Asian Spine Journal最新文献

The purpose of this study was to assess the factors affecting caudal screw loosening after spinopelvic fixation for adult patients with spinal deformity. This meta-analysis calculated the weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) using Review Manager ver. 5.3 (RevMan; Cochrane, London, UK). The loosening group was older than the control group (WMD, 2.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-3.87; p=0.01). The S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) could prevent the caudal screw from loosening (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.94; p=0.03). However, gender distribution (p=0.36), the number of fusion segments (p=0.24), rod breakage (p=0.97), T-score (p=0.10), and proximal junctional kyphosis (p=0.75) demonstrated no difference. Preoperatively, only pelvic incidence (PI) in the loosening group was higher (WMD, 5.08; 95% CI, 2.71-7.45; p<0.01), while thoracic kyphosis (p=0.09), lumbar lordosis (LL) (p=0.69), pelvic tilt (PT) (p=0.31), pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) (p=0.35), sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (p=0.27), and T1 pelvic angle (TPA) demonstrated no difference (p=0.10). PI-LL (WMD, 6.05; 95% CI, 0.96-11.14; p=0.02), PT (WMD, 4.12; 95% CI, 0.99-7.26; p=0.01), TPA (WMD, 4.72; 95% CI, 2.35-7.09; p<0.01), and SVA (WMD, 13.35; 95% CI, 2.83-3.87; p=0.001) were higher in the screw loosening group immediately postoperatively. However, TK (p=0.24) and LL (p=0.44) demonstrated no difference. TPA (WMD, 8.38; 95% CI, 3.30-13.47; p<0.01), PT (WMD, 6.01; 95% CI, 1.47-10.55; p=0.01), and SVA (WMD, 23.13; 95% CI, 12.06-34.21; p<0.01) were higher in the screw loosening group at the final follow-up. However, PI-LL (p=0.17) demonstrated no significant difference. Elderly individuals were more susceptible to the caudal screw loosening, and the S2AI screw might better reduce the caudal screw loosening rate than the iliac screws. The lumbar lordosis and sagittal alignment should be reconstructed properly to prevent the caudal screw from loosening. Measures to block sagittal alignment deterioration could also prevent the caudal screw from loosening.

Single-position lateral interbody fusion surgery has gained traction over the years because of reduced surgical time and improved operating theater workflow. With the introduction of robotics in spine surgery, surgeons can place pedicle screws with a high degree of accuracy and efficiency; moreover, the robot allows us to localize the disk space and perform endplate preparation accurately with minimal radiation. In this study, we discuss the potential synergistic benefits of integrating robotic-assisted spine surgery and singleposition prone lateral surgery. We share our technique and provide the operative nuances of using the Mazor X Stealth Edition system (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). We highlighted the potential synergistic benefits of integrating both the prone lateral and robotic-assisted surgical techniques, including the challenges encountered. This approach is not meant to replace other techniques or be used in all patients. Instead, it adds to our arsenal for managing spine fusion.

Study design: A prospective longitudinal cohort study.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of two different techniques of transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) with contrast and without contrast in treating lumbar radiculopathy.

Overview of literature: Epidural injections are one of the most frequently used nonsurgical treatment options for managing lumbar radiculopathy. This study aims to simplify the TFESI technique, which is effective and requires less effort to replicate.

Methods: We collected data on 118 patients who underwent TFESI without contrast versus TFESI with contrast for lumbar radiculopathy. The pain was evaluated using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain at 5 minutes, 2 hours, 2 weeks, and 2 months. The functional status was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. The operation time and fluoroscopic dosage were also measured using this score.

Results: Two groups of patients with radiculopathy were studied, comprising of 56 patients in the non-contrast group (NC group) and 62 patients in the contrast group (C group). There was a significant decrease in pain, as evaluated by NRS, in the C group compared to the NC group at 5 minutes post-procedure (3.39±1.54 vs. 3.86±0.72, with a p-value of 0.039). There was no significant difference in NRS scores at 2 hours, 2 weeks, and 2 months, as well as in ODI scores. The operation time and fluoroscopic dosage were lower in the group without contrast compared to the contrast group, with 12.58±3.30 minutes per level vs. 16.70±5.94 minutes per level (p <0.001) and 3.62±1.66 mGy vs. 5.32±2.74 mGy per level (p =0.014), respectively. No complications were reported in either group.

Conclusions: There is no difference in pain and functional outcome when treating lumbar radiculopathy with or without contrast using TFESI. The TFESI without contract technique has a shorter operation time and lower intra-operative fluoroscopic dosage without complications.

Study design: This study is a retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: This study aims to determine whether preoperative neuroforaminal stenosis (FS) severity is associated with motor function patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

Overview of literature: Cervical FS can significantly contribute to patient symptoms. While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been used to classify FS, there has been limited research into the impact of FS severity on patient outcomes.

