Single-level Lumbar Decompression Research Articles

One Year Patient Reported Outcomes After Single-Level Lumbar Fusion at Orthopedic Specialty Hospital Compared to Tertiary Referral Center

Lumbar spinal fusion is an increasingly common operation to treat symptoms related to degenerative disorders of the spine including radiculopathy and pain. As the volume of spine surgeries grows, it is becoming increasingly common for procedures to take place in non-tertiary care centers, including orthopaedic specialty hospitals (OSH). While previous research demonstrates that surgical outcomes at an OSH are non-inferior to those at a tertiary referral center (TRC), the implications of this difference on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have not been sufficiently assessed. The objectives of this study were (1) to determine if changes in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after elective lumbar spinal fusion surgery differ between patients who undergo surgery at an orthopedic specialty hospital (OSH) and those who undergo surgery at a tertiary referral center (TRC) and (2) to characterize differences in short-term outcomes between hospitals. Retrospective cohort study. Adult patients (≥ 18 years old) who underwent primary, elective single-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion between January 2014 and December 2021 at a tertiary referral center or an orthopaedic specialty hospital. PROMs: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-form 12 (SF12) Mental Component Summary (MCS); SF12 Physical Component Summary (PCS); Visual Analogue Back and Leg (VAS Back/Leg) METHODS: PROMs were collected preoperatively, 6 months after surgery, and 1 year after surgery. Six-month and 1-year delta PROM values were calculated by subtracting the preoperative PROM score from the 6-month or 1-year score, respectively. Multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to assess the independent effect of hospital location on postoperative PROM scores. A total of 288 patients were identified as part of the study cohort including 205 patients who underwent surgery at the tertiary hospital and 83 patients who underwent surgery at the OSH. OSH patients had shorter length of stay (1.57 ± 0.72 vs. 3.28 ± 1.32, p<0.001), however there was no difference in discharge disposition or 90-day readmission rates between hospitals (p>0.05). At 6 months, having surgery at the specialty hospital was associated with higher PCS (estimate = 2.96, confidence interval: 0.21 - 5.71, p=0.035). At 1-year postoperatively, the location of surgery no longer demonstrated significant associations with PROM scores. Preoperative PROM scores demonstrated significant associations with 6-month and 1-year scores for each PROM (p<0.05) except VAS leg at 6 months postoperatively. To our knowledge, this is one of the largest studies investigating PROMs at OSH versus TRCs for single-level lumbar fusions. We demonstrated that at one-year follow-up, there is not a significant difference in PROM improvement between patients who undergo surgery at a TRC and patients who do so at an OSH.

Impact of preoperative back pain severity on PROMIS outcomes following minimally invasive lumbar decompression.

To evaluate the effect of baseline back pain severity on PROMIS mental health outcomes following minimally invasive lumbar decompression (LD). Patients undergoing elective, primary, single-level LD were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective single spine surgeon registry. Perioperative characteristics, demographics, and the following patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were extracted: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)/Patient-Health Questionnaire-9 /PROMIS-Physical Function/Anxiety/Pain Interference/Sleep Disturbance (PROMIS-PF/A/PI/SD). Two cohorts were created: preoperative VAS-B < 7 and VAS-B ≥ 7. Change in PROs (ΔPROs) from baseline to six weeks/final follow-up were determined. Average patient follow-up was 13.4 ± 8.8months. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement rates were calculated and compared through multivariable logistic regression. Postoperative scores and ΔPROs, were compared with multivariable linear regression while all other data was compared between groups with inferential statistics. Altogether, 347 patients were included, with 190 in the VAS-B < 7 group. VAS-B ≥ 7 reported worse outcomes preoperatively (p ≤ 0.013, all). At six weeks, VAS-B ≥ 7 reported worse VAS-B (p = 0.017), with no other significant differences. At final follow-up, patients with worse VAS-B reported worse ODI (p = 0.040) and VAS-B while all other PROs were similar (p ≥ 0.078, all). VAS-B ≥ 7 experienced greater 6-week improvements in VAS-B/ODI/PROMIS-PI/PROMIS-SD (p ≤ 0.009, all), greater VAS-B/ODI/PROMIS-SD improvement by final follow-up (p ≤ 0.009, all) and greater MCID achievement in ODI/VAS-B (p ≤ 0.027). Patients with worse baseline back pain report inferior baseline scores that converge with those with milder preoperative back pain by 6weeks after LD and reported greater 6-week improvements in disability, pain interference, and sleep disturbance by 6weeks, and greater improvements in disability and sleep disturbance by final follow-up.

