Search

Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is a major cause of low back pain and disability, affecting millions of people worldwide. Current treatments for IVD degeneration are limited to invasive surgery or pain management. Recently, there has been increasing interest in the use of biomaterials, such as alginate hydrogels, for the treatment of IVD degeneration. Alginate hydrogels are an example of such a biomaterial that is biocompatible and can be tailored to mimic the native extracellular matrix of the IVD. Derived from alginate, a naturally derived polysaccharide from brown seaweed that can be transformed into a gelatinous solution, alginate hydrogels are emerging in the field of tissue engineering. They can be used to deliver therapeutic agents, such as growth factors or cells, to the site of injury, providing a localized and sustained release that may enhance treatment outcomes. This paper provides an overview on the use of alginate hydrogels for the treatment of IVD degeneration. We discuss the properties of alginate hydrogels and their potential applications for IVD regeneration, including the mechanism against IVD degeneration. We also highlight the research outcomes to date along with the challenges and limitations of using alginate hydrogels for IVD regeneration, including their mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and surgical compatibility. Overall, this review paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current research on alginate hydrogels for IVD degeneration and to identify future directions for research in this area., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: Hybrid surgery (HS) is the combination of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) at different levels in the same operation. The aim of this study was to investigate perioperative variables, 30-day postoperative outcomes, and complications of HS in comparison with those of CDA and ACDF., Methods: The authors queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) registry for patients who underwent multilevel primary HS, CDA, and ACDF for degenerative disc disease from 2015 to 2019. The authors compared these three operations in terms of 30-day postoperative outcomes, specifically readmission and reoperation rates, discharge destination, and complications., Results: This analysis included 439 patients who underwent HS, 976 patients who underwent CDA, and 27,460 patients who underwent ACDF. Patients in the HS and CDA groups were younger, had fewer comorbidities, and myelopathy was less often the indication for surgery compared with patients who underwent ACDF. For the HS group, the unplanned readmission rate was 0.7%, index surgery-related reoperation rate was 0.3%, and nonroutine discharge rate was 2.1%. Major and minor complications were also rare, with rates of 0.2% for each. The mean length of stay in the HS group was 1.5 days. The association of HS with better outcomes in univariate analysis was not evident after adjustment for confounding factors., Conclusions: The authors found that HS was noninferior to ACDF and CDA in terms of early postoperative outcomes among patients treated for degenerative disc disease.

The first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) was issued in 2007. Since then, 8 more artificial discs have been granted FDA approval for single-level CTDR. Two of these have also been approved for 2-level CTDR. All devices are indicated for levels C3 to C7 for symptomatic patients with radiculopathy or myelopathy caused by disc herniation or spondylosis unresponsive to conservative management. Trials have shown noninferiority of CTDR compared with anterior cervical decompression and fusion in their overall success. Hybrid surgery and CTDR of 3 or more levels are not FDA approved., Competing Interests: Disclosure None of the authors have any conflict of interest or any other financial disclosures to report., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Frailty is an increasingly studied tool for preoperative risk stratification, but its prognostic value for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) patients is unclear. We sought to evaluate the association of the 5-item modified Frailty Index (5i-mFI) with 30-day adverse outcomes following ACDF and its predictive performance compared with other common metrics., Methods: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried from 2016-2018 for patients undergoing elective ACDF for degenerative diseases. Outcomes of interest included 30-day complications, extended length of stay (LOS), non-home discharge, and unplanned readmissions. Unadjusted/adjusted odds ratios were calculated. The discriminatory performance of the 5i-mFI compared with age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and body mass index was computed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)., Results: A total of 23,754 patients were identified. On adjusted analysis, an index of 1 was significantly associated with extended LOS, non-home discharge, and unplanned readmissions (P < 0.001, P = 0.023, P = 0.003, respectively), but not complications (all P > 0.05). An index ≥2 was significantly associated with each outcome (all P < 0.001). The 5i-mFI was found to have a significantly higher AUC than body mass index for each outcome, a similar AUC compared with ASA classification and age for complications and unplanned readmissions, and a significantly lower AUC than ASA classification and age for extended LOS and non-home discharge., Conclusions: The 5i-mFI was found to be significantly associated with 30-day adverse outcomes following ACDF but had similar or lesser predictive performance compared with more universally available and easily implemented metrics, such as ASA classification and age., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of the spine has been associated with lower complication rates and improved patient-reported outcomes in recent studies. In this study, we aimed to investigate operative and postoperative outcomes associated with both surgical techniques in elderly patients., Methods: Patients who are 65 years old or older underwent either minimally invasive or open surgery for lumbar degenerative conditions. Patients with a nondegenerative cause such as infection or trauma were excluded from the analysis. Patient characteristics such as demographics and associated comorbidities as well as perioperative and postoperative complications were collected. Outcomes of interest were operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), readmissions, reoperations, and any complications., Results: A total of 107 elderly patients were identified for this study, with a median age of 73.0 years. Demographics and comorbidities in both groups were similar in both groups. Univariate analysis yielded an MIS group with significantly lower EBL (P < 0.001), operative time (P < 0.001), and LOS (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, EBL and LOS were found to be significantly lower in the MIS group (P = 0.02 and 0.001, respectively). Rates of complications, readmissions (no readmissions in MIS group), reoperations, and pain improvement also favored the MIS group and although they were not found to be significantly different between the 2 groups on univariate and multivariable analysis, the results trended toward significance., Conclusions: These findings suggest that minimally invasive spine surgery in the elderly is safe and may pose a lower risk of associated perioperative and postoperative complications with faster recovery time., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To utilize a national surgical quality registry to compare 30-day quality outcomes between repeat anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA)., Material and Methods: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) Participant User Files (PUF) for the years 2005-2018 were queried for patients undergoing repeat ACDF and CDA using current procedural terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9th version codes. We compared demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, operative characteristics, 30-day readmissions, reoperations, and complications between the two groups. We also performed multivariable analyses to assess the impact of the type of repeat procedure on outcomes of interest., Results: A total of 3,957 patients were identified, of which 182 underwent revision/removal of arthroplasty, while 3,775 underwent revision or removal of fusion. Up to 4.6% of patients (n=179) in the repeat ACDF group had a complication, compared to 0.5% (n=1) in the CDA group. The 30-day readmission rate was found to be similar between the two groups (repeat-ACDF, 3.8% (n=145), vs. repeat-CDA, 2.2% (n=4); p=0.23). Similarly, 30-day reoperation rate was also not found to be different between the two groups (repeat-ACDF, 3.9% (n=149) vs. repeat-CDA, 2.7% (n=5); p=0.39). On multivariable analysis, removal or revision ACDF was found to be only significantly associated with an increased risk of 30-day complications (OR, 8.00; 95% CI, 1.07-59.79; p=0.04)., Conclusion: Repeat ACDF or repeat CDA can be performed safely and are associated with optimal 30-day outcomes, comparable to those of index procedures. However, patients undergoing revision ACDF may be slightly more likely to have complications than those undergoing revision CDA.

Background: The impact of symptom characteristics on outcomes of spine surgery remains elusive., Objective: To determine the impact of symptom location, severity, and duration on outcomes following lumbar spine surgery., Methods: We queried the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) for patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery for lumbar degenerative spine disease. Multivariable regression was utilized to determine the impact of preoperative symptom characteristics (location, severity, and duration) on improvement in disability, quality of life, return to work, and patient satisfaction at 1 yr. Relative predictor importance was determined using an importance metric defined as Wald χ2 penalized by degrees of freedom., Results: A total of 22 022 subjects were analyzed. On adjusted analysis, we found patients with predominant leg pain were more likely to be satisfied (P < .0001), achieve minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (P = .002), and return to work (P = .03) at 1 yr following surgery without significant difference in Euro-QoL-5D (EQ-5D) (P = .09) [ref = predominant back pain]. Patients with equal leg and back pain were more likely to be satisfied (P < .0001), but showed no significant difference in achieving MCID (P = .22) or return to work (P = .07). Baseline numeric rating scale-leg pain and symptom duration were most important predictors of achieving MCID and change in EQ-5D. Predominant symptom was not found to be an important determinant of return to work. Worker's compensation was found to be most important determinant of satisfaction and return to work., Conclusion: Predominant symptom location is a significant determinant of functional outcomes following spine surgery. However, pain severity and duration have higher predictive importance. Return to work is more dependent on sociodemographic features as compared to symptom characteristics., (Copyright © 2020 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.)

Lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a multifaceted progressive condition and often accompanied by disc herniation (DH) and/or degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). Given the high prevalence of the disease (up to 20% according to some estimates) and the high costs associated with its care, there is a need to explore novel therapies such as regenerative medicine. Exploring these novel therapies first warrants investigation of molecular pathways underlying these disorders. Here, we show results from next generation RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) on mRNA isolated from 10 human nucleus pulposus (NP) samples of lumbar degenerated discs (DH and DS; n = 5 for each tissue) and other musculoskeletal tissues (Bone, cartilage, growth plate, and muscle; n = 7 for each tissue). Pathway and network analyses based on gene ontology (GO) terms were used to identify the biological functions of differentially expressed mRNAs. A total of 701 genes were found to be significantly upregulated in lumbar NP tissue compared to other musculoskeletal tissues. These differentially expressed mRNAs were primarily involved in DNA damage, immunity and G1/S transition of mitotic cell cycle. Interestingly, DH-specific signaling genes showed major network in chemotactic (e.g., CXCL10, CXCL11, IL1RL2 and IL6) and matrix-degrading pathway (e.g., MMP16, ADAMTSL1, 5, 8, 12, and 15), while DS-specific signaling genes were found to be those involved in cell adhesion (e.g., CDH1, EPHA1 and EFNA2) and inflammatory cytokines (e.g., CD19, CXCL5, CCL24, 25 and XCL2). Our findings provide new leads for therapeutic drug discovery that would permit optimization of medical or pharmacological intervention for cases of lumbar DDD., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Low back pain due to lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) is one of the most common causes of disability and morbidity, particularly among older adults. Current research efforts in lumbar DDD management are shifting towards identifying and correcting the pathology in intervertebral discs without any external manipulation. Herein, we present a systematic review of current literature regarding regenerative treatments for lumbar DDD. An electronic search of databases including PubMed, Ovid/MEDLINE, Cochrane and Scopus was conducted for articles in all available years. Studies that investigated treatment for