Methods: Patients undergoing primary, elective 1-3 level ACDF for radiculopathy at a single academic center between 2015 and 2021 were identified retrospectively. Cervical FS was evaluated using axial T2-weighted MRI images via a validated grading scale. The maximum degree of stenosis was used for multilevel disease. Motor symptoms were classified using encounters at their final preoperative and first postoperative visits, with examinations ≤3/5 indicating weakness. PROMs were obtained preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up. Bivariate analysis was used to compare outcomes based on stenosis severity, followed by multivariable analysis.

Results: This study included 354 patients, 157 with moderate stenosis and 197 with severe stenosis. Overall, 58 patients (16.4%) presented with upper extremity weakness ≤3/5. A similar number of patients in both groups presented with baseline motor weakness (13.5% vs. 16.55, p =0.431). Postoperatively, 97.1% and 87.0% of patients with severe and moderate FS, respectively, experienced full motor recovery (p =0.134). At 1-year, patients with severe neuroforaminal stenosis presented with significantly worse 12-item Short Form Survey Physical Component Score (PCS-12) (33.3 vs. 37.3, p =0.049) but demonstrated a greater magnitude of improvement (Δ PCS-12: 5.43 vs. 0.87, p =0.048). Worse stenosis was independently associated with greater ΔPCS-12 at 1-year (β =5.59, p =0.022).

Conclusions: Patients with severe FS presented with worse preoperative physical health. While ACDF improved outcomes and conferred similar motor recovery in all patients, those with severe FS reported much better improvement in physical function.

Study design: Prospective study.

Purpose: To propose a scoring system for predicting the need for surgery in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Overview of literature: The indications for surgery in patients with LDH are well established. However, the exact timing of surgery is not. According to surgeons, patients with failed conservative treatment who underwent delayed surgery, often after 6 months postsymptom initiation, have poor functional recovery and outcome.

Methods: The current study included patients with symptomatic LDH. Patients with an indication for emergent surgery such as profound or progressive motor deficit, cauda equina syndrome, and diagnoses other than single-level LDH were excluded from the analysis. All patients followed a conservative treatment regimen (a combination of physical therapy, pain medications, and/or spinal epidural steroid injections). Surgery was indicated for patients who continuously experienced pain despite maximal conservative therapy.

Results: In total, 134 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among them, 108 (80.6%) responded to conservative management, and 26 (19.4%) underwent unilateral laminotomy and microdiscectomy. The symptom duration, disc degeneration grade on magnetic resonance imaging (Pfirrmann disc grade), herniated disc location and type, fragment size, and thecal sac diameter significantly differed between patients who responded to conservative treatment and those requiring surgery. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the scoring system based on the anteroposterior size of the herniated disc fragment and herniated disc location and type was 0.81.

Conclusions: A scoring system based on herniated disc/fragment size, location, and type can be applied to predict the need for surgery in patients with LDH. In the future, this tool can be used to prevent unnecessarily prolonged conservative management (>4-8 weeks).

Study design: This was a retrospective multivariate analysis of preoperative risk factors leading to intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in patients undergoing elective or acute dorsal spine surgery.

Purpose: Numerous studies have predicted a substantial increase in spine surgeries within the next decades, potentially overwhelming hospitals' resources, including ICU occupancy. Accurate estimates of whether patients need postsurgical ICU treatment are pivotal for both resource allocation and patient safety.

Overview of literature: Risk factors leading to ICU admissions after dorsal spine surgery have been extensively examined for lumbar elective surgery. Studies including other anatomical segments of the spine and nonelective surgery regarding postsurgical ICU treatment probability are lacking.

Methods: This study was designed to be a single-center multivariate analysis of data retrospectively collected from a tertiary care university hospital. Patients undergoing dorsal spine surgery from 2009 to 2019 were included in this study. The patients' demographic data were analyzed to determine potential preoperative risk factors for ICU admission after surgery using multiple logistic regression.

Results: In our cohort, 962 patients with a mean age of 71.1±0.55 years were included. Surgeries involved 3.24±0.08 spinal levels on average. The incidence of ICU treatment after surgery was 30.4% (n=292). Multivariate logistic regression showed a markedly increased odds ratio (OR) for patients undergoing surgery of the cervicothoracic junction (OR, 8.86) and those undergoing surgery for spinal deformity treatment (OR, 7.7). Additionally, cervical procedures (OR, 3.29), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 3-4 (OR, 2.74), spondylodiscitis (OR, 2.47), fusion of ≥3 levels (OR, 1.94), and age >75 years (OR, 1.33) were associated with an increased risk of postsurgical ICU admission.

Conclusions: The findings highlight the relevance of anatomical location, preoperative diagnosis, ASA class, and length of surgery regarding the predictability of postoperative ICU admission. Our data allowed for more sophisticated estimates regarding the need for ICU treatment after dorsal spine surgery, guiding the surgeon through patient selection, communication, and ICU admission predictability.

Study design: This is a retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: This study aims to investigate the risk factors for postoperative distal adding-on in Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and validate the relationship between fusion mass shift (FMS) and postoperative distal adding-on.

Overview of literature: Postoperative distal curve adding-on is one of the complications in AIS. FMS has been proposed to prevent postoperative distal adding-on, which requires further validation from different institutions.

