Search

OBJECTIVE The objective of this paper was to determine the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on surgeon experience (< 5 years, 5–10 years, 10–20 years, and > 20 years) and surgical subspecialty (orthopedic spine surgery, neurosurgery, and "other" surgery). METHODS A total of 11,601 assessments of upper cervical spine injuries were evaluated based on the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System. Reliability and reproducibility scores were obtained twice, with a 3-week time interval. Descriptive statistics were utilized to examine the percentage of accurately classified injuries, and Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was used to screen for potentially relevant differences between study participants. Kappa coefficients (κ) determined the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS The intraobserver reproducibility was substantial for surgeon experience level (< 5 years: 0.74 vs 5–10 years: 0.69 vs 10–20 years: 0.69 vs > 20 years: 0.70) and surgical subspecialty (orthopedic spine: 0.71 vs neurosurgery: 0.69 vs other: 0.68). Furthermore, the interobserver reliability was substantial for all surgical experience groups on assessment 1 (< 5 years: 0.67 vs 5–10 years: 0.62 vs 10–20 years: 0.61 vs > 20 years: 0.62), and only surgeons with > 20 years of experience did not have substantial reliability on assessment 2 (< 5 years: 0.62 vs 5–10 years: 0.61 vs 10–20 years: 0.61 vs > 20 years: 0.59). Orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons had substantial intraobserver reproducibility on both assessment 1 (0.64 vs 0.63) and assessment 2 (0.62 vs 0.63), while other surgeons had moderate reliability on assessment 1 (0.43) and fair reliability on assessment 2 (0.36). CONCLUSIONS The international reliability and reproducibility scores for the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System demonstrated substantial intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability regardless of surgical experience and spine subspecialty. These results support the global application of this classification system.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Prior upper cervical spine injury classification systems have focused on injuries to the craniocervical junction (CCJ), atlas, and dens independently. However, no previous system has classified upper cervical spine injuries using a comprehensive system incorporating all injuries from the occiput to the C2-3 joint. PURPOSE To (1) determine the accuracy of experts at correctly classifying upper cervical spine injuries based on the recently proposed AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System (2) to determine their interobserver reliability and (3) identify the intraobserver reproducibility of the experts. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING International Multi-Center Survey PATIENT SAMPLE: A survey of international spine surgeons on 29 unique upper cervical spine injuries OUTCOME MEASURES: Classification accuracy, interobserver reliability, intraobserver reproducibility METHODS: Thirteen international AO Spine Knowledge Forum Trauma members participated in two live webinar-based classifications of 29 upper cervical spine injuries presented in random order, four weeks apart. Percent agreement with the gold-standard and kappa coefficients (ƙ) were calculated to determine the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS Raters demonstrated 80.8% and 82.7% accuracy with identification of the injury classification (combined location and type) on the first and second assessment, respectively. Injury classification intraobserver reproducibility was excellent (mean, [range] ƙ = 0.82 [0.58-1.00]). Excellent interobserver reliability was found for injury location (ƙ = 0.922 and ƙ= 0.912) on both assessments, while injury type was substantial (ƙ=0.689 and 0.699) on both assessments. This correlated to a substantial overall interobserver reliability (ƙ = 0.729 and 0.732). CONCLUSION Early phase validation demonstrated classification of upper cervical spine injuries using the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System to be accurate, reliable, and reproducible. Greater than 80% accuracy was detected for injury classification. The intraobserver reproducibility was excellent, while the interobserver reliability was substantial.

