Anterior Posterior Fusion Research Articles

A comparison of dysphagia rates between long-segment anterior versus posterior cervical fusion.

The goal of this study was to compare rates of dysphagia and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following long-segment (≥ 3 levels) anterior cervical spinal fusion (ACF) and posterior cervical spinal fusion (PCF) at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. PROs were also compared for patients with dysphagia versus those without dysphagia. A prospectively collected quality improvement database was used to identify patients who had a long-segment cervical spinal fusion. Cohorts were divided into ACF and PCF groups. Eating Assessment Tool-10 scores and PROs were obtained for all patients preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively to compare. Multivariate analysis was also performed to evaluate risk factors for dysphagia. A total of 132 patients met the inclusion criteria, 77 of whom had undergone ACF and 55 of whom had undergone PCF. Dysphagia rates between ACF and PCF cohorts were similar at baseline (13.0% vs 18.2%, p = 0.4). New-onset dysphagia rates were also comparable at 3-month follow-up (39.7% vs 23.1%, p = 0.08) and 12-month follow-up (32.6% vs 32.4%, p > 0.99). Patients who underwent PCF had worse Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores at 3 months than did patients with ACF (13.67 ± 9.49 vs 10.55 ± 6.24, respectively; p = 0.03). There were significantly higher NDI scores for patients with dysphagia at 3 months in both the ACF and PCF groups and at 12 months for those in the PCF group. Analogously, EuroQol-5 Dimensions scores were worse for patients with dysphagia; however, this was only significant for patients in the ACF group at 3 months. There were no significant risk factors for the development of dysphagia found on multivariate analysis. Similar rates and severity of dysphagia were seen following ACF and PCF at 3- and 12-month follow-up. This suggests that long-term dysphagia following cervical fusion surgery may be due to structural changes from the fusion rather than the surgical approach. However, the ACF cohort was significantly younger, and this may have partially accounted for the findings. PROs were also compared for patients with and without dysphagia, demonstrating worsened outcomes in some domains for patients who presented with dysphagia at 3- and 12-month follow-up. This suggests that dysphagia may be associated with a decreased quality of life after cervical fusion.

Lateral lumbar and thoracic interbody fusion (LLIF) for thoracolumbar spine trauma (Trauma LLIF): A single-center, retrospective observational cohort study

BackgroundPain, disability and progressive kyphosis is a common problem after traumatic injury of the thoracolumbar (TL-) junction. Surgical treatment may include long-segment posterior or short-segment anterior-posterior fusion. We aim to report our experience with the application of short-segment posterior instrumented fusion with anterior column support using lateral lumbar or thoracic interbody (LLIF) cages. MethodsIn this retrospective, single-center observational cohort study we included consecutive patients treated surgically for traumatic injury of the TL-junction (Th10/11-L2/3) by posterior instrumentation/fusion and LLIF. We measured segmental kyphosis, complications, and outcomes until last follow-up (about 3 years postoperative). ResultsWe identified 61 patients (mean age 39.0 years (SD 13.3); 23 females (37.7%)) with A3 fractures without (n=48; 78.7%) or with additional sagittal split component (n=11; 18.0%. Additional posterior tension band injury was present in n=26 (42.6%). The affected levels of injury were Th12/L1 in n=25 (41.0%) and Th11/12 in n=22 (36.1%). The segmental kyphotic angle was 14.6° (6.7°) preoperative and remained significantly reduced at all times of follow-up at discharge (5.4°±5.5°; p<0.001), at 90 days (7.2°±5.5°; p<0.001), after partial hardware removal (7.2°±6.0°; p<0.001) and at last follow-up (8.1°±6.3°; p<0.001). We noticed a tendency for less progression of kyphosis in the group with two-staged, compared to single-staged bisegmental surgery (mean difference (MD) 3.1° after partial hardware removal, p=0.064). During follow-up, n=11 experienced complications (18%), n=58 (95.1%) had an excellent or good outcome and solid fusion was noticed in n=60 (98.4%). Conclusions“Trauma LLIF” should be considered as possibility for short-segment anterior-posterior fusion for injuries of the TL- junction. We observed most reproducible and long-lasting kyphosis reduction with a temporary bisegmental, two-staged procedure resulting in monosegmental fusion (posterior instrumentation/fusion with delayed LLIF and partial hardware removal to release the non-injured caudal motion segment).

