Comparing results of posterior spine fusion in patients with AIS: Are two surgeons better than one?

Two AIS Cases, 2 Surgeons, 1 Operating Room, 1 Day: Faster and Safer Than 1 Case in a Day

BACKGROUND

To lessen surgical times for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) undergoing posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF), our department developed a quality improvement initiative where 2 AIS cases were completed in 1 day by the same 2 surgeons operating together in 1 operating room (OR). We describe the results of this initiative, comparing operative times and outcomes to cases of these surgeons operating individually.

METHODS

From 2017 to 2023, patients aged 10 to 18 years with AIS undergoing PSIF were prospectively enrolled for "Two Spine Tuesday." Patients were matched by age, sex, curve severity, and number of levels fused to historical AIS controls. Outcomes included surgery time, total OR time, estimated blood loss (EBL), volume of cell saver transfused, allogenic blood transfusion, length of stay, 90-day readmissions, Clavien-Dindo-Sink Complication Classification System complication rates, and percentage who achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for SRS-22.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients composing the 2-spine group (group 2) were compared with 55 historical sex-matched and age-matched controls (group 1). Major coronal curve and average number of levels fused were similar between groups. Overall surgery time (203 vs. 296 min, P <0.001), total OR time ( P <0.001), and EBL (400 vs. 550 mL, P <0.001) were lower for group 2. Group 2 had fewer complications [n=17 (31%) vs. n=28 (51%), P =0.03].

CONCLUSIONS

Performing 2 AIS cases in 1 OR by 2 surgeons the same day resulted in shorter surgery times, less total time in the operating room, lower complication rates, and less blood loss compared with single-surgeon matched controls.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Simultaneous Co-surgeon Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) Flap Breast Reconstructions: Feasibility and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

A co-surgeon model is known to be favorable in microvascular breast reconstruction, but simultaneous co-surgeon deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap cases have not been well-studied. The authors hypothesize that performing two simultaneous co-surgeon bilateral DIEP flap reconstructions results in non-inferior clinical outcomes and may improve patient access to care.

METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was performed utilizing record review to identify all cases of co-surgeon free-flap breast reconstructions over a 38-month period. Patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral DIEP flap breast reconstructions with the same two co-surgeons were identified. The control group consisted of subjects who underwent non-simultaneous reconstruction by the same co-surgeons within the same, preceding, or following month of those in the study group. Primary outcome variables were 90-day postoperative complications, while secondary outcomes were operating time, ischemia time, and length of stay. Descriptive statistics, univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 137 subjects were identified and 64 met the inclusion criteria (n = 28 study, n = 36 control). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in body mass index, radiation, trainee experience, flap perforator number, immediate/delayed reconstruction, or length of stay. There were also no statistically significant differences in complications, including flap loss, anastomosis revision, take-back to the operating room, or re-admission. Operative time was longer in the simultaneous DIEP group (540.5 vs. 443.5 min, p < 0.01), but ischemia time was shorter in the simultaneous group (64.0 vs. 80.5 min, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

A simultaneous co-surgeon approach to bilateral DIEP flap reconstruction may improve access to care and does not result in a higher complication rate compared with non-simultaneous bilateral DIEP flaps.

Hybrid vs all pedicle screws constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a metaanalysis of clinical and radiological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) affects around 1 to 3% of young individuals, leading to spinal deformities typically exceeding a Cobb angle of 10 degrees without congenital or neuromuscular causes. Advances in treatment now include various surgical techniques such as posterior fusion utilizing all-pedicle screw constructs or hybrid constructs.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20) were searched up until February 2024. Comparative studies in which the cohort was separated into two groups (HC and PSC) were included. Data consisting of, surgery-related outcomes, sagittal radiographic outcomes, coronal radiographic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes, was extracted and compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies including 3435 patients were included. Higher rates of complications (Odds-Ratio = 1.99, p < 0.00001) and reoperations (Odds-Ratio = 2.82, p < 0.00001) were seen in the hybrid group. Better radiographic coronal correction was seen in the PSC group in both the major curve (Mean Difference = 5.97, p < 0.00001) and the secondary curve (Mean Difference = - 10.73, p < 0.0001). However, restoration of sagittal alignment was better in the HC group when assessing thoracic kyphosis (Mean Difference = 2.97, p = 0.02) and lumbar lordosis (Mean Difference = 3.17, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

While all-pedicle screw constructs demonstrated greater stability in AIS compared to hybrid constructs, resulting in reduced rates of reoperations and complications, as well as improved correction of major and secondary curves, they were unable to fully restore optimal sagittal alignment.

