Pub Date : 2024-07-26DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24187
Chul-Ho Kim, Dong-Ho Lee, Chang Ju Hwang, Jae Hwan Cho, Sehan Park
Objective: Nonunion and significant subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) are associated with poor clinical outcomes, which occasionally lead to revision surgery. Allograft and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used interbody spacer devices for ACDF. Although studies have been conducted to compare the efficacies of these two interbody materials, the question remains regarding the superiority of one over the other. Therefore, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation rates after ACDF using allograft and PEEK cages as interbody devices.
Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors systematically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published prior to November 2023 that compared the efficacy and safety of allograft and PEEK cages for ACDF. A pooled analysis was designed to identify differences in nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation rates between the two interbody devices.
Results: Ten studies involving 1462 patients (allograft, 852 patients; PEEK cage, 610 patients) were included. The pooled analysis demonstrated that allograft had a significantly lower rate of nonunion compared to that of PEEK cages (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.79; p = 0.01). Furthermore, the reoperation rate due to nonunion was significantly higher with PEEK cages compared to that with allograft (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.71; p < 0.01), whereas the reoperation rate due to overall causes did not display significant results (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.11-1.29; p = 0.12). The incidence of significant subsidence (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.28-1.55; p = 0.34) and the mean amount of subsidence (standard mean difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.47; p = 0.90) did not demonstrate significant differences between allograft and PEEK cages.
Conclusions: Overall, the current meta-analysis suggests the advantages of allograft over PEEK cages used for ACDF, due to an enhanced fusion rate and minimized revision risk, with no increase in the risk of subsidence.
目的:颈椎前路椎间盘切除和融合术(ACDF)后的不愈合和明显下沉与不良的临床疗效有关,有时会导致翻修手术。同种异体移植和聚醚醚酮(PEEK)保持架是 ACDF 最常用的两种椎间隔装置。虽然已有研究对这两种椎体间架材料的功效进行了比较,但关于其中一种材料优于另一种材料的问题仍然存在。因此,作者进行了一项系统性回顾和荟萃分析,比较了使用同种异体移植材料和 PEEK 骨架作为椎体间设备进行 ACDF 后的不愈合率、下沉率和再手术率:在这项系统性综述和荟萃分析中,作者系统地检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库中2023年11月之前发表的、比较同种异体移植和PEEK保持架用于ACDF的有效性和安全性的研究。我们设计了一项汇总分析,以确定两种椎间孔镜装置在不愈合率、下沉率和再次手术率方面的差异:结果:共纳入了 10 项研究,涉及 1462 名患者(异体移植物,852 名患者;PEEK 骨架,610 名患者)。汇总分析表明,与 PEEK 保持架相比,同种异体移植的不愈合率明显较低(OR 0.33,95% CI 0.14-0.79;P = 0.01)。此外,与同种异体骨移植相比,PEEK 骨架因骨不连导致的再手术率明显更高(OR 0.28,95% CI 0.11-0.71;P < 0.01),而因整体原因导致的再手术率则没有明显结果(OR 0.38,95% CI 0.11-1.29;P = 0.12)。明显下沉的发生率(OR 0.66,95% CI 0.28-1.55;P = 0.34)和平均下沉量(标准平均差 0.03,95% CI -0.42-0.47;P = 0.90)在同种异体移植和 PEEK 骨架之间没有显示出显著差异:总体而言,当前的荟萃分析表明,在 ACDF 中使用同种异体移植比使用 PEEK 骨架更有优势,因为同种异体移植可提高融合率,最大限度地降低翻修风险,同时不会增加下沉风险。
{"title":"Which interbody device minimized nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing allograft versus polyetheretherketone cage.","authors":"Chul-Ho Kim, Dong-Ho Lee, Chang Ju Hwang, Jae Hwan Cho, Sehan Park","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24187","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24187","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Nonunion and significant subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) are associated with poor clinical outcomes, which occasionally lead to revision surgery. Allograft and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used interbody spacer devices for ACDF. Although studies have been conducted to compare the efficacies of these two interbody materials, the question remains regarding the superiority of one over the other. Therefore, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation rates after ACDF using allograft and PEEK cages as interbody devices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors systematically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published prior to November 2023 that compared the efficacy and safety of allograft and PEEK cages for ACDF. A pooled analysis was designed to identify differences in nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation rates between the two interbody devices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies involving 1462 patients (allograft, 852 patients; PEEK cage, 610 patients) were included. The pooled analysis demonstrated that allograft had a significantly lower rate of nonunion compared to that of PEEK cages (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.79; p = 0.01). Furthermore, the reoperation rate due to nonunion was significantly higher with PEEK cages compared to that with allograft (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.71; p < 0.01), whereas the reoperation rate due to overall causes did not display significant results (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.11-1.29; p = 0.12). The incidence of significant subsidence (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.28-1.55; p = 0.34) and the mean amount of subsidence (standard mean difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.47; p = 0.90) did not demonstrate significant differences between allograft and PEEK cages.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, the current meta-analysis suggests the advantages of allograft over PEEK cages used for ACDF, due to an enhanced fusion rate and minimized revision risk, with no increase in the risk of subsidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141766372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-26Print Date: 2024-11-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24107
Justin K Zhang, Salim Yakdan, Muhammad I Kaleem, Saad Javeed, Jacob K Greenberg, Kathleen S Botterbush, Braeden Benedict, Martin Reis, Natasha Hongsermeier-Graves, Spencer Twitchell, Brandon Sherrod, Marcus S Mazur, Mark A Mahan, Andrew T Dailey, Erica F Bisson, Sheng-Kwei Song, Wilson Z Ray
Objective: A major shortcoming in optimizing care for patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is the lack of robust quantitative imaging tools offered by conventional MRI. Advanced MRI modalities, such as diffusion MRI (dMRI), including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and diffusion basis spectrum imaging (DBSI), may help address this limitation by providing granular evaluations of spinal cord microstructure.