Impact of Supine versus Prone Positioning on Segmental Lumbar Lordosis in Patients Undergoing ALIF Followed by PSF: A Comparative Study.

Background: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) play pivotal roles in restoring lumbar lordosis in spinal surgery. There is an ongoing debate between combined single-position surgery and traditional prone-position PSF for optimizing segmental lumbar lordosis. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 59 patients who underwent ALIF in the supine position followed by PSF in the prone position at a single institution. Cobb angles were measured preoperatively, post-ALIF, and post-PSF using X-ray imaging. One-way repeated measures ANOVA and post-hoc analyses with Bonferroni adjustment were employed to compare mean Cobb angles at different time points. Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated to assess the magnitude of changes. Sample size calculations were performed to ensure statistical power. Results: The mean segmental Cobb angle significantly increased from preoperative (32.2 ± 13.8 degrees) to post-ALIF (42.2 ± 14.3 degrees, Cohen's d: -0.71, p < 0.0001) and post-PSF (43.6 ± 14.6 degrees, Cohen's d: -0.80, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between Cobb angles after ALIF and after PSF (Cohen's d: -0.10, p = 0.14). The findings remained consistent when Cobb angles were analyzed separately for single-screw and double-screw ALIF constructs. Conclusions: Both supine ALIF and prone PSF significantly increased segmental lumbar lordosis compared to preoperative measurements. The negligible difference between post-ALIF and post-PSF lordosis suggests that supine ALIF followed by prone PSF can be an effective approach, providing flexibility in surgical positioning without compromising lordosis improvement.

Reoperation Rates According to Surgical Approach After Operation for Degenerative Cervical Pathology in Patients With Athetoid Cerebral Palsy: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

National population-based cohort study. The overall complication rate for patients with athetoid cerebral palsy (CP) undergoing cervical surgery is significantly higher than that of patients without CP. The study was conducted to compare the reoperation and complication rates of anterior fusion, posterior fusion, combined fusion, and laminoplasty for degenerative cervical myelopathy/radiculopathy in patients with athetoid cerebral palsy. The Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service national database was used for analysis. Data from patients diagnosed with athetoid CP who underwent cervical spine operations for degenerative causes between 2002 and 2020 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into four groups for comparison: anterior fusion, posterior fusion, combined fusion, and laminoplasty. A total of 672 patients were included in the study. The overall revision rate was 21.0% (141/672). The revision rate was highest in the anterior fusion group (42.7%). The revision rates of combined fusion (11.1%; hazard ratio [HR], .335; P = .002), posterior fusion (13.8%; HR, .533; P = .030) were significantly lower than that of anterior fusion. Revision rate of laminoplasty (13.1%; HR, .541; P = .240) was also lower than anterior fusion although the result did not demonstrate statistical significance. Anterior fusion presented the highest reoperation risk after cervical spine surgery reaching 42.7% in patients with athetoid CP. Therefore, anterior-only fusion in patients with athetoid CP should be avoided or reserved for strictly selected patients. Combined fusion, with the lowest revision risk at 11.1%, could be safely applied to patients with athetoid CP.

Traumatic spinal cord injury in South Korea for 13 years (2008–2020)

Traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) has significant physical, psychological, and socioeconomic impacts. However, the epidemiological characteristics and treatment patterns of TSCI in South Korea remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate TSCI incidence and treatment behaviors in South Korea from 2008 to 2020. We included data from 30,979 newly diagnosed TSCI patients obtained from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA). Treatment trends, location of surgery, surgical method, comorbidities, factors affecting hospital stay, and risk factors affecting readmission were analyzed. Patients were divided into the surgery group [n = 7719; (25%)] and the non-surgery group [n = 23,260; (75%)]. Surgical cases involved cervical (64%), thoracic (17%), and lumbar/sacral (19%) lesions. Anterior fusion (38%), posterior fusion (54%), and corpectomy (8%) were the surgical methods. Surgical treatments increased annually. Factors influencing hospital stay included male sex, older age, and higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Female sex and higher CCI scores were associated with readmission. In conclusion, a quarter of all TSCI patients underwent surgery, with an upward trend. Risk factors for longer hospital stays were thoracic spine injury, older age, higher CCI, and male sex. Risk factors for readmission included age range of 40–59 years, lumbar/sacral spine injuries, CCI score of 2, and female sex.

Evaluating the Readability of Patient Education Materials for Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering, Distraction-Based Methods, and Posterior Spinal Fusion for the Treatment of Pediatric Spinal Deformity.