Preoperative Leg Pain as a Predictor of Clinical Outcomes after Single Lumbar Microdecompression Surgery in Young and Middle-Aged Groups: A Retrospective Study

Background: Previous studies have stated that the higher the LP VAS, the better the outcome. However, there is no quantification of this relationship. Objectives: To maximize the understanding of the effect of symptom duration and intensity of leg pain on surgical outcome at one year, ascertain whether the level of radiculopathy influences outcome, and examine the possible factors that may lead to repeat surgery at the same level in young and middle age groups. Methods: Retrospective data was collected from patients who underwent primary, single-level lumbar decompression surgery with a 12-month follow-up period. We used the ROC curve to determine the LP VAS cutoff value. Results: 500 patients were included. There was a significant improvement in LBP VAS and LP VAS after 12-month follow-up (84% and 95%, respectively). There was a significant relationship between the reoperation rate and LP VAS, with a p-value of 0.001. LP VAS (&gt;7.0) is the maximum area under the curve, with 92% sensitivity and 37% specificity to predict reoperation. There was no significant relationship with the duration of radiculopathy. Conclusions: Patients (92%) with a preoperative LP VAS &gt;7.0 are more susceptible to re-operation surgery. LP cannot be used as a predictor of surgical outcome independently of other factors. Surgeons should be more cautious in selecting patients for surgery and not base their decision only on preoperative leg pain.

A Tubular-Mounted Digital Camera Versus Optical Surgical Microscope for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Surgery: The Impact on Operative Times, Ergonomics, and Workflow

ObjectivesUnderstanding the ergonomic impact is foundational to critically evaluate the value and safety of enabling technologies in spinal Minimally Invasive Spine Surgeries (MISS). This study assessed the impact of tube-mounted digital camera (TMDC) vs. optical surgical microscope (OSM) in single-level MISS on operative times, durotomy rate, surgeon ergonomics, safety, and operating room workflow. MethodsIn a retrospective study, we compared consecutive single-level MIS lumbar decompression surgeries with TMDC (Sep 2021-Jun 2022) to a historical OSM cohort (Jan 2020-Jul 2021). Data included patient demographics, operative times, durotomy incidence, surgeon ergonomics (REBA scores), and equipment impact via staff surveys. T-tests assessed operative times, while Pearson chi-squared tests compared sex. Age, BMI, and CCI comparisons used Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and survey results were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. ResultsIn total, 74 and 82 patients were included in the TMDC and OSM groups, respectively. Age, sex, and CCI did not significantly differ between both groups. The TMDC group had a higher BMI (29. 6 ± 5.1) versus the OSM group (29.0 ± 7.5) (p=0.04). The TMDC group (n=74) had significantly shorter operative times (57.3±16.6 minutes) compared to the OSM group (n=82) (66.7±22.5 minutes) (p=0.004), with no difference in durotomy rates (p=0.42). TMDC use yielded lower REBA scores (3) vs. OSM (4.1±0.77) (p<0.001). Surveys indicated improved safety, setup time, and workflow with TMDC (p<0.001). ConclusionsTMDC in single-level MIS lumbar decompression surgery improved surgeon ergonomics, reduced operative times, and maintained durotomy rates, enhancing operative room efficiency. Evaluating technology's ergonomic impact is vital for safety and value assessment.

182 Comparison of Post-operative Functional Recovery Following Awake Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Lumbar Laminectomy Under General Anesthesia

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive techniques and awake surgery have changed the nature of fusion surgery, though these effects are not yet fully characterized due to the subjective nature of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Physical activity data measured from smartphone accelerometers offer the ability to objectively quantify the benefits of surgical intervention and time to functional recovery. METHODS: Patients undergoing single-level open lumbar decompression and awake, endoscopic lumbar fusion under an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol over a 5-year period were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective multi-institution study. Included patients were required to own an Apple iPhone (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA) and have at least eight months of continuous pre-operative smartphone accelerometer data. Pre-operative demographics and changes in peri-operative activity levels were compared between the two patient groups. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 17 underwent awake, endoscopic fusion and 16 underwent open lumbar laminectomy. Fifteen of the 17 patients (88.2%) receiving endoscopic fusion achieved functional recovery within 1 year of surgery. The average length of time to reach functional recovery was 113.8 ± 28.8 days. In comparison, 13 of 16 patients (81.3%) receiving lumbar laminectomy without fusion achieved functional recovery, requiring 105 ± 18.2 days on average. There was no statistical difference in time-to-recovery between groups (p = 0.798). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive fusion surgery in the setting of awake spinal anesthesia and peri-operative ERAS protocols allow for a recovery time that is statistically equivalent to post-operative recovery periods of less anatomically invasive decompression surgeries. These findings warrant further investigation and comparison of the functional outcomes of ultra-minimally invasive surgical procedures to traditional standard of care treatments.