Benefits and limitations of a dual faculty neurosurgeon approach to resection of pediatric craniopharyngioma

PURPOSE

The utility and safety of including two neurosurgeons for tumor resections is unknown. This study compares outcomes among pediatric patients with craniopharyngiomas operated on with a dual or single surgeon approach (DSA, SSA).

METHODS

A single-center review identified all craniopharyngioma transsphenoidal or craniotomy resections from 2000 to 2020. Surgical years of experience (YOE) and rates of 5-year reoperations, complications, recurrence, and postoperative radiotherapy were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-six transsphenoidal and 68 craniotomies were identified among 62 patients. Eleven transsphenoidal (42.3%) utilized DSA and 15 utilized (57.7%) SSA. Eight craniotomies (11.8%) were DSA and 60 (88.2%) were SSA. The surgeon for SSA transsphenoidal procedures had a median of 10.7 YOE (IQR: 9.9-13.7) versus 6.6 (IQR: 2.7-16; p = 0.058) for the lead surgeon in DSAs. The co-surgeon in transsphenoidal DSAs had a median of 27 YOE (IQR: 11.8-35.7). The surgeon for SSA craniotomies had a median of 19.3 YOE (IQR: 12.1-26.4) versus 4.5 years (IQR: 1.3-15.3; p = 0.017) for the lead surgeon in DSA cases. The co-surgeon in DSA craniotomies had a median of 23.2 YOE (IQR: 12.6-31.4). Case complexity was similar across transsphenoidal groups. DSA transsphenoidal resections had fewer complications (18% DSA vs. 33% SSA), reoperations (45% vs. 53%), and radiation therapy (9.1% DSA vs. 33% SSA) than SSA.

CONCLUSION

Lead surgeons in DSAs are frequently junior surgeons while SSAs typically employ senior surgeons. Outcomes did not significantly differ between DSA and SSA. Mentorship through DSAs does not negatively affect patient care.

Do two operators improve outcomes in left main percutaneous coronary intervention? Insights from the ORPKI Registry

BACKGROUND

Significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease is prevalent in 7% of patients undergoing angiography. Limited data exists on the impact of double scrubbing in LMCA PCI. We sought to assess periprocedural outcomes in two-operator LMCA percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Using data from the Polish National Registry of PCI (ORPKI), we collected data on 28,745 patients undergoing LMCA PCI from 154 centers. Patients were divided into two groups based on the number of operators performing PCI (one vs. two operators).

RESULTS

LMCA PCI was performed by a single operator in 86% of the cases and by two operators in 14% of cases. Patients treated by two operators had a greater comorbidity burden including diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension, previous myocardial infarction, and previous revascularization. In addition, these were more likely to be treated in high-volume centers, by operators with higher volume of LMCA PCIs. The risk of periprocedural death (2.37% vs. 2.44%; P=0.78), as well as cardiac arrest, coronary artery perforation, no-reflow, and puncture site bleeding was comparable between the two groups. On multivariable analysis, we found that a two-operator strategy was an independent predictor of periprocedural death, with this effect being much more profound in an elective setting (OR=5.13 [1.37-19.26]; P=0.015), compared to an urgent (ACS) setting (OR=1.32 [1.00-1.73]; P=0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that a two-operator approach is not necessarily routinely recommended for LMCA interventions, although it can be considered for more complex cases.

Co-surgery in head and neck microvascular reconstruction

PURPOSE

Co-surgery with two attending reconstructive surgeons is becoming increasingly common in breast microvascular reconstruction due to case complexity and the potential for improved outcomes and operative efficiency. The impact of co-surgery on outcomes in head and neck microvascular reconstruction has not been studied.

METHODS

Our multidisciplinary head and neck reconstruction team (Otolaryngology, Plastic Surgery) at the University of Pittsburgh transitioned to a practice of co-surgery on head and neck free flaps. In this study, we compare outcomes of two surgeon head and neck reconstruction to single surgeon reconstruction in a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

384 patients met our inclusion criteria from 2020 to 2022. Cases were performed by a single surgeon in 77.8 % of cases (299/384) and two surgeons in 22.1 % (85/384). The mean age was 62.5 years. There was no difference between the single surgeon cohort and the co-surgery cohort in terms of flap survival, procedure time, ischemia time, hospital length of stay, recipient site complications, or rates of return to the operating room. Donor site complications were less common in the co-surgery cohort (0 % vs 4.7 %, p = 0.021). For our reconstructive team, the transition to co-surgery has increased total surgeon fee collection per free flap by 28 % and increased surgeon flap related RVU production by 35 %.

