Difference In Reoperation Rates Research Articles

Predictors of patient satisfaction after surgery for grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis: a 5-year analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.

Lumbar decompression and/or fusion surgery is a common operation for symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis refractory to conservative management. Multiyear follow-up of patient outcomes can be difficult to obtain but allows for identification of preoperative patient characteristics associated with durable pain relief, improved functional outcome, and higher patient satisfaction. A query of the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) low-grade spondylolisthesis module for patients who underwent surgery for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis (from July 2014 to June 2016 at the 12 highest-enrolling sites) was used to identify patient satisfaction, as measured with the North American Spine Society (NASS) questionnaire, which uses a scale of 1-4. Patients were considered satisfied if they had a score ≤ 2. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify baseline demographic and clinical predictors of long-term satisfaction 5 years after surgery. Of 573 eligible patients from a cohort of 608, patient satisfaction data were available for 81.2%. Satisfaction (NASS score of 1 or 2) was reported by 389 patients (83.7%) at 5-year follow-up. Satisfied patients were predominantly White and ambulation independent and had lower baseline BMI, lower back pain levels, lower Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and greater EQ-5D index scores at baseline when compared to the unsatisfied group. No significant differences in reoperation rates between groups were reported at 5 years. On multivariate analysis, patients who were independently ambulating at baseline had greater odds of long-term satisfaction (OR 1.12, p = 0.04). Patients who had higher 5-year ODI scores (OR 0.99, p < 0.01) and were uninsured (OR 0.43, p = 0.01) were less likely to report long-term satisfaction. Lumbar surgery for the treatment of grade 1 spondylolisthesis can provide lasting pain relief with high patient satisfaction. Baseline independent ambulation is associated with a higher long-term satisfaction rate after surgery. Higher ODI scores at 5-year follow-up and uninsured status are associated with lower postoperative long-term satisfaction.

Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Compared with Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy: Two-Year Results of the FACET Randomized Noninferiority Study.

Posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) is a valid alternative to anterior discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) as a surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy, but the quality of evidence has been limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of these treatments after 2 years of follow-up. We hypothesized that posterior surgery would be noninferior to anterior surgery. This multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial assessed patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy in 9 Dutch hospitals with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The primary outcomes measured reduction of cervical radicular pain and were the success ratio based on the Odom criteria, and arm pain and decrease in arm pain, evaluated with the visual analog scale, with a 10% noninferiority margin, which represents the maximum acceptable difference between the new treatment (posterior surgery) and the standard treatment (anterior surgery), beyond which the new treatment would be considered clinically unacceptable. The secondary outcomes were neck pain, Neck Disability Index, Work Ability Index, quality of life, complications (including reoperations), and treatment satisfaction. Generalized linear mixed effects modeling was used for analyses. The study was registered at the Overview of Medical Research in the Netherlands (OMON), formerly the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5536). From January 2016 to May 2020, 265 patients were randomized (132 to the posterior surgery group and 133 to the anterior surgery group). Among these, 25 did not have the allocated intervention; 11 of these 25 patients had symptom improvement, and the rest of the patients did not have the intervention due to various reasons. At the 2-year follow-up, of 243 patients, primary outcome data were available for 236 patients (97%). Predicted proportions of a successful outcome were 0.81 after posterior surgery and 0.74 after anterior surgery (difference in rate, -0.06 [1-sided 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.02]), indicating the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The between-group difference in arm pain was -2.7 (1-sided 95% CI, 7.4) and the between-group difference in the decrease in arm pain was 1.5 (1-sided 95% CI, 8.2), both confirming the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The secondary outcomes demonstrated small between-group differences. Serious surgery-related adverse events occurred in 9 patients (8%) who underwent posterior surgery, including 9 reoperations, and 11 patients (9%) who underwent anterior surgery, including 7 reoperations (difference in reoperation rate, -0.02 [2-sided 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.05]). This trial demonstrated that, after a 2-year follow-up, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery with regard to the success rate and arm pain reduction in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Unveiling the impact of three-dimensional (3D) technology on rhinoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This study aimed to investigate the impact of three-dimensional technology(3D) on preoperative evaluation for rhinoplasty. A systematic search was conducted on EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies that utilized 3D technology in preoperative assessment for rhinoplasty were included. Primary outcome was surgeon and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included nasal function, cost-efficiency, reoperation rate, precision, and surgical time. Twelve studies (595 patients) were included. Surgeons reported higher satisfaction with 3D approaches based on precision and postoperative results. Patients expressed satisfaction with the 3D approaches due to better understanding of the procedure and the ability to discuss with the surgeons on planning the procedure and participating in postoperative design. The 3D approaches demonstrated higher surgeon satisfaction (mean difference -0.13, 95%CI -0.20 to -0.06, p=0.0002), particularly in revision cases, and provided higher precision compared with the 2D approaches. However, 3D technology was more expensive and not cost-efficient. There were no significant differences in reoperation rate (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.36, p=0.09) and surgical time. Postoperative nasal function showed inconsistent results. Three-dimensional technology offered higher surgeon satisfaction and increased precision compared with 2D imaging. However, 3D imaging was expensive and not cost-efficient. Reoperation rate and surgical time were comparable, while postoperative nasal function outcomes showed inconsistent results.

