Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons最新文献

Introduction: While perioperative nutritional, functional, and bone health status optimization in spine surgery is supported with ample evidence, the implementation and surgeon perception regarding such efforts in clinical practice remain largely unexplored. This study sought to assess the current perception of spine surgeons and implementation regarding the nutritional, functional status, and bone health perioperative optimization.

Methods: An anonymous 30-question survey was distributed to orthopaedic spine fellowship and neurosurgery program directors identified through the North American Spine Society and American Association of Neurological Surgeons contact databases.

Results: The questionnaire was completed by 51 surgeon survey respondents. Among those, 62% reported no current formal nutritional optimization protocols with 14% not recommending an optimization plan, despite only 10% doubting benefits of nutritional optimization. While 5% of respondents perceived functional status optimization as nonbeneficial, 68% of respondents reported no protocol in place and 46% noted a functional status assessment relying on patient dependency. Among the respondents, 85% routinely ordered DEXA scan if there was suspicion of osteoporosis and 85% usually rescheduled surgery if bone health optimization goals were not achieved while 6% reported being suspicious of benefit from such interventions.

Conclusion: While most responding spine surgeons believe in the benefit of perioperative nutritional and functional optimization, logistical and patient compliance challenges were noted as critical barriers toward optimization. Understanding surgeon perception and current practices may guide future efforts toward advancement of optimization protocols.

Paired vertebral arteries (VAs) travel from the subclavian artery through the cervical spine and into the intracranial space where they contribute to posterior cerebral circulation. Blunt and penetrating injuries to the cervical spine risk injury to the VA. Among the most feared complications of vertebral artery injury (VAI) is posterior circulation stroke. Appropriate screening and treatment of these injuries in the trauma setting remain vitally important to aid in the prevention of devastating neurologic sequelae. A robust knowledge of the VA anatomy is required for spine surgeons to avoid VAI during cervical spine approaches and instrumentation. Both anterior and posterior cervical spine surgeries can place the VA at risk. Careful preoperative assessment with the appropriate advanced imaging studies is necessary to verify the course of the VA in the cervical spine and thus prevent iatrogenic injury because anatomic variations along the course of the artery can prove hazardous if not properly anticipated. Iatrogenic VAI can be treated successfully with tamponade. However, in some cases, ligation, repair, or endovascular procedures may be indicated.

Selecting the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) in fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is potentially the most nuanced decision a surgeon has to make. This article reviews the literature on the range-of-motion loss related to the LIV, ability to return to sports based on LIV, correlation between LIV and disk degeneration, and short-term and long-term clinical outcomes related to LIV.

Introduction: The prevalence of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pathology generating lower back pain is increasing, often requiring SI joint fusion in refractory cases. Similarly, total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an increasing procedure in the older growing population. Prior SIJ fusion in patients undergoing THA has increased hip dislocation. This study aims to determine the prevalence of preexisting THA in SIJ fusion patients at our institution.

Methods: After institutional review board approval, we completed a retrospective review of consecutive SIJ fusion cases performed by fellowship-trained orthopaedic spine surgeons between October 2019 and June 2022. The senior surgeon reviewed pelvis radiographs to determine whether a THA was present. Patient demographics, surgical history, SIJ fusion date, and laterality information from study participants' medical records were collected and analyzed.

Results: We screened 157 consecutive cases and excluded 45 not meeting the inclusion criteria. One hundred twelve radiographs were reviewed, with seven additional patients excluded. The final analysis consisted of 105 patients (33M:72F). The mean age was 50.4 ± 13.8 years, and the mean body mass index was 29.1 ± 6.1 kg/m 2 . SIJ fusion laterality included 51 right (48.6%), 44 left (41.9%), and 10 bilateral (9.5%). One patient (0.95%) had a preexisting right THA, and two patients (1.9%) underwent ipsilateral THA after SIJ fusion.

Conclusions: This study demonstrated a low prevalence (0.95%) of preexisting THA in SIJ fusion patients at our institution, similar to the THA prevalence of the total US population. Additional research is needed to determine the outcomes of patients with preexisting THA undergoing SIJ fusion.