CONCLUSION

Co-surgery is feasible and safe in head and neck microvascular reconstruction. Benefits may include reduced complications, increased reimbursement, and improved interdisciplinary collaboration.

Do we need a co-pilot in the operating theatre? A cross-sectional study on surgeons' perceptions

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this original study was to investigate general surgeons' perceptions on the role of dual surgeon operating for high-risk, elective complex surgical procedures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A 21-part cross-sectional online survey was self-completed by 85 general surgeons across hospitals in the UK. The survey assessed the perception of dual surgeon operating on patient morbidity and mortality, surgeons' burnout rates, complaints, patient waiting times and overall trainee experience. Statistical analysis was performed using R version 3.6.1.

RESULTS

Overall 78.8% believed that dual surgeon operating could help to overcome these human factors. Sub-analysis includes improve surgeon fatigue (89.4%), improve confidence (83.5%), improve decision-making (76.5%), minimise technical error (69.4%), improve communication, team work and leadership skills (65.9%). 65.9% believed it would reduce surgeons' burnout. There was a statistically significant relationship between the participants believing it would reduce surgeons' burnout and those who felt it would reduce complaints, Chi-squared(4) = [30.8], p = [0.00000342]. A statistically significant relationship was noted between participants believing it would reduce surgeons' burnout and those who felt it would reduce patient mortality/morbidity, Chi-squared(4) = [19.9], p = [0.000517].

CONCLUSION

The survey has highlighted positive surgeons' perceptions regarding dual surgeon operating.

Perioperative Complications and Health-related Quality of Life Outcomes in Severe Pediatric Spinal Deformity

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative complications and mid-term outcomes for severe pediatric spinal deformity.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Few studies have evaluated the impact of complications on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in severe pediatric spinal deformity.

METHODS

Patients from a prospective, multicenter database with severe pediatric spinal deformity (minimum of 100 degree curve in any plane or planned vertebral column resection (VCR)) with a minimum of 2-years follow-up were evaluated (n=231). SRS-22r scores were collected preoperatively and at 2-years postoperatively. Complications were categorized as intraoperative, early postoperative (within 90-days of surgery), major, or minor. Perioperative complication rate was evaluated between patients with and without VCR. Additionally, SRS-22r scores were compared between patients with and without complications.

RESULTS

Perioperative complications occurred in 135 (58%) patients, and major complications occurred in 53 (23%) patients. Patients that underwent VCR had a higher incidence of early postoperative complications than patients without VCR (28.9% vs. 16.2%, P =0.02). Complications resolved in 126/135 (93.3%) patients with a mean time to resolution of 91.63 days. Unresolved major complications included motor deficit (n=4), spinal cord deficit (n=1), nerve root deficit (n=1), compartment syndrome (n=1), and motor weakness due to recurrent intradural tumor (n=1). Patients with complications, major complications, or multiple complications had equivalent postoperative SRS-22r scores. Patients with motor deficits had lower postoperative satisfaction subscore (4.32 vs. 4.51, P =0.03), but patients with resolved motor deficits had equivalent postoperative scores in all domains. Patients with unresolved complications had lower postoperative satisfaction subscore (3.94 vs. 4.47, P =0.03) and less postoperative improvement in self-image subscore (0.64 vs. 1.42, P =0.03) as compared to patients with resolved complications.

CONCLUSION

Most perioperative complications for severe pediatric spinal deformity resolve within 2-years postoperatively and do not result in adverse HRQoL outcomes. However, patients with unresolved complications have decreased HRQoL outcomes.