The Internet is an important source of information for patients, but its effectiveness relies on the readability of its content. Patient education materials (PEMs) should be written at or below a sixth-grade reading level as outlined by agencies such as the American Medical Association. This study assessed PEMs' readability for the novel anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT), distraction-based methods, and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) in treating pediatric spinal deformity. An online search identified PEMs using the terms "anterior vertebral body tethering," "growing rods scoliosis," and "posterior spinal fusion pediatric scoliosis." We selected the first 20 general medical websites (GMWs) and 10 academic health institution websites (AHIWs) discussing each treatment (90 websites total). Readability tests for each webpage were conducted using Readability Studio software. Reading grade levels (RGLs), which correspond to the US grade at which one is expected to comprehend the text, were calculated for sources and independent t tests compared with RGLs between treatment types. The mean RGL was 12.1 ± 2.0. No articles were below a sixth-grade reading level, with only 2.2% at the sixth-grade reading level. AVBT articles had a higher RGL than distraction-based methods (12.7 ± 1.6 vs 11.9 ± 1.9, P = 0.082) and PSF (12.7 ± 1.6 vs 11.6 ± 2.3, P = 0.032). Materials for distraction-based methods and PSF were comparable (11.9 ± 1.9 vs 11.6 ± 2.3, P = 0.566). Among GMWs, AVBT materials had a higher RGL than distraction-based methods (12.9 ± 1.4 vs 12.1 ± 1.8, P = 0.133) and PSF (12.9 ± 1.4 vs 11.4 ± 2.4, P = 0.016). Patients' health literacy is important for shared decision-making. Assessing the readability of scoliosis treatment PEMs guides physicians when sharing resources and discussing treatment with patients. Both GMWs and AHIWs exceed recommended RGLs, which may limit patient and parent understanding. Within GMWs, AVBT materials are written at a higher RGL than other treatments, which may hinder informed decision-making and patient outcomes. Efforts should be made to create online resources at the appropriate RGL. At the very least, patients and parents may be directed toward AHIWs; RGLs are more consistent.

Craniovertebral Junction Surgical Approaches: State of Art.

Surgical approaches directed toward craniovertebral junction (CVJ) can be addressed to the ventral, dorsal, and lateral aspects through a variety of 360° surgical corridors Herein, we report features, advantages, and limits of the updated technical support in CVJ surgery in clinical setting and dissection laboratories enriched by our preliminary surgical results of the simultaneous application of O-arm intraoperative neuronavigation and imaging system along with the 3D-4K EX in TOA for the treatment of CVJ pathologies.In the past 4years, eight patients harboring CVJ compressive pathologies underwent one-step combined anterior neurosurgical decompression and posterior instrumentation and fusion technique with the aid of exoscope and O-arm. In our equipped Cranio-Vertebral Junction Laboratory, we use fresh cadavers (and injected "head and neck" specimens) whose policy, protocols, and logistics have already been elucidated in previous works. Five fresh-frozen adult specimens were dissected adopting an FLA. In these specimens, a TOA was also performed, as well as a neuronavigation-assisted comparison between transoral and transnasal explorable distances.A complete decompression along with stable instrumentation and fusion of the CVJ was accomplished in all the cases at the maximum follow-up (mean: 25.3months). In two cases, the O-arm navigation allowed the identification of residual compression that was not clearly visible using the microscope alone. In four cases, it was not possible to navigate C1 lateral masses and C2 isthmi due to the angled projection unfitting with the neuronavigation optical system, so misleading the surgeon and strongly suggesting changing surgical strategy intraoperatively. In another case (case 4), it was possible to navigate and perform both C1 lateral masses and C2 isthmi screwing, but the screw placement was suboptimal at the immediate postoperative radiological assessment. In this case, the hardware displacement occurred 2months later requiring reoperation.