Methods: Forty-seven patients with CSM underwent comprehensive clinical assessments and dMRI, followed by DTI and DBSI modeling. Conventional MRI metrics included 10 total qualitative and quantitative assessments of spinal cord compression in both the sagittal and axial planes. The dMRI metrics included 12 unique measures including anisotropic tensors, reflecting axonal diffusion, and isotropic tensors, describing extraaxonal diffusion. The primary outcome was the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score measured at 2 years postoperatively. Extreme gradient boosting-supervised classification algorithms were used to classify patients into disease groups and to prognosticate surgical outcomes at 2-year follow-up.
Results: Forty-seven patients with CSM, including 24 (51%) with a mild mJOA score, 12 (26%) with a moderate mJOA score, and 11 (23%) with a severe mJOA score, as well as 21 control subjects were included. In the classification task, the traditional MRI metrics correctly assigned patients to healthy control versus mild CSM versus moderate/severe CSM cohorts, with an accuracy of 0.647 (95% CI 0.64-0.65). In comparison, the DTI model performed with an accuracy of 0.52 (95% CI 0.51-0.52) and the DBSI model's accuracy was 0.81 (95% CI 0.808-0.814). In the prognostication task, the traditional MRI metrics correctly predicted patients with CSM who improved at 2-year follow-up on the basis of change in mJOA, with an accuracy of 0.58 (95% CI 0.57-0.58). In comparison, the DTI model performed with an accuracy of 0.62 (95% CI 0.61-0.62) and the DBSI model had an accuracy of 0.72 (95% CI 0.718-0.73).
Conclusions: Conventional MRI is a powerful tool to assess structural abnormality in CSM but is inherently limited in its ability to characterize spinal cord tissue injury. The results of this study demonstrate that advanced imaging techniques, namely DBSI-derived metrics from dMRI, provide granular assessments of spinal cord microstructure that can offer better diagnostic and prognostic utility.
{"title":"Spinal cord metrics derived from diffusion MRI: improvement in prognostication in cervical spondylotic myelopathy compared with conventional MRI.","authors":"Justin K Zhang, Salim Yakdan, Muhammad I Kaleem, Saad Javeed, Jacob K Greenberg, Kathleen S Botterbush, Braeden Benedict, Martin Reis, Natasha Hongsermeier-Graves, Spencer Twitchell, Brandon Sherrod, Marcus S Mazur, Mark A Mahan, Andrew T Dailey, Erica F Bisson, Sheng-Kwei Song, Wilson Z Ray","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24107","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24107","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>A major shortcoming in optimizing care for patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is the lack of robust quantitative imaging tools offered by conventional MRI. Advanced MRI modalities, such as diffusion MRI (dMRI), including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and diffusion basis spectrum imaging (DBSI), may help address this limitation by providing granular evaluations of spinal cord microstructure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-seven patients with CSM underwent comprehensive clinical assessments and dMRI, followed by DTI and DBSI modeling. Conventional MRI metrics included 10 total qualitative and quantitative assessments of spinal cord compression in both the sagittal and axial planes. The dMRI metrics included 12 unique measures including anisotropic tensors, reflecting axonal diffusion, and isotropic tensors, describing extraaxonal diffusion. The primary outcome was the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score measured at 2 years postoperatively. Extreme gradient boosting-supervised classification algorithms were used to classify patients into disease groups and to prognosticate surgical outcomes at 2-year follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-seven patients with CSM, including 24 (51%) with a mild mJOA score, 12 (26%) with a moderate mJOA score, and 11 (23%) with a severe mJOA score, as well as 21 control subjects were included. In the classification task, the traditional MRI metrics correctly assigned patients to healthy control versus mild CSM versus moderate/severe CSM cohorts, with an accuracy of 0.647 (95% CI 0.64-0.65). In comparison, the DTI model performed with an accuracy of 0.52 (95% CI 0.51-0.52) and the DBSI model's accuracy was 0.81 (95% CI 0.808-0.814). In the prognostication task, the traditional MRI metrics correctly predicted patients with CSM who improved at 2-year follow-up on the basis of change in mJOA, with an accuracy of 0.58 (95% CI 0.57-0.58). In comparison, the DTI model performed with an accuracy of 0.62 (95% CI 0.61-0.62) and the DBSI model had an accuracy of 0.72 (95% CI 0.718-0.73).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Conventional MRI is a powerful tool to assess structural abnormality in CSM but is inherently limited in its ability to characterize spinal cord tissue injury. The results of this study demonstrate that advanced imaging techniques, namely DBSI-derived metrics from dMRI, provide granular assessments of spinal cord microstructure that can offer better diagnostic and prognostic utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141766371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-19Print Date: 2024-11-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24282
Avani S Vaishnav, Cole Kwas, Jung Kee Mok, Kasra Araghi, Nishtha Singh, Olivia Tuma, Maximilian Korsun, Chad Z Simon, Tomoyuki Asada, Eric Mai, Joshua Zhang, Myles Allen, Eric Kim, Annika Heuer, Sravisht Iyer, Sheeraz Qureshi
Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between patient-perceived changes in health and commonly utilized patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in lumbar spine surgery.
Methods: This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data on consecutive patients who underwent lumbar microdiscectomy, lumbar decompression, or lumbar fusion at a single academic institution from 2017 to 2023. Correlation between the global rating of change (GRC) questionnaire, a 5-item Likert scale (much better, slightly better, about the same, slightly worse, and much worse), and PROMs (Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale for back and leg pain, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary, and PROMIS physical function) was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients.
