Journal of neurosurgery. Spine最新文献

Objective: Many studies have compared outcomes following anterior and posterior cervical fusion, yet the differences in the impacts of perioperative complications on outcomes have not been well studied. This study aimed to assess the differences in the effects of 30-day perioperative complications on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after multilevel anterior versus posterior cervical fusion.

Methods: Adult patients who underwent anterior or posterior cervical fusion at three or more levels between 2014 and 2020 were analyzed. Each group was subdivided based on the occurrence and severity of perioperative complication: no complication versus minor complication versus major complication. The study primarily compared PROMs and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) within and between the groups.

Results: A total of 146 anterior (102 with no complications, 36 with minor complications, 8 with major complications) and 55 posterior (36 with no complications, 13 with minor complications, 6 with major complications) cervical fusion cases were analyzed. Within the anterior or posterior group, there were no significant differences in the PROM change or proportions of patients achieving the MCID. In comparing the anterior group with the posterior group, anterior patients without complications had better improvement in the 3-month Neck Disability Index (coefficient 11.2, p = 0.019), with higher odds of achieving the MCID for the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score at 3 months (OR 2.0, p = 0.039). Otherwise, there were no significant differences in the PROM change or proportions of patients achieving the MCID in subsets of anterior or posterior patients with minor or major complications. Furthermore, patients with major complications had higher early readmission rates regardless of the surgical approach. Major complications were also associated with longer and increased rates of intensive care unit stays after posterior fusion compared with anterior fusion.

Conclusions: This study suggests that the severity of perioperative complications following anterior or posterior cervical fusion did not predict changes in PROMs or achievement of MCIDs in the anterior or posterior group. Also, PROMs may not fully differentiate the full extent of the impact of perioperative complications following anterior versus posterior cervical fusion. Otherwise, in subsets of patients without complications, anterior compared with posterior patients had improved Neck Disability Index scores at 3 months, with a significant proportion of patients achieving the MCID for the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score at 3 months.

Objective: The escalating incidence of de novo spinal infections poses a substantial neurological impact on patients. This has prompted a growing interest in discerning which patients would derive greater benefit from medical as opposed to surgical management of these occurrences. The authors assessed the predictive applicability of the Spinal Infection Treatment Evaluation (SITE) score in discerning between surgical intervention and medical management. This assessment represents the first external validation of the SITE score conducted in a cohort of patients with de novo spinal infections.

Methods: A comprehensive retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients diagnosed with de novo spinal infections (osteomyelitis, discitis, or epidural abscess) at a tertiary center between July 1, 2004, and March 31, 2023. All necessary data for calculating the SITE score were collected for each patient. Surgical intervention was advised for patients scoring 0-8 or exhibiting acute plegia or bladder or bowel dysfunction and optional for those scoring 9-12; medical treatment was recommended for patients scoring 13-15. Predictability of the score was scrutinized using the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Results: Among 194 identified patients, the mean ± SD age was 65.96 ± 13.66 years and 58% were men. Stratification of patients based on medical and surgical management revealed that 27% underwent medical treatment alone and 73% required surgical intervention. In the medical group, 72.2% of patients were neurologically intact compared to 50% in the surgical group (p = 0.006). Surgically managed patients exhibited a higher incidence of spinal stenosis with impingement of the spinal cord, with or without deformity, when compared to nonsurgical patients (38.6% vs 22.2%, p = 0.04). Additionally, surgically managed patients had a lower mean ± SD SITE score (7.16 ± 2.39 vs 8.2 ± 2.33, p < 0.005) and were more likely to have multilevel infection than patients who underwent medical management (59.3% vs 33.3%, p < 0.001). When patients were categorized on the basis of SITE score, the sensitivity of the score (using a threshold of 8) to predict surgical management was 68.6% and specificity was 59.3%. According to ROC curve, the SITE score exhibited an AUC of 0.66.

Conclusions: Validation of the SITE score could not accurately predict medical versus surgical management in a tertiary center cohort of patients with de novo spinal infections. Further multicenter studies incorporating additional variables and larger cohorts are imperative to develop an optimal predictive tool.