The Incidence of Vertebral Artery Injury in Cervical Spine Surgery

Study DesignRetrospective Cohort Study ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to identify the incidence of vertebral artery injuries (VAI) in patients undergoing cervical spine procedures for degenerative pathologies. Summary of Background DataPreviously reported estimates of VAI during cervical spine surgery relied upon self-reported survey studies and retrospective cohorts which may not be reflective of national averages. The largest study to date reports an incidence of 0.07%; however, significant variation exists between different cervical spine procedures. MethodsA national insurance database was used to access patient data from 2010-2020, who underwent Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF), Anterior Corpectomy, Posterior Cervical Fusion (C3-C7), or C1-C2 posterior fusions for degenerative pathologies. Patients who experienced a vertebral artery injury were identified and frequencies for the different procedures were compared. ResultsA total of 224,326 patients were included in this study and the overall incidence of VAI across all procedures was found to be 0.03%. The highest incidence of VAI was estimated in C1-C2 posterior fusion (0.12-1.10%). The number of VAI cases post anterior corpectomy, ACDF, and posterior fusion were 14 (0.06), 43 (0.02) and 26 (0.01) patients respectively. ConclusionsThis is the largest study to date that provides frequencies of vertebral artery injuries in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery in the United States. Our finding of 0.03% is lower than previously reported estimates but significant variability exists between procedures which is important to counsel patients when discussing risks of surgery.

Early outcomes in hybrid fixation for idiopathic scoliosis: posterior fusion combined with anterior vertebral body tethering. Patient series.

Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) are options for patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Combining both procedures in patients with double curves, a procedure in which PSF is performed for the thoracic curve and AVBT for the lumbar curve, provides maximal correction of the thoracic curve with a theoretical maintenance of motion in the lumbar spine. The authors retrospectively reviewed 20 skeletally immature patients diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis at a single institution with an average age of 12.7 ± 1.6 years and who had undergone hybrid treatment with an average follow-up of 8 months. The PSF procedures averaged 276 ± 63 minutes with 442.8 ± 295 mL of blood loss, and the AVBT averaged 275 ± 54 minutes with 118.3 ± 80 mL of blood loss. Following the hybrid correction, the thoracic and lumbar coronal curve angles improved from 67.6° to 21.6° and from 65.2° to 24°, respectively. The three-dimensional kyphosis improved from 3.3° to 24°. A combined approach of PSF and AVBT is safe and effective for idiopathic scoliosis. This approach combines the gold standard of thoracic fusion with the motion preservation benefits of AVBT in the lumbar spine. This study will continue to refine indications for AVBT.

Comparison of ALIF and PLIF in Isthmic Lumbosacral Spondylolisthesis. A Multicenter Surveillance Study of 602 cases from the German Spine Registry (DWG Register).

Isthmic spondylolisthesis most commonly occurs in the lumbosacral junction and can cause backpain and radicular pain as well as stiffness with progressive immobilization, with a negative impact on an individual's ability to work and quality of life. Multiple operative treatments are currently available. This study aims to compare complications, demography, and clinical features between anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior lumber body fusion (PLIF) in the operative treatment in isthmic spondylolisthesis. An analysis of data from the German spine registry (Deutsche Wirbelsäulengesellschaft [DWG]-Register) of patients who underwent operative treatment (PLIF and ALIF) for isthmic spondylolisthesis in the sacrolumbar junction in 170 departments between January 2017 and May 2021 was performed. Age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, surgical approach, smoker/nonsmoker, as well as severeness of the spondylolisthesis according to the Meyerding classification were evaluated. In total, 602 patients undergoing fusion in L5/S1 were identified in the registry, n = 570 PLIF (group 1) and n = 32 ALIF (group 2). A significant difference in the ASA score between the two groups was noted; group 1 had more patients suffering a more debilitating disease in comparison to group 2. There was no significant difference in gender, grade of spondylolisthesis, age, or smoking status. Significant differences were found in operative and postoperative variables and complications (fusion material, dura injury). No difference was found between the two procedures in terms of symptomatic benefit of patients who underwent either ALIF or PLIF. According to the DWG Register, PLIF was the preferred method to treat isthmic spondylolisthesis in the sacrolumbar junction in Germany. To compare these two spine fusion techniques, further studies with an adequate sample size and follow-up period are required.

A comparison of modern-era anterior lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at the lumbosacral junction.