Endoscopic and Nonendoscopic Approaches to Single-Level Lumbar Spine Decompression: Propensity Score-Matched Comparative Analysis and Frailty-Driven Predictive Model.

The endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) approach is associated with high levels of patient satisfaction, shorter recovery time, and reduced complications. The present study reports multicenter, international data, comparing ESS and non-ESS approaches for singlelevel lumbar decompression, and proposes a frailty-driven predictive model for nonhome discharge (NHD) disposition. Cases of ESS and non-ESS lumbar spine decompression were queried from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2017-2020). Propensity score matching was performed on baseline characteristics frailty score (measured by risk analysis index [RAI] and modified frailty index-5 [mFI-5]). The primary outcome of interest was NHD disposition. A predictive model was built using logistic regression with RAI as the primary driver. Single-level nonfusion spine lumbar decompression surgery was performed in 38,686 patients. Frailty, as measured by RAI, was a reliable predictor of NHD with excellent discriminatory accuracy in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis: C-statistic: 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.94) in ESS cohort, C-statistic: 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.76) overall cohort. After propensity score matching, there was a reduction in total operative time (89 minutes vs. 103 minutes, p = 0.049) and hospital length of stay (LOS) (0.82 days vs. 1.37 days, p < 0.001) in patients treated endoscopically. In ROC curve analysis, the frailty-driven predictive model performed with excellent diagnostic accuracy for the primary outcome of NHD (C-statistic: 0.87; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88). After frailty-based propensity matching, ESS is associated with reduced operative time, shorter hospital LOS, and decreased NHD. The RAI frailty-driven model predicts NHD with excellent diagnostic accuracy and may be applied to preoperative decisionmaking with a user-friendly calculator: nsgyfrailtyoutcomeslab.shinyapps.io/lumbar_decompression_dischargedispo.

A Beginner's Perspective on Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Single-Level Lumbar Decompression: A Comparative Study with a Microscopic Surgery.

The application of biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) in spine surgery is increasing. However, the clinical results of related studies have been inconsistent. In this study, the perioperative and clinical outcomes of two techniques in single-level lumbar decompression surgery were compared using the perspective of a spine surgeon experienced in microscopic surgery but inexperienced in BESS. This is a retrospective study performed with prospectively collected data. From April 2019, 50 consecutive patients who underwent a single-level lumbar decompression surgery with BESS were evaluated. Additionally, the data of 150 consecutive patients who underwent the same microscopic surgery before April 2019 were collected. We performed 1 : 1 ratio propensity score matching for these two groups to adjust for baseline variables. The postoperative patient-reported outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and numeric rating scale for the back and leg preoperatively and at 6 months after surgery. The laboratory data (C-reactive protein [CRP, mg/L] and hemoglobin [Hb, g/dL]) were measured preoperatively and 3 times (1, 2, and 3 or 4 days) postoperatively. In these periods, the peak and lowest CRP and Hb concentrations were evaluated. The perioperative outcomes, operation time (from skin incision to dressing), length of hospital stay, drainage (for 24 hours after surgery), and surgery-related complications were also evaluated. Forty-seven patients (27 men and 20 women) were included in each group. The postoperative 6-month ODI was significantly lower in the BESS group than in the microscope group (6.90 ± 5.98 vs. 11.54 ± 9.70). The peak CRP concentration (16.63 ± 19.41 vs. 42.40 ± 37.73, p < 0.001) and CRP increment (peak CRP minus preoperative CRP, 14.69 ± 19.47 vs. 40.71 ± 37.32, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the microscope group. Operation time (83.72 ± 35.71 vs. 70.27 ± 23.24, p = 0.047) was significantly longer in the BESS group. Surgery-related complications were found in 6 and 3 cases in the BESS group (3 revisions, 2 dural tears, and 1 conversion to open surgery) and microscope group (2 revisions and 1 hematoma), respectively. BESS as a new technique resulted in satisfying short-term outcomes. It was a well-tolerated option for surgical treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disease. The relatively high incidence of recurrence at the index level and incidental dural tears should be considered for surgeons new to BESS; however, these were manageable complications.