Study Design Systematic Review. Objectives To systematically review the current literature and perform a meta-analysis on patients with cervical or lumbar spine Modic changes to determine if their baseline axial back pain and disability are comparable to patients without Modic changes. Methods A systematic review of the PubMed database was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the mean differences in back pain, leg pain, and disability based on the presence of cervical or lumbar spine Modic changes. A subgroup analysis of the different types of Modic changes was conducted to determine if Modic type affected back pain or disability. Results – After review of 259 articles, 17 studies were included for meta-analysis and ten studies were included for qualitative synthesis. In the lumbar spine, 10 high-quality studies analyzed Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back pain, 10 evaluated VAS leg pain, and 8 analyzed Oswestry Disability Index. VAS back pain (mean difference (MD), −.38; 95% CI, -.61 – .16) and Oswestry disability index (MD −2.52; 95% CI, −3.93 – −1.12) were significantly lower in patients without Modic changes. Modic change subtype was not associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes. Patients with cervical spine Modic changes did not experience more severe pain than those without MC. Conclusions Modic changes in the lumbar spine are not associated with clinically significant axial low back pain severity or patient disability. Similar to the lumbar spine, Modic changes in the cervical spine are not associated with symptom severity, but they are associated with pain duration.

PURPOSE To assess the accuracy and reliability of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on a surgeons' work setting and trauma center affiliation. METHODS A total of 275 AO Spine members participated in a validation of 25 upper cervical spine injuries, which were evaluated by computed tomography (CT) scans. Each participant was grouped based on their work setting (academic, hospital-employed, or private practice) and their trauma center affiliation (Level I, Level II or III, and Level IV or no trauma center). The classification accuracy was calculated as percent of correct classifications, while interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reproducibility were evaluated based on Fleiss' Kappa coefficient. RESULTS The overall classification accuracy for surgeons affiliated with a level I trauma center was significantly greater than participants affiliated with a level II/III center or a level IV/no trauma center on assessment one (p1

Determining important links between medical comorbidities and cervical spine degenerative disc disease (DDD) will help elucidate pathomechanisms of disc degeneration. Electronic medical records and magnetic resonance imaging were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate 799 patients assessed for cervical spine pathology. Bivariate analysis identified older age, diabetes, ASA class, cancer, COPD, depression, hypertension, hypothyroidism, Medicare status, peripheral vascular disease, history of previous cervical spine surgery, smoking, and lower median household income as having strong associations with increased cumulative grade of cervical spine DDD. This study provides evidence suggesting aging and accumulation of medical comorbidities influence severity of cervical spine DDD.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate patient and surgical factors that predict increased overall lumbar lordosis (LL) and segmental lordosis correction following a minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedure. METHODS A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent one- or two-level LLIF. Preoperative, initial postoperative, and 6-month postoperative measurements of LL, segmental lordosis, anterior disc height, and posterior disc height were collected from standing lateral radiographs for each patient. Cage placement was measured utilizing the center point ratio (CPR) on immediate postoperative radiographs. Spearman correlations were used to assess associations between cage lordosis and radiographic parameters. Multivariate linear regression was performed to assess independent predictors of outcomes. RESULTS A total of 106 levels in 78 unique patients were included. Most procedures involved fusion of one level (n = 50, 64.1%), most commonly L3–4 (46.2%). Despite no differences in baseline segmental lordosis, patients with anteriorly or centrally placed cages experienced the greatest segmental lordosis correction immediately (mean anterior 4.81° and central 4.46° vs posterior 2.47°, p = 0.0315) and at 6 months postoperatively, and patients with anteriorly placed cages had greater overall lordosis correction postoperatively (mean 6.30°, p = 0.0338). At the 6-month follow-up, patients with anteriorly placed cages experienced the greatest increase in anterior disc height (mean anterior 6.24 mm vs posterior 3.69 mm, p = 0.0122). Cages placed more posteriorly increased the change in posterior disc height postoperatively (mean posterior 4.91 mm vs anterior 1.80 mm, p = 0.0001) and at 6 months (mean posterior 4.18 mm vs anterior 2.06 mm, p = 0.0255). There were no correlations between cage lordotic angle and outcomes. On multivariate regression, anterior cage placement predicted greater 6-month improvement in segmental lordosis, while posterior placement predicted greater 6-month improvement in posterior disc height. Percutaneous screw placement, cage lordotic angle, and cage height did not independently predict any radiographic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS LLIF procedures reliably improve LL and increase intervertebral disc space. Anterior cage placement improves the lordosis angle greater than posterior placement, which better corrects sagittal alignment, but there is still a significant improvement in lordosis even with a posteriorly placed cage. Posterior cage placement provides greater restoration in posterior disc space height, maximizing indirect decompression, but even the anteriorly placed cages provided indirect decompression. Cage parameters including cage height, lordosis angle, and material do not impact radiographic improvement.