Interbody fusion is the primary method for achieving arthrodesis across the lumbosacral junction in the setting of degenerative pathologies, such as spondylosis and spondylolisthesis. Two common techniques are anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). In recent years, interbody design and technology have advanced, and most earlier studies comparing ALIF and TLIF did not specifically assess the lumbosacral junction. This study compared changes in radiographic and clinical parameters between patients undergoing modern-era single-level ALIF and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) TLIF at L5-S1. Consecutive patients who underwent single-segment L5-S1 ALIF or MIS TLIF performed by the senior authors over a 6-year interval (January 1, 2016-November 30, 2021) were retrospectively reviewed. Upright radiographs were used to determine pre- and postoperative lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, disc angle, and neuroforaminal height. Improvements in patient-reported outcome scores (Oswestry Disability Index and SF-36) were also compared. Overall, 108 patients (58 [54%] men, 50 [46%] women; mean [SD] age 57.6 [13.5] years) were included in the study. ALIF was performed in 49 patients, and TLIF was performed in 59 patients. The most common treatment indications were spondylolisthesis (50%, 54/108) and spondylosis (46%, 50/108). The cohorts did not differ in terms of intraoperative (p > 0.99) or postoperative (p = 0.73) complication rates. The mean (SD) hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for patients undergoing TLIF than ALIF (1.3 [0.6] days vs 2.0 [1.4] days, p < 0.001). Both techniques significantly improved L5-S1 segmental lordosis, disc angle, and neuroforaminal height (p ≤ 0.008). ALIF versus TLIF significantly increased mean [SD] segmental lordosis (12.5° [7.3°] vs 2.0° [5.7°], p < 0.001), disc angle (14.8° [5.5°] vs 3.0° [6.1°], p < 0.001), and neuroforaminal height (4.5 [4.6] mm vs 2.4 [3.0] mm, p = 0.008). Improvements in patient-reported outcome parameters and reoperation rates were similar between cohorts. When treating patients at a single segment across the lumbosacral junction, ALIF resulted in significantly greater increases in segmental lordosis, L5-S1 disc angle, and neuroforaminal height compared with MIS TLIF. Improvements in clinical parameters and reoperation rates were similar between the 2 techniques.

Аналіз результатів лікування грудного ідіопатичного сколіозу з кутом Cobb 80-100º

Anterior spinal mobilization is an effective method of staged correction of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis with a Cobb angle of 80-100º. The introduction of modern transpedicular implants and osteotomies of the posterior support complex into clinical practice has reduced the frequency of its use, but increased the number of neurological complications. Purpose - to compare the results of anterior mobilization in combination with posterior corrective fusion and posterior corrective fusion alone in patients with stiff thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Materials and methods. A retrospective comparative analysis of the results of surgical treatment of 167 patients with thoracic idiopathic scoliosis with a Cobb angle of 80-100º was performed. Patients were divided into two groups: the Group 1 - 83 patients (mean age - 13.7 years) who underwent anterior curvature mobilization and posterior corrective fusion, the Group 2 - 84 patients (mean age - 14.7 years) who underwent posterior corrective fusion and Ponte osteotomy at 3-5 levels. Results. The average thoracic Cobb angle before surgery in the Group 1 was 87.1º (±1.96), in the Group 2 - 83.8º (±2.85); after surgery - 32.2º (±2.24), or 63% correction, and 44.2º (±3.22), or 47% correction, respectively. The total average duration of surgical interventions in the Group 1 was 410 minutes (140 minutes + 270 minutes), in the Group 2 - 320 minutes. Intraoperative blood loss was 890 ml and 900 ml, respectively. The average volume of haemotransfusion was 650 ml and 672 ml, respectively. The average hospital stay was 15.6 days and 8.6 days, respectively. Conclusions. Compared with posterior corrective fusion, the use of two-stage treatment, which includes anterior mobilization of the curvature and posterior corrective fusion for surgical correction of stiff scoliotic spinal deformities, allows to increase the intraoperative correction of the main curvature by 17%. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol was approved by the Local Ethics Committee of all the institutions mentioned in the study. Informed consent was obtained from the patients. No conflict of interests was declared by the authors.

Anterior Dynamic Versus Posterior Transpedicular Spinal Fusion for Lenke Type 5 Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Comparison of Long-term Results

