Search

Study Design: Systematic review., Objective: This systematic review aims to identify prognostic factors, encompassing biomedical and psychosocial variables, linked to outcome of fusion surgery for chronic low back pain (CLBP) in single or two-level lumbar degenerative spinal disorders. Identifying these factors is crucial for decision making and therefore long-term treatment outcome., Methods: A systematic search (PROSPERO ID: CRD4202018927) from January 2010 to October 2022 was conducted, utilizing Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR, CENTRAL). Prognostic factors associated with various outcomes, including functional status, back and leg pain, health-related quality of life, complications, return to work, and analgesic use, were assessed. Risk of bias was determined using QUIPS, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE approach., Results: Of the 9852 initially screened studies, eleven studies (n = 16,482) were included in the analysis. In total, 161 associations were identified, with 67 prognostic factors showing statistical significance ( P < 0.05). Thirty associations were supported by two or more studies, and only eight associations were eligible for meta-analyses: female gender remained statistically significant associated with decreased postoperative back pain, but negatively associated with complication rates and functional status, and smoking with increased postoperative back pain., Conclusion: Only female gender and smoking were consistently associated with outcome of fusion for CLBP. Most of the included studies exhibited low to moderate methodological quality, which may explain the relatively weak associations identified for the assessed prognostic factors., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Study Design: Prospective, multicenter, international, observational study., Objective: Identify independent prognostic factors associated with achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) among adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients ≥60 years of age undergoing primary reconstructive surgery., Methods: Patients ≥60 years undergoing primary spinal deformity surgery having ≥5 levels fused were recruited for this study. Three approaches were used to assess MCID: (1) absolute change:0.5 point increase in the SRS-22r sub-total score/0.18 point increase in the EQ-5D index; (2) relative change: 15% increase in the SRS-22r sub-total/EQ-5D index; (3) relative change with a cut-off in the outcome at baseline: similar to the relative change with an imposed baseline score of ≤3.2/0.7 for the SRS-22r/EQ-5D, respectively., Results: 171 patients completed the SRS-22r and 170 patients completed the EQ-5D at baseline and at 2 years postoperative. Patients who reached MCID in the SRS-22r self-reported more pain and worse health at baseline in both approaches (1) and (2). Lower baseline PROMs ((1) - OR: .01 [.00-.12]; (2)- OR: .00 [.00-.07]) and number of severe adverse events (AEs) ((1) - OR: .48 [.28-.82]; (2)- OR: .39 [.23-.69]) were the only identified risk factors. Patients who reached MCID in the EQ-5D demonstrated similar characteristics regarding pain and health at baseline as the SRS-22r using approaches (1) and (2). Higher baseline ODI ((1) - OR: 1.05 [1.02-1.07]) and number of severe AEs (OR: .58 [.38-.89]) were identified as predictive variables. Patients who reached MCID in the SRS22r experienced worse health at baseline using approach (3). The number of AEs (OR: .44 [.25-.77]) and baseline PROMs (OR: .01 [.00-.22] were the only identified predictive factors. Patients who reached MCID in the EQ-5D experienced less AEs and a lower number of actions taken due to the occurrence of AEs using approach (3). The number of actions taken due to AEs (OR: .50 [.35-.73]) was found to be the only predictive variable factor. No surgical, clinical, or radiographic variables were identified as risk factors using either of the aforementioned approaches., Conclusion: In this large multicenter prospective cohort of elderly patients undergoing primary reconstructive surgery for ASD, baseline health status, AEs, and severity of AEs were predictive of reaching MCID. No clinical, radiological, or surgical parameters were identified as factors that can be prognostic for reaching MCID., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Study Design: Multicenter, international prospective study., Objective: This study investigated the clinical outcome up to 2 years after multi-level spinal deformity surgery in the elderly by reporting the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of EuroQol 5-dimensions (EQ-5D), EQ-VAS, and residential status., Methods: As an ancillary study of 219 patients ≥60 years with spinal deformity undergoing primary instrumented fusion surgery of ≥5 levels, this study focuses on EQ-5D (3-L) as the primary outcome and EQ-VAS and residential status as secondary outcomes. Data on EQ-5D were compared between pre-operatively and postoperatively at 10 weeks, 12 months, and 24 months. An anchor-based approach was used to calculate the MCID., Results: The EQ-5D index and EQ-VAS, respectively, improved significantly at each time point compared to pre-operatively (from .53 (SD .21) and 55.6 (SD 23.0) pre-operatively to .64 (SD .18) and 65.8 (SD 18.7) at 10 weeks, .74 (SD .18) and 72.7 (SD 18.1) at 12 months, and .73 (SD .20) and 70.4 (SD 20.4) at 24 months). 