discogenic pain in lumbar DDD, including any type of stem cell or bone marrow concentrate as the treatment agent and studies that report both baseline and follow-up pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were included in the review. Changes in pain and ODI scores were calculated for 3-month, 6-month and 12-month periods. Six studies with a total of 93 patients were evaluated. Mean (SD) age of the pooled sample was 40.0(8.1) and 39.5% (32/81) of patients were female. Pain improvement was reported in 38.8% of patients at 3-month, 40.8% at 6-month and 44.1% at 12-month follow-up. Average improvement in ODI score for 3-month, 6-month and 12-month follow-ups was calculated to be 24.0, 26.5 and 25.7, respectively. Regenerative treatments are being increasingly employed across all spectrums of medicine. Review of six single arm studies revealed a potential positive impact in the preliminary results. However, these promising 'preliminary' results should not be interpreted as the definite treatment and should be validated with further prospective studies., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has emerged as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the surgical treatment of degenerative cervical disc disease. Although comparison of the 2 techniques has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of all artificial discs between each has not been performed. The objective of the present study was to examine the long-term outcomes of 5 artificial discs., Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted for studies of CDR devices for all years available. Only articles in English were included. Heterotopic ossification, adjacent segment disease, and reoperation comprised the primary outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with effect size (ES) and 95% confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each device., Results: Sixty-five studies (n = 5785) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the incidence of grade III/IV heterotopic ossification showed a significant variability between the 5 devices (P < 0.001) with ProDisc-C (ES, 38%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24%-54%) having the highest incidence rate. Overall rate of adjacent segment disease was 14% (95% CI, 7%-23%) with significant associated heterogeneity (P < 0.001). Regarding 2-year reoperation risk, the overall incidence rate was 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%), with nonsignificant variability between devices (P = 0.63). The highest rate was observed in the Discover group (ES, 4%; 95% CI, 0%-13%)., Conclusions: The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that surgical and clinical outcomes may differ among different CDR devices. These findings may assist surgeons in tailoring their decision making to specific patient profiles. Future multicenter efforts are needed to validate associations found in this study., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Surgical procedures, such as spinal fusion and disk replacement, are commonly used for treatment following failure of conservative treatment in degenerative spine disease. However, there is growing consensus that currently available surgical technologies may have long-term inefficacy for successful management. Intervertebral disk degeneration is the most common manifestation of degenerative spine disease, hence, replacement/repair of this tissue is an important component of surgical treatment. Restoration of spinal alignment and preservation of natural kinematics is also essential to a good outcome. This article reviews novel intervertebral implant technologies that have the potential to significantly impact elective spine surgery for degenerative spine disease., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Context: Low back pain has an immense impact on the US economy. A significant number of patients undergo surgical management in order to regain meaningful functionality in daily life and in the workplace. Return to work (RTW) is a key metric in surgical outcomes, as it has profound implications for both individual patients and the economy at large., Purpose: In this study, we investigated the factors associated with RTW in patients who achieved otherwise favorable outcomes after lumbar spine surgery., Study Design/setting: This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data from the lumbar module of national spine registry, the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD)., Patient Sample: The lumbar module of QOD includes patients undergoing lumbar surgery for primary stenosis, disc herniation, spondylolisthesis (Grade I) and symptomatic mechanical disc collapse or revision surgery for recurrent same-level disc herniation, pseudarthrosis, and adjacent segment disease. Exclusion criteria included age under 18 years and diagnoses of infection, tumor, or trauma as the cause of lumbar-related pain., Outcome Measures: The outcome of interest for this study was the return to work 12-month after surgery., Methods: The lumbar module of QOD was queried for patients who were employed at the time of surgery. Good outcomes were defined as patients who had no adverse events (readmissions/complications), had achieved 30% improvement in Oswestry disability index (ODI) and were satisfied (NASS satisfaction) at 3-month post-surgery. Distinct multivariable logistic regression models were fitted with 12-month RTW as outcome for a. overall population and b. the patients with good outcomes. The variables included in the models were age, gender, race, insurance type, education level, occupation type, currently working/on-leave status, workers' compensation, ambulatory status, smoking status, anxiety, depression, symptom duration, number of spinal levels, diabetes, motor deficit, and preoperative back-pain, leg-pain and ODI score., Results: Of the total 12,435 patients, 10,604 (85.3%) had successful RTW at 1-year postsurgery. Among patients who achieved good surgical outcomes, 605 (7%) failed to RTW. For both the overall and subgroup analysis, older patients had lower odds of RTW. Females had lower odds of RTW compared with males and patients with higher back pain and baseline ODI had lower odds of RTW. Patients with longer duration of symptoms, more physically demanding occupations, worker's compensation claim and those who had short-term disability leave at the time of surgery had lower odds of RTW independent of their good surgical outcomes., Conclusions: This study identifies certain risk factors for failure to RTW independent of surgical outcomes. Most of these risk factors are occupational; hence, involving the patient's employer in treatment process and setting realistic expectations may help improve the patients' work-related functionality., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in clinical applications for the treatment of musculoskeletal disease is steadily