Radiographic fusion and subsidence rates for stand-alone cage versus anterior cage-plate construct in ACDF

Study DesignRetrospective cohort BackgroundThe addition of an anterior cervical plate to a structural allograft during ACDF is thought to provide extra stability and enhance fusion, but it may increase the risk of complications like dysphagia. Stand-alone cages were designed to provide this extra stability without the need for the plate, but these may increase a patient's risk of subsidence, cervical dislocation, and cervical kyphosis. The purpose of this study was to assess reoperation rates and radiographic outcomes during follow-up longer than 6 months for patients who underwent ACDF with a cage and plate compared to stand-alone cage. MethodsACDF cases were retrospectively identified for four fellowship trained spine surgeons from 2016 – 2020 from two academic hospitals. A total of 57 stand-alone structural allograft constructs were matched via propensity scoring with a cohort of 65 patients with plate-secured structural allograft constructs. The primary outcome was reoperation rate within the follow-up period and secondary outcomes included complications, operative characteristics, readmission within 30 days, reoperation within 30 days and within follow-up, and radiographic outcomes. Immediate post-operative radiographs were compared to final follow-up radiographs at least 6 months post-operation to assess for evidence of subsidence, fusion, and change in cervical kyphosis using the Cobb angle technique. ResultsThere were 5 patients (5.26 %) in the stand-alone cohort and 4 patients (3.15 %) in the plate cohort that had cervical reoperation at any time in follow-up (P = 0.83). At final follow-up, 58 patients (92.1 %) in the plate group and 37 patients (75.5 %) in the stand-alone group had radiographic evidence of fusion (P = 0.015). There were 38 patients (77.6 %) in the stand-alone group and 29 patients (46 %) in the plate group with evidence of subsidence (P = 0.0007). Patients with subsidence had a greater change in kyphosis angle at final follow-up and this change was significantly decreased in the plate group compared to the stand-alone group. ConclusionThe use of anterior cage-plate constructs in ACDF produces higher rates of fusion and lower rates of subsidence than stand-alone cage constructs. Subsidence significantly increases the change in kyphosis angle between post-op and final follow-up, and the presence of a spanning plate significantly reduces this angle change compared to stand-alone cages. There were no statistically significant differences in reoperation rates, regardless of radiographic evidence of subsidence.

Comparison of Patients Operated for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with and without Spondylolisthesis – A Secondary Analysis of the NORDSTEN Trials

Study Design. Observational cohort study (secondary analysis of two randomized trials) Objective. To investigate whether function, disability, pain and quality of life before surgery and patient-reported outcome as well as complication and reoperation rates up to two years after surgery differ between lumbar spinal stenosis patients with and without spondylolisthesis. Summary of Background Data. Lumbar spinal stenosis is a degenerative condition of the spine, which appears with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis often presenting similar signs and symptoms. Method. This study is a secondary analysis of two randomized trials on patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with and without spondylolisthesis conducted at 16 public Norwegian hospitals. Disability, function, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, complication and reoperation rates up to two years after surgery were compared between the two cohorts. Results. A total of 704 patients were included in this study, 267 patients with spondylolisthesis (median age 67.0 years [IQR 61.0-72.0]; 68.7% female) and 437 patients without spondylolisthesis (median age 68.0 years IQR 62.0-73.0]; 52.9% female). In the linear mixed model analysis there were no significant differences in disability, function, back pain, leg pain and quality of life scores between the two cohorts of patient with and without spondylolisthesis before surgery or at two years follow-up. The complication rate was 22.9% in patients with spondylolisthesis and 12.1% in patients without spondylolisthesis (P&lt;0.001). There were no significant differences in reoperation rates. Conclusion. In patients with lumbar spinal stenosis the symptom burden before surgery and the clinical outcome up to two years after surgery were similar independently of a concomitant spondylolisthesis.

Nitinol Staple Use in Primary Arthrodesis of Lisfranc Fracture-Dislocations.

Primary arthrodesis of Lisfranc fracture-dislocations is a reliable treatment option, yet concerns remain about nonunion. Nitinol staple use has recently proliferated in midfoot arthrodesis. The purpose of this study is to examine the union rate of primary arthrodesis of acute Lisfranc fracture-dislocations treated with nitinol staples compared with traditional plate-and-screw fixation. The secondary objective is to assess the difference in operative times and reoperation rates. Midfoot fracture-dislocations treated with primary arthrodesis by 7 foot and ankle orthopaedic surgeons were reviewed. Of 160 eligible patients, 121 patients (305 joints) met the required 4-month minimum radiographic follow-up. Radiographic outcomes were analyzed at the individual joint level. Each joint was classified as either staples alone (45 patients, 154 joints), staples plus plates and screws (hybrid) (45 patients, 40 joints), or plates and screws alone (31 patients, 111 joints). The primary outcome was arthrodesis union at each joint fused. Nonunion was more common (9.0%, 10/111) among joints fixed with plate and screws than with hybrid (2.5%, 1/40) or staples only (1.3%, 2/154) (P = .0085). Multivariable regression demonstrated that autograft use was independent associated with union (P = .0035) and plate-and-screw only fixation was an independent risk factor for nonunion (P = .0407). Median operating room and tourniquet times were shorter for hybrid (92 and 83 minutes) and staple only (67 and 63 minutes) constructs compared to plate-and-screw only fixation (105 and 95 minutes) (P ≤ .0001 and .0003). There was no difference in reoperation rates among patients with different fixation types. We found that use of nitinol compression staple and bone autograft in primary arthrodesis of Lisfranc and midfoot fracture-dislocations was associated with both improved union rates and shorter tourniquet and operative times compared to traditional plate-and-screw fixation techniques. Level III, therapeutic.