217 (99.1%) patients lived at home pre-operatively, while 186 (88.6%), 184 (98.4%), and 172 (100%) did so at 10 weeks, 12 months, and 24 months, respectively. Our calculated MCID for the EQ-5D index at 1 year was .22 (95% CI .15-.29)., Conclusions: The EQ-5D index significantly increased at each time point over 24 months after ≥5 level spinal deformity surgery in elderly patients. The MCID of the EQ-5D-3 L was .22. Patients living at home pre-operatively can expect to be able to live at home 2 years postoperatively., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Study Design: Prospective multicenter database post-hoc analysis., Objectives: Opioids are frequently prescribed for painful spinal conditions to provide pain relief and to allow for functional improvement, both before and after spine surgery. Amidst a current opioid epidemic, it is important for providers to understand the impact of opioid use and its relationship with patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate pre-/postoperative opioid consumption surrounding ASD and assess patient-reported pain outcomes in older patients undergoing surgery for spinal deformity., Methods: Patients ≥60 years of age from 12 international centers undergoing spinal fusion of at least 5 levels and a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patient-reported outcome scores were collected using the Numeric Rating Scale for back and leg pain (NRS-B; NRS-L) at baseline and at 2 years following surgery. Opioid use, defined based on a specific question on case report forms and question 11 from the SRS-22r questionnaire, was assessed at baseline and at 2-year follow-up., Result: Of the 219 patients who met inclusion criteria, 179 (81.7%) had 2-year data on opioid use. The percentages of patients reporting opioid use at baseline (n = 75, 34.2%) and 2 years after surgery (n = 55, 30.7%) were similar ( P = .23). However, at last follow-up 39% of baseline opioid users (Opi) were no longer taking opioids, while 14% of initial non-users (No-Opi) reported opioid use. Regional pre- and postoperative opioid use was 5.8% and 7.7% in the Asian population, 58.3% and 53.1% in the European, and 50.5% and 40.2% in North American patients, respectively. Baseline opioid users reported more preoperative back pain than the No-Opi group (7.0 vs 5.7, P = .001), while NRS-Leg pain scores were comparable (4.8 vs 4, P = .159). Similarly, at last follow-up, patients in the Opi group had greater NRS-B scores than Non-Opi patients (3.2 vs 2.3, P = .012), but no differences in NRS-Leg pain scores (2.2 vs 2.4, P = .632) were observed., Conclusions: In this study, almost one-third of surgical ASD patients were consuming opioids both pre- and postoperatively world-wide. There were marked international variations, with patients from Asia having a much lower usage rate, suggesting a cultural influence. Despite both opioid users and nonusers benefitting from surgery, preoperative opioid use was strongly associated with significantly more back pain at baseline that persisted at 2-year follow up, as well as persistent postoperative opioid needs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Objectives: No consensus exists among surgeons on which radiologic method to prefer for the assessment of curve flexibility in spinal deformity. The objective of this study was to evaluate the difference in curve correction on supine traction radiographs versus prone side bending radiographs., Methods: A retrospective analysis of idiopathic scoliosis (IS), degenerative idiopathic scoliosis (DIS) and de novo degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DNDLS) patients was performed on supine traction as well as prone bending films (when available). Age, weight, traction force, diagnosis and Cobb angles of the primary and secondary curves were extracted. Differences in curve correction (percentages) on traction versus prone bending radiographs were analyzed for the primary and secondary curve. Subgroup analyses were performed for the 3 different diagnoses., Results: In total, 170 patients were eligible for inclusion. 43 were diagnosed with IS, 58 with DIS and 69 with DNDLS. For the primary curve, greater curve correction was obtained with bending in the DNDLS group ( P < 0.001). In the DIS group, there was a trend toward more correction on bending ( P = 0.054). In de IS group no difference was found. For the secondary curve, bending showed more curve correction in the IS and DIS group ( P = 0.002 and P <0.001). No difference was found in the DNDLS group., Conclusion: Compared to traction radiographs, bending radiographs better serve the purpose of curve flexibility assessment of IS, DIS and DNDLS spinal deformity, despite the fact that patients are exposed to more radiation.