Implementation of Machine Learning to Predict Cost of Care Associated with Ambulatory Single-Level Lumbar Decompression

With the emergence of the concept of value-based care, efficient resource allocation has become an increasingly prominent factor in surgical decision-making. Validated machine learning (ML) models for cost prediction in outpatient spine surgery are limited. As such, we developed and internally validated a supervised ML algorithm to reliably identify cost drivers associated with ambulatory single-level lumbar decompression surgery. A retrospective review of the New York State Ambulatory Surgical Database was performed to identify patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression from 2014 to 2015. Patients with a length of stay of >0 were excluded. Using pre- and intraoperative parameters (features) derived from the New York State Ambulatory Surgical Database, an optimal supervised ML model was ultimately developed and internally validated after 5 candidate models were rigorously tested, trained, and compared for predictive performance related to total charges. The best performing model was then evaluated by testing its performance on identifying relationships between features of interest and cost prediction. Finally, the best performing algorithm was entered into an open-access web application. A total of 8402 patients were included. The gradient-boosted ensemble model demonstrated the best performance assessed via internal validation. Major cost drivers included anesthesia type, operating room time, race, patient income and insurance status, community type, worker's compensation status, and comorbidity index. The gradient-boosted ensemble model predicted total charges and associated cost drivers associated with ambulatory single-level lumbar decompression using a large, statewide database with excellent performance. External validation of this algorithm in future studies may guide practical application of this clinical tool.

Remodeling of Epidural Fluid Hematoma after Uniportal Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy with Bilateral Decompression: Comparative Clinical and Radiological Outcomes with a Minimum Follow-up of 2 Years.

Retrospective cohort study. To evaluate the clinical and radiological effects of epidural fluid hematoma in the medium term after lumbar endoscopic decompression. There is limited literature comparing the effect of postoperative epidural fluid hematoma after uniportal endoscopic decompression. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical evaluation were performed for patients with single-level uniportal endoscopic lumbar decompression with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. A total of 126 patients were recruited with a minimum follow-up of 26 months. The incidence of epidural fluid hematoma was 27%. Postoperative MRI revealed a significant improvement in the postoperative dura sac area at postoperative day 1 and at the upper endplate at 6 months in the hematoma cohort (39.69±15.72 and 26.89±16.58 mm2) as compared with the nonhematoma cohort (48.92±21.36 and 35.1±20.44 mm2), respectively (p <0.05); and at the lower endplate on postoperative 1 day in the hematoma cohort (51.18±24.69 mm2) compared to the nonhematoma cohort (63.91±27.92 mm2) (p <0.05). No significant difference was observed in the dura sac area at postoperative 1 year in both cohorts. The hematoma cohort had statistically significant higher postoperative 1-week Visual Analog Scale (VAS; 3.32±0.68) pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; 32.65±5.56) scores than the nonhematoma cohort (2.99±0.50 and 30.02±4.84, respectively; p <0.05). No significant difference was found at the final follow-up VAS, ODI, and MRI dura sac area. Epidural fluid hematoma is a common early postoperative MRI finding in lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression. Conservative management is the preferred treatment option for patients who do not have a neurological deficit. Symptoms last only a few days and are self-limiting. A common endpoint is a remodeled fluid hematoma and the subsequent expansion of the dura sac area.