Study Design Retrospective Cohort Objectives To (1) quantify the risk opioids impart on pseudarthrosis development, (2) analyze the effect of pseudarthrosis on clinical outcomes, and (3) identify if the amount of opioids prescribed are predictive of pseudarthrosis revision. Methods Patients who underwent ACDF at a single institution between 2017-2019 were retrospectively identified. Postoperative dynamic cervical spine radiographs were reviewed to assess fusion status. Logistic regression models measured the effect of morphine milligram equivalents (MME) prescribed on the likelihood of pseudarthrosis development. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to predict the probability of surgical revision based on MME prescribed. Results Of 298 included patients, an average of 2.01 ± 0.82 levels were included in the construct and 121 (40.9%) patients were diagnosed with a pseudarthrosis. However, only 14 (4.7%) required a pseudarthrosis revision. Patients requiring pseudarthrosis revision had worse one-year postoperative Δ PCS-12 (−1.70 vs. 7.58, P = 0.004), Δ NDI (3.33 vs. −15.26, P = 0.002), and Δ VAS Arm (2.33 vs. −2.48, P = .047). Multivariate logistic regression analyses found the three-month postoperative (OR=1.00, P = .010), one-year postoperative (OR=1.001, P = 0.025), and combined pre- and postoperative MME (OR=1.000, P = .035) increased the risk of pseudarthrosis. ROC analysis identified cutoff values to predict pseudarthrosis revision at 90.00 (area under the curve (AUC): 0.693, confidence interval (CI): 0.554-0.832), 132.86 (0.710, CI: 0.589-0.840), 224.76 (0.687, CI: 0.558-0.817) and 285.00 (0.711, CI: 0.585-0.837) MME in the preoperative, three-month postoperative, one-year postoperative, and combined pre-and postoperative period. Conclusion Increased prescription of opioid medications following ACDF procedures may increase the risk of pseudarthrosis development and revision surgery. Level of Evidence Therapeutic Level III

Purpose: To determine if longus colli cross-sectional area (CSA) is associated with the severity preoperative cervical degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods and Materials: Patients undergoing elective anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for cervical spondylolisthesis between 2010–2021 were retrospectively identified. Longus colli cross-sectional areas (CSA) were measured from preoperative MRI images at the C5 level. Preoperative spondylolisthesis measurements were recorded with cervical radiographs. Patients were grouped by quartiles respectively according to longus colli CSAs. Statistical tests compared patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and surgical outcomes between groups. Multiple linear regression analysis was utilized to assess if longus colli CSA predicted cervical spondylolisthesis. Results: A total of 157 patients met inclusion criteria. Group 1 (first quartile) was the oldest (60.4 ± 12.0 years, p = 0.024) and was predominantly female (59.0%, p = 0.001). Group 1 also had the highest maximum spondylolisthesis (0.19mm, p = 0.031) and highest proportion of grade 2 spondylolisthesis (23.1%, p = 0.003). On regression analysis, lowest quartile of longus colli CSA was an independent predictor of larger measured maximum spondylolisthesis (β: 0.04, p = 0.012). Conclusion: Smaller longus colli CSA is independently associated with a higher grade and degree of preoperative cervical spondylolisthesis, but this finding does not result in adverse postsurgical outcomes.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: Spinal cord injuries (SCIs) resulting in motor deficits can be devastating injuries resulting in millions of health care dollars spent per incident. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a potential class of drugs that could improve motor function after an SCI. This systematic review utilizes PRISMA guidelines to evaluate the effectiveness of NSAIDs for SCI. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, and Scopus were reviewed linking the keywords of “ibuprofen,” “meloxicam,” “naproxen,” “ketorolac,” “indomethacin,” “celecoxib,” “ATB-346,” “NSAID,” and “nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug” with “spinal.” Results were reviewed for relevance and included if they met inclusion criteria. The SYRCLE checklist was used to assess sources of bias. Results: A total of 2960 studies were identified in the PubMed/MEDLINE database using the above-mentioned search criteria. A total of 461 abstracts were reviewed in Scopus, 340 in CINAHL, 179 in PsycINFO, and 7632 in Embase. A total of 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Conclusions: NSAIDs’ effectiveness after SCI is largely determined by its ability to inhibit Rho-A. NSAIDs are a promising therapeutic option in acute SCI patients because they appear to decrease cord edema and inflammation, increase axonal sprouting, and improve motor function with minimal side effects. Studies are limited by heterogeneity, small sample size, and the use of animal models, which might not replicate the therapeutic effects in humans. There are no published human studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of these drugs after a traumatic cord injury. There is a need for well-designed prospective studies evaluating ibuprofen or indomethacin after adult spinal cord injuries.