Objective: Outpatient spine surgery could reduce hospital costs and improve patient outcomes. Outpatient lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) can be performed for select patients. This study identified and compared the demographic, clinical, and surgical characteristics of patients who underwent outpatient versus inpatient single-level LLIF.

Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent first-time single-level LLIF at a single institution performed by the same surgeon from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2022. Demographic characteristics, including age, sex, BMI, and medical comorbidities, were collected. Surgical factors, such as level of surgery, operative duration, and estimated blood loss, were also collected. Length of stay and 30-day readmission were the primary outcomes of interest. Patients discharged on the day of surgery or the following day were considered to be in the outpatient group. ANOVA and chi-square tests were performed to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Univariate logistic regression was used to examine the correlation between baseline demographic and surgical variables and outpatient surgery. If a variable significantly correlated with outpatient surgery on univariate analysis, it was subsequently used in multivariate logistic regression.

Results: A total of 107 patients underwent first-time single-level LLIF, and 48 (44.9%) did not have posterior instrumentation. Fifty-three (49.5%) patients were women. The median age and BMI were 66.3 years and 28.9, respectively. The mean length of stay was 1 day (range 0-4 days), with 71 (66.4%) of 107 single-level LLIFs managed on an outpatient basis. There were no readmissions within 30 days. Patients in the outpatient group were more likely than patients in the inpatient group to be male (59% [42/71] vs 25% [9/36], p = 0.002), have a low LACE (risk criteria based on length of stay, acuity of the admission, comorbidity of the patient, and emergency department use within 6 months before admission) readmission index (63% [45/71] vs 28% [10/36], p < 0.001), and have a stand-alone construct (62% [44/71] vs 11% [4/36], p < 0.001). The outpatient cohort also had a shorter mean operative duration (104.4 vs 175.5 minutes, p < 0.001) and lower mean estimated blood loss (20 vs 100 mL, p < 0.001). There was no difference in age between the groups. Factors that remained significant on multivariate logistic regression were male sex (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.53; p = 0.004), lower LACE readmission index (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.25; p < 0.001), and stand-alone construct (OR 8.17, 95% CI 1.49-44.74; p = 0.02).

Conclusions: Multiple baseline and surgical characteristics were more common in the outpatient setting. With appropriate patient selection, single-level LLIF can be achieved on an outpatient basis.

Objective: Instrumentation surgery in combination with radiotherapy (RT) is one of the key management strategies for patients with spinal metastases. However, the use of materials can affect the RT dose delivered to the tumor site and surrounding tissues, as well as hinder optimal postoperative tumor evaluation. The association of the preoperative Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) with the need for spinal stabilization and life expectancy are unclear. This multicenter prospective study aimed to investigate the current situation and make recommendations regarding the choice of surgical procedure based on the preoperative SINS and prospectively collected postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

Methods: The study prospectively included 317 patients with spinal metastases who underwent palliative surgery and had a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. The survey items included SINS, patient background, and clinical data including surgical procedure, history of RT, prognosis, and PROs (i.e., the visual analog scale score, Faces Scale, Barthel Index, Vitality Index, and 5-level EQ-5D health survey) at baseline, and at 1 and 6 months after surgery. The association of preoperative SINS with life expectancy, PROs, and surgical procedures was examined using statistical analysis.

Results: Preoperative SINS (three categories) had no association with life expectancy. All PROs evaluated in the study improved up to 6 months after surgery. Pain categories (visual analog scale score and/or Faces Scale) at baseline were correlated with preoperative SINS. As many as 90.9% of enrolled patients underwent fusion surgery, and even in SINS 0-6 cases, implants were used in 64.3% of patients. Postoperative RT was performed in 42.9% of the patients. However, prospective assessments of PROs showed no significant difference between surgical procedures (with and without fusion) in patients with SINS 0-9. In addition, no cases required conversion from noninstrumentation surgery to fusion surgery.