No Differences in 2-Year Reoperation Rates for Meniscus Allograft Transplant With Concomitant Cartilage Restoration or Osteotomy: A National Database Study

PurposeTo investigate reoperation rates after meniscus allograft transplant (MAT), comparing rates with and without concomitant articular cartilage and osteotomy procedures using a national insurance claims database. MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent MAT from 2010 to 2021 with minimum 2 year follow-up using the PearlDiver database. Using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes, we identified patients who underwent concomitant procedures including chondroplasty or microfracture, cartilage restoration defined as osteochondral graft or autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), or osteotomy. Univariate logistic regressions identified risk factors for reoperation. Reoperations were classified as knee arthroplasty, interventional procedures, or diagnostic or debridement procedures. Results750 patients were included with an average age of 29.6 years (interquartile range 21.0-36.8) and average follow-up time was 5.41 years (SD: 2.51). 90-day, 2-year, and all-time reoperation rates were 1.33%, 14.4%, and 27.6% respectively. MAT with cartilage restoration was associated with increased reoperation rate at 90 days (OR: 4.88; 95% CI: 1.38-19.27; p=.015), however there was no significant difference in reoperation rates at 2 years or to the end of follow-up. ACI had increased reoperation rates at 90 days (OR: 6.95; 95% CI: 1.45-25.96; p=.006), with no difference in reoperation rates 2 years post-operatively or to the end of follow-up. Osteochondral autograft and allograft were not associated with increased reoperation rates. Conclusion14.4% of patients in our cohort had a reoperation within 2 years of MAT. Nearly one in four patients undergoing MAT had concomitant cartilage restoration, showing that it is commonly performed on patients with articular cartilage damage. Concomitant osteochondral autograft, osteochondral allograft, chondroplasty, microfracture and osteotomy were not associated with any significant difference in reoperation rates. ACI was associated with increased reoperation rates at 90 days, but not later.

Clinical outcomes of triclosan-coated barbed suture in open hernia repair: a retrospective cohort study

PurposeWe assessed clinical outcomes of patients undergoing open hernia repair using STRATAFIX™ Symmetric, a barbed triclosan-coated suture (TCS; Ethicon), versus conventional polydioxanone suture (PDS) for abdominal wall closure.MethodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study identified patients undergoing hernia repair. The site used PDS from 2013 to 2016 and switched exclusively to barbed TCS in 2017. Outcomes were assessed at 30, 60, and 90 days. Multivariate regression analyses and Cox proportional hazards models were used.ResultsOf 821 hernia repairs, 446 used barbed TCS and 375 used conventional PDS. Surgical site infections (SSIs) were significantly less frequent with barbed TCS (60 days, 5.9% vs. 11.4%; P = 0.0083; 90 days, 5.9% vs. 11.7%; P = 0.006) and this remained consistent after multivariate adjustment (60 days, OR [95% CI]: 0.5 [0.3–0.9]; 90 days, 0.5 [0.3–0.9]). Among patients with SSI, deep SSIs were less frequent with barbed TCS (60 days, 9.1% vs. 35.7%; P = 0.022; 90 days, 9.1% vs. 34.9%; P = 0.0252). Barbed TCS significantly reduced the risk of perioperative complications (HR [95% CI]: 0.5[0.3–0.8]; P = 0.0058). Hospital length of stay was 2.5 days shorter with barbed TCS (mean [95% CI]: 5.7[4.9–6.6] vs. 8.2[7.3–9.1] days; P < 0.0001). No differences in reoperation rate over time were observed by type of suture (HR[95% CI]:1.3 [0.5–3.4]; P = 0.4793).ConclusionsThis study showed that patients who underwent open hernia repair appeared to recover equally well regardless of the suture type. In addition, the use of barbed TCS was associated with significantly reduced risk of perioperative complications and hospital length of stay.