Presenteeism and absenteeism before and after single-level lumbar spine surgery

Background ContextHealth can impact work performance through absenteeism, time spent away from work, and presenteeism, inhibited at-work performance. Low back pain is common and costly, both in terms of direct medical expenditures and indirect reduced work performance. PurposeSurgery for lumbar spinal pathology is an important part of treatment for patients who do not respond to nonsurgical management. While the indirect costs of return to work and absenteeism among employed patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery have been studied, little work has been done to quantify presenteeism before and after lumbar spine surgery. Study Design/SettingProspective cohort study at a single high-volume urban musculoskeletal specialty hospital. PATIENT SAMPLEPatients undergoing single-level lumbar spinal fusion and/or decompression surgery. Outcome MeasuresPresenteeism and absenteeism were measured using the World Health Organization's Health and Work Performance Questionnaire before surgery, as well as 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery. MethodsAverage presenteeism and absenteeism were evaluated at pre-surgical baseline and each follow-up timepoint. Monthly average time lost to presenteeism and absenteeism were calculated before surgery and 12 months after surgery. Study data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools with support from Clinical and Translational Science Center grant, UL1TR002384. One author discloses royalties, private investments, consulting fees, speaking/teaching arrangements, travel, board of directorship, and scientific advisory board membership totaling >$300,000. ResultsWe enrolled 134 employed surgical patients, among whom 115 (86%) responded at 6 weeks, 105 (78%) responded at 6 months, and 115 (86%) responded at 12 months. Preoperatively, mean age was 56.4 years (median 57.5), and 41.0% were women; 68 (50.7%) had only decompressions, while 66 (49.3%) had fusions. Among respondents at each time point, 98%, 92%, and 92% were still employed, among whom 76%, 96%, and 96% had resumed working, respectively (median 29 days). Average at-work performance among working patients (who responded at each pair of timepoints) moved from 75.4 to 78.7 between baseline and 6 weeks, 71.8 to 85.9 between baseline and 6 months, and 73.0 to 88.1 between baseline and 12 months. Gains were concentrated among the 52.0% of patients whose at-work performance was declining (and low) leading up to surgery. Average absenteeism was relatively unmoved between baseline and each follow-up. Before surgery, the monthly average time lost to presenteeism and absenteeism was 19.8% and 18.9%, respectively; 12 months after surgery, these numbers were 9.7% and 16.0%; changes represent a mitigated loss of 13.0 percentage points of average monthly value. ConclusionsPresenteeism and absenteeism contributed roughly evenly to preoperative average monthly lost time. Although average changes in absenteeism and 6-week at-work performance were small, average changes in at-work performance at 6 and 12 months were significant. Cost-benefit analyses of lumbar spine surgery should therefore consider improved presenteeism, which appears to offset some of the direct and indirect costs of surgical treatment.

Time to Complete Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients with Lumbar Decompression.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to capture the true extent of postoperative improvement. Use of lengthier and repetitive PROMs can increase question burden on patients. This study aims to determine whether the length of time to complete (TTC) legacy PROMs has an impact on scores after lumbar decompression. A surgical database was retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent primary, single-level lumbar decompression from 2013 to 2020. Demographic and perioperative characteristics were collected. Physical function (PF) was measured by 12-Item Short Form (SF-12), 12-Item Veterans RAND (VR-12), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and was collected preoperatively and postoperatively. TTC was calculated as the difference between start and ending times for each instance of survey completion. Improvements for PROMs and comparison of TTC between SF-12/VR-12 and PROMIS PF were evaluated using a t-test. Correlation between TTC and PROM scores was evaluated using the Pearson correlation. Impact of TTC on postoperative PROM scores was evaluated using linear regression. A total of 216 patients, of which 68.1% were men, were included with a mean age of 45.8 years. Mean postoperative TTC for SF-12 and VR-12 was significantly longer than preoperative values (all P < 0.05). No notable difference in TTC was demonstrated for PROMIS PF. TTC PROMIS PF was significantly shorter than SF-12 and VR-12 from 12 weeks through 1 year (all P < 0.050). A low-strength negative correlation of TTC with SF-12 and VR-12 was observed at the preoperative, 6-week and 1-year timepoint whereas PROMIS PF had a low-strength positive correlation with TTC preoperatively and at 6 months (all P > 0.05). Time spent completing PROMIS PF did not markedly differ postoperatively, but SF-12 and VR-12 required a longer TTC than PROMIS PF. Although insightful to patient improvement, SF-12 and VR-12 may increase the question burden placed on patients to complete surveys in a timely manner.

Cost and Complications of Single-Level Lumbar Decompression in Those Over and Under 75: A Matched Comparison.

Retrospective database analysis. This study aimed to compare costs and complication rates following single-level lumbar decompression in patients under age 75 versus patients aged 75 and older. Lumbar decompression is a common surgical treatment for lumbar pathology; however, its effectiveness can be debated in elderly patients because complication rates and costs by age group are not well-defined. The Medicare database was queried through the PearlDiver server for patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression without fusion as an index procedure. The 90-day complication and reoperation rates were compared between age groups after matching for sex and comorbidity burden. Same day and 90-day costs are compared. The matched cohort included 89,388 total patients (n = 44,694 for each study arm). Compared to the under 75 age group, the 75 and older age group had greater rates of deep venous thrombosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.443, P = 0.042) and dural tear (OR 1.560, P = 0.043), and a lower rate of seroma complicating the procedure (OR 0.419, P = 0.009). There was no difference in overall 90-day reoperation rate in patients under age 75 versus patients aged 75 and older (9.66% vs. 9.28%, P = 0.051), although the 75 and older age group had a greater rate of laminectomy without discectomy (CPT-63047; OR 1.175, P < 0.001), while having a lower rate of laminotomy with discectomy (CPT-63042 and CPT-63030; OR 0.727 and 0.867, respectively, P = 0.013 and <0.001, respectively). The 75 and older age group had greater same day ($3329.24 vs. $3138.05, P < 0.001) and 90-day ($5014.82 vs. $4749.44, P < 0.001) mean reimbursement. Elderly patients experience greater rates of select perioperative complications, with mildly increased costs. There is no significant difference in overall 90-day reoperation rates. 3.