Results: A total of 1871 patients (397 microdiscectomies, 965 decompressions, and 509 fusions) were included. A majority of patients in each group rated their lumbar condition as much better at each postoperative time point compared with preoperatively and reported improved health status at each postoperative time point compared with the previous follow-up visit. Statistically significant but weak to moderate correlations were found between GRC and change in PROM scores from the preoperative time point. Correlation between GRC and change in PROM scores from the prior visit showed some statistically significant correlations, but the strengths ranged from very weak to weak.
Conclusions: A majority of patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy, decompression, or fusion endorsed notable improvements in health status in the early postoperative period and continued to improve at late follow-up. However, commonly used PROMs demonstrated very weak to moderate correlations with patient-perceived changes in overall lumbar spine-related health status as determined by GRC. Therefore, currently used PROMs may not be as sensitive at detecting these changes or may not be adequately reflecting changes in health conditions that are meaningful to patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery.
{"title":"Discrepancy between global- and disease-specific outcome measures following lumbar spine surgery.","authors":"Avani S Vaishnav, Cole Kwas, Jung Kee Mok, Kasra Araghi, Nishtha Singh, Olivia Tuma, Maximilian Korsun, Chad Z Simon, Tomoyuki Asada, Eric Mai, Joshua Zhang, Myles Allen, Eric Kim, Annika Heuer, Sravisht Iyer, Sheeraz Qureshi","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24282","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24282","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between patient-perceived changes in health and commonly utilized patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in lumbar spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data on consecutive patients who underwent lumbar microdiscectomy, lumbar decompression, or lumbar fusion at a single academic institution from 2017 to 2023. Correlation between the global rating of change (GRC) questionnaire, a 5-item Likert scale (much better, slightly better, about the same, slightly worse, and much worse), and PROMs (Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale for back and leg pain, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary, and PROMIS physical function) was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1871 patients (397 microdiscectomies, 965 decompressions, and 509 fusions) were included. A majority of patients in each group rated their lumbar condition as much better at each postoperative time point compared with preoperatively and reported improved health status at each postoperative time point compared with the previous follow-up visit. Statistically significant but weak to moderate correlations were found between GRC and change in PROM scores from the preoperative time point. Correlation between GRC and change in PROM scores from the prior visit showed some statistically significant correlations, but the strengths ranged from very weak to weak.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A majority of patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy, decompression, or fusion endorsed notable improvements in health status in the early postoperative period and continued to improve at late follow-up. However, commonly used PROMs demonstrated very weak to moderate correlations with patient-perceived changes in overall lumbar spine-related health status as determined by GRC. Therefore, currently used PROMs may not be as sensitive at detecting these changes or may not be adequately reflecting changes in health conditions that are meaningful to patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11328975/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141727316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-19Print Date: 2024-10-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE23707
Min-Seok Kang, Jae-Yeun Hwang, Sang-Min Park, Jae-Hyuk Yang, Ki-Han You, Seok-Ho Hong, Samuel K Cho, Hyun-Jin Park
Objective: Foraminal and extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation (FELDH) is an important pathological condition that can lead to lumbar radiculopathy. The paraspinal muscle-splitting approach introduced by Reulen and Wiltse is a reasonable surgical technique. Minimally invasive procedures using a tubular retractor system have also been introduced. However, surgical treatment is considered more challenging for FELDH than for central or subarticular lumbar disc herniations (LDHs). Some researchers have proposed uniportal extraforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy through a posterolateral approach as an alternative for FELDH, but heterogeneous clinical results have been reported. Recently, the biportal endoscopic (BE) paraspinal approach has been suggested as an alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of BE and microscopic tubular (MT) paraspinal approaches for decompressive foraminotomy and lumbar discectomy (paraLD) in patients with FELDH.
Methods: Ninety-one consecutive patients with unilateral lumbar radiculopathy and FELDH underwent paraLD. Demographic and perioperative data were collected. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for spinal disability, and the modified Macnab criteria for patient satisfaction. Postoperative complications and reoperation rates were also evaluated.
Results: In total, 76 patients were included in the final analysis. Among them, 43 underwent BE paraLD (group A) and the remaining 33 underwent MT paraLD (group B). The demographic and preoperative data were not statistically different between the groups. All patients showed significant improvements in VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI scores compared with baseline values (p < 0.05). The improvement in VAS back scores was significantly better in group A than in group B on postoperative day 2 (p < 0.001). However, all clinical parameters were comparable between the two groups after postoperative year 1 (p > 0.05). According to the modified Macnab criteria, 86.1% and 72.7% of the patients had excellent or good outcomes in groups A and B, respectively. No intergroup differences were observed (p = 0.367). In addition, there were no differences in the total operation time or amount of surgical drainage. Postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.301); however, reoperation rates were significantly higher in group B (p = 0.035).
Conclusions: BE paraLD is an effective treatment for FELDH and is an alternative to MT paraLD. In particular, BE paraLD has advantages of early improvement in postoperative back pain and low reoperation rates.