Improved Survival Rates with Fixed Bearing Total Ankle Arthroplasty

Introduction/Purpose: With increasing total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) being performed and a plethora of new survivorship data available, an updated literature review is needed to better understand the impact of different types of implants on the outcomes of TAA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of fixed vs mobile bearing TAAs in the literature. Methods: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE for all articles published between 2004 and 2023 was conducted with a minimum two-year mean follow-up. Two reviewers evaluated each study to determine whether it was eligible for inclusion and abstracted the data of interest. Meta-analytic pooling of group results across studies was performed, examining implant survival and component failure. Seventy-three implant groups met inclusion criteria (only 3rd and 4th generation implants), composed of STAR (20), Salto (mobile bearing) (10), Salto Talaris (11), Hintegra (8), Zimmer (6), INBONE II (6), INBONE I (4), Infinity (4), Cadence (4). 41 groups (56.2%) were implanted with mobile bearing devices, and 32 (43.8%) with fixed bearing implants. In total, 6498 subjects were included, with a mean age of 61.77 years and a mean BMI of 28.5 kg/m2. At a mean follow-up of 62.2 months, the overall reoperation rate was 21.13% and the metal component revision rate was 10.16%. Results: The mean follow-up of mobile bearing TAA studies (N =41) was 77.8 (range 24-188.4) months, and that of fixed bearing studies (N =32) was 45.3 (range 24-85.2) months. Multivariate analysis of bearing type, controlling for follow-up duration, found fixed bearing implants had statistically significantly higher metal component survival rates (fixed=96.1%, mobile=87.9%, p=.001); however, there were no statistically significant differences in rates of reoperation (fixed=17.0%, mobile=24.8%, p=.768). When examining specifically tibial and talar component failure rates, there was no statistically significant difference between bearing type (fixed tibial=1.46%, mobile tibial=2.95%, p=.472) (fixed talar=2.19%, mobile talar=2.79%, p=.966). Overall implant survival rates at one, two, five, and ten years were 96.4%, 96.0%, 92.7%, and 79.4%, respectively, and did not differ by bearing type (Table 1). Conclusion: Implant survival was statistically significantly better for 3rd and 4th generation fixed bearing TAAs as compared to mobile bearing TAAs, controlling for length of follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference in total reoperation rate. This suggests that fixed bearing implants may offer improved implant survival compared to mobile bearing implants, though further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Does Timing of Subtalar Arthrodesis Affect Reoperation or Revision Rates for Total Ankle Arthroplasty?

Introduction/Purpose: The incidence of primary total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) in the treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis has increased substantially over the last decade. TAA may be performed alone or in conjunction with additional procedures including subtalar (ST) or triple arthrodesis as end-stage ankle arthritis is often associated with degenerative disease affecting neighboring joints. Prior literature has demonstrated that the ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis may increase the risk for revision after TAA and that simultaneous ST arthrodesis with TAA could result in significant short term clinical and radiologic improvements. However, there is limited research comparing staged versus simultaneous hindfoot arthrodesis with concomitant TAA. The purpose of this study is to compare the reoperation rates after TAA with simultaneous hindfoot arthrodesis versus staged hindfoot arthrodesis followed by TAA. Methods: Patients who underwent primary TAA from 2015-2022 were identified in the PearlDiver database using international classification of diseases (ICD) and current procedural (CPT) codes. Patients were only selected if they contained 1-year database follow-up after the index TAA. Patients were sorted into three cohorts: (1) primary TAA without any history of hindfoot arthrodesis (control), (2) those with staged hindfoot arthrodesis prior to TAA, and (3) those with hindfoot arthrodesis at the same time as TAA. Demographic characteristics including age, gender, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were assessed for each cohort. The 1-year rate of reoperation and revision were the primary outcomes of this study. Univariate analysis using chi- square tests and student T-tests were performed to analyze any differences in patient demographics, comorbidities, and complications. Multivariate analysis using logistic regression was subsequently conducted to account for any confounding variables and covariates. Results: 9,912 patients underwent TAA without prior hindfoot arthrodesis, 297 patients underwent TAA with prior hindfoot arthrodesis and 174 with hindfoot arthrodesis concurrently with TAA. The incidences of reoperation (OR 3.52, 12.6% vs. 3.9%, P&lt;0.001) and revision (OR 3.66, 4.0% vs. 1.1%, P=0.001) were higher in the simultaneous cohort when compared to the control. However, there were no statistically significant differences in rates of reoperation (OR 0.96, 4.0% vs. 3.9%, P= 0.891) or revision (OR 1.94, 2.4% vs. 1.1 %, P= 0.095) when comparing staged hindfoot arthrodesis to the control. Conclusion: Patients undergoing concurrent hindfoot arthrodesis with TAA had a 3.5 times higher odds of reoperation and revision when compared to the control. Patients undergoing staged procedures did not demonstrate a difference in revision or reoperation rates when compared to the control. Staged hindfoot arthrodesis and TAA may be an effective option in treating complex end-stage ankle and hindfoot arthritis whereas a simultaneous approach may lead to higher rates of complications.