Background. Despite the active implementation of dynamic correction in case of idiopathic scoliosis, there are no comparative studies of results of posterior and anterior dynamic correction in patients with completed and near-completed growth.&#x0D; Aim of the study to compare clinical and radiological results of anterior dynamic correction and conventional posterior transpedicular correction of Lenke type 5 scoliotic defonnities in patients with completed or near-completed growth.&#x0D; Methods. Eighty-six patients with Lenke type 5 scoliotic deformities were enrolled in the study. The first group (54 patients) underwent deformity correction via posterior approach using a rigid transpedicular system; the second group (32 patients) using dynamic correction system. Mean patients age was 22.612.8 and 27.310.9 years, respectively. We studied radiological data before surgery, immediately after surgery, and 2 or more years after surgery. Blood loss volume, duration of hospital stay, and duration of narcotic analgesics intake in the early postoperative period were analyzed. Functional results were assessed using SRS-22 questionnaire.&#x0D; Results. Preoperative Cobb angle in the first group was 65.5, and 27.5 at the long-term follow-up. Junctional kyphosis of T10-L2 before surgery was 21.0 and 13.2 at the long-term follow-up. Preoperative Cobb angle of the initial curve in the second group was 52.5 and 24.5 at the long-term follow-up. Junctional kyphosis of T10-L2 before surgery was 19.5, and 19.0 at the long-term follow-up. Nash and Moe apical vertebral rotation in the first group before surgery was 1.62 and 0.17 at the last follow-up; in the second group, it was 1.80 and 0.81, respectively. Mean number of fixed levels was 6.41.0 in the first group and 5.61.5 in the second group. Mobility of the thoracolumbar/lumbai curve was higher in the second group, 28.29.1, compared with 36.0 7.2 in the first group. Preoperatively, lumbar lordosis in the second group was 42.5, in the long-tenn period 43.5, and in the first group 43.4 and 44.3, respectively.&#x0D; Conclusion. Both posterior rigid and anterior dynamic correction in case of Lenke type 5 idiopathic scoliosis can provide satisfactory radiological results with initially similar thoracolumbar deformities in patients with completed or nearcompleted growth. However, dynamic approach can reduce blood loss, duration of hospital stay, duration of narcotic analgesics intake after surgery, and improve quality of life in the long-term period.

Comparison of Value per Operative Time between Primary and Revision Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Retrospective cohort study. To compare the relative value units (RVUs) per minute of operative time between primary and revision surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD). Surgery for ASD is technically demanding and has high risks of complications and revision rates. This common need for additional surgery can increase the overall cost of care for ASD. RVU is used to calculate reimbursement from Medicare and to determine physician payments nationally. In calculating RVUs, the physician's work, the expenses of the physician's practice, and professional liability insurance. Cost effectiveness of surgeries for ASD have been evaluated, except for RVUs per minute compared between primary and revision surgery. Data were obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent surgery for spinal deformity between 2011 and 2019 were identified and included. To ensure a homogenous patient cohort, those who underwent anterior-only and concurrent anterior-posterior fusions were excluded. Propensity score matching analysis was performed, and Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson chi-square test, or Fisher's exact test were used to compare matched cohorts as appropriate. A total of 326 patients who underwent revision surgery were matched with 206 primary surgery patients via propensity score matching. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, and readmission and reoperation rates were not significantly different between groups. The revision surgery group had significantly higher mean RVUs per minute than that of the primary surgery group (0.331 vs. 0.249, p <0.001), as well as rates of morbidity and blood transfusion. Compared to primary surgery, revision surgery for ASD is associated with significantly higher RVUs per minute and total RVUs and higher rates of 30-day morbidity and blood transfusions. Readmission and reoperation rates are similar between surgeries.

RETROSPECTIVE MATCHED COMPARISON STUDY ON NON FUSION ANTERIOR SCOLIOSIS CORRECTION (NFASC) VERSUS POSTERIOR SPINAL FUSION (PSF) FOR LENKE 5 ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS (AIS) CURVES IN SKELETALLY MATURE CHILDREN: CLINICO-RADIOLOGICAL OUTCOMES WITH TWO YEARS’ FOLLOW-UP