Study Design: Prospective cohort study., Objective: To investigate the primary stability of the Prodisc-C Vivo cervical disc arthroplasty with regard to the adjacent cervical vertebrae using radiostereometric analysis (RSA), and to monitor its clinical performance., Methods: Sixteen patients with degenerative cervical disc disease were included. RSA radiographs were obtained at the first postoperative day, at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Migration (translation [mm]) of the superior and inferior implant components were measured with model-based RSA, expressed along the 3 orthogonal axes, and calculated as total translation. Clinical outcomes were Neck Disability Index, numeric rating scales for neck and arm pain, Likert-type scales for satisfaction, and adverse events. Range of motion was reported as C2-C7 flexion-extension mobility (ROM)., Results: At final follow-up, no significant increase over time in median total translation was found. One inferior and 3 superior components subsided but were asymptomatic. ROM remained stable and clinical outcomes improved over time. Although 3 patients were unsatisfied and 3 adverse events occurred, this was not related to translation of the components., Conclusions: On a group level, both components of the Prodisc-C Vivo cervical disc arthroplasty remained stable over time and below the clinical threshold of 1 mm. Individual outliers for translation were not clinically relevant and probably related to settling of the components into the vertebral endplates. RSA allowed us to perform a preliminary but accurate study on the micromotion of a new cervical disc replacement in a small sample size, without putting large numbers of patients at risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2019.)

Study Design: Historical cohort study., Objective: To evaluate progression in the coronal and sagittal planes in nonsurgical patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD)., Methods: A retrospective analysis of nonsurgical ASD patients between 2005 and 2017 was performed. Magnitude of the coronal and sagittal planes were compared on the day of presentation and at most recent follow-up. Previous reported prognostic factors for progression in the coronal plane, including the direction of scoliosis, curve magnitude, and the position of the intercrest line (passing through L4 or L5 vertebra), were studied., Results: Fifty-eight patients were included with a mean follow-up of 59.8 ± 34.5 months. Progression in the coronal plane was seen in 72% of patients. Mean Cobb angle on the day of presentation and most recent follow-up was 37.2 ± 14.6° and 40.8° ± 16.5°, respectively. No significant differences were found in curve progression in left- versus right-sided scoliosis (3.3 ± 7.1 vs 3.7 ± 5.4, P = .81), Cobb angle <30° versus ≥30° (2.6 ± 5.0 vs 4.3 ± 6.5, P = .30), or when the intercrest line passed through L4 rather than L5 vertebra (3.4 ± 5.0° vs 3.8 ± 7.1°, P = .79). No significant differences were found in the sagittal plane between presentation and most recent follow-up., Conclusions: This is the first study that describes progression in the coronal and sagittal planes in nonsurgical patients with ASD. Previous reported prognostic factors were not confirmed as truly relevant. Although progression appears to occur, large variation exists and these results may not be directly applicable to the individual patient., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2019.)

Study Design: Systematic literature review with meta-analysis., Objective: Osteoporosis is common in elderly patients, who frequently suffer from spinal fractures or degenerative diseases and often require surgical treatment with spinal instrumentation. Diminished bone quality impairs primary screw purchase, which may lead to loosening and its sequelae, in the worst case, revision surgery. Information about the incidence of spinal instrumentation-related complications in osteoporotic patients is currently limited to individual reports. We conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of quantifying the incidence of screw loosening in osteoporotic spines., Methods: Publications on spinal instrumentation of osteoporotic patients reporting screw-related complications were identified in 3 databases. Data on screw loosening and other local complications was collected. Pooled risks of experiencing such complications were estimated with random effects models. Risk of bias in the individual studies was assessed with an adapted McHarm Scale., Results: From 1831 initial matches, 32 were eligible and 19 reported screw loosening rates. Studies were heterogeneous concerning procedures performed and risk of bias. Screw loosening incidences were variable with a pooled risk of 22.5% (95% CI 10.8%-36.6%, 95% prediction interval [PI] 0%-81.2%) in reports on nonaugmented screws and 2.2% (95% CI 0.0%-7.2%, 95% PI 0%-25.1%) in reports on augmented screws., Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that screw loosening incidences may be considerably higher in osteoporotic spines than with normal bone mineral density. Screw augmentation may reduce loosening rates; however, this requires confirmation through clinical studies. Standardized reporting of prespecified complications should be enforced by publishers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was funded by AO Foundation TK System. Two authors (Elke Rometsch and Kathrin Espinoza) are employees of AO Foundation in the Department of Clinical Investigation and Documentation (AOCID) and have received grants from the AO Foundation TK System during the conduct of the study. Concerning the work under consideration, Frank Kandziora has received travel support and honorary for board meetings by AO Spine and Maarten Spruit is Chairman of the AOSpine Technical Commission. Financial activities outside the submitted work within the preceding 36 months are reported by Frank Kandziora for his activities as a consultant for DePuy-Synthes, Siemens, and Silony, by Roger Härtl for his activities as a consultant for Brainlab, Ulrich, Depuy-Synthes, and Zimmer, and by Jean Ouellet for receiving grants from AO North America and from Omega, whereas the other authors have nothing to disclose., (© The Author(s) 2019.)