Conclusions: Although the choice of surgical procedure should be made on a case-by-case basis on the NOMS (neurological, oncological, mechanical, and systemic) framework, careful consideration is required to determine whether spinal stabilization is needed in patients with SINS ≤ 9, considering the patient's background and the plan for postoperative adjuvant therapy.

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared minimally invasive surgery (MIS) to open surgery for treatment of spinal metastases with respect to perioperative outcomes. Few studies have systemically assessed the body of evidence on this topic.

Methods: A systematic review of EMBASE and PubMed from database inception to December 2023 was performed to identify studies comparing MIS with open surgery for the treatment of spine metastases. Nine outcomes were collected: estimated blood loss (EBL), operative time, hospital length of stay (LOS), risk of revision, risk of neurological deterioration, likelihood of receiving postoperative radiation therapy, time to radiation therapy, time to chemotherapy, and treatment of pain measured through patient-reported visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Meta regression was used to estimate adjusted mean differences (aMDs) and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for outcomes. Certainty of evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach.

Results: There were 34 eligible studies including 1656 patients with spinal metastases; 904 (54.6%) patients were treated with MIS and 752 (45.4%) were treated with open surgery. MIS was associated with significantly less blood loss (aMD -602 mL, 95% CI -1204 to -0.2 mL; I2 = 97%) with a moderate certainty of evidence. MIS was found to be noninferior with respect to operative time (aMD -2.6 minutes, 95% CI -53.3 to 48.1 minutes; I2 = 88%), risk of revision (aOR 0.9, 95% CI 0.8-1.1; I2 < 0.01), risk of neurological deterioration (aOR 0.9, 95% CI 0.8-1.0; I2 < 0.01), likelihood of postoperative radiation therapy (aOR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7-1.4; I2 < 0.01), and postoperative VAS score (aMD -0.6, 95% CI -1.5 to 0.4; I2 = 52%) with low certainty of evidence. MIS was associated with significantly shorter time to chemotherapy (MD -0.9 weeks, 95% CI -1.9 to -0.01 weeks; I2 = 22%), with very low certainty of evidence. Inferences for LOS and time to radiation were indeterminate; however, we found a trend toward earlier radiation therapy with MIS that was significant in the subgroup of patients treated with decompression and fusion.

Conclusions: Treatment with MIS compared with open surgery was associated with reduced EBL, shorter time to chemotherapy, similar operative time, and similar reductions in postoperative pain. Limitations were largely due to heterogeneity across studies. Future research among subgroups is very likely to improve certainty in the comparative effect estimates.

Objective: The objective of this study was to identify baseline patient and surgical factors predictive of optimal outcomes in staged versus same-day combined-approach surgery.

Methods: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with baseline and perioperative (by 6 weeks) data were stratified based on single-stage (same-day) or multistage (staged) surgery, excluding planned multiple hospitalizations. Means comparison analyses were used to assess baseline demographic, radiographic, and surgical differences between cohorts. Backstep logistic regression and conditional inference tree analysis were used to identify variable thresholds associated with study-specific definitions of an optimal outcome in each cohort, defined as no intraoperative or surgery-related in-hospital adverse event.

Results: There were 439 patients with complex ASD in the dataset (mean age 64.0 ± 9.3 years, 68% female, mean BMI 28.7 ± 5.5 kg/m2). Overall, 58.8% of patients were in the same-day group, while 41.2% were in the staged group. Demographically, cohorts were not significantly different (p > 0.05), but staged patients were more frail per total Edmonton Frail Scale score (p = 0.043). Staged patients also reported greater numeric rating scale scores for back pain than same-day patients (p = 0.002). Cohorts were comparable in magnitude of planned correction of C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, and T4-12 kyphosis (all p > 0.05). Controlling for baseline age, frailty, and number of levels fused, staged patients reported significantly higher PROMIS Discretionary Social Activities scores by 6 weeks (p = 0.029). Radiographic outcomes by 6 weeks were comparable between cohorts, in terms of both magnitude of change from baseline and overall result (all p > 0.05). Same-day patients were significantly more likely to experience in-hospital complications (p = 0.013). When considering frailty thresholds for staging, only a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤ 1.0 was associated with optimal outcome in same-day patients, while Edmonton Frail Scale score ≥ 7 (p = 0.036), ≥ 9 levels fused (p = 0.016), and baseline PI-LL mismatch ≥ 15.3° (p = 0.028) were associated with optimal outcome for staged patients. Yet, staging alone was not significantly associated with an optimal outcome perioperatively (p = 0.056).