Methods: This study included 60 patients with Lenke 1 AIS who underwent selective thoracic fusion surgery. Coronal spinal alignment parameters were analyzed preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the final follow-up. The postoperative FMS was divided into two groups: the balanced group (FMS ≤20 mm) and the unbalanced group (FMS >20 mm). An independent t-test was used to compare quantitative data between groups, and a chi-square test was used for qualitative data. Furthermore, binary logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics curve analyses were used to identify the risk factors for postoperative distal adding-on in AIS.

Results: At 2-year follow-up, the unbalanced group was more likely to have adding-on (17 of 24 patients) than the balanced group (six of 36 patients; p<0.001). Twenty-three patients with distal adding-on had significantly greater preoperative and postoperative lower instrumented vertebrae (LIV) rotation, FMS, and FMS angle (FMSA) than those without postoperative distal adding-on. Binary logistic regression analysis selected three independent risk factors for adding-on incidence after surgery: FMS (odds ratio [OR], 1.115; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.049-1.185; p<0.001), FMSA (OR, 1.590; 95% CI, 1.225-2.064; p<0.001), and postoperative LIV rotation (OR, 6.581; 95% CI, 2.280-19.000; p<0.001).

Conclusions: Achieving a balanced fusion mass intraoperatively is important to avoid postoperative distal adding-on, with FMS of <20 mm and FMS angle of <4.5°. Furthermore, correcting LIV rotation helps to decrease the incidence of postoperative distal addingon.

Study design: Retrospective matched analysis.

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of antithrombotic drug therapy on the rates of thrombo-ischemic or bleeding events 90 days following elective spine surgery.

Overview of literature: Thrombo-ischemic and bleeding complications in patients undergoing spine surgery are major causes of morbidity. Many patients who pursue elective spine surgery are concurrently receiving antithrombotic therapy for unrelated conditions; however, at this time, the effects of preoperative antithrombotic use on postoperative bleeding and thrombosis are unclear.

Methods: Using an all-payer claims database, patients who underwent elective cervical and lumbar spine interventions between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2018, were identified. Individuals were categorized into groups taking and not taking antithrombotics. A 1:1 analysis was constructed based on comorbidities found to be independently associated with bleeding or ischemic complications using logistic regression models. The primary outcomes were the rates of thrombo-ischemic events and bleeding complications.

Results: A total of 660,866 patients were eligible for inclusion. Following the matching procedure, 56,476 patient records were analyzed, with 28,238 in each group. The antithrombotic agent group had significantly greater odds of developing any 90-day thromboischemic event after surgery: deep vein thrombosis (odds ratio [OR], 3.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.06-4.25), pulmonary embolism (OR, 3.93; 95% CI, 3.34-4.62), myocardial infarction (OR, 6.20; 95% CI, 5.69-6.76), and ischemic stroke (OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 3.31-4.27). In addition, the antithrombotic agent group had an increased likelihood of experiencing hematoma (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.35-1.76) and need for transfusion (OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 2.29-2.96).

Conclusions: Patients taking antithrombotic medications before elective surgery of the cervical and lumbar spine had increased risks of both ischemic and bleeding events. Spine surgeons should carefully consider these implications when appraising patients for surgery, given the lack of guidelines on perioperative management of antithrombotic agents.

Study design: Retrospective radiographic study.

Purpose: This study aims to demonstrate the proper resection trajectory of a partial posterior uncinate process resection combined with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and evaluate whether foraminal stenosis or uncinate process degeneration increases the risk of vertebral artery (VA) injury.

Overview of literature: Appropriate resection trajectory that could result in sufficient decompression and avoid vertebral artery injury is yet unknown.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent cervical magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography angiography for preoperative ACDF evaluation. The segments were classified according to the presence of foraminal stenosis. The height, thickness, anteroposterior length, horizontal distance from the uncinate process to the VA, and vertical distance from the uncinate process baseline to the VA of the uncinate process were measured. The distance between the uncinate anterior margin and the resection trajectory (UAM-to-RT) was measured.

Results: There were no VA injuries or root injuries among the 101 patients who underwent ACDF (163 segments, mean age of 56.3±12.2). Uncinate anteroposterior length was considerably longer in foramens with foraminal stenosis, whereas uncinate process height, thickness, and distance between the uncinate process and VA were not significantly associated with foraminal stenosis. There were no significant differences in radiographic parameters based on uncinate degeneration. The UAM-to-RT distances for adequate decompression were 1.6±1.4 mm (range, 0-4.8 mm), 3.4±1.7 mm (range, 0-7.1 mm), 4.0±1.7 mm (range, 0-9.0 mm), and 4.5±1.2 mm (range, 2.5-7.5 mm) for C3-C4, C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7, respectively.

Conclusions: More than half of the uncinate process in the anteroposterior plane should be removed for adequate neural foramen decompression. Foraminal stenosis or uncinate degeneration did not alter the relative anatomy of the uncinate process and the VA and did not impact VA injury risk.