Specialty Impact on Patient Outcomes: Paving a Way for an Integrated Approach to Spinal Disorders

Spinal surgical procedures are steadily increasing globally due to broad indications of certain techniques encompassing a wide spectrum of conditions, including degenerative spine disorders, congenital anomalies, spinal metastases, and traumatic spinal fractures. The two specialties, neurosurgery (NS) and orthopedic surgery (OS), both possess the clinical adeptness to perform these procedures. With the advancing focus on comparative effectiveness research, it is vital to compare patient outcomes in spine surgeries performed by orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons, given their distinct approaches and training backgrounds to guide hospital programs and physicians to consider surgeon specialty when making informed decisions. Our review of the available literature revealed no significant difference in postoperative outcomes in terms of blood loss, neurological deficit, dural injury, intraoperative complications, and postoperative wound dehiscence in procedures performed by neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. An increase in blood transfusion rates among patients operated by orthopedic surgeons and a longer operative time of procedures performed by neurosurgeons was a consistent finding among several studies. Other findings include a prolonged hospital stay, higher hospital readmission rates, and lower cost of procedures in patients operated on by orthopedic surgeons. A few studies revealed lower sepsis rates unplanned intubation rates and higher incidence of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and pneumonia postoperatively among patient cohorts operated by neurosurgeons. Certain limitations were identified in the studies including the use of large databases with incomplete information related to patient and surgeon demographics. Hence, it is imperative to account for these confounding variables in future studies to alleviate any biases. Nevertheless, it is essential to embrace a multidisciplinary approach integrating the surgical expertise of the two specialties and develop standardized management guidelines and techniques for spinal disorders to mitigate complications and enhance patient outcomes.

Two-Surgeon Multidisciplinary Approach to Pediatric Cervical Spinal Fusion: A Single-Institution Series and Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

A collaborative 2-surgeon approach is becoming increasingly popular in surgery but is not widely used for pediatric cervical spine fusions. The goal of this study is to present a large single-institution experience with pediatric cervical spinal fusion using a multidisciplinary 2-surgeon team, including a neurosurgeon and an orthopedic surgeon. This team-based approach has not been previously reported in the pediatric cervical spine literature.

METHODS

A single-institution review of pediatric cervical spine instrumentation and fusion performed by a surgical team composed of neurosurgery and orthopedics during 2002-2020 was performed. Demographics, presenting symptoms and indications, surgical characteristics, and outcomes were recorded. Particular focus was given to describe the primary surgical responsibility of the orthopedic surgeon and the neurosurgeon.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients (54% male) with an average age of 12.1 (range 2-26) years met the inclusion criteria. The most common indications for surgery were os odontoideum with instability (n=21) and trauma (n=18). Syndromes were present in 44 (39%) cases. Fifty-five (49%) patients presented with preoperative neurological deficits (26 motor, 12 sensory, and 17 combined deficits). At the time of the last clinical follow-up, 44 (80%) of these patients had stabilization or resolution of their neurological deficit. There was 1 new postoperative neural deficit (1%). The average time between surgery and successful radiologic arthrodesis was 13.2±10.6 mo. A total of 15 (13%) patients experienced complications within 90 days of surgery (2 intraoperative, 6 during admission, and 7 after discharge).

CONCLUSIONS

A multidisciplinary 2-surgeon approach to pediatric cervical spine instrumentation and fusion provides a safe treatment option for complex pediatric cervical cases. It is hoped that this study could provide a model for other pediatric spine groups interested in implementing a multi-specialty 2-surgeon team to perform complex pediatric cervical spine fusions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-case series.

The "In-Parallel" Technique for Awake, Bilateral Simultaneous Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Multilevel Lumbar Decompression

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) and MIS lumbar decompression have been successfully undertaken in the absence of general anesthesia in well-selected patients. By leveraging spinal anesthesia, surgeons may safely conduct surgeries on one- or two-level lumbar pathology. However, surgeries on more extensive pathology have not yet been described, because of concerns about the duration of efficacy of spinal anesthetic in the awake patient.

OBJECTIVE

To report the use of a novel awake technique for "in parallel," simultaneous lumbar spinal surgery on three-segment pathology.

METHODS

We describe concurrent performance of a dual microscopic, navigated MIS TLIF and MIS two-level decompression, using a combination of liposomal bupivacaine erector spinae block in conjunction with a spinal anesthetic.

RESULTS

We show that a left-sided, two-level MIS tubular microscopic decompression combined with a concurrent right-sided, transfacet MIS TLIF via a tubular microscopic approach was well tolerated in an 87-year-old patient with multilevel lumbar stenosis with a mobile spondylolisthesis.

CONCLUSION

We provide the first description of a dual-surgeon approach for minimally invasive spine surgery. This "in-parallel" technique-reliant on 2, independent spine surgeons-may aid in the performance of surgeries previously considered too extensive, given the time constraints of regional anesthesia and can be successfully applied to patients who otherwise may not be candidates for general anesthesia.