目的:椎间孔及椎间孔外腰椎间盘突出症(FELDH)是一种可导致腰椎根性病变的重要病理状态。Reulen 和 Wiltse 提出的脊柱旁肌肉分割法是一种合理的手术技术。使用管状牵引器系统的微创手术也已问世。然而,与中央型或关节下型腰椎间盘突出症(LDHs)相比,FELDH 的手术治疗被认为更具挑战性。一些研究人员提出了通过后外侧入路的单孔椎管外内窥镜腰椎间盘切除术,作为治疗 FELDH 的替代方法,但临床结果报道不一。最近,有人建议采用双门内窥镜(BE)脊柱旁入路作为替代方法。本研究旨在比较BE和显微管(MT)椎旁入路对FELDH患者进行减压椎板切除术和腰椎间盘切除术(paraLD)的临床效果:91例单侧腰椎间盘突出症和FELDH患者连续接受了paraLD手术。收集了人口统计学和围手术期数据。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估腰腿痛,使用Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评估脊柱残疾,使用改良Macnab标准评估患者满意度。此外,还对术后并发症和再次手术率进行了评估:共有 76 名患者纳入最终分析。结果:共有 76 名患者纳入最终分析,其中 43 人接受了 BE paraLD(A 组),其余 33 人接受了 MT paraLD(B 组)。两组患者的人口统计学和术前数据无统计学差异。与基线值相比,所有患者的 VAS 背部评分、VAS 腿部评分和 ODI 评分均有明显改善(P < 0.05)。在术后第 2 天,A 组的 VAS 背部评分改善情况明显优于 B 组(P < 0.001)。不过,术后第 1 年后,两组的所有临床参数均不相上下(P > 0.05)。根据改良的 Macnab 标准,A 组和 B 组分别有 86.1% 和 72.7% 的患者获得了极佳或良好的治疗效果。没有观察到组间差异(P = 0.367)。此外,总手术时间和手术引流量也没有差异。两组的术后并发症无明显差异(p = 0.301);但 B 组的再手术率明显更高(p = 0.035):结论:BE paraLD是治疗FELDH的有效方法,也是MT paraLD的替代方法。结论:BE paraLD是治疗FELDH的有效方法,是MT paraLD的替代疗法,尤其是BE paraLD具有术后背痛改善早、再手术率低的优势。
{"title":"Comparison of biportal endoscopic and microscopic tubular paraspinal approach for foraminal and extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation.","authors":"Min-Seok Kang, Jae-Yeun Hwang, Sang-Min Park, Jae-Hyuk Yang, Ki-Han You, Seok-Ho Hong, Samuel K Cho, Hyun-Jin Park","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE23707","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE23707","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Foraminal and extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation (FELDH) is an important pathological condition that can lead to lumbar radiculopathy. The paraspinal muscle-splitting approach introduced by Reulen and Wiltse is a reasonable surgical technique. Minimally invasive procedures using a tubular retractor system have also been introduced. However, surgical treatment is considered more challenging for FELDH than for central or subarticular lumbar disc herniations (LDHs). Some researchers have proposed uniportal extraforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy through a posterolateral approach as an alternative for FELDH, but heterogeneous clinical results have been reported. Recently, the biportal endoscopic (BE) paraspinal approach has been suggested as an alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of BE and microscopic tubular (MT) paraspinal approaches for decompressive foraminotomy and lumbar discectomy (paraLD) in patients with FELDH.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety-one consecutive patients with unilateral lumbar radiculopathy and FELDH underwent paraLD. Demographic and perioperative data were collected. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for spinal disability, and the modified Macnab criteria for patient satisfaction. Postoperative complications and reoperation rates were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 76 patients were included in the final analysis. Among them, 43 underwent BE paraLD (group A) and the remaining 33 underwent MT paraLD (group B). The demographic and preoperative data were not statistically different between the groups. All patients showed significant improvements in VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI scores compared with baseline values (p < 0.05). The improvement in VAS back scores was significantly better in group A than in group B on postoperative day 2 (p < 0.001). However, all clinical parameters were comparable between the two groups after postoperative year 1 (p > 0.05). According to the modified Macnab criteria, 86.1% and 72.7% of the patients had excellent or good outcomes in groups A and B, respectively. No intergroup differences were observed (p = 0.367). In addition, there were no differences in the total operation time or amount of surgical drainage. Postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.301); however, reoperation rates were significantly higher in group B (p = 0.035).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BE paraLD is an effective treatment for FELDH and is an alternative to MT paraLD. In particular, BE paraLD has advantages of early improvement in postoperative back pain and low reoperation rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141727315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-12Print Date: 2024-10-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231071
S Alexander Ammerman, Alexander Keister, Joshua Vignolles-Jeong, Noah Mallory, David C Gibbs, Ryan G Eaton, Jianing Ma, David S Xu, Stephanus Viljoen, Andrew J Grossbach
Objective: The primary goal of this study was to establish the current microbial trends in vertebral osteomyelitis/discitis (VOD) amid the opioid epidemic and to determine if intravenous drug use (IVDU) predisposes one to a unique microbial profile of infection.
Methods: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study consisting of 1175 adult patients diagnosed with VOD between 2011 and 2022 at a single quaternary center. Data were acquired through retrospective chart review, with pertinent demographic and clinical information collected.
Results: Staphylococcus aureus was the most cultured organism in both the IVDU and non-IVDU groups at 56.1% and 40.7%, respectively. In the IVDU cohort, Serratia marcescens was the next most prevalently cultured organism at 13.9%.
Conclusions: The present study demonstrates that in the IVDU population S. marcescens is an organism of high concern. The potential for Serratia spp. infection should be accounted for when selecting empirical antimicrobial therapy in VOD patients.