increasing in office-based practice. The so-called "first generation" of MSCs is defined as autologous stem cells that have undergone minimal manipulation and are used for a homologous purpose. Systematic reviews of the clinical trials completed to date of such MSCs enable practitioners to better understand what is currently known about the outcomes and side effects of such treatments., Study Design: A systematic review of human clinical studies of office-based MSC therapy for the treatment of painful degenerative musculoskeletal conditions., Methods: A search of the Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases was conducted from 2006 through September 2016. Seven hundred sixty-one records were identified from database searching, and two records from reference review of included papers. Studies with human subjects that evaluated treatment of musculoskeletal disease with minimally manipulated MSCs were included., Results: Eight studies were included in this review based on selection criteria. A total of 941 patients were included, 841 of whom received cellular products, and no significant adverse events were reported. Symptomatology generally improved, though no differences were seen over controls where present., Conclusion: Support in the literature is strongest for the use of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) injections for the treatment of knee pain, but applications of the use of BMAC and peripheral blood-derived MSCs for the treatment of hip pain, tendon pain, and disc pain have all been reported. Further research is required, with large randomized controlled trials., (© 2018 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Study Design: This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data., Objective: Here in this study we aim to determine the factors which impact a patient's ability to return to work (RTW) in the setting of cervical spine surgery in patients without worker's compensation status., Summary of Background Data: Surgical management of degenerative cervical disease has proven cost-effectiveness and shown significant improvement in quality of life. However, the ability to RTW is an important clinical outcome for preoperatively employed patients., Methods: All adult patients undergoing elective surgery for cervical degenerative disease at our institution are enrolled in a prospective, web-based registry. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was built for time to RTW. The variables included in the model were age, sex, smoking status, occupation type, number of levels operated on, ASA grade, body mass index, history of diabetes, history of coronary artery disease (CAD), history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), anxiety, depression, myelopathy at presentation, duration of symptoms more than 12 months, diagnosis, type of surgery performed, and preoperative Neck Disability Index, EuroQol Five Dimensions, and Numeric Rating Scale pain scores for neck pain and arm pain scores., Results: Of the total 324 patients with complete 3-month follow-up data 83% (n = 269) returned to work following surgery. The median time to RTW was 35 days (range, 2-90 d). Patients with a labor-intensive occupation, higher ASA grade, history of CAD, and history of COPD were less likely to RTW. The likelihood of RTW was lower in patients with a diagnosis of disc herniation compared with cervical stenosis, patients undergoing cervical corpectomy compared laminectomy and fusion and patient with longer operative time., Conclusion: Our study identifies the various factors associated with a lower likelihood of RTW at 3 months after cervical spine surgery in the non-worker's compensation setting. This information provides expectations for the patient and employer when undergoing cervical spine surgery., Level of Evidence: 3.

Background Context: Although lumbar disc herniation (LDH) classically presents with lower extremity radiculopathy, there are patients who have substantial associated back pain., Purpose: The present study aims to determine if patients with LDH with substantial back pain improve with decompression alone., Study Design: This is a longitudinal observational cohort study., Patient Sample: Patients enrolled in the Quality and Outcomes Database with LDH and a baseline back pain score of ≥5 of 10 who underwent single- or two-level lumbar discectomy only., Outcome Measures: Back and leg pain scores (0-10), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EuroQoL 5D were measured., Methods: Standard demographic and surgical variables were collected, as well as patient-reported outcomes at baseline and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively., Results: The mean age of the cohort was 49.8 years and 1,195 (52.8%) were male. Mean body mass index was 30.1 kg/m 2 . About half of the patients (1,103, 48.8%) underwent single-level discectomy and the other half (1,159, 51.2%) had two-level discectomy. Average blood loss was 44 cc. Most of the patients (2,217, 98%) were discharged home with routine postoperative care. The average length of stay was 0.53 days. At 3 and 12 months postoperatively, there were statistically significant (p<.000) improvements in back pain (from 7.7 to 2.9 to 3.2), leg pain (from 7.5 to 2.3 to 2.5), and ODI (from 26.2 to 11.6 to 11.2). Patients with a single-level discectomy, compared with patients with a two-level discectomy, had similar improvements in 3- and 12-month back pain, leg pain, and ODI scores., Conclusions: Patients with LDH who have substantial back pain can be counseled to expect improvement in their back pain scores 12 months after a discectomy., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Current surgical treatment options for one-time recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) include repeat discectomy or discectomy supplemented with fusion. Significant contention exists within the surgical spine community with regard to the most effective treatment modality. The objective of this study is to compare reoperation rates and patient reported outcomes following fusion versus repeat discectomy for RLDH., Patients and Methods: The electronic literature search was performed in Ovid Medline/Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane, Scopus and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for human studies directly comparing repeat discectomy with fusion for ipsilateral or contralateral RLDH. Random effects meta-analysis was conducted to pool the estimates of effect, using mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) for continuous and categorical outcomes, respectively., Results: A total of 1405 patients with RLDH (746 fusions and 659 repeat discectomies) from 15 studies (13 observational and 2 randomized controlled trials) were analyzed. Mean time to reherniation was 54.4 ± 30.4 months, while average follow-up time was 40 ± 11.7 months (range: 12-92.6). No difference