Introduction: The factors most important in the spine fellowship match may not ultimately correlate with quality of performance during fellowship. This study examined the spine fellow applicant metrics correlated with high application rank compared with the metrics associated with the strongest clinical performance during fellowship.

Methods: Spine fellow applications at three academic institutions were retrieved from the San Francisco Match database (first available to 2021) and deidentified for application review. Application metrics pertaining to research, academics, education, extracurriculars, leadership, examinations, career interests, and letter of recommendations were extracted. Attending spine surgeons involved in spine fellow selection at their institutions were sent a survey to rank (1) fellow applicants based on their perceived candidacy and (2) the strength of performance of their previous fellows. Pearson correlation assessed the associations of application metrics with theoretical fellow rank and actual performance.

Results: A total of 37 spine fellow applications were included (Institution A: 15, Institution B: 12, Institution C: 10), rated by 14 spine surgeons (Institution A: 6, Institution B: 4, Institution C: 4). Theoretical fellow rank demonstrated a moderate positive association with overall research, residency program rank, recommendation writer H-index, US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, and journal reviewer positions. Actual fellow performance demonstrated a moderate positive association with residency program rank, recommendation writer H-index, USMLE scores, and journal reviewer positions. Linear regressions identified journal reviewer positions (ß = 1.73, P = 0.002), Step 1 (ß = 0.09, P = 0.010) and Step 3 (ß = 0.10, P = 0.002) scores, recommendation writer H-index (ß = 0.06, P = 0.029, and ß = 0.07, P = 0.006), and overall research (ß = 0.01, P = 0.005) as predictors of theoretical rank. Recommendation writer H-index (ß = 0.21, P = 0.030) and Alpha Omega Alpha achievement (ß = 6.88, P = 0.021) predicted actual performance.

Conclusion: Residency program reputation, USMLE scores, and a recommendation from an established spine surgeon were important in application review and performance during fellowship. Research productivity, although important during application review, was not predictive of fellow performance.

Level of evidence: III.

Study design: Cohort Study.

Radiation therapy plays an important role in the management of patients with primary and metastatic spine tumors. Technological innovations in the past decade have allowed for improved targeting, dose escalation, and precision of radiation therapy while concomitant improvements in surgical techniques have resulted in improved outcomes with reduced morbidity. Patients with cancer have increasingly complex oncologic needs, and multidisciplinary management is more essential than ever. This review will provide an overview of radiation principles, modern radiation techniques, management algorithms, and expected toxicities of common radiation treatments in the management of spine tumors.

Introduction: Although osteoporosis and low bone mineral density is thought to lead to poor fusion outcomes, few studies have adequately addressed the correlation, and they were limited by small sample size at a single institution.

Methods: We completed a secondary analysis of 182 patients enrolled at 26 spine centers across the United States in the EXO-SPINE FDA-approved clinical trial with 12-month CT-based fusion status determined by two independent, blinded radiologists. Using previously described CT-based techniques, we measured local and global Hounsfield units (HU) and examined the relationship with radiographic and clinical outcomes.

Results: CT scans were available for review from 95 patients, with a mean age of 56.2 years and mean global density of 153.0 HU. No relationship was observed between HU and radiographic fusion status or clinical outcomes. Although 12% of patients had lumbar vertebral body HU measurements consistent with osteoporosis, this classification had no relation with fusion or clinical outcomes. Patients with pseudarthrosis had higher Oswestry Disability Index (22.2 vs. 16.6, P = 0.037) and back pain visual analog scale (7.0 vs. 4.9, P = 0.014) scores than patients with at least unilateral fusion at the 12-month follow-up.

Discussion: In this large, multicenter study, lower vertebral body HU was not associated with worse fusion status after single-level instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion using only local autologous bone graft. However, there was an association between radiographic fusion status and clinical outcomes, validating the importance of determining predictors of successful fusion. Assessment of fusion status with CT scans yielded a much lower fusion success rate with local bone graft than previously reported and may warrant additional investigation.