{"title":"Microbial etiology of vertebral osteomyelitis/discitis amid the opioid epidemic.","authors":"S Alexander Ammerman, Alexander Keister, Joshua Vignolles-Jeong, Noah Mallory, David C Gibbs, Ryan G Eaton, Jianing Ma, David S Xu, Stephanus Viljoen, Andrew J Grossbach","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231071","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231071","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary goal of this study was to establish the current microbial trends in vertebral osteomyelitis/discitis (VOD) amid the opioid epidemic and to determine if intravenous drug use (IVDU) predisposes one to a unique microbial profile of infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors performed a retrospective cohort study consisting of 1175 adult patients diagnosed with VOD between 2011 and 2022 at a single quaternary center. Data were acquired through retrospective chart review, with pertinent demographic and clinical information collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Staphylococcus aureus was the most cultured organism in both the IVDU and non-IVDU groups at 56.1% and 40.7%, respectively. In the IVDU cohort, Serratia marcescens was the next most prevalently cultured organism at 13.9%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present study demonstrates that in the IVDU population S. marcescens is an organism of high concern. The potential for Serratia spp. infection should be accounted for when selecting empirical antimicrobial therapy in VOD patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141600220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-12Print Date: 2024-10-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231131
Sam H Jiang, Ryan K Wang, Morteza Sadeh, Zayed Almadidy, Ankit I Mehta, Nauman S Chaudhry
Objective: Second cervical vertebrae (C2) fractures are a common traumatic spinal injury in the elderly population. Surgical fusion and nonoperative bracing are two primary treatments for cervical instability, but the former is often withheld in the elderly due to concerns for poor postoperative outcomes arising from patient frailty. This study sought to evaluate the in-hospital differences in mortality, outcomes, and discharge disposition in elderly patients with C2 fractures undergoing surgical intervention compared with conservative therapy.
Methods: The National Trauma Data Bank was queried from 2017 to 2019 for all patients aged ≥ 65 years with C2 fractures undergoing either surgical stabilization or conservative therapy. Propensity score matching was performed using k-nearest neighbors with replacement based on patient demographics, comorbidities, insurance type, injury severity, and fracture type. Group differences were compared using Student t-tests and Pearson's chi-square tests with Benjamini-Hochberg multiple comparisons correction. Subgroup analyses were performed in the 65-74, 75-79, and 80+ year age subgroups.
Results: Six thousand forty-nine patients were identified, of whom 2156 underwent surgery and 3893 received conservative treatment. Following matching, the surgery group had significantly lower mortality rates (5.52% vs 9.6%, p < 0.001), a longer mean hospital length of stay (LOS; 12.64 vs 7.49 days p < 0.001), and slightly higher rates of several complications (< 3% difference), as well as lower rates of discharge home (14.56% vs 23.52%, p < 0.001) and to hospice (1.07% vs 2.09%, p = 0.02) and a higher rate of discharge to intermediate care (68.83% vs 48.28%, p < 0.001). Similar trends in mortality and LOS were noted in all 3 subgroups.
Conclusions: In elderly patients with C2 fractures, surgical stabilization confers a small survival advantage with a slightly higher in-hospital complication rate compared to conservative therapy. The increased rate of discharge to rehabilitation may represent better long-term prognosis following surgery. The increased risk of short-term complications is present but relatively small, thus surgery should not be withheld in patients with good long-term prognosis.
目的:第二颈椎(C2)骨折是老年人群中常见的脊柱外伤。手术融合和非手术支具是治疗颈椎不稳的两种主要方法,但由于担心患者体质虚弱导致术后效果不佳,前者通常不被老年人采用。本研究旨在评估接受手术治疗与保守治疗的 C2 骨折老年患者在院内死亡率、治疗效果和出院处置方面的差异:从2017年到2019年,对国家创伤数据库中所有年龄≥65岁、接受手术稳定或保守治疗的C2骨折患者进行了查询。根据患者的人口统计学特征、合并症、保险类型、受伤严重程度和骨折类型,使用k-近邻替换法进行倾向得分匹配。使用学生 t 检验和皮尔逊卡方检验比较组间差异,并进行 Benjamini-Hochberg 多重比较校正。对 65-74 岁、75-79 岁和 80 岁以上年龄组进行了分组分析:共发现 649 名患者,其中 2156 人接受了手术治疗,3893 人接受了保守治疗。匹配后,手术组的死亡率明显较低(5.52% 对 9.6%,P < 0.001),平均住院时间(LOS;12.64 天对 7.49 天,P < 0.001),几种并发症的发生率略高(差异< 3%),出院回家(14.56% vs 23.52%,p < 0.001)和临终关怀(1.07% vs 2.09%,p = 0.02)的比例较低,出院转入中级护理(68.83% vs 48.28%,p < 0.001)的比例较高。所有3个亚组的死亡率和住院时间趋势相似:结论:与保守疗法相比,手术稳定C2骨折老年患者的生存率略高,但院内并发症发生率略高。出院康复率的提高可能代表了手术后更好的长期预后。短期并发症的风险增加是存在的,但相对较小,因此对于长期预后良好的患者,不应放弃手术治疗。
{"title":"In-hospital outcomes following surgery versus conservative therapy in elderly patients with C2 fractures: a propensity score-matched analysis.","authors":"Sam H Jiang, Ryan K Wang, Morteza Sadeh, Zayed Almadidy, Ankit I Mehta, Nauman S Chaudhry","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231131","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231131","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Second cervical vertebrae (C2) fractures are a common traumatic spinal injury in the elderly population. Surgical fusion and nonoperative bracing are two primary treatments for cervical instability, but the former is often withheld in the elderly due to concerns for poor postoperative outcomes arising from patient frailty. This study sought to evaluate the in-hospital differences in mortality, outcomes, and discharge disposition in elderly patients with C2 fractures undergoing surgical intervention compared with conservative therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The National Trauma Data Bank was queried from 2017 to 2019 for all patients aged ≥ 65 years with C2 fractures undergoing either surgical stabilization or conservative therapy. Propensity score matching was performed using k-nearest neighbors with replacement based on patient demographics, comorbidities, insurance type, injury severity, and fracture type. Group differences were compared using Student t-tests and Pearson's chi-square tests with Benjamini-Hochberg multiple comparisons correction. Subgroup analyses were performed in the 65-74, 75-79, and 80+ year age subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six thousand forty-nine patients were identified, of whom 2156 underwent surgery and 3893 received conservative treatment. Following matching, the surgery group had significantly lower mortality rates (5.52% vs 9.6%, p < 0.001), a longer mean hospital length of stay (LOS; 12.64 vs 7.49 days p < 0.001), and slightly higher rates of several complications (< 3% difference), as well as lower rates of discharge home (14.56% vs 23.52%, p < 0.001) and to hospice (1.07% vs 2.09%, p = 0.02) and a higher rate of discharge to intermediate care (68.83% vs 48.28%, p < 0.001). Similar trends in mortality and LOS were noted in all 3 subgroups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In elderly patients with C2 fractures, surgical stabilization confers a small survival advantage with a slightly higher in-hospital complication rate compared to conservative therapy. The increased rate of discharge to rehabilitation may represent better long-term prognosis following surgery. The increased risk of short-term complications is present but relatively small, thus surgery should not be withheld in patients with good long-term prognosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141600219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-05Print Date: 2024-09-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE2424
