified Tokuhashi scores ≥9 correlated with higher Frankel scores (4.5 ± .9) than scores <9 (3.5 ± 1.1), <i>P</i> < .0001. Both scoring systems positively predicted neurological outcomes at late follow-up, with odds ratios of 1.6 (<i>P</i> = .03) for Bauer and 9.2 (<i>P</i> < .0001) for Tokuhashi. However, only Tokuhashi predicted ambulatory function at late follow-up (<i>P</i> < .0001), demonstrating its utility in prognosticating post-surgical mobility.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Higher modified Bauer and Tokuhashi scores were associated with better neurologic function at last follow-up, as well as greater likelihood of being able to walk again. The Tokuhashi score was found to be more accurate than the modified Bauer score in predicting the neurological outcome after surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"136-142"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571499/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141316996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1177/21925682241259686
Markian Pahuta, Ilya Laufer, Sheng-Fu Larry Lo, Stefano Boriani, Charles Fisher, Nicolas Dea, Michael H Weber, Dean Chou, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence Rhines, Jeremy Reynolds, Aron Lazary, Alessandro Gasbarrinni, Jorrit-Jan Verlaan, Ziya Gokaslan, Chetan Bettegowda, Mohamed Sarraj, Ori Barzilai
Study design: Systematic Review.
Objectives: Formalized terminology for pain experienced by spine cancer patients is lacking. The common descriptors of spine cancer pain as mechanical or non-mechanical is not exhaustive. Misdiagnosed spinal pain may lead to ineffective treatment recommendations for cancer patients.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review of pain terminology that may be relevant to spinal oncology patients. We provide a comprehensive and unbiased summary of the existing evidence, not limited to the spine surgery literature, and subsequently consolidate these data into a practical, clinically relevant nomenclature for spine oncologists.
Results: Our literature search identified 3515 unique citations. Through title and abstract screening, 3407 citations were excluded, resulting in 54 full-text citations for review. Pain in cancer patients is typically described as nociceptive pain (somatic vs visceral), neurologic pain and treatment related pain.
Conclusions: We consolidate the terminology used in the literature and consolidated into clinically relevant nomenclature of biologic tumor pain, mechanical pain, radicular pain, neuropathic pain, and treatment related pain. This review helps standardize terminology for cancer-related pain which may help clinicians identify pain generators.
{"title":"Defining Spine Cancer Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Proposed Terminology.","authors":"Markian Pahuta, Ilya Laufer, Sheng-Fu Larry Lo, Stefano Boriani, Charles Fisher, Nicolas Dea, Michael H Weber, Dean Chou, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence Rhines, Jeremy Reynolds, Aron Lazary, Alessandro Gasbarrinni, Jorrit-Jan Verlaan, Ziya Gokaslan, Chetan Bettegowda, Mohamed Sarraj, Ori Barzilai","doi":"10.1177/21925682241259686","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241259686","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic Review.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Formalized terminology for pain experienced by spine cancer patients is lacking. The common descriptors of spine cancer pain as mechanical or non-mechanical is not exhaustive. Misdiagnosed spinal pain may lead to ineffective treatment recommendations for cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review of pain terminology that may be relevant to spinal oncology patients. We provide a comprehensive and unbiased summary of the existing evidence, not limited to the spine surgery literature, and subsequently consolidate these data into a practical, clinically relevant nomenclature for spine oncologists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our literature search identified 3515 unique citations. Through title and abstract screening, 3407 citations were excluded, resulting in 54 full-text citations for review. Pain in cancer patients is typically described as nociceptive pain (somatic vs visceral), neurologic pain and treatment related pain.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We consolidate the terminology used in the literature and consolidated into clinically relevant nomenclature of biologic tumor pain, mechanical pain, radicular pain, neuropathic pain, and treatment related pain. This review helps standardize terminology for cancer-related pain which may help clinicians identify pain generators.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":"15 1_suppl","pages":"81S-92S"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726517/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142970462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2023-10-21DOI: 10.1177/21925682231208083
Scott L Zuckerman, Jacob L Goldberg, Meghan Cerpa, Meghana Vulapalli, Mychael W Delgardo, Xena E Flowers, Sandra Leskinen, Mena G Kerolus, Ian A Buchanan, Alex S Ha, K Daniel Riew
Study design: Retrospective, cohort study.
Objectives: Hand function can be difficult to objectively assess perioperatively. In patients undergoing cervical spine surgery by a single-surgeon, we sought to: (1) use a hand dynamometer to report pre/postoperative grip strength, (2) distinguish grip strength changes in patients with radiculopathy-only vs myelopathy, and (3) assess predictors of grip strength improvement.