The current study aims to compare the clinico radiological outcomes between Non-Fusion Anterior Scoliosis (NFASC) Correction and Posterior Spinal Fusion (PSF) for Lenke 5 curves at 2 years follow up.Methods:38 consecutive Lenke 5 AIS patients treated by a single surgeon with NFASC (group A) or PSF (group B) were matched by age, Cobb's angle, and skeletal maturity. Intraoperative blood loss, operative time, LOS, coronal Cobbs, and SRS22 scores at 2 years were compared. Flexibility was assessed by modified Schober's test. Continuous variables were compared using student t-tests and categorical variables were compared using chi-square.The cohort included 19 patients each in group A and B . Group A had M:F distribution of 1:18 while group B had 2:17. The mean age in group A and group B were 14.8±2.9 and 15.3±3.1 years respectively. The mean follow-up of patients in groups A and B were 24.5±1.8 months and 27.4±2.1 months respectively. Mean pre-op thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) cobbs for group A and group B were 55°±7° and 57.5°±8° respectively. At two years follow up, the cobbs for group A and B were 18.2°±3.6° and 17.6°±3.5° respectively (p=0.09). The average operating time for groups A and B were 169±14.2 mins and 219±20.5 mins respectively (p&lt;0.05). The average blood loss of groups A and B were 105.3±15.4 and 325.3±120.4 respectively (p&lt;0.05). The average number of instrumented vertebra between groups A and B were 6.2 and 8.5 respectively (p&lt;0.05). The average LOS for NFASC and PSF was 3.3±0.9 days and 4.3±1.1 days respectively (p&lt;0.05). No statistically significant difference in SRS 22 score was noted between the two groups. No complications were recorded.Our study shows no significant difference in PSF and NFASC in terms of Cobbs correction and SRS scores, but the NFASC group had significantly reduced blood loss, operative time, and fewer instrumented levels. NFASC is an effective alternative technique to fusion to correct and stabilize Lenke 5 AIS curves with preservation of spinal motion.

Comparison of Perioperative Complications After Anterior-Posterior Versus Posterior-Anterior-Posterior Cervical Fusion: A Retrospective Review of 153 Consecutive Cases.

Although published data support the utilization of circumferential fusion to treat select cervical spine pathologies, it is unclear whether the posterior-anterior-posterior (PAP) fusion has increased risks compared with the anterior-posterior fusion. To evaluate the differences in perioperative complications between the 2 circumferential cervical fusion approaches. One hundred fifty-three consecutive adult patients who underwent single-staged circumferential cervical fusion for degenerative pathologies from 2010 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified into the anterior-posterior ( n = 116) and PAP ( n = 37) groups. The primary outcomes assessed were major complications, reoperation, and readmission. Although the PAP group was older ( P = .024), predominantly female ( P = .024), with higher baseline neck disability index ( P = .026), cervical sagittal vertical axis ( P = .001), and previous cervical operation rate ( P < .00001), the major complication, reoperation, and readmission rates were not significantly different from the 360° group. Although the PAP group had higher urinary tract infection ( P = .043) and transfusion ( P = .007) rates, higher estimated blood loss ( P = .034), and longer operative times ( P < .00001), these differences were insignificant after the multivariable analysis. Overall, operative time was associated with older age (odds ratio [OR] 17.72, P = .042), atrial fibrillation (OR 158.30, P = .045), previous cervical operation (OR 5.05, P = .051), and lower baseline C1 - 7 lordosis (OR 0.93, P = .007). Higher estimated blood loss was associated with older age (OR 1.13, P = .005), male gender (OR 323.31, P = .047), and higher baseline cervical sagittal vertical axis (OR 9.65, P = .022). Despite some differences in preoperative and intraoperative variables, this study suggests both circumferential approaches have comparable reoperation, readmission, and complication profiles, all of which are high.

Lateral decubitus single position anterior posterior surgery improves operative efficiency, improves perioperative outcomes, and maintains radiological outcomes comparable with traditional anterior posterior fusion at minimum 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND CONTEXTThe advantages of lateral single position surgery (LSPS) in the perioperative period has previously been demonstrated, however 2-year postoperative outcomes of this novel technique have not yet been compared to circumferential anterior-posterior fusion (FLIP) at 2-years postoperatively. PURPOSEEvaluate the safety and efficacy of LSPS versus gold-standard FLIP STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGMulticenter retrospective cohort review. PATIENT SAMPLEFour hundred forty-two patients undergoing lumbar fusion via LSPS or FLIP OUTCOME MEASURESLevels fused, operative time, estimated blood loss, perioperative complications, and reasons for reoperation at 30-days, 90-days, 1-year, and 2-years. Radiographic outcomes included lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), PI-LL mismatch, and segmental lumbar lordosis. METHODSPatients were grouped as LSPS if anterior and posterior portions of the procedure were performed in the lateral decubitus position, and FLIP if patients were repositioned from supine or lateral to prone position for the posterior portion of the procedure under the same anesthetic. Groups were compared in terms of demographics, intraoperative, perioperative and radiological outcomes, complications and reoperations up to 2-years follow-up. Measures were compared using independent samples or paired t-tests and chi-squared analyses with significance set at p<.05. RESULTSFour hundred forty-two patients met inclusion, including 352 LSPS and 90 FLIP patients. Significant differences were noted in age (62.4 vs 56.9; p≤.001) and smoking status (7% vs 16%; p=.023) between the LSPS and FLIP groups. LSPS demonstrated significantly lower Op time (97.7min vs 297.0 min; p<.001), fluoro dose (36.5mGy vs 78.8mGy; p<.001), EBL (88.8mL vs 270.0mL; p<.001), and LOS (1.91 days vs 3.61 days; p<.001) compared to FLIP. LSPS also demonstrated significantly fewer post-op complications than FLIP (21.9% vs 34.4%; p=.013), specifically regarding rates of ileus (0.0% vs 5.6%; p<.001). No differences in reoperation were noted at 30-day (1.7%LSPS vs 4.4%FLIP, p=.125), 90-day (5.1%LSPS vs 5.6%FLIP, p=.795) or 2-year follow-up (9.7%LSPS vs 12.2% FLIP; p=.441). LSPS group had a significantly lower preoperative PI-LL (4.1° LSPS vs 8.6°FLIP, p=.018), and a significantly greater postoperative LL (56.6° vs 51.8°, p = .006). No significant differences were noted in rates of fusion (94.3% LSPS vs 97.8% FLIP; p=.266) or subsidence (6.9% LSPS vs 12.2% FLIP; p=.260). CONCLUSIONSLSPS and circumferential fusions have similar outcomes at 2-years post-operatively, while reducing perioperative complications, improving perioperative efficiency and safety.