375 Cervical Arthroplasty in the Treatment of Myelopathy: Clinical Predictors, Utilization, and Outcomes in a Large Administrative Database

INTRODUCTION: Cervical arthroplasty is a treatment for cervical radiculopathy; however, it may also be safe and effective in patients with mild myelopathy. METHODS: Retrospective data spanning 2016-2020 from the PearlDiver Patient Claims Database was used to select patients. Age, gender, osteoporosis, obesity, smoking, diabetes, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and 1- or 2-level surgery, re-operation rates, 90-day readmission, medical complications, and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) before/after surgery were collected. Univariate &amp; multivariate analyses were performed to identify differences. Reoperation rates were compared using propensity-matched analysis. RESULTS: We identified n = 2,391 (4.5%) CDA and n = 50,845 ACDF procedures for cervical myelopathy. Predictors favoring CDA included female sex, younger age, lower CCI score, lower incidence of obesity, osteoporosis, diabetes, or smoking (p ≤ 0.001); remaining significant after multivariate analysis except sex (p = 0.06). Single-level surgery was more predictive for undergoing CDA. CDA patients had lower 90-day readmissions, complications, and lower opioid utilization. The overall reoperation rate was 5%. Predictors of reoperation included: male sex, younger age, greater CCI, obesity, osteoporosis, diabetes, smoking, and 2-level surgery, remaining significant after multivariable logistic regression except for diabetes (p = 0.23) and CCI (p = 0.05). The robustness of these factors were evaluated by matching patients (n = 2,391) with no difference in re-operation rates identified (p = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: CDA patients are generally healthier (lower incidence of obesity, smoking, diabetes, CCI) and represents 4.5% of procedures for 1- or 2-level cervical myelopathy. Readmission rates, medical complications, and opiate use was lower with patients undergoing CDA, despite an overall similar reoperation rate. This study is limited by its retrospective nature and the lack of granular outcomes measurements. However, the data suggests that CDA is a viable option for cervical myelopathy.

Immune Hypersensitivity Is Associated With Higher Graft Failure Rate After Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation of the Knee

To analyze the effects of 1 or more patient-reported allergies on clinical outcomes, in particular graft failure rate, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA) of the knee. Retrospective review of patients who underwent knee OCA from August 2010 to May 2021 with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Patients were initially divided into 2 cohorts: those with at least 1 allergy and those without any allergies. Clinical outcomes assessed included graft failure, reoperation rates, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, and manipulation under anesthesia/lysis of adhesions (MUA/LOA). PROs assessed, including the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and return to sport rates, were compared. In total, 285 patients were included with a mean clinical follow-up of 4.8 ± 2.0 years. The allergy cohort had a significantly higher rate of graft failure (P= .008). In a regression analysis controlling for confounding variables, graft failure remained significantly associated with the presence of medication allergies (odds ratio [OR], 3.631; 95% CI, 1.139-11.577; P= .029). Furthermore, an increasing number of allergies were associated with an increased rate of graft failure (OR, 1.644; 95% CI, 1.074-2.515; P= .022). There was no difference in rate of reoperation, complications, infection, and MUA/LOA. Of the 100 patients who completed PROs, there was no difference in VAS satisfaction, pain, and any of the KOOS outcome scores or return to sport. The presence of 1 or more patient-reported allergies was shown to be significantly associated with OCA graft failure. Furthermore, an increasing number of patient-reported allergies were associated with a higher rate of graft failure. However, there were no significant differences in VAS satisfaction or pain, KOOS symptom, quality of life, pain, or return to sport in patients with at least 1 patient-reported allergy and those without allergies. Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Influence of Concomitant Meniscal Allograft Transplantation on Midterm Outcomes After Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation: A Comparative Matched-Pair Analysis.

Osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCAT) is an accepted knee joint-preserving treatment strategy for focal osteochondral lesions that is often conducted in combination with meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT). Despite its frequent and simultaneous utilization, there remains a lack in the literature reporting on outcomes and failure rates after concomitant procedures. To determine (1) the midterm clinical success rate after OCAT+MAT in comparison with a matched-pair cohort undergoing isolated OCAT, (2) whether patient-specific and procedural variables influence the risk of failure, and (3) patient-reported outcome measures over time. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. A single-center matched-pair cohort study was conducted investigating outcomes in patients who underwent OCAT of the medial or lateral femoral condyle with and without MAT between 2004 and 2020. Patients were matched 1:1 by age (±5 years), sex (male or female), body mass index (±5), and grouped Kellgren and Lawrence grade (grades 0-1 or 2-4). The minimum follow-up time was 2 years. Radiographic variables (International Cartilage Regeneration & Joint Preservation Society [ICRS] grade and Kellgren and Lawrence grade) were assessed preoperatively and at follow-up. Subjective patient-reported outcome measures (Lysholm score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] including subscores, International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] score, and visual analog scale score) were collected preoperatively and at follow-up. Clinical failure was defined as revision surgery for graft failure or conversion to total knee arthroplasty. Patient-reported, clinical, and radiographic outcomes were compared between groups. In total, 66 patients (33 treated with isolated OCAT, 33 treated with OCAT+MAT; 57.6% male) with a mean age of 26.3 years (range, 18-62 years) were followed for a mean of 5.6 years (minimum, 2 years; range, 24-218 months). The 2 cohorts showed no difference in Kellgren and Lawrence grade postoperatively (P = .59). There was a significantly higher ICRS grade detected at follow-up in the OCAT+MAT group (2.81 ± 1.10) compared with the OCAT group (2.04 ± 0.96) (P < .05). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding reoperation rate (OCAT: n = 6; OCAT+MAT: n = 13; P = .116), time to reoperation (OCAT: 46.67 ± 47.27 months vs OCAT+MAT: 28.08 ± 30.16 months; P = .061), and failure rate (OCAT: n = 4 [12.1%] vs OCAT+MAT: n = 5 [15.2%]; P = .66). In the OCAT+MAT group, an increase of tibial slope by 1° conferred a 1.65-fold increase in the hazard for failure over decreased slope (hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.10-2.50; P < .05). The overall survival rate was 86% at a mean follow-up of 5.6 years. Patient-reported outcome scores were significantly improved at the final follow-up compared with preoperative status. No significant differences were seen between groups with respect to subjective IKDC, Lysholm, Tegner, and KOOS results, except for the KOOS Symptoms subscale score, which was significantly higher in the OCAT+MAT group than in the OCAT group (mean difference, 14.6; P < .05) and did exceed the minimal clinically important difference threshold of 10.7. Midterm results after isolated OCAT and OCAT+MAT show high rates of healing and sustainable subjective improvement of knee function and quality of life. However, it should be noted that the difference in reoperation rate and time to reoperation between the groups is arguably clinically important and that lack of statistical significance may be because of low power. These results imply that isolated OCAT is an efficient joint-preserving treatment that can be combined with MAT in well-selected patients with meniscal insufficiency without negative influence on global clinical outcomes.