Study Design Global cross-sectional survey. Objective To explore the influence of geographic region on the AO Spine Sacral Classification System. Methods A total of 158 AO Spine and AO Trauma members from 6 AO world regions (Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin and South America, Middle East, and North America) participated in a live webinar to assess the reliability, reproducibility, and accuracy of classifying sacral fractures using the AO Spine Sacral Classification System. This evaluation was performed with 26 cases presented in randomized order on 2 occasions 3 weeks apart. Results A total of 8320 case assessments were performed. All regions demonstrated excellent intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology. Respondents from Europe (k = .80) and North America (k = .86) achieved excellent reproducibility for fracture subtype while respondents from all other regions displayed substantial reproducibility. All regions demonstrated at minimum substantial interobserver reliability for fracture morphology and subtype. Each region demonstrated >90% accuracy in classifying fracture morphology and >80% accuracy in fracture subtype compared to the gold standard. Type C morphology (p2 = .0000) and A3 (p1 = .0280), B2 (p1 = .0015), C0 (p1 = .0085), and C2 (p1 =.0016, p2 =.0000) subtypes showed significant regional disparity in classification accuracy (p1 = Assessment 1, p2 = Assessment 2). Respondents from Asia (except in A3) and the combined group of North, Latin, and South America had accuracy percentages below the combined mean, whereas respondents from Europe consistently scored above the mean. Conclusions In a global validation study of the AO Spine Sacral Classification System, substantial reliability of both fracture morphology and subtype classification was found across all geographic regions.

STUDY DESIGN Global Cross Sectional Survey. OBJECTIVE To determine the classification accuracy, interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on an international group of AO Spine members. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Previous upper cervical spine injury classifications have primarily been descriptive without incorporating a hierarchical injury progression within the classification system. Further, upper cervical spine injury classifications have focused on distinct anatomical segments within the upper cervical spine. The AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System incorporates all injuries of the upper cervical spine into a single classification system focused on a hierarchical progression from isolated bony injuries (type A) to fracture dislocations (type C). METHODS A total of 275 AO Spine members participated in a validation aimed at classifying 25 upper cervical spine injuries via computed tomography (CT) scans according to the AO Spine Upper Cervical Classification System. The validation occurred on two separate occasions, three weeks apart. Descriptive statistics for percent agreement with the gold-standard were calculated and Pearson's chi square test evaluated significance between validation groups. Kappa coefficients (ƙ) determined the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS The accuracy of AO Spine members to appropriately classify upper cervical spine injuries was 79.7% on assessment 1 (AS1) and 78.7% on assessment 2 (AS2). The overall intraobserver reproducibility was substantial (ƙ=0.70), while the overall interobserver reliability for AS1 and AS2 was substantial (ƙ=0.63 and ƙ=0.61, respectively). Injury location had higher interobserver reliability (AS1: ƙ = 0.85 and AS2: ƙ=0.83) than the injury type (AS1: ƙ=0.59 and AS2: 0.57) on both assessments. CONCLUSION The global validation of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System demonstrated substantial interobserver agreement and intraobserver reproducibility. These results support the universal applicability of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System.