Anterior cervical discectomy fusion versus posterior decompression and fusion in octogenarians with cervical myelopathy: Clinical outcomes and complications with a 3-year follow-up

IntroductionCervical stenosis and concurrent Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy (CSM) are prevalent in the elderly. Treatment options include Anterior Cervical Discectomy Fusion (ACDF) and Posterior Decompression and Fusion (PDF). Research questionThis study aims to compare clinical outcomes and complications between ACDF and PDF in patients aged 80 and above. Material and methodsData from electronic medical records between 2005 and 2021 at a single institution were analyzed. Logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to explore risk factors and the relationship between comorbidities and neurological conditions. Results21 patients with ACDF and 26 with PDF were studied over 16 years. PDF patients had more operated levels, higher blood loss, and longer hospital stays, but mortality rates and mJOA improvements were similar in both groups. The presence of comorbidities was a unique risk factor for postoperative complications. Discussion and conclusionACDF and PDF led to neurological improvements in elderly CSM patients. However, the decision of surgical procedure should carefully consider the potential for postoperative complications, particularly in patients with comorbidities.

Two Cases of Subaxial Cervical Facet Dislocation Undergoing Open Reduction through an Anterior Approach Followed by Combined Anterior-Posterior Fusion

Two Cases of Subaxial Cervical Facet Dislocation Undergoing Open Reduction through an Anterior Approach Followed by Combined Anterior-Posterior Fusion

Surgical Treatment of Scoliosis Lenke Type 5, Anterior Versus Posterior, Which Approach is Better?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Systematic review and meta-analysis. This study aimed to compare the radiographical and clinical outcomes between anterior spinal fusion (ASF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) in Lenke type 5 adolescence idiopathic scoliosis. PSF has been the standard operation for adolescence idiopathic scoliosis. ASF can also achieve a good curve correction effect with fewer fusion segments and minor invasion of paraspinal structures. A systematic literature research was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Use meta-analysis to compare the changes of thoracolumbar/lumbar and thoracic curves and other important outcomes between ASF and PSF. A total of 427 ASF and 392 PSF patients from 12 studies were included. There was no significant difference in the correction degree of thoracolumbar/lumbar and thoracic curve between ASF and PSF ( P >0.05), except for PSF had more compensatory correction degree of thoracic curve at postoperation ( P <0.05). Besides, the loss of correction in thoracic curve in PSF at the last follow-up was significantly less than that in ASF ( P <0.05). PSF presented larger change values of thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis at the last follow-up ( P <0.05). PSF showed a better effect in correcting trunk shift distance at the postoperation ( P <0.05) but less trunk shift distance correction from postoperation to last follow-up ( P <0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of proximal junctional kyphosis and estimated blood loss between the two approaches ( P >0.05). Moreover, ASF showed fewer fusion segments, but longer operation and hospital stay time ( P <0.05). ASF is capable of achieving similar correction in coronal curve and balance as PSF with fewer fusion segments. Spine surgeons should select an appropriate approach tailored to individual patients needs while considering procedural risks and benefits. Level II.