Does type of bone graft matter? A retrospective review of the use of biological bone grafts in patients undergoing elective 1-3 level spinal interbody fusion.

There is a lack of strong evidence for use of expensive bone substitutes. This study compares perioperative data and patient reported quality-of-life outcomes across the varied types of bone graft extenders. The study analyzes the existing Quality and Outcomes Database and evaluates patient reported outcomes for 1-3 level lumbar fusion procedures comparing across different types of biologics bone graft. We retrospectively analyzed a prospectively collected data registry. Bone graft implant data were collected and grouped into the following categories: (1) Autograft with basic allograft (2) Enhanced, synthetic, or cellular allograft (3) Use of BMP. Preoperative and 1year patient reported outcomes and perioperative data from the prospective collected registry were analyzed. There were 384 patients included in this study. There were 168 (43.8%) patients in group 1, 133 (34.6%) patients in group 2, and 83 (21.6%) in group 3. There were no group differences in baseline or 1year back pain, leg pain, ODI, or EQ-5D. The GLM Repeated Measures results indicate a significant difference within each of the three groups between the preoperative and postoperative measures for back pain, leg pain, ODI, and EQ-5D. The change over time was not significantly different between the groups. Bone graft extenders are a significant contributor to the cost of lumbar fusion. This study demonstrates no difference in preoperative, and 1year patient reported outcomes between the three groups. There was no significant difference in rate of reoperations across the three groups.

Similar rates of reoperation for neuroma after transtibial amputations with and without targeted muscle reinnervation.

To compare the rates of revision surgery for symptomatic neuromas in patients undergoing primary transtibial amputations with and without targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR). Retrospective cohort study. Level I trauma hospital and tertiary military medical center. Adult patients undergoing transtibial amputations with and without TMR. Transtibial amputation with targeted muscle reinnervation. Reoperation for symptomatic neuroma. During the study period, there were 112 primary transtibial amputations performed, 29 with TMR and 83 without TMR. Over the same period, there were 51 revision transtibial amputations performed, including 23 (21%) in the patients undergoing primary transtibial amputation at the study institution. The most common indications for revision surgery were wound breakdown/dehiscence (42%, n = 25), followed by symptomatic neuroma 18% (n = 9/51) and infection/osteomyelitis (17%, n = 10) as the most common indications. However, of the patients undergoing primary amputation at the study's institution, there was no difference in reoperation rates for neuroma when comparing the TMR group (3.6%, n = 1/28) and no TMR group (4.0%, n = 3/75) (P = 0.97). Symptomatic neuroma is one of the most common reasons for revision amputation; however, this study was unable to demonstrate a difference in revision surgery rates for neuroma for patients undergoing primary transtibial amputation with or without targeted muscle reinnervation. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Passive or active drainage system for chronic subdural haematoma—a single-center retrospective follow-up study

BackgroundPostoperative drainage systems have become a standard treatment for chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH). We previously compared treatment results from three Scandinavian centers using three different postoperative drainage systems and concluded that the active subgaleal drainage was associated with lower recurrence and complication rates than the passive subdural drainage. We consequently changed clinical practice from using the passive subdural drainage to the active subgaleal drainage.ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to assess a potential change in reoperation rates for CSDH after conversion to the active subgaleal drainage.MethodsThis single-center cohort study compared the reoperation rates for recurrent same-sided CSDH and postoperative complication rates between patients treated during two study periods (passive subdural drainage cohort versus active subgaleal drainage cohort).ResultsIn total, 594 patients were included in the study. We found no significant difference in reoperation rates between the passive subdural drain group and the active subgaleal drain group (21.6%, 95% CI 17.5–26.4% vs. 18.0%, 95% CI 13.8–23.2%; p = 0.275). There was no statistical difference in the rate of serious complications between the groups. The operating time was significantly shorter for patients operated with the active subgaleal drain than patients with the passive subdural drain (32.8 min, 95% CI 31.2–34.5 min vs. 47.6 min, 95% CI 44.7–50.4 min; p < 0.001).ConclusionsConversion from the passive subdural to the active subgaleal drainage did not result in a clear reduction of reoperation rates for CSDH in our center.