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement is necessary for delivery of intravenous (IV) antibiotics to treat bone and soft tissue infections. Upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT) after PICC placement is a complication with unknown incidence in the orthopaedic literature. The major objectives of this study are Identifying the rate of upper extremity PICC-associated DVTs after orthopaedic procedures;Which orthopaedic subspecialties are most likely to encounter an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT?What surgeries or medical comorbidities are risk factors for upper extremity PICC-associated DVTs?Does type of DVT chemoprophylaxis decrease the risk of an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT?A retrospective review of electronic medical records (EMR) was performed to include all patients undergoing irrigation and debridement (ID) for treatment of orthopaedic surgery-related infections over a 10-year period. All patients with PICC placement were included for analyses. Age, sex, and medical comorbidities were extracted from the EMR. Mann-Whitney non-parametric tests, Fisher's exact tests, Chi-square tests, and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) tests were used to determine associations with DVT events for those with PICCs based on medical comorbidities, PICC lumen size, team placing the PICC, impact of implant removal, and protective effect of DVT chemoprophylaxis. Significance was set at p0.05.Twenty-one of 660 patients (3.18% rate) were found to have an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT. A history of DVT (OR=8.99 [95% CI: 3.39, 49.42]) was significantly associated with an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT. The greatest risk for an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT was intramedullary implant removal (OR=12.43 [95% CI: 3.13, 49.52]). The type of DVT chemoprophylaxis did not significantly affect the likelihood of an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT.Intramedullary implant removal and a history of DVT are risk factors for an upper extremity PICC-associated DVT. The results of this study should be of particular interest to surgeons who do not typically give DVT prophylaxis and plan to perform surgery on patients with CHF, a history of a DVT, or plan to manipulate the intramedullary canal.

Modic changes (MCs) are believed to be potential pain generators in the lumbar and cervical spine, but it is currently unclear if their presence affects postsurgical outcomes. We performed a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All studies evaluating cervical or lumbar spine postsurgical outcomes in patients with documented preoperative MCs were included. A total of 29 studies and 6013 patients with 2688 of those patients having preoperative MCs were included. Eight included studies evaluated cervical spine surgery, eleven evaluated lumbar discectomies, nine studied lumbar fusion surgery, and three assessed lumbar disc replacements. The presence of cervical MCs did not impact the clinical outcomes in the cervical spine procedures. Moreover, most studies found that MCs did not significantly impact the clinical outcomes following lumbar fusion, lumbar discectomy, or lumbar disc replacement. A meta-analysis of the relevant data found no significant association between MCs and VAS back pain or ODI following lumbar discectomy. Similarly, there was no association between MCs and JOA or neck pain following ACDF procedures. Patients with MC experienced statistically significant improvements following lumbar or cervical spine surgery. The postoperative improvements were similar to patients without MCs in the cervical and lumbar spine.