Technological innovation has advanced the efficacy of spine surgery for patients; however, these advances do not consistently translate into clinical effectiveness. Some patients who undergo spine surgery experience continued chronic back pain and other complications that were not present before the procedure. Defects in healthcare value, such as the lack of clinical benefit from spine surgery, are, unfortunately, common, and the US healthcare system spends $1.4 trillion annually on value defects. In this article, we examine how avoidable complications, postacute healthcare use, revision surgeries, and readmissions among spine surgery patients contribute to $67 million of wasteful spending on value defects. Furthermore, we estimate that almost $27 million of these costs could be recuperated simply by redirecting patients to facilities referred to as centers of excellence. In total, quality improvement efforts are costly to implement but may only cost about $36 million to fully correct the $67 million in finances misappropriated to value defects. The objectives of this article are to present an approach to eliminate defects in spine surgery, including a center-of-excellence framework for eliminating defects specific to this group of procedures.

Introduction: Surgical counseling enables shared decision making and optimal outcomes by improving patients' understanding about their pathologies, surgical options, and expected outcomes. Here, we aimed to provide practical answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs) from patients undergoing an anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disk replacement (CDR) for the treatment of degenerative conditions.

Methods: Patients who underwent primary one-level or two-level ACDF or CDR for the treatment of degenerative conditions with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Data were used to answer 10 FAQs that were generated from author's experience of commonly asked questions in clinic before ACDF or CDR.

Results: A total of 395 patients (181 ACDF, 214 CDR) were included. (1, 2, and 3) Will my neck/arm pain and physical function improve? Patients report notable improvement in all patient-reported outcome measures. (4) Is there a chance I will get worse? 13% (ACDF) and 5% (CDR) reported worsening. (5) Will I receive a significant amount of radiation? Patients on average received a 3.7 (ACDF) and 5.5 mGy (CDR) dose during. (6) How long will I stay in the hospital? Most patients get discharged on postoperative day one. (7) What is the likelihood that I will have a complication? 13% (8% minor and 5% major) experienced in-hospital complications (ACDF) and 5% (all minor) did (CDR). (8) Will I need another surgery? 2.2% (ACDF) and 2.3% (CDR) of patients required a revision surgery. (9 & 10) When will I be able to return to work/driving? Most patients return to working (median of 16 [ACDF] and 14 days [CDR]) and driving (median of 16 [ACDF] and 12 days [CDR]).

Conclusions: The answers to the FAQs can assist surgeons in evidence-based patient counseling.

Introduction: Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) is a complex surgical procedure that provides correction of moderate sagittal imbalance. Surgical complications have adverse effects on patient outcomes and healthcare costs, making it imperative for clinical researchers to focus on minimizing complications. However, when it comes to risk modeling of PSO surgery, there is currently no consensus on which patient characteristics or measures should be used. This study aimed to describe complications and compare the performance of various sociodemographic characteristics, surgical variables, and established risk indices in predicting postoperative complications, infections, and readmissions after lumbar PSO surgeries.

Methods: A review was conducted on 191 patients who underwent PSO surgery at a single institution by a single fellowship-trained orthopaedic spine surgeon between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data within 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years of the index procedure were evaluated. Descriptive statistics, t -test, chi-squared analysis, and logistic regression models were used.

Results: Intraoperative complications were significantly associated with coronary artery disease (odds ratios [OR] 3.95, P = 0.03) and operating room time (OR 1.01, P = 0.006). 30-day complications were significantly cardiovascular disease (OR 2.68, P = 0.04) and levels fused (OR 1.10, P = 0.04). 2-year complications were significantly associated with cardiovascular disease (OR 2.85, P = 0.02). 30-day readmissions were significantly associated with sex (4.47, 0.04) and length of hospital stay (χ 2 = 0.07, P = 0.04). 2-year readmissions were significantly associated with age (χ 2 = 0.50, P = 0.03), hypertension (χ 2 = 4.64, P = 0.03), revision surgeries (χ 2 = 5.46, P = 0.02), and length of hospital stay (χ 2 = 0.07, P = 0.03).

Discussion: This study found that patients with coronary vascular disease and longer fusions were at higher risk of postoperative complications and patients with notable intraoperative blood loss were at higher risk of postoperative infections. In addition, physicians should closely follow patients with extended postoperative hospital stays, with advanced age, and undergoing revision surgery because these patients were more likely to be readmitted to the hospital.