Conclusions: While staged and same-day combined-approach surgeries yield comparable radiographic and patient-reported outcomes, certain subsets of complex ASD patients may benefit from staged surgery despite the invariably increased hospital length of stay. Individuals with increased frailty, moderate to severe PI-LL mismatch, and increased anticipated number of levels fused may experience a lower risk of perioperative adverse events if they undergo a staged procedure. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT04194138 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Objective: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of fractional curve (FC) severity on curve progression and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing adult idiopathic scoliosis (AdIS) correction.

Methods: Patients with AdIS who had preoperative coronal plane deformity and who had undergone thoracolumbar fusion with a lowermost instrumented vertebra (LIV) between L1 and L4 were included. Patients were stratified by 6-week postoperative FC severity (small FC, ≤ 40th percentile, large FC, ≥ 60th percentile of the entire cohort; calculated as the Cobb angle between LIV and S1) and age groups. Preoperative to 2-year postoperative changes in FC were evaluated using Student t-tests. Demographics, spinopelvic alignment, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and complications were compared using chi-square tests for categorical variables and Student t-tests for quantitative variables. Multivariate regression analyses, accounting for age, sex, frailty, and 6-week postoperative LIV, were also performed when feasible to assess the impact of FC on 2-year postoperative outcomes.

Results: In total, 86 patients, with 34 in the group with small FCs and 34 in the group with large FCs, were examined (18 were in the group with medium FC). The mean age (36.4 years for those with small FCs vs 36.0 years for those with large FCs, p > 0.05) was similar. Preoperatively, spinopelvic parameters and PROMs were comparable (p > 0.05). Two years postoperatively, higher postoperative FC was associated with larger thoracolumbar deformity (i.e., higher thoracolumbar/lumbar/lumbosacral Cobb angles) and lower perceived lumbar stiffness (p < 0.05); however, other PROMs and complications, including revisions, were comparable (p > 0.05). Bidirectional change in postoperative FC was associated with a lower C7 pelvic angle and lower C7 plumb line (R2 = -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.00, p = 0.050). Across all patients, the mean FC improved from baseline to 6 weeks postoperatively (from 18.1° to 6.5°, p < 0.001) but changed minimally from 6 weeks to 2 years postoperatively (from 6.5° to 6.5°, p = 0.942). After stratification, the cohort with small FCs exhibited a relative increase (from 1.6° to 3.5°, p < 0.001), whereas the cohort with large FCs noted a nonsignificant change (from 11.9° to 9.8°, p = 0.121) in FC over time.

Conclusions: Following surgery for AdIS, larger residual lumbosacral FCs were not correlated with adverse events or poor outcomes at 2 years postoperatively. FCs may improve or worsen over time to drive improvement in global coronal balance surgery, but are not associated with adverse outcomes or reoperation during the first 2 years after surgery.

Objective: Surgical correction of adult spinal deformity (ASD) is associated with a high rate of hardware complication that can be challenging to predict. Hardware integrity and alignment after surgery are typically followed with standing radiography, where pedicle screw loosening may be incidentally identified but the clinical significance of which is often unclear. This study aimed to identify the incidence and implications of pedicle screw loosening at the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) after surgical correction of ASD.