Methods: Demographic and operative data were collected for patients who underwent surgery 2015-2018. Hand dynamometer readings were pre/postoperatively at three follow-up time periods (0-3 m, 3-6 m, 6-12 m).
Results: 262 patients (mean age of 59 ± 14 years; 37% female) underwent the following operations: ACDF (80%), corpectomy (25%), laminoplasty (19%), and posterior cervical fusion (7%), with 81 (31%) patients undergoing multiple operations in a single anesthetic setting. Radiculopathy-only was seen in 128 (49%) patients, and myelopathy was seen 134 (51%) patients. 110 (42%) had improved grip strength by ≥10-lbs, including 69/128 (54%) in the radiculopathy-only group, and 41/134 (31%) in the myelopathy group. Those most likely to improve grip strength were patients undergoing ACDF (OR 2.53, P = .005). Patients less likely to improve grip strength were older (OR = .97, P = .003) and underwent laminoplasty (OR = .44, 95% CI .23, .85, P = .014). Patients undergoing surgery at the C2/3-C5/6 levels and C6/7-T1/2 levels both experienced improvement during the 0-3-month time range (C2-5: P = .035, C6-T2: P = .015), but only lower cervical patients experienced improvement in the 3-6-month interval (P = .030).
Conclusions: Grip strength significantly improved in 42% of patients. Patients with radiculopathy were more likely to improve than those with myelopathy. Patients undergoing surgery from the C2/3-C5/6 levels and the C6/7-T1/2 levels both significantly improved grip strength at 3-month postoperatively.
{"title":"Do Grip Strength Dynamometer Readings Improve After Cervical Spine Surgery?","authors":"Scott L Zuckerman, Jacob L Goldberg, Meghan Cerpa, Meghana Vulapalli, Mychael W Delgardo, Xena E Flowers, Sandra Leskinen, Mena G Kerolus, Ian A Buchanan, Alex S Ha, K Daniel Riew","doi":"10.1177/21925682231208083","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682231208083","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective, cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Hand function can be difficult to objectively assess perioperatively. In patients undergoing cervical spine surgery by a single-surgeon, we sought to: (1) use a hand dynamometer to report pre/postoperative grip strength, (2) distinguish grip strength changes in patients with radiculopathy-only vs myelopathy, and (3) assess predictors of grip strength improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Demographic and operative data were collected for patients who underwent surgery 2015-2018. Hand dynamometer readings were pre/postoperatively at three follow-up time periods (0-3 m, 3-6 m, 6-12 m).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>262 patients (mean age of 59 ± 14 years; 37% female) underwent the following operations: ACDF (80%), corpectomy (25%), laminoplasty (19%), and posterior cervical fusion (7%), with 81 (31%) patients undergoing multiple operations in a single anesthetic setting. Radiculopathy-only was seen in 128 (49%) patients, and myelopathy was seen 134 (51%) patients. 110 (42%) had improved grip strength by ≥10-lbs, including 69/128 (54%) in the radiculopathy-only group, and 41/134 (31%) in the myelopathy group. Those most likely to improve grip strength were patients undergoing ACDF (OR 2.53, <i>P</i> = .005). Patients less likely to improve grip strength were older (OR = .97, <i>P</i> = .003) and underwent laminoplasty (OR = .44, 95% CI .23, .85, <i>P</i> = .014). Patients undergoing surgery at the C2/3-C5/6 levels and C6/7-T1/2 levels both experienced improvement during the 0-3-month time range (C2-5: <i>P</i> = .035, C6-T2: <i>P</i> = .015), but only lower cervical patients experienced improvement in the 3-6-month interval (<i>P</i> = .030).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Grip strength significantly improved in 42% of patients. Patients with radiculopathy were more likely to improve than those with myelopathy. Patients undergoing surgery from the C2/3-C5/6 levels and the C6/7-T1/2 levels both significantly improved grip strength at 3-month postoperatively.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"76-83"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11696972/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49676677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-05-13DOI: 10.1177/21925682241255610
Féthi Laouissat, Sonia Ramos-Pascual, Mo Saffarini, Ankitha Kumble, Pierre Roussouly
{"title":"Letter to the Editor Regarding \"Characteristics of Spinal Morphology According to the \"Current\" and \"Theoretical\" Roussouly Classification Systems in a Diverse, Asymptomatic Cohort: Multi-Ethnic Alignment Normative Study\".","authors":"Féthi Laouissat, Sonia Ramos-Pascual, Mo Saffarini, Ankitha Kumble, Pierre Roussouly","doi":"10.1177/21925682241255610","DOIUrl":"10.1177/21925682241255610","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"284-285"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572018/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140916027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}