Anthony L Mikula, Nikita Lakomkin, Abdelrahman M Hamouda, Megan C Everson, Zach Pennington, Rahul Kumar, Zachariah W Pinter, Michael L Martini, Mohamad Bydon, Kurt A Kennel, Francis Baffour, Ahmad Nassr, Brett Freedman, Arjun S Sebastian, Kingsley Abode-Iyamah, Paul A Anderson, Jeremy L Fogelson, Benjamin D Elder
Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of osteoporosis medications on opportunistic CT-based Hounsfield units (HU).
Methods: Spine and nonspine surgery patients were retrospectively identified who had been treated with romosozumab for 3 to 12 months, teriparatide for 3 to 12 months, teriparatide for > 12 months, denosumab for > 12 months, or alendronate for > 12 months. HU were measured in the L1-4 vertebral bodies. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the mean change in HU among the five treatment regimens.
Results: In total, 318 patients (70% women) were included, with a mean age of 69 years and mean BMI of 27 kg/m2. There was a significant difference in mean HU improvement (p < 0.001) following treatment with romosozumab for 3 to 12 months (n = 32), teriparatide for 3 to 12 months (n = 30), teriparatide for > 12 months (n = 44), denosumab for > 12 months (n = 123), and alendronate for > 12 months (n = 100). Treatment with romosozumab for a mean of 10.5 months significantly increased the mean HU by 26%, from a baseline of 85 to 107 (p = 0.012). Patients treated with teriparatide for > 12 months (mean 23 months) experienced a mean HU improvement of 25%, from 106 to 132 (p = 0.039). Compared with the mean baseline HU, there was no significant difference after treatment with teriparatide for 3 to 12 months (110 to 119, p = 0.48), denosumab for > 12 months (105 to 107, p = 0.68), or alendronate for > 12 months (111 to 113, p = 0.80).
Conclusions: Patients treated with romosozumab for a mean of 10.5 months and teriparatide for a mean of 23 months experienced improved spinal bone mineral density as estimated by CT-based opportunistic HU. Given the shorter duration of effective treatment, romosozumab may be the preferred medication for optimization of osteoporotic patients in preparation for elective spine fusion surgery.
{"title":"Change in spinal bone mineral density as estimated by Hounsfield units following osteoporosis treatment with romosozumab, teriparatide, denosumab, and alendronate: an analysis of 318 patients.","authors":"Anthony L Mikula, Nikita Lakomkin, Abdelrahman M Hamouda, Megan C Everson, Zach Pennington, Rahul Kumar, Zachariah W Pinter, Michael L Martini, Mohamad Bydon, Kurt A Kennel, Francis Baffour, Ahmad Nassr, Brett Freedman, Arjun S Sebastian, Kingsley Abode-Iyamah, Paul A Anderson, Jeremy L Fogelson, Benjamin D Elder","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE2424","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE2424","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of osteoporosis medications on opportunistic CT-based Hounsfield units (HU).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Spine and nonspine surgery patients were retrospectively identified who had been treated with romosozumab for 3 to 12 months, teriparatide for 3 to 12 months, teriparatide for > 12 months, denosumab for > 12 months, or alendronate for > 12 months. HU were measured in the L1-4 vertebral bodies. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the mean change in HU among the five treatment regimens.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 318 patients (70% women) were included, with a mean age of 69 years and mean BMI of 27 kg/m2. There was a significant difference in mean HU improvement (p < 0.001) following treatment with romosozumab for 3 to 12 months (n = 32), teriparatide for 3 to 12 months (n = 30), teriparatide for > 12 months (n = 44), denosumab for > 12 months (n = 123), and alendronate for > 12 months (n = 100). Treatment with romosozumab for a mean of 10.5 months significantly increased the mean HU by 26%, from a baseline of 85 to 107 (p = 0.012). Patients treated with teriparatide for > 12 months (mean 23 months) experienced a mean HU improvement of 25%, from 106 to 132 (p = 0.039). Compared with the mean baseline HU, there was no significant difference after treatment with teriparatide for 3 to 12 months (110 to 119, p = 0.48), denosumab for > 12 months (105 to 107, p = 0.68), or alendronate for > 12 months (111 to 113, p = 0.80).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients treated with romosozumab for a mean of 10.5 months and teriparatide for a mean of 23 months experienced improved spinal bone mineral density as estimated by CT-based opportunistic HU. Given the shorter duration of effective treatment, romosozumab may be the preferred medication for optimization of osteoporotic patients in preparation for elective spine fusion surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141538009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-05DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24414
Cheng Li, Zhikang Tian, Chunyang Meng
{"title":"Letter to the Editor. Tranexamic acid in spinal surgery.","authors":"Cheng Li, Zhikang Tian, Chunyang Meng","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24414","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE24414","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141538011","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-05Print Date: 2024-10-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231007
Hannah A Levy, Zachariah W Pinter, Ryder Reed, Joshua R Harmer, Kay Raftery, Karim Rizwan Nathani, Konstantinos Katsos, Mohamad Bydon, Jeremy L Fogelson, Benjamin D Elder, Bradford L Currier, Nicolas Newell, Ahmad N Nassr, Brett A Freedman, Brian A Karamian, Arjun S Sebastian
Objective: The aims of this study were to 1) define the incidence of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) interbody subsidence; 2) determine the relative importance of preoperative and intraoperative patient- and instrumentation-specific risk factors predictive of postoperative subsidence using CT-based assessment; and 3) determine the impact of TLIF subsidence on postoperative complications and fusion rates.