was found between fusions and repeat discectomies with regards to related reoperations (OR: 0.68; 95% C.I: 0.14-3.2). Changes in PRO scores from baseline to last follow-up were also similar between the two groups, including VAS-back pain (MD, -0.3; 95% CI, -1.4 to 0.7), VAS-leg pain (MD, -0.3; 95% CI, -1.4 to 0.7), ODI (MD, 0.6; 95% CI, -0.2 to 1.4), JOA (MD: 1.0; 95% CI: 0.02 to 2.0) and MacNab satisfaction (OR: 1.5; 95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3)., Conclusion: Available evidence shows that in treating one-time recurrent disc herniations, repeat discectomy and fusion are associated with comparable reoperation rates, incidence of dural tears, functional outcomes as well as satisfaction with surgical treatment at last follow-up. Future longitudinal, randomized controlled trials should be completed to validate any associations found in this study., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have emerged as viable and safe alternatives for lumbar disc herniation, including percutaneous discectomy, percutaneous endoscopic discectomy, and tubulardiscectomy (TD). We present here a systematic review and a multiple-treatment meta-analysis evaluating the operative outcomes and patient-reported outcomes of open/microdiscectomy (OD/MD) and all MIS approaches for lumbar disc herniation., Methods: The PICO approach and PRISMA (i.e., Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed to query existing online databases since their inception to 2016, which yielded 14 studies after we applied the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials was used to assess the risk of bias in each study was used to assess the risk of bias in each study. Each outcome was assessed across all studies with the GRADE (i.e., Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) criteria., Results: There were 1707 patients analyzed, with 782 (45.81%) undergoing OD/MD, 491 (28.76%) undergoing TD, 199 (11.65%) undergoing percutaneous endoscopic discectomy, and 235 (13.76%) patients undergoing percutaneous discectomy. TD was found to be associated with significantly worse Oswestry Disability Index scores (mean difference 1.17, P = 0.03) whereas OD/MD was associated with worse Oswestry Disability Index scores compared with all other approaches (mean difference 2.61, P = 0.03), significantly longer duration of stay (mean difference 2.96, P = 0.04), and more blood loss (mean difference 30.53, P < 0.001). In terms of complications, TD was found to be associated with a greater rate of overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.49, P = 0.002), greater incidence of dural tears (OR 1.72 P = 0.04), and recurrent herniation (OR 2.09, P = 0.0007). Finally, OD/MD was associated with significantly lower incidence of revision surgery (OR 0.53, P = 0.0007)., Conclusions: Our meta-analysis revealed that tubular-discectomy and percutaneous-endoscopic-discectomy, the most commonly employed MIS techniques for discectomy, can be used as safe alternatives for open discectomy depending on the preference of the operating surgeon., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Thoracic disc herniations (TDH) represent 1.5-4% of all intervertebral disc herniations. Surgical treatment can be divided into anterior, lateral and posterior approaches and is an area of contention in the literature. Available evidence consists mostly of single-arm, single-institutional studies with limited sample sizes. The objective of this study is to investigate 30-day surgical outcomes following excision of TDH utilizing a national surgical registry., Patients and Methods: The American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) was queried for cases that underwent anterior (thoracotomy or thoracoscopy), lateral (extracavitary or costotransversectomy) or posterior (transpedicular or laminectomy) surgery for a primary diagnosis of TDH between 2012 and 2015., Results: A total of 388 patients (48% females) were included in the analysis. An anterior approach was used in 65 patients, lateral approach in 34, transpedicular approach in 90 and laminectomy in 199. Overall, baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were similarly distributed between the four procedure groups. Patients undergoing an anterior approach spent, on average, 2-3 more days in the hospital compared to the other groups (p < .001). Furthermore, they were more likely to have developed a major complication (27%) compared to the lateral (8%), transpedicular (18%) or laminectomy group (14%) (p = .13). Unplanned 30-day readmission and return to the operating room occurred in 5-8% of patients (p = .69 and 0.63, respectively). Lastly, the majority of the patients were discharged to home or a home facility (anterior-74%; lateral-81%; transpedicular-68% and laminectomy-74%, p = .58)., Conclusion: Anterior approaches had longer LOS and higher, although not statistically significant, complication rates. No difference was found with regard to discharge disposition. In light of these findings, surgeons should weigh the risks and benefits of each surgical technique during tailoring of decision making., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Prospective observational study., Objectives: Quantify the amount of lumbar lordosis achieved on a hinged operative table in neutral, flexion, and extension., Summary of Background Data: Hinged operative tables may allow surgeons to adjust lumbar spine positioning intraoperatively. The amount of lumbar lordosis in neutral, flexion, and extension positions has not been quantified prospectively using a hinged table., Methods: Thirty patients undergoing elective lumbar surgery were enrolled. Standing x-rays taken in neutral, maximal flexion, and maximal extension were obtained. After prone positioning on a hinged operative table, x-rays in neutral, maximal flexion, and maximal extension were taken. Total lumbar lordosis was calculated for all six images by two physicians. Disc degeneration was graded using Pfirrmann grades., Results: Lumbar lordosis on the operative table was 56.5 ± 2.1, 43.6 ± 2.2, 63.2 ± 2.0 compared with 46.9 ± 3.1, 33.2 ± 2.8, 52.3 ± 3.3 on the standing films in neutral, flexion, and extension, respectively. Average flexion (12.9 ± 1.1) and extension (6.7 ± 1.2) were significantly different from neutral on the table (P < 0.001). Lumbar lordosis was significantly higher on the operative table (P < 0.001). Total range of motion was 19.6 ± 1.9 on the table and 19.1 ± 2.0 with standing (P = 0.42). Average Pfirrmann disc grade was 2.77 ± 0.10 that did not correlate with range of motion (P = 0.40)., Conclusion: In this cohort, the hinged operative table allowed for a physiologic arc of motion of nearly 20 from flexion to extension. A considerable amount of lumbar sagittal motion can be obtained on hinged operative tables without decreasing overall lumbar lordosis below physiologic levels., Level of Evidence: 3.