Experience of using a 3-blade LES-Tri retractor over 5 years for lumbar decompression microdiscectomy

BackgroundLower back pain is the fifth most common reason for visiting a physician in the United States. Degenerative disc disease, degenerative spondylolisthesis, arthritis, and facet arthrosis are leading causes for lumbar spinal stenosis. The previous gold standard involved open laminectomy combined with medial facetectomy and foraminotomy. The advent of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and endoscopic technologies has led to less invasive and targeted interventions. In this study, the authors aim to show a five-year experience using a three-blade retractor for lumbar decompression and microdiscectomy. MethodsA database review of a single spine surgeon over the last 5 years with a total of 306 patients undergoing single-level lumbar decompression with and without microdiscectomy. ResultsThe average age was 47 ± 12 years and the average BMI was 29.7 ± 5.7 kg/m2 with a total of 52% male patients. Operative levels included L3-4, L4-L5, and L5-S1, with 65% of procedures at the L5-S1 level and follow-up was for two years. Overall mean VAS back scores decreased from 7.9 ± 1.6 to 2.5 ± 1.1 at two-year follow-up, p = 0.001. Preoperative ODI scores improved from 32.1 ± 5.1 to 17.9 ± 4.3 at two-year follow-up, p = 0.002. The mean EBL and surgeon time was 21 ± 15 ml and 35 ± 17 min, respectively. ConclusionThis less exposure surgery technique can be performed to allow lumbar decompression, with or without microdiscectomy. This is an anatomy preserving technique with improved outcomes.

Effectiveness of Gelatin-Thrombin Matrix Sealants (Floseal®) on Postoperative Spinal Epidural Hematoma during Single-Level Lumbar Decompression Using Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Image Study.

Background Symptomatic postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (PSEH) is a devastating complication that could develop after lumbar decompression surgery. PSEH can also develop after biportal endoscopic spine surgery (BESS), one of the recently introduced minimally invasive spine surgery techniques. Gelatin-thrombin matrix sealant (GTMS) is commonly used to prevent PSEH. This study aimed at analyzing the clinical and radiological effects of GTMS use during BESS. Methods A total of 206 patients with spinal stenosis who underwent decompression by BESS through a posterior interlaminar approach from October 2015 to September 2018 were enrolled in this study. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed in all patients for evaluation of PSEH. Patients in whom GTMS was not used during surgery were assigned to Group A, and those in whom GTMS was used were classified as Group B. In the clinical evaluation, the visual analog scale (VAS) of the leg and back, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria were used. The incidence rate and degree of dural compression of PSEH on postoperative MRI were measured. Results The average age of the patients was 68.1 ± 11.2 (42–89) years. The overall incidence rate of PSEH was 20.9% (43/206). The incidence rates in Groups A and B were 26.4% and 13.6%, respectively, showing a significant difference (p = 0.023). The VAS-leg and ODI improvement was significantly different depending on the intraoperative use of GTMS. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of the VAS-back improvement. Groups A and B showed “good” and “excellent” rates according to the modified MacNab criteria in 79.4% and 87.6% of patients, respectively, showing statistically significant difference (p = 0.049). In Group A, two patients underwent revision surgery due to PSEH, while none in Group B had such event. Conclusion Intraoperative use of GTMS during BESS may be related to reduction in the occurrence rate of PSEH. Specifically, patients with GTMS appliance showed marked decrease in the occurrence of PSEH and had better clinical outcomes.

Endoscopic Versus Open Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: An International, Multi-Institutional Analysis of Outcomes and Adverse Events.