Study Design Retrospective Cohort Study. Objectives To (1) investigate the effect of marijuana use on surgical outcomes following lumbar fusion, (2) determine how marijuana use affects patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), and (3) determine if marijuana use impacts the quantity of opioids prescribed. Methods Patients > 18 years of age who underwent primary one- or two-level lumbar fusion with preoperative marijuana use at our institution were identified. A 3:1 propensity match incorporating patient demographics and procedure type was conducted to compare preoperative marijuana users to non-marijuana users. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, surgical outcomes (90-day all-cause and 90-day surgical readmissions, reoperations, and revision surgeries), pre- and postoperative narcotic usage, and PROMs were compared between groups. Multivariate regression models were created to determine the effect of marijuana on surgical reoperations patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) 1-year postoperatively. Results Of the 259 included patients, 65 used marijuana preoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that marijuana use (OR = 2.28, P = .041) significantly increased the likelihood of having a spine reoperation. No other surgical outcome was found to be significantly different between groups. Multivariate linear regression analysis showed that marijuana use was not significantly associated with changes in 1-year postoperative PROMs (all, P > .05). The quantity of pre- and postoperative opioids prescriptions was not significantly different between groups (all, P > .05). Conclusions Preoperative marijuana use increased the likelihood of a spine reoperation for any indication following lumbar fusion, but it was not associated with 90-day all cause readmission, surgical readmission, the magnitude of improvement in PROMs, or differences in opioid consumption. Level of Evidence III

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a relatively common disease seen in Whites of northern European descent. Classically, it was a lethal disease and uncommon for the orthopedic practitioner to interact with CF patients. Recent pharmaceutical breakthroughs targeting the CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene have significantly prolonged patient life expectancy. This makes it increasingly likely that orthopedic surgeons will encounter CF patients in their clinic. In this article, the authors discuss pertinent musculoskeletal manifestations of the CF population, including the increased risk of decreased bone mineral density and bone mineral content, muscle deconditioning, spinal kyphosis, fractures, and elevated systemic inflammation predisposing these individuals to CF-related arthralgia. The diagnoses are grouped into subspecialties (arthroplasty, pediatrics, spine, sports, and trauma) most likely to evaluate the patient. Additionally, the authors review treatment options for these conditions and discuss the need for these patients to be seen in the perioperative period by their CF care team for patient optimization due to their diminished pulmonary function. Interspersed with this literature review, the authors present 2 unique cases. The first case details a patient with pain over her spine due to multilevel spinous process bursitis caused by a high-frequency chest wall oscillation system, which masquerades as an infection. The second case is a non-contact midsubstance rectus femoris tear in an athlete. These cases highlight the need for increased vigilance for uncommon diagnoses in the CF patient population. [ Orthopedics . 2021;44(3):e440–e445.]

Study Design: Retrospective study.Purpose: To identify the rate of positive acid-fast bacillus (AFB) and fungal cultures during spine debridement, determine whether these infections are more common in certain spine segments, identify comorbidities associated with these infections, and determine whether the universal performance of fungal and AFB cultures during spine debridement is cost effective.Overview of Literature: Spine infections are associated with significant morbidity and costs. Spine fungal and AFB infections are rare, but their incidence has not been well documented. As such, guidance regarding sample procurement for AFB and fungal cultures is lacking.Methods: A retrospective review of medical record data from patients undergoing spine irrigation and debridement (I&D) at the University of Missouri over a 10-year period was performed.Results: For patients undergoing spine I&D, there was a 4% incidence of fungal infection and 0.49% rate of AFB infection. Steroid use was associated with a higher likelihood (odds ratio, 5.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.33–23.75) of positive fungal or AFB cultures. Although not significant, patients undergoing multiple I&D procedures had higher rates of positive fungal cultures during each subsequent I&D. Over a 10-year period, if fungal cultures are obtained for each patient, it would cost our healthcare system $12,151.58. This is compared to an average cost of $177,297.64 per missed fungal infection requiring subsequent treatment.Conclusions: Spine fungal infections occur infrequently at a rate of 4%. Physicians should strongly consider obtaining samples for fungal cultures in patients undergoing spine I&D, especially those using steroids and those undergoing multiple I&Ds. Our AFB culture rates mirror the false positive rates seen in previous orthopedic literature. It is unlikely to be cost effective to send for AFB cultures in areas with low endemic rates of AFB.