Background: Comprehensive assessment of quality of care includes patient-reported outcomes, safety of care delivered, and patient satisfaction. The impact of the patient-reported Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at baseline and 12 months on satisfaction with outcomes following spine surgery is not well documented., Purpose: This study aimed to determine the impact of patient disability (ODI) scores at baseline and 12 months on satisfaction with outcomes following surgery., Study Design: Analysis of prospectively collected longitudinal web-based multicenter data., Patient Sample: Patients undergoing elective surgery for degenerative lumbar disease were entered into a prospective multicenter registry., Outcome Measures: Primary outcome measures were ODI, North American Spine Society satisfaction (NASS) questionnaire., Methods: Baseline and 12-month ODI scores were recorded. Satisfaction at 12 months after surgery was measured using NASS questionnaire. Multivariable proportional odds logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the impact of baseline and 12-month ODI on satisfaction with outcomes., Results: Of the total 5,443 patients, 64% (n=3,460) were satisfied at a level where surgery met their expectations (NASS level 1) at 12 months after surgery. After adjusting for all baseline and surgery-specific variables, the 12-month ODI score had the highest impact (Wald χ 2 =1,555, 86% of the total χ 2 ) on achieving satisfaction with outcomes compared with baseline ODI scores (Wald χ 2 =93, 5% of the total χ 2 ). The level of satisfaction decreases with increasing 12-month ODI score. Greater change in ODI is required to achieve a better satisfaction level when the patient starts with a higher baseline ODI score., Conclusion: Absolute 12-month ODI following surgery had a significant association on satisfaction with outcomes 12 months after surgery. Patients with higher baseline ODI required a larger change in ODI score to achieve satisfaction. No single measure can be used as a sole yardstick to measure quality of care after spine surgery. Satisfaction may be used in conjunction with baseline and 12-month ODI scores to provide an assessment of the quality of spine surgery provided in a patient centric fashion., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

OBJECTIVE Current costs associated with spine care are unsustainable. Productivity loss and time away from work for patients who were once gainfully employed contributes greatly to the financial burden experienced by individuals and, more broadly, society. Therefore, it is vital to identify the factors associated with return to work (RTW) after lumbar spine surgery. In this analysis, the authors used data from a national prospective outcomes registry to create a predictive model of patients' ability to RTW after undergoing lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spine disease. METHODS Data from 4694 patients who underwent elective spine surgery for degenerative lumbar disease, who had been employed preoperatively, and who had completed a 3-month follow-up evaluation, were entered into a prospective, multicenter registry. Patient-reported outcomes-Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP), and EQ-5D scores-were recorded at baseline and at 3 months postoperatively. The time to RTW was defined as the period between operation and date of returning to work. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, including an array of preoperative factors, was fitted for RTW. The model performance was measured using the concordance index (c-index). RESULTS Eighty-two percent of patients (n = 3855) returned to work within 3 months postoperatively. The risk-adjusted predictors of a lower likelihood of RTW were being preoperatively employed but not working at the time of presentation, manual labor as an occupation, worker's compensation, liability insurance for disability, higher preoperative ODI score, higher preoperative NRS-BP score, and demographic factors such as female sex, African American race, history of diabetes, and higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score. The likelihood of a RTW within 3 months was higher in patients with higher education level than in those with less than high school-level education. The c-index of the model's performance was 0.71. CONCLUSIONS This study presents a novel predictive model for the probability of returning to work after lumbar spine surgery. Spine care providers can use this model to educate patients and encourage them in shared decision-making regarding the RTW outcome. This evidence-based decision support will result in better communication between patients and clinicians and improve postoperative recovery expectations, which will ultimately increase the likelihood of a positive RTW trajectory.