Study Design:Retrospective cohort study and systematic review.Objectives:Endoscopic decompression offers a minimally invasive alternative to traditional, open laminectomy. However, comparison of these surgical techniques has been largely limited to small, single-center studies. In this study, we perform the first international, multicenter comparison of both with regard to their associated rates of mortality, complications, readmissions, and reoperations.Methods:The 2017 American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database, containing data from over 650 hospitals internationally, was queried to evaluate the effect of endoscopic guidance on adverse events. Operative time, length of stay, readmission and reoperation rates, as well as the incidence of peri- and postoperative complications, were compared between endoscopic and open groups. The PubMed/MEDLINE database was queried for studies comparing the techniques.Results:A total of 10 726 single-level lumbar decompression patients were identified and included in this study, 34 (0.32%) of whom were operated upon endoscopically. Apart from 2 (5.88%) readmissions, among which only 1 was unplanned, there were no reported surgical complications within the endoscopic group. The mean length of stay for these patients was 0.86 ± 1.44 days, with procedures lasting an average of 91.89 ± 46.72 minutes. However, these endpoints did not differ significantly from the open group. On literature review, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria, and largely consisted of single-center, retrospective analyses.Conclusions:Endoscopically guided approaches to single-level lumbar decompression did not reduce the incidence of adverse events, length of stay or operative time, perhaps due to advances among certain nonendoscopic techniques, such as microsurgery.

Hidden blood loss following 2- to 3-level posterior lumbar fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXTPatients undergoing single-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion (PLDF) usually do not need transfusions. However, patients undergoing two or three-level PLDF occasionally require transfusion postoperatively even when estimated blood loss (EBL) or blood loss from drains appears acceptable. Estimating the volume of HBL is critical in perioperative fluid management. PURPOSETo determine the volume of hidden blood loss (HBL) in two- or three-level PLDF. STUDY DESIGNSingle-center, multisurgeon, secondary analysis from a prospective randomized clinical trial of cell saver use. PATIENT SAMPLEPatients enrolled in a prospective randomized trial of cell saver undergoing two- or three-level PLDF were included in this analysis. METHODSTotal blood loss was calculated using four estimation formulas including Bourke's, Gross’, Camarasa's, and Lopez-Picado's formulas. HBL was determined by subtracting the visible loss (EBL and blood loss from drains) from the calculated total blood loss. RESULTSA total of 89 patients (36 males, mean age 62 years) were included. Seventy-five patients underwent open two-level fusion while 14 had three-level fusions. Intervertebral fusion was performed in 20 patients. Mean surgical time was 261 minutes, and EBL was 685 mL. Mean blood loss from drains was 824 mL. Seventy patients received allogenic blood whereas 47 cell saver blood reinfused intraoperatively. HBL was calculated to be 678 mL, 963 mL, 1,267 mL, and 819 mL using each formula. CONCLUSIONSHBL following two or three-level PLDF was substantial and more than EBL. Postoperative management of blood loss should take HBL into account.

Sarcopenia does not affect clinical outcomes following lumbar fusion

Sarcopenia, defined as decreased skeletal muscle mass or function, has recently been found to have increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. The relationship between sarcopenia and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar fusion has not been examined. This study investigates whether sarcopenia affects fusion rates and outcomes following single-level lumbar decompression and fusion. A retrospective analysis was undertaken of 97 consecutive patients who underwent a single level lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Demographics, perioperative data, and patient reported clinical outcomes were collected. Measurements of paraspinal muscle CSA were made using a standardized protocol at the level of the L3-4 disc space on a preoperative lumbar MRI. Univariate analysis was used to compare cohorts with regards to demographics, comorbidities, and clinical outcomes. Of 97 patients, 16 patients (15.8%) were in the sarcopenic cohort utilizing a threshold of 986.1 mm2/m2. Reoperation rates were not significantly different between the two groups (0% vs 3.6%, p = .451). The sarcopenia cohort had lower BMI (28.1 vs 31.8, p = .017) and less male patients (6.3% vs 55.6%, p < .001). Mean follow-up was 18.3 months. There was no significant difference in postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (24.7 vs 23.2, p = .794) Short Form 12 Physical (38.0 vs. 40.4, p = .445) Mental scores (55.5 vs. 53.6, p = .503), or visual analog scale (VAS) back pain scores (3.4 vs. 3.3, p = .818). No significant difference was found with regards to outcomes when comparing sarcopenic to non-sarcopenic patients undergoing lumbar fusion. Sarcopenia does not impact the clinical success of lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

A Novel Mobile Phone Text Messaging Platform Improves Collection of Patient-Reported Post-operative Pain and Opioid Use Following Orthopedic Surgery.