Study Design: Systematic literature review with meta-analysis., Objective: Thoracolumbar (TL) fractures can be treated conservatively or surgically. Especially, the treatment strategy for incomplete and complete TL burst fractures (A3 and A4, AOSpine classification) in neurologically intact patients remains controversial. The aim of this work was to collate the clinical evidence on the respective treatment modalities., Methods: Searches were performed in PubMed and the Web of Science. Clinical and radiological outcome data were collected. For studies comparing operative with nonoperative treatment, the standardized mean differences (SMD) for disability and pain were calculated and methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed., Results: From 1929 initial matches, 12 were eligible. Four of these compared surgical with conservative treatment. A comparative analysis of radiological results was not possible due to a lack of uniform reporting. Differences in clinical outcomes at follow-up were small, both between studies and between treatment groups. The SMD was 0.00 (95% CI -0.072, 0.72) for disability and -0.05 (95% CI -0.91, 0.81) for pain. Methodological quality was high in most studies and no evidence of publication bias was revealed., Conclusions: We did not find differences in disability or pain outcomes between operative and nonoperative treatment of A3 and A4 TL fractures in neurologically intact patients. Notwithstanding, the available scores have been developed and validated for degenerative diseases; thus, their suitability in trauma may be questionable. Specific and uniform outcome parameters need to be defined and enforced for the evaluation of TL trauma., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Three authors (Elke Rometsch, Brigitte Sandra Gallo-Kopf, and Vasiliki Kalampoki) are employees of AO Foundation in the Department of Clinical Investigation and Documentation (AOCID). Concerning the work under consideration, Frank Kandziora has received travel support and honorary for board meetings by AO Spine. Financial activities outside the submitted work within the preceding 36 months are reported by Maarten Spruit for his activities as Chairman of AO TK Spine, by Frank Kandziora for his activities as a consultant for DePuy-Synthes, Siemens, and Silony, by Roger Härtl for his activities as a consultant for Brainlab, Lanx, Depuy-Synthes and AOSpine, and by Robert Alton McGuire for review of medical records for Rehab, Inc.

Study Design  A prospective cohort study. Objective  Decompression and fusion of cervical vertebrae is a combined procedure that has a high success rate in relieving radicular symptoms and stabilizing or improving cervical myelopathy. However, fusion may lead to increased motion of the adjacent vertebrae and cervical deformity. Both have been postulated to lead to adjacent segment pathology (ASP). Kinematic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been increasingly used to evaluate range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine and ASP. Our objective was to measure ASP, cervical curvature, and ROM of individual segments of the cervical spine using kinematic MRI before and 24 months after monosegmental cage fusion. Methods  Eighteen patients who had single-level interbody fusion were included. ROM (using kinematic MRI) and degeneration, spinal stenosis, and cervical curvature were measured preoperatively and 24 months postoperatively. Results  Using kinematic MRI, segmental motion of the cervical segments was measured with a precision of less than 3 degrees. The cervical fusion did not affect the ROM of adjacent levels. However, pre- and postoperative ROM was higher at the levels immediately adjacent to the fusion level compared with those further away. In addition, at 24 months postoperatively, the number of cases with ASP was higher at the levels immediately adjacent to fusion level. Conclusions  Using kinematic MRI, ROM after spinal fusion can be measured with high precision. Kinematic MRI can be used not only in clinical practice, but also to study intervention and its effect on postoperative biomechanics and ASP of cervical vertebrae.