Objective: This study moves beyond previous cohort studies and benchmark data by studying a population of elective spine surgery from a multicenter registry in an effort to validate, disprove, and/or identify novel risk factors for dural tears., Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis queried a multicenter registry for patients with degenerative spinal diagnoses undergoing elective spinal surgery from 2010-2014. Multivariable logistic regression analysis interrogated for independent risk factors of dural tears., Results: Of 104,930 patients, a dural tear requiring repair occurred in 0.6% of cases. On adjusted analysis, the following factors were independently associated with increased likelihood of a dural tear: ankylosing spondylitis vs. intervertebral disc disorders, greater than two levels, combined surgical approach and posterior approach vs. anterior approach, decompression only vs. fusion and decompression, age groups 85+, 75-84 and 65-74 vs. <65, obesity (BMI ≥30), corticosteroid use and preoperative platelet count <150,000., Conclusions: This multicenter study identifies novel risk factors for dural tears in the elective spine surgery population, including corticosteroids, thrombocytopenia, and ankylosing spondylitis. The results of this analysis provide further information for surgeons to use both in operative planning and in preoperative counseling when discussing the risk of dural tears.

Objective: The primary objective of this study is to examine the effects smoking status on rhBMP-2 supplementation in spinal fusion constructs., Methods: Patient records were reviewed retrospectively for a consecutive set of patients who underwent first-time posterolateral, instrumented fusion of the lumbar spine for degenerative spinal disease. All operations included arthrodesis supplementation with rhBMP-2. All patients were followed for at least 2 years. The primary endpoint of this study was reoperation for pseudarthrosis, instrumentation failure, or adjacent segment disease. After a rigorous sensitivity analysis, the measure of association was calculated with a multivariable logistic regression controlling for smoking, age, and number of spinal levels fused., Results: Of the 110 patients in the study population, 82 (74.6%) were nonsmokers and 28 (25.5%) were smokers. Among perioperative predictors, smokers were younger in age (53.9 ± 9.6 vs. 61.1 ± 13.1 years; P = 0.008) and had shorter length of inpatient hospital stay (4.1 ± 1.8 vs. 5.3 ± 3.0; P = 0.039). After a mean follow-up of 59 months, the 32% incidence of reoperation for pseudarthrosis, instrumentation failure, or adjacent segment among smokers was statistically significantly higher than the 13.4% incidence in nonsmokers (P = 0.027). Following multivariable logistic regression, the odds of reoperation among smokers was 4.75-fold higher than for nonsmokers (P = 0.009; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-15.24)., Conclusions: While rhBMP-2 supplements arthrodesis of instrumented lumbar fusion constructs, smoking status ascertains the strongest predictor of reoperation for pseudarthrosis, instrumentation failure, and adjacent segment., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

OBJECTIVE Prospective longitudinal outcomes registries are at the center of evidence-driven health care reform. Obtaining real-world outcomes data at 12 months can be costly and challenging. In the present study, the authors analyzed whether 3-month outcome measurements sufficiently represent 12-month outcomes for patients with degenerative lumbar disease undergoing surgery. METHODS Data from 3073 patients undergoing elective spine surgery for degenerative lumbar disease were entered into a prospective multicenter registry (N(2)QOD). Baseline, 3-month, and 12-month follow-up Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were recorded. The absolute differences between actual 12- and 3-month ODI scores was evaluated. Additionally, the authors analyzed the absolute difference between actual 12-month ODI scores and a model-predicted 12-month ODI score (the model used patients' baseline characteristics and actual 3-month scores). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for ODI of 12.8 points and the substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for ODI of 18.8 points were used based on the previously published values. The concordance rate of achieving MCID and SCB for ODI at 3-and 12-months was computed. RESULTS The 3-month ODI scores differed from 12-month scores by an absolute difference of 11.9 ± 10.8, and predictive modeling estimations of 12-month ODI scores differed from actual 12-month scores by a mean (± SD) of 10.7 ± 9.0 points (p = 0.001). Sixty-four percent of patients (n = 1982) achieved an MCID for ODI at 3 months in comparison with 67% of patients (n = 2088) by 12 months; 51% (n = 1731) and 61% (n = 1860) of patients achieved SCB for ODI at 3 months and 12 months, respectively. Almost 20% of patients had ODI scores that varied at least 20 points (the point span of an ODI functional category) between actual 3- and 12-month values. In the aggregate analysis of achieving MCID, 77% of patients were concordant and 23% were discordant in achieving or not achieving MCID at 3 and 12 months. The discordance rates of achieving or not achieving MCID for ODI were in the range of 19% to 27% for all diagnoses and treatments (decompression with and without fusion). The positive and negative predictive value of 3-months ODI to predict 12-month ODI was 86% and 60% for MCID and 82% and 67% for SCB. CONCLUSIONS Based on their findings, the authors conclude the following: 1) Predictive methods for functional outcome based on early patient experience (i.e., baseline and/or 3-month data) should be used to help evaluate the effectiveness of procedures in patient populations, rather than serving as a proxy for long-term individual patient experience. 2) Prospective longitudinal registries need to span at least 12 months to determine the effectiveness of spine care at the individual patient and practitioner level.