Virtual Scoliosis Surgery Using a 3D-Printed Model Based on Biplanar Radiographs

The aim of this paper is to describe a protocol that simulates the spinal surgery undergone by adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) by using a 3D-printed spine model. Patients with AIS underwent pre- and postoperative bi-planar low-dose X-rays from which a numerical 3D model of their spine was generated. The preoperative numerical spine model was subsequently 3D printed to virtually reproduce the spine surgery. Special consideration was given to the printing materials for the 3D-printed elements in order to reflect the radiopaque and mechanical properties of typical bones most accurately. Two patients with AIS were recruited and operated. During the virtual surgery, both pre- and postoperative images of the 3D-printed spine model were acquired. The proposed 3D-printing workflow used to create a realistic 3D-printed spine suitable for virtual surgery appears to be feasible and reliable. This method could be used for virtual-reality scoliosis surgery training incorporating 3D-printed models, and to test surgical instruments and implants.

Effect of surgeon volume on pediatric thyroid surgery outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pediatric thyroidectomy has been identified as a surgical procedure that may benefit from concentrating cases to high-volume surgeons. This systematic review aimed to address the definition of "high-volume surgeon" for pediatric thyroidectomy and to examine the relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and OpenGrey databases were searched for through February 2020 for studies which reported on pediatric thyroidectomy and specified surgeon volume and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Ten studies, encompassing 6430 patients, were included in the review. Five single-center retrospective studies reported only on high-volume surgeons, one single center retrospective study reported on only low-volume surgeons, and four national database studies (2 cross sectional, 2 retrospective reviews) reported outcomes for both high-volume and low-volume surgeons. Majority of patients underwent total thyroidectomy (54.9%); common indications for surgery were malignancy (41.7%) and hyperthyroidism/thyroiditis (40.5%). Rates of transient hypocalcemia (11.4% - 74.2%), transient recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (0% - 9.7%), and bleeding (0.5% - 4.3%) varied across studies. Definitions for high-volume pediatric thyroid surgeons ranged from ≥9 annual pediatric thyroid operations to >200 annual thyroid operations (with >30 pediatric cases). Four studies reported significantly better outcomes, including lower post-operative complications and shorter length of hospital stay, for patients treated by high-volume surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant variation in caseloads to define volume, pediatric thyroid patients have generally better outcomes when operated on by higher volume surgeons. Concentration thyroidectomy cases to a smaller cohort of surgeons within pediatric practices may confer improved outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; Level IV.

Single-Surgeon Versus Dual-Surgeon Strategy in Spinal Tumor Surgery: A Single Institution Experience

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to compare the outcomes of spinal tumor surgery between dual-surgeon and single-surgeon approach.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Perioperative adverse outcomes may be improved with 2 attending surgeons in spinal deformity cases. It is unclear if this advantage may be seen in spinal oncology operations.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review identified 24 patients who underwent spinal tumor surgery by two attending surgeons between January 1, 2016, and April 30, 2020 at a single tertiary care institution. 1:1 matching was then performed to identify 24 patients who underwent spinal tumor operations of similar complexity by a single attending surgeon. Postoperative outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Cases in the dual-surgeon group had significantly lower total operative time (601 vs. 683 minutes), reduced estimated blood loss (956 vs. 1780 ml), and were less likely to have an intraoperative blood transfusion (41.7% vs. 75.0%). The incidence of cerebrospinal fluid leak and wound infection did not significantly differ between groups, nor were there differences in total length of hospital stay, discharge disposition, 6-month emergency room visit, readmission, and reoperation rates.

CONCLUSION

Dual-surgeon strategy in spinal tumors surgery may lead to decreased operative time and estimated blood loss. These benefits may have clinical and cost implications, but should be weighed against the impact of resident and fellow training.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Surgeon specialty effect on early outcomes of elective posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a propensity-matched analysis of 965 patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Comparative effectiveness research plays a vital role in health care delivery. Specialty training is one of these variables; surgeons who are trained in different specialties may have different outcomes performing the same procedure. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of spine surgeon specialty (neurosurgery vs orthopedic surgery) on early perioperative outcome measures of elective posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

METHODS

This is a retrospective, 1:4 propensity score-matched cohort study. 5520 AIS patients were reviewed from ACS-NSQIP pediatric database. Propensity score matching was utilized.