Methods: All adult patients who underwent one- or two-level TLIF for lumbar degenerative conditions at a multi-institutional academic center between 2017 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients with traumatic injury, infection, malignancy, previous fusion at the index level, combined anterior-posterior procedures, surgery with greater than two TLIF levels, or incomplete follow-up were excluded. Interbody subsidence at the superior and inferior endplates of each TLIF level was directly measured on the endplate-facing surface of both coronal and sagittal CT scans obtained greater than 6 months postoperatively. Patients were grouped based on the maximum subsidence at each operative level classified as mild, moderate, or severe based on previously documented < 2-mm, 2- to 4-mm, and ≥ 4-mm thresholds, respectively. Univariate and regression analyses compared patient demographics, medical comorbidities, preoperative bone quality, surgical factors including interbody cage parameters, and fusion and complication rates across subsidence groups.
Results: A total of 67 patients with 85 unique fusion levels met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, 28% of levels exhibited moderate subsidence and 35% showed severe subsidence after TLIF with no significant difference in the superior and inferior endplate subsidence. Moderate (≥ 2-mm) and severe (≥ 4-mm) subsidence were significantly associated with decreases in cage surface area and Taillard index as well as interbody cages with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) material and sawtooth surface geometry. Severe subsidence was also significantly associated with taller preoperative disc spaces, decreased vertebral Hounsfield units (HU), the absence of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use, and smooth cage surfaces. Regression analysis revealed decreases in Taillard index, cage surface area, and HU, and the absence of BMP use predicted subsidence. Severe subsidence was found to be a predictor of pseudarthrosis but was not significantly associated with revision surgery.
Conclusions: Patient-level risk factors for TLIF subsidence included decreased HU and increased preoperative disc height. Intraoperative risk factors for TLIF subsidence were decreased cage surface area, PEEK cage material, bullet cages, posterior cage positioning, smooth cage surfaces, and sawtooth surface designs. Severe subsidence predicted TLIF pseudarthrosis; however, the causality of this relationship remains unclear.
{"title":"Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion subsidence: computed tomography analysis of incidence, associated risk factors, and impact on outcomes.","authors":"Hannah A Levy, Zachariah W Pinter, Ryder Reed, Joshua R Harmer, Kay Raftery, Karim Rizwan Nathani, Konstantinos Katsos, Mohamad Bydon, Jeremy L Fogelson, Benjamin D Elder, Bradford L Currier, Nicolas Newell, Ahmad N Nassr, Brett A Freedman, Brian A Karamian, Arjun S Sebastian","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231007","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE231007","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aims of this study were to 1) define the incidence of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) interbody subsidence; 2) determine the relative importance of preoperative and intraoperative patient- and instrumentation-specific risk factors predictive of postoperative subsidence using CT-based assessment; and 3) determine the impact of TLIF subsidence on postoperative complications and fusion rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All adult patients who underwent one- or two-level TLIF for lumbar degenerative conditions at a multi-institutional academic center between 2017 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients with traumatic injury, infection, malignancy, previous fusion at the index level, combined anterior-posterior procedures, surgery with greater than two TLIF levels, or incomplete follow-up were excluded. Interbody subsidence at the superior and inferior endplates of each TLIF level was directly measured on the endplate-facing surface of both coronal and sagittal CT scans obtained greater than 6 months postoperatively. Patients were grouped based on the maximum subsidence at each operative level classified as mild, moderate, or severe based on previously documented < 2-mm, 2- to 4-mm, and ≥ 4-mm thresholds, respectively. Univariate and regression analyses compared patient demographics, medical comorbidities, preoperative bone quality, surgical factors including interbody cage parameters, and fusion and complication rates across subsidence groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 67 patients with 85 unique fusion levels met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, 28% of levels exhibited moderate subsidence and 35% showed severe subsidence after TLIF with no significant difference in the superior and inferior endplate subsidence. Moderate (≥ 2-mm) and severe (≥ 4-mm) subsidence were significantly associated with decreases in cage surface area and Taillard index as well as interbody cages with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) material and sawtooth surface geometry. Severe subsidence was also significantly associated with taller preoperative disc spaces, decreased vertebral Hounsfield units (HU), the absence of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use, and smooth cage surfaces. Regression analysis revealed decreases in Taillard index, cage surface area, and HU, and the absence of BMP use predicted subsidence. Severe subsidence was found to be a predictor of pseudarthrosis but was not significantly associated with revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient-level risk factors for TLIF subsidence included decreased HU and increased preoperative disc height. Intraoperative risk factors for TLIF subsidence were decreased cage surface area, PEEK cage material, bullet cages, posterior cage positioning, smooth cage surfaces, and sawtooth surface designs. Severe subsidence predicted TLIF pseudarthrosis; however, the causality of this relationship remains unclear.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141538012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-05Print Date: 2024-10-01DOI: 10.3171/2024.4.SPINE23917
Luke MacLean, Andrew M Hersh, Meghana Bhimreddy, Kelly Jiang, A Daniel Davidar, Carly Weber-Levine, Safwan Alomari, Brendan F Judy, Daniel Lubelski, Nicholas Theodore
Objective: Pedicle screw placement guidance is critical in spinal fusions, and spinal surgery robots aim to improve accuracy and reduce complications. Current literature has yet to compare the relative merits of available robotic systems. In this review, the authors aimed to 1) assess the current state of spinal robotics literature; 2) conduct a meta-analysis of robotic performance based on accuracy, speed, and safety; and 3) offer recommendations for robotic system selection.
Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, the authors conducted a systematic literature review across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus as of April 28, 2022, for studies on approved robots for placing lumbar pedicle screws. Three reviewers screened and extracted data relating to the study characteristics, accuracy rate, intraoperative revisions, and reoperations. Secondary performance metrics included operative time, blood loss, and radiation exposure. The authors statistically compared the performance of the robots using a random-effects model to account for variation within and between the studies. Each robot was also compared with performance benchmarks of traditional techniques including freehand, fluoroscopic, and CT-navigated insertion. Finally, we performed a Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill test to assess for the presence of publication bias.
Results: The authors identified 46 studies, describing 4670 patients and 25,054 screws, that evaluated 4 different robotic systems: Mazor X, ROSA, ExcelsiusGPS, and Cirq. The weighted accuracy rates of Gertzbein-Robbins classification grade A or B screws were as follows: ExcelsiusGPS, 98.0%; ROSA, 98.0%; Mazor, 98.2%; and Cirq, 94.2%. No robot was significantly more accurate than the others. However, the accuracy of the ExcelsiusGPS was significantly higher than that of traditional methods, and the accuracies of the Mazor and ROSA were significantly higher than that of fluoroscopy. The intraoperative revision rates were Cirq, 0.55%; ROSA, 0.91%; Mazor, 0.98%; and ExcelsiusGPS, 1.08%. The reoperation rates were Cirq, 0.28%; ExcelsiusGPS, 0.32%; and Mazor, 0.76% (no reoperations were reported for ROSA). Operative times were similar for all robots. Both the ExcelsiusGPS and Mazor were associated with significantly less blood loss than the ROSA. The Cirq had the lowest radiation exposure. Robots tended to be more accurate and generally their use was associated with fewer reoperations and less blood loss than freehand, fluoroscopic, or CT-navigated techniques.
Conclusions: Robotic platforms perform comparably based on key metrics, with high accuracy rates and low intraoperative revision and reoperation rates. The spinal robotics publication rate will continue to accelerate, and choosing a robot will depend on the context of the practice.
{"title":"Comparison of accuracy, revision, and perioperative outcomes in robot-assisted spine surgeries: systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Luke MacLean, Andrew M Hersh, Meghana Bhimreddy, Kelly Jiang, A Daniel Davidar, Carly Weber-Levine, Safwan Alomari, Brendan F Judy, Daniel Lubelski, Nicholas Theodore","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE23917","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2024.4.SPINE23917","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Pedicle screw placement guidance is critical in spinal fusions, and spinal surgery robots aim to improve accuracy and reduce complications. Current literature has yet to compare the relative merits of available robotic systems. In this review, the authors aimed to 1) assess the current state of spinal robotics literature; 2) conduct a meta-analysis of robotic performance based on accuracy, speed, and safety; and 3) offer recommendations for robotic system selection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PRISMA guidelines, the authors conducted a systematic literature review across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus as of April 28, 2022, for studies on approved robots for placing lumbar pedicle screws. Three reviewers screened and extracted data relating to the study characteristics, accuracy rate, intraoperative revisions, and reoperations. Secondary performance metrics included operative time, blood loss, and radiation exposure. The authors statistically compared the performance of the robots using a random-effects model to account for variation within and between the studies. Each robot was also compared with performance benchmarks of traditional techniques including freehand, fluoroscopic, and CT-navigated insertion. Finally, we performed a Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill test to assess for the presence of publication bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The authors identified 46 studies, describing 4670 patients and 25,054 screws, that evaluated 4 different robotic systems: Mazor X, ROSA, ExcelsiusGPS, and Cirq. The weighted accuracy rates of Gertzbein-Robbins classification grade A or B screws were as follows: ExcelsiusGPS, 98.0%; ROSA, 98.0%; Mazor, 98.2%; and Cirq, 94.2%. No robot was significantly more accurate than the others. However, the accuracy of the ExcelsiusGPS was significantly higher than that of traditional methods, and the accuracies of the Mazor and ROSA were significantly higher than that of fluoroscopy. The intraoperative revision rates were Cirq, 0.55%; ROSA, 0.91%; Mazor, 0.98%; and ExcelsiusGPS, 1.08%. The reoperation rates were Cirq, 0.28%; ExcelsiusGPS, 0.32%; and Mazor, 0.76% (no reoperations were reported for ROSA). Operative times were similar for all robots. Both the ExcelsiusGPS and Mazor were associated with significantly less blood loss than the ROSA. The Cirq had the lowest radiation exposure. Robots tended to be more accurate and generally their use was associated with fewer reoperations and less blood loss than freehand, fluoroscopic, or CT-navigated techniques.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Robotic platforms perform comparably based on key metrics, with high accuracy rates and low intraoperative revision and reoperation rates. The spinal robotics publication rate will continue to accelerate, and choosing a robot will depend on the context of the practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141538010","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}