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to report the long-term clinical outcomes following 3- and 4-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS A retrospective review of all adult neurosurgical patients undergoing elective ACDF for degenerative disease at a single institution between 1996 and 2013 was performed. Patients who underwent first-time 3- or 4-level ACDF were included; patients with previous cervical spine surgery, those undergoing anterior/posterior approaches, and those with corpectomy were excluded. Outcome measures included perioperative complication rates, fusion rates, need for revision surgery, Nurick Scores, Odom's criteria, symptom resolution, neck visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and persistent narcotics usage. RESULTS Seventy-one patients who underwent 3-level ACDF and 26 patients who underwent 4-level ACDF were identified and followed for an average of 7.6 ± 4.2 years. There was 1 case (3.9%) of deep wound infection in the 4-level group and 1 case in the 3-level group (1.4%; p = 0.454). Postoperatively, 31% of patients in the 4-level group complained of dysphagia, compared with 12.7% in the 3-level group (p = 0.038). The fusion rate was 84.6% after 4-level ACDF and 94.4% after 3-level ACDF (p = 0.122). At last follow-up, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the 4-level group continued to have axial neck pain (53.8%) than in the 3-level group (31%; p = 0.039); the daily oral morphine equivalent dose was significantly higher in the 4-level group (143 ± 97 mg/day) than in the 3-level group (25 ± 10 mg/day; p = 0.030). Outcomes based on Odom's criteria were also different between cohorts (p = 0.044), with a significantly lower proportion of patients in the 4-level ACDF group experiencing an excellent/good outcome. CONCLUSIONS In this study, patients who underwent 4-level ACDF had significantly higher rates of dysphagia, postoperative neck pain, and postoperative narcotic usage when compared with patients who underwent 3-level ACDF. Pseudarthrosis and deep wound infection rates were also higher in the 4-level group, although this did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, a smaller proportion of patients achieved a good/excellent outcome in the 4-level group than in the 3-level group. These findings suggest a significant increase of perioperative morbidity and worsened outcomes for patients who undergo 4- versus 3-level ACDF.

Objective: Palsy of dorsiflexion, or foot drop, may be due to degenerative lumbar disease and amenable to posterior spinal decompression. The objective of this study is to measure prognostic factors of and time to foot drop improvement after posterior lumbar decompression., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 71 patients undergoing first-time, posterior lumbar decompression for foot drop due to degenerative spinal disease. Patient sex, age, comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index), preoperative anterior tibialis strength (manual muscle testing, MMT), and duration of foot drop were ascertained from clinical notes. Prognostic factors affecting foot drop improvement were calculated with a discrete time proportional hazards model, in which follow-up times and outcome measures were binned into six time intervals: 1 week, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and ≥ 1 year., Results: Of the 71 patients, the mean age was 54.6 ± 16.0 years, and 66.2% (n=47) were males. The mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 2.42. During a mean follow-up of 30.4 months, dorsiflexion function improved postoperatively in 73.2% (n=52) of patients. The median time to surgery from onset of foot drop was within 6 weeks, and the median preoperative MMT strength of patients with foot drop improvement was 3. Following a discrete-time proportional hazards model, duration of anterior tibialis palsy (HR=0.67, P=0.004) and preoperative muscle strength (HR=1.10, P=0.010) were significant predictors of foot drop improvement. Following an adjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median time to foot drop improvement was within 6 weeks of surgical intervention., Conclusions: Preoperative muscle strength and palsy duration were statistically significant predictors of foot drop improvement. Furthermore, the median time to improvement was 6 weeks., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Objective: To evaluate the current evidence comparing lumbar fusion to nonoperative management for the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain., Background and Context: Discogenic low back pain is a common and sometimes disabling condition. When the condition becomes chronic and intractable, spinal fusion may play a role., Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the PubMed and CENTRAL databases. We included RCTs that compared lumbar fusion to nonoperative management for the treatment of adult patients with chronic discogenic low back pain. A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the improvement in back pain based on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)., Results: Five RCTs met our inclusion criteria. A total of 707 patients were divided into lumbar fusion (n=523) and conservative management (n=134). Although inclusion/exclusion criteria were relatively similar across studies, surgical techniques and conservative management protocols varied. The pooled mean difference in ODI (final ODI-initial ODI) between the nonoperative and lumbar fusion groups across all studies was -7.39 points (95% confidence interval: -20.26, 5.47) in favor of lumbar fusion, but this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.26)., Conclusions: Despite the significant improvement in ODI in the lumbar fusion groups in 3 studies, pooled data revealed no significant difference when compared with the nonoperative group. Although there was an overall improvement of 7.39 points in the ODI in favor of lumbar fusion, it is unclear that this change in ODI would lead to a clinically significant difference. Prospective randomized trials comparing a specific surgical technique versus a structured physical therapy program may improve evidence quality. Until then, either operative intervention by lumbar fusion or nonoperative management and physical therapy remain 2 acceptable treatment methods for intractable low back pain.