RESULTS

Patients operated on by orthopedic surgeons were more likely to have shorter operation time (263 min vs 285 min), shorter total hospital stay (95 h vs 118 h), lower rate of return to operating room within the same admission (1.2% vs 3.8%), lower discharge rates after postoperative day 4 (23.8% vs 30.9%), and lower unplanned readmission rate (1.6% vs 4.1%), (p < 0.05). On the other hand, patients operated on by neurosurgeons had lower perioperative blood transfusion rate (62.1% vs 69.8%), (p < 0.05). Other outcome measures and mortality rates were not significantly different between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study found significant differences in early perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing PSF for AIS by neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. Further studies are recommended to corroborate this finding which may trigger changes in the educational curriculum for neurosurgery residents.

Factors Affecting Operation Duration in Posterior Spinal Fusion (PSF) Using Dual Attending Surgeon Strategy Among Lenke 1 and 2 Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) Patients

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Prolonged operation duration in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery was associated with increased perioperative complications. However, the factors affecting operation duration in AIS surgery were unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the factors affecting operation duration in posterior spinal fusion (PSF) surgery using a dual attending surgeon strategy among Lenke 1 and 2 AIS patients.

METHODS

In all, 260 AIS patients with Lenke 1 and 2 curves who underwent PSF were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative and intraoperative factors affecting operation duration such as age, sex, height, weight, body mass index, Risser grade, Lenke subtypes, number of fusion level, number of screws, screw density, wound length, upper and lowest instrumented vertebrae level, preoperative Cobb angle, and flexibility of the major curve were assessed using univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses. Independent factors were determined when P-value <0.05.

RESULTS

The mean operation duration was 122.2±28.6 minutes. Significant independent factors affecting operation duration in PSF among Lenke 1 and 2 AIS patients were Lenke 2 subtypes (β=8.86, P=0.008), number of screws (β=7.01, P<0.001), wound length (β=1.14, P=0.009), and flexibility of the major curve (β=-0.25, P=0.005). The overall model fit was R2=0.525. Operation duration can be predicted using the formula: (8.86×Lenke subtypes)+(7.01×number of screws)+(1.14×wound length)-(0.25×flexibility)-0.54, where Lenke 2=1 and Lenke 1=0.

CONCLUSION

The factors affecting operation duration in PSF among Lenke 1 and 2 AIS patients were Lenke 2 curves, number of screws, wound length, and curve flexibility. The knowledge of these factors enables the spinal deformity surgeons to plan and estimate the operation duration before AIS surgery.

Resection of congenital hemivertebra in pediatric scoliosis: the experience of a two-specialty surgical team

OBJECTIVE

Institutions investigating value and quality emphasize utilization of two attending surgeons with different areas of technical expertise to treat complex surgical cases and to minimize complications. Here, the authors chronicle the 12-year experience of using a two-attending surgeon, two-specialty model to perform hemivertebra resection in the pediatric population.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort data from 2008 to 2019 were obtained from the NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital operative database. This database included all consecutive pediatric patients < 21 years old who underwent hemivertebra resection performed with the two-attending surgeon (neurosurgeon and orthopedic surgeon) model. Demographic information was extracted. Intraoperative complications, including durotomy and direct neurological injury, were queried from the clinical records. Intraoperative neuromonitoring data were evaluated. Postoperative complications were queried, and length of follow-up was determined from the clinical records.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2019, 22 patients with a median (range) age of 9.1 (2.0-19.3) years underwent hemivertebra resection with the two-attending surgeon, two-specialty model. The median (range) number of levels fused was 2 (0-16). The mean (range) operative time was 5 hours and 14 minutes (2 hours and 59 minutes to 8 hours and 30 minutes), and the median (range) estimated blood loss was 325 (80-2700) ml. Navigation was used in 14% (n = 3) of patients. Neither Gardner-Wells tongs nor halo traction was used in any operation. Neuromonitoring signals significantly decreased or were lost in 14% (n = 3) of patients. At a mean ± SD (range) follow-up of 4.6 ± 3.4 (1.0-11.6) years, 31% (n = 7) of patients had a postoperative complication, including 2 instances of proximal junctional kyphosis, 2 instances of distal junctional kyphosis, 2 wound complications, 1 instance of pseudoarthrosis with hardware failure, and 1 instance of screw pullout. The return to the operating room (OR) rate was 27% (n = 6), which included patients with the abovementioned wound complications, distal junctional kyphosis, pseudoarthrosis, and screw pullout, as well as a patient who required spinal fusion after loss of motor evoked potentials during index surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-two patients underwent hemivertebra resection with a two-attending surgeon, two-specialty model over a 12-year period at a specialized children's hospital, with a 14% rate of change in neuromonitoring, 32% rate of nonneurological complications, and a 27% rate of unplanned return to the OR.