Studies on adult spinal deformity have shown spinopelvic malalignment results in worse outcomes. However, it is unclear if this relationship exists in patients with single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) receiving short-segment fusions.To determine if spinopelvic alignment affects patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after posterior lumbar decompression and fusion (PLDF) with or without a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with L4-5 DS.A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients who underwent PLDF for L4-5 DS at a single tertiary referral academic medical center.Patients were divided into groups based on preoperative cutoff values of 20° for pelvic tilt (PT) and 11° for pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) with subsequent reclassification based on correction to20° PT or 11° PI-LL. Radiographic outcomes and PROMs were compared between the groups.Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to determine whether radiographic cutoff values served as the independent predictors of change in PROMs. Statistical significance was set atA total of 188 patients with completed PROMs were included for the analysis. Preoperative PT20° was associated with significantly greater reduction in PI-LL (-2.41° vs. 1.21°,A preoperative PT20° is associated with improved PI-LL reduction and an increase in SS. However, no differences in clinical outcomes were found 1 year postoperatively for patients with preoperative PT20° and PI-LL ≥11° compared to patients below this threshold.

Abdominal pain after surgery can occur for numerous reasons. Postoperative radiographs may be indicated to evaluate for ileus or other reasons for the pain. Whether outcomes are significantly different based on whether patients get radiographs following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are unclear.To investigate the postoperative outcomes of patients experiencing abdominal pain after LLIF.This retrospective cohort study included patients at a tertiary academic medical center and surrounding affiliated hospitals.Patients18 years of age who underwent elective LLIF at a single institution were retrospectively identified. Patients were stratified into two groups depending on whether they received a postoperative abdominal radiograph or computed tomography (CT) scan for postoperative abdominal pain.Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and surgical outcomes were compared between groups utilizing independentA total of 153 patients (18 with abdominal scans, 135 without) were included. Patients who received a postoperative abdominal radiograph or CT scan were more likely to undergo exploratory laparotomy (11.1% vs. 0.00%,Patients who received abdominal imaging after LLIF were more likely to undergo exploratory laparotomy, experience longer hospital length of stay, and were discharged home less frequently. Intra-abdominal air on postoperative imaging without corresponding physical exam findings consistent with bowel injury is not an appropriate indication for surgical intervention.

Qingli Li,1,2 Mark J Lambrechts,1 Qiuyang Zhang,1 Sen Liu,1 Dongxia Ge,1 Rutie Yin,2 Mingrong Xi,2 Zongbing You1 1Departments of Structural and Cellular Biology and Orthopaedic Surgery, Tulane Cancer Center and Louisiana Cancer Research Consortium, Tulane Center for Stem Cell Research and Regenerative Medicine, and Tulane Center for Aging, Tulane University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA, USA; 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China Abstract: Glycine is a nonessential amino acid that is reversibly converted from serine intracellularly by serine hydroxymethyltransferase. Glyphosate and its degradation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), are analogs to glycine, thus they may inhibit serine hydroxymethyltransferase to decrease intracellular glycine synthesis. In this study, we found that glyphosate and AMPA inhibited cell growth in eight human cancer cell lines but not in two immortalized human normal prostatic epithelial cell lines. AMPA arrested C4-2B and PC-3 cancer cells in the G1/G0 phase and inhibited entry into the S phase of the cell cycle. AMPA also promoted apoptosis in C4-2B and PC-3 cancer cell lines. AMPA upregulated p53 and p21 protein levels as well as procaspase 9 protein levels in C4-2B cells, whereas it downregulated cyclin D3 protein levels. AMPA also activated caspase 3 and induced cleavage of poly (adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase. This study provides the first evidence that glyphosate and AMPA can inhibit proliferation and promote apoptosis of cancer cells but not normal cells, suggesting that they have potentials to be developed into a new anticancer therapy. Keywords: serine hydroxymethyltransferase, prostate cancer, apoptosis