Methods: A single-institution retrospective analysis was performed on a cohort of 217 patients who underwent long-segment fusion with pelvic fixation for correction of ASD between September 2013 and November 2021. Cases with a minimum 1-year follow-up were included. UIV pedicle screws were graded on radiographs for evidence of loosening with a 0- to 3-point scale: 0, no loosening; 1, lucency within screw threads; 2, lucency around screw threads; and 3, screw dislodgment/backout. Need for hardware revision surgery was assessed as the primary outcome. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMIS and Oswestry Disability Index scores) were assessed as secondary outcomes among the patients with available scores.

Results: Low-grade UIV screw loosening (grade 1) was identified in 37 patients (17.1%), and high-grade UIV loosening (grade 2 or 3) was identified in 23 patients (10.6%). Low-grade UIV loosening was not associated with eventual need for hardware revision (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.17-1.61, p = 0.258); however, high-grade loosening was associated with increased odds of hardware revision (OR 5.17, 95% CI 1.74-15.36, p = 0.003), including specifically surgery for correction of proximal junctional kyphosis (OR 5.73, 95% CI 1.27-25.95, p = 0.024). Among patients with PROMIS T-scores, those requiring hardware revision reported worse Pain Interference (65.0 ± 5.1 vs 59.6 ± 7.7, p = 0.001) and Physical Function (33.3 ± 5.6 vs 37.4 ± 7.4; p = 0.011). Patients with high-grade UIV loosening reported higher Oswestry Disability Index scores than those without high-grade loosening (grade 0 or 1), although this failed to reach statistical significance (44.0 ± 8.5 vs 33.7 ± 18.5, p = 0.101).

Conclusions: Grade 1 UIV pedicle screw loosening may represent a benign incidental finding, whereas high-grade loosening is associated with significantly increased odds of hardware revision surgery. High-grade loosening may also be associated with worse patient-reported disability. The authors' findings suggest that while low-grade UIV loosening may often be managed expectantly, identification of high-grade UIV pedicle screw loosening on follow-up imaging warrants increased attention and continued surveillance.

Objective: Spinal meningioma (SM) is a pathology with an estimated incidence of nearly 1000 diagnoses per year in the United States and presents in 20% of patients with neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2). This multi-institutional retrospective cohort study aimed to assess clinical outcomes for patients with SM who underwent surgery between 1998 and 2020 with stratification by NF2 mutation status.

Methods: Medical records were reviewed retrospectively to collect data on patient demographics, clinical presentation, tumor characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. Analyses were done to determine radiographic predictors of gross-total resection (GTR) and tumor recurrence, to assess radiographic characteristics of NF2-associated tumors, and to determine progression-free survival between groups.

Results: A total of 166 patients who received surgery for SM during the study period were included, of whom 133 were women (80%). Fifteen (9%) patients had a concurrent NF2 diagnosis. The mean age at surgery was 58 (SD 18) years. The mean presenting Karnofsky Performance Status score was 76 (SD 11), and the most common presenting symptoms were sensation changes (60%) and weakness (59%). Most tumors were in the thoracic spine (72%). GTR was achieved in 154 cases (93%). Eight patients with subtotal resection were treated with radiation therapy, and none received chemotherapy. Eighteen patients (11%) experienced radiographic recurrence of disease following surgery, with a mean time to recurrence of 4.2 years. NF2 patients were diagnosed at a significantly earlier mean age (33.3 [SD 15.4] years) compared with other patients. NF2 patients experienced progression at a significantly higher rate than other patients (40%), and in less time (mean 2.8 [SD 3.7] years). Radiographic characteristics, including tumor volume, T2 cord edema, dural tail sign, and calcification, were similar between NF2 and non-NF2 patients, between patients who underwent gross-total versus subtotal resection, and between patients who experienced tumor recurrence and those who did not.

Conclusions: In this study of 166 surgically treated patients with SM, patients with NF2 presented earlier, experienced earlier progression, and experienced progression more frequently compared with those without NF2. Radiographic characteristics of tumors were relatively consistent between groups. While idiopathic SMs remain a relatively benign and highly manageable disease, considering tumor molecular characteristics and broader clinical history is paramount in providing efficacious and individualized patient care.