Patients with Borderline Hip Dysplasia Undergoing Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Demonstrate Lower Outcome Scores but Comparable Survivorship to Non-Dysplastic Controls: A Propensity-Matched Study with Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

Background: Patients with borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) have demonstrated similar outcomes following primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) compared to equivalent patients without dysplasia at short- and mid-term follow-up. However, outcomes in these groups have not yet been compared at long-term follow-up. Objectives: To compare long-term clinical outcomes following primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between patients with BHD and non-dysplastic matched controls. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS from January 2012 through February 2013. Patients with BHD, defined as a lateral center edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25°, were propensity matched in a 1:3 ratio by sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) to non-dysplastic controls. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected preoperatively and 10 years postoperatively, and achievement rates of Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were calculated. PRO measures included the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sports-Specific (HOS-SS) subscales, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), 12-item international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and Visual Analog Scales (VAS) for Pain and Satisfaction. Gross survivorship was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. PROs, MCID and PASS achievement rates, and survivorship were compared between groups. Results: Twenty-eight patients with BHD (71.4% female; age: 30.8 ± 10.8 years, BMI: 24.2 ± 3.9 kg/m2) were matched to 84 controls (66.7% female, age: 34.4 ± 10.5 years, BMI: 24.9 ± 5.1 kg/m2; p ≥ 0.135). Mean follow-up was 10.3 ± 0.3 years. There were no significant differences between groups in any demographic characteristics, radiographic measurements, or intraoperative findings (p ≥ 0.096), except pre- and post-operative LCEA and Tönnis angle, which were lower and higher, respectively, among BHD patients (p &lt; 0.001). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in all PROs between the preoperative and 10-year postoperative time points (p &lt; 0.001 for all). Preoperative, 10-year postoperative, and magnitude of change (delta) in PRO scores were similar between groups for all measures (p ≥ 0.072), except 10-year postoperative HOS-SS (BHD: 62.9 ± 31.9 vs. Controls: 80.1 ± 26.0, p = 0.030) and change in VAS Pain (BHD: -34.2 ± 27.2 vs. Controls: -48.5 ± 26.1, p = 0.047). Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups for all PRO measures, but rates of PASS achievement were significantly lower among BHD patients for HOS-ADL (BHD: 39.1% vs. Controls: 77.4%, p = 0.002), HOS-SS (BHD: 45.5% vs. Controls: 84.7%, p = 0.001), and VAS Pain (BHD: 50.0% vs. Controls: 78.5%, p = 0.015). There was no difference in reoperation rate between groups (BHD: 14.3% vs. Controls: 17.9%, p = 0.778). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated comparable gross survivorship at long-term follow-up (p = 0.645). Conclusions: Patients with BHD undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS demonstrated significantly lower sports-specific PRO scores than propensity-matched controls at 10-year follow-up, with a trend toward significantly worse scores for measures assessing activities of daily living, pain, and satisfaction. Rates of MCID achievement were similar between groups, but BHD patients demonstrated lower rates of PASS achievement for the majority of PRO measures. However, patients with BHD had similar long-term hip survivorship compared to controls, with no significant differences in rates of revision hip arthroscopy or conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

Do patients with lumbar spinal stenosis benefit from decompression of levels with adjacent moderate stenosis? A prospective cohort study from the NORDSTEN study

BackgroundLumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is characterized by pain that radiates to the buttocks and/or legs, aggravated by walking and relieved by forward flexion. There is poor correlation between clinical symptoms and severity of stenosis on MRI, and multilevel stenosis has not been described to present worse symptoms or treatment outcomes, compared with patients with single-level stenosis. In patients with one level with severe stenosis combined with an adjacent level with moderate stenosis, the surgeon must decide whether to decompress only the narrowest level or both, to achieve the best possible outcome. The potential benefits of performing surgery on an adjacent moderate stenosis is debated, and the scientific evidence in scarce. PurposeThe aim of the present study was to investigate whether patients with a level of adjacent moderate stenosis, along with an index stenosis, benefitted from a dual-level decompression (DLD) compared with a single-level decompression (SLD). Furthermore, to investigate whether DLD patients had longer duration of surgery and hospital stay, higher rates of complications and/or lower rate of reoperations compared with SLD patients. Study designProspective cohort study. Patient sampleWe analyzed data from the Norwegian Degenerative Spondylisthesis and Spinal Stenosis study- Spinal Stenosis Trial (NORDSTEN-SST). In this randomized multicenter study, 437 patients were included, evaluating clinical outcomes of three different surgical treatment options for LSS. Patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis were excluded. MethodBased on preoperative MRI, the present analysis included all patients who had a moderate stenosis (defined as Schizas B or C) in addition to a predefined index stenosis (the level with the smallest cross-sectional area). We compared patients who, based on the surgeons` choice, received a dual-level decompression, with those receiving a single-level decompression. Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was mean change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score from baseline to 2-year follow up. Secondary outcomes were proportion of success (30% reduction in ODI score), the Numeric Rating Scales for back and leg pain (NRS), the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire utility index (EQ-5D), the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), the Global Perceived Effect (GPE)-scale, duration of surgery, duration of hospital stay, perioperative complications and reoperation rates. ResultsAmong the 222 patients, included in the analysis, 108 underwent DLD and 114 underwent SLD. There was no difference in change scores for any of the investigated patient-reported outcomes between the groups after 2 years. However, the DLD group had longer duration of surgery and longer length of hospital stay. There was no difference in reoperation rates or perioperative complications. ConclusionThis study, alongside the NORDSTEN-LSS trial on patients with adjacent moderate stenosis as well as an index stenosis, showed no superior clinical effectiveness for dual-level surgery compared with single-level surgery.

Postoperative complications following neoadjuvant therapy and surgery in a phase 2 borderline resectable pancreatic cancer clinical trial (Alliance A021501).

664 Background: Postoperative complications in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy and pancreatectomy in the national cooperative group setting have not been previously characterized. Further, the impact of preoperative hypofractionated radiotherapy on postoperative outcomes is largely unknown. We sought to quantify perioperative morbidity among patients with pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy with or without hypofractionated radiotherapy on a multicenter clinical trial. Methods: The A021501 phase 2 trial randomized patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to 8 doses of mFOLFIRINOX (Arm 1) or 7 doses of mFOLFIRINOX then hypofractionated radiotherapy (Arm 2), followed by pancreatectomy (Dec 31, 2016-Jan 1, 2019). Patients underwent resection according to defined operative standards at enrolling centers without specific requirements for either surgeon or hospital volume. Surgical complications and adverse events were assessed and captured at a single time point of 90 days after surgery and compared between treatment arms. Results: Of 126 enrolled patients, 51 (40%) underwent pancreatectomy (n=32, Arm 1; n=19, Arm 2) at 28 institutions. Vascular resection was performed in 19 patients (37%). One patient in Arm 2 died within 90 days after surgery. Rates of any surgical complication were 19% (n=6) in Arm 1 and 42% (n=8) in Arm 2 (p=0.07). Median length of stay was 7 days (range 5-38 days). Five (10%) patients required reoperation within 90 days. Readmission rates were higher in Arm 2 than Arm 1 (16% vs. 42%, p=0.04) but there were no differences in rates of reoperation, pancreatic fistula or abscess requiring drainage, or wound infection between study arms. 54% of patients (n=26/48) experienced a grade 3 or higher adverse event, with no difference between treatment arms (47% versus 67%, p=0.7). Rates of initiation of adjuvant therapy did not differ between treatment arms (66% vs. 68%, p=0.4). Pancreatic fistula and abscess were associated with adjuvant therapy (p&lt;0.01). No difference in overall survival was observed based on occurrence of surgical complications (HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.5-2.6). Conclusions: In this national cooperative group study of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer,postoperative complications following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical resection were consistent with rates previously reported by high-volume institutions and using large datasets. Multimodality trials of preoperative therapy for locoregionally advanced pancreatic cancer may be safely performed in the cooperative group setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02839343 .

Trends of Microsurgical Head and Neck Free Flap Reconstruction and Safety during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses unprecedented challenges among patients with head and neck (HN) cancer that require oncological and reconstructive surgeries. This study aims to identify differences in postoperative outcomes for patients who underwent microsurgical HN free flap reconstruction prior to versus during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A retrospective observational study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2019 to 2020 database to identify patients with HN cancer who underwent a vascularized free tissue transfer was undertaken. Two cohorts were created: pre- and during COVID-19. Fisher's exact test and the unpaired Student's t-test were used to evaluate differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics between the cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess differences in reoperation rates between groups as well as to identify potential risk factors for reoperation. Results A total of 763 patients were analyzed. The mean age of patients in the overall cohort was 63.6 (standard deviation: 11.5) years. Most patients were white (62.7%). Overall, no statistically significant difference was evidenced between cohorts in terms of immediate postoperative outcomes. Similarly, reoperation rates were similar between groups (p &gt; 0.05). Dependent functional status (p = 0.021) and postoperative infection (p &lt; 0.001) were found to be risk factors for reoperation after holding other factors constant. Conclusion HN flap reconstruction can be performed safely during the COVID-19 era. Standardized protocols for patient selection must be strictly followed to avoid disease progression and optimize surgical outcomes. Further studies assessing long-term outcomes during the pandemic are of utmost importance to elucidate the true impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on this population.