Prospective collection of patient-reported opioid consumption and pain levels post-surgically may hold value in highlighting solutions related to the opioid crisis. Traditional methods for collecting patient-reported outcomes after surgery, such as paper surveys, often have poor response rates, and electronic messaging may offer more convenience and therefore yield more robust data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a novel mobile phone short message service (SMS) platform would lead to better patient response rates to surveys on pain and opioid use than data-collection tools. An SMS text messaging platform was created and implemented between September 2017 and May 2018 at an orthopedic specialty hospital. The purpose was to collect reports on opioid consumption and pain levels twice a day for 6weeks post-surgery from patients who had undergone total hip or knee arthroplasty or a single-level lumbar microdiscectomy or decompression spine surgery. Patients who responded to fewer than 50% of the text messages were excluded. Our mobile phone text messaging platform was used by 183 patients, demonstrating a significantly higher response rate (96.1%) than our institution's post-operative email registry capture, as well as the majority of published response rates for post-operative outcomes captured through electronic and traditional data-collection systems. Response rate remained consistently high among the various surgeons and across patients, regardless of age. This application of a widely available technology can improve the measurement of post-operative patient-reported outcomes. Such data can in turn be used in the development of strategies to reduce post-operative opioid use. The adoption of novel technologies at a patient level will play a key role in combating the opioid epidemic.

Increased risk of symptomatic progression of instability following decompression for lumbar canal stenosis in patients receiving chronic glucocorticoids therapy

BackgroundLumbar decompression surgery is a commonly used treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis; however, some patients develop symptomatic spinal instability following decompression surgery. The objective of this study was to reveal risk factors for delayed instability following decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. MethodsOne hundred ten patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression between 2008 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Surgical indication for decompression surgery was symptomatic lumbar canal stenosis without spondylolisthesis or with minimum spondylolisthesis (less than 4 mm translation). Patients with gross segmental motion (>10° in disc angle, >2 mm translation) on flexion-extension lumbar radiographs were excluded. Age, sex, body mass index, smoking history, diabetes mellitus, autoimmune connective tissue diseases including rheumatoid arthritis, and the use of glucocorticoids were investigated. Radiographic measurements included disc angle, disc height, slippage, facet angle, segmental motion (flexion-extension), lumbar alignment, facet effusion, and disc degeneration. Data were analyzed using multivariate forward selection stepwise logistic regression, chi-square tests, and Student t-test. ResultsSix of 110 patients (5.5%) developed symptomatic spinal instability at the operative level and underwent spinal fusion surgery at an average of 2.1 years postoperatively. Autoimmune connective tissue disorders and chronic use of glucocorticoids were associated with the occurrence of symptomatic spinal instability requiring spine fusion surgery, while there was no significant difference in radiographic parameters and demographic factors excluding autoimmune connective tissue diseases between reoperation and non-reoperation groups. ConclusionsPatients with autoimmune connective tissue disorders receiving chronic glucocorticoid therapy are more likely to develop symptomatic spinal instability following decompression surgery for lumbar canal stenosis without or with minimal spondylolisthesis.

Outpatient Spine Surgery: Transition to the Ambulatory Surgery Center

With the emergence of the concept of value-based care, efficient resource allocation has become an increasingly prominent factor in surgical decision-making. Validated machine learning (ML) models for cost prediction in outpatient spine surgery are limited. As such, we developed and internally validated a supervised ML algorithm to reliably identify cost drivers associated with ambulatory single-level lumbar decompression surgery.A retrospective review of the New York State Ambulatory Surgical Database was performed to identify patients who underwent single-level lumbar decompression from 2014 to 2015. Patients with a length of stay of >0 were excluded. Using pre- and intraoperative parameters (features) derived from the New York State Ambulatory Surgical Database, an optimal supervised ML model was ultimately developed and internally validated after 5 candidate models were rigorously tested, trained, and compared for predictive performance related to total charges. The best performing model was then evaluated by testing its performance on identifying relationships between features of interest and cost prediction. Finally, the best performing algorithm was entered into an open-access web application.A total of 8402 patients were included. The gradient-boosted ensemble model demonstrated the best performance assessed via internal validation. Major cost drivers included anesthesia type, operating room time, race, patient income and insurance status, community type, worker’s compensation status, and comorbidity index.The gradient-boosted ensemble model predicted total charges and associated cost drivers associated with ambulatory single-level lumbar decompression using a large, statewide database with excellent performance. External validation of this algorithm in future studies may guide practical application of this clinical tool.