Risk of early complication following anterior vertebral body tethering for idiopathic scoliosis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine peri-operative morbidity associated with anterior vertebral body tethering (aVBT) for idiopathic scoliosis.

METHOD

Of 175 patients treated with aVBT, 120 patients had 2 year follow up and were included in this study. Prospectively collected clinical and radiographic data was analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Pre-operatively, the mean patient age was 12.6 year (8.2-15.7 year), Risser 0-3, with main thoracic scoliosis 51.2° (40-70°). Immediately post-operative, scoliosis improved to 26.9° (6-53°; p < 0.05), at 1-year post-operative was 23.0° (- 11 to 50°; p < 0.01 vs immediate post-op) and at 2-year post-operative was 27.5° (- 5 to 52; p = 0.64 vs immediate post-op). Pre-operative T5-T12 kyphosis was 16.0° (- 23 to 52°), post-operative was 16.9° (- 7 to 44°), at 1-year was 17.5° (- 14 to 61°) and at 2-year was 17.0° (- 10 to 50°; p = 0.72 vs pre-op). All patients underwent thoracoscopic approach, EBL 200 ml (20-900 ml), surgical time 215.3 min (111-472 min), anesthesia time 303.5 min (207-480 min), ICU stay of 0.2 day (0-2 days), and post-operative hospital stay 4.5 days (2-9 days). During the in-hospital peri-operative period, there were no unplanned return to the operating room (UPROR) and there was a 0.8% rate of complication: one pneumothorax requiring reinsertion of chest tube. By 90 days post-operative, there was no UPROR and a 5% rate of complication. Five additional patients developed complications after discharge: one CSF leak treated with blood patch injection in the clinic and resolved, two pleural effusions requiring chest tubes, one superficial wound infection and one pneumonia treated with outpatient antibiotics. By 1-year post-op, there was a 1.7% rate of UPROR and 8.3% rate of complication. Four additional patients developed complications beyond 90 days: two upper limb paresthesia required outpatient medical management, one CSF leak which initially treated blood patch injection in the clinic initially which then required UPROR, and one compensatory lumbar curve add on that was treated with extension of the tether. By 2-years post-op, there was a 6.7% rate of UPROR and 15.8% rate of complication. 9 additional complications developed after 1 year. One curve progression, one keloid scar, one right leg weakness, 4 cable failures and 2 curve overcorrections.

CONCLUSION

This large, multicenter series of aVBT demonstrated a 15.8% complication rate and a 6.7% UPROR rate at 2 year post-operatively. This early study during the learning curve of aVBT found higher rates of CSF leaks and overall complications than would be expected for PSFI at 1 year post-operatively and a higher rate of overall complications and of UPROR than would be expected for PSFI at 2 year post-operatively. As is common with new procedures, the complication rate may fall with further experience.

Dual attending surgeon strategy learning curve in single-staged posterior spinal fusion (PSF) surgery for 415 idiopathic scoliosis (IS) cases

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The implementation of a dual attending surgeon strategy had improved perioperative outcomes of idiopathic scoliosis (IS) patients. Nevertheless, the learning curve of a dual attending surgeon practice in single-staged posterior spinal fusion (PSF) surgery has not been established.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the surgical learning curve of a dual attending surgeon strategy in IS patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

415 IS patients (Cobb angle <90°) who underwent PSF using a dual attending surgeon strategy OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included operative time, total blood loss, allogenic blood transfusion requirement, length of hospital stay and perioperative complication rate.

METHODS

Regression analysis using Locally Weighted Scatterplot Smoothing (LOWESS) method was applied to create the best-fit-curve between case number versus operative time and total blood loss in identifying cut-off points for the learning curve.

RESULTS

The mean Cobb angle was 60.8±10.8°. Mean operative time was 134.4±32.1 minutes and mean total blood loss was 886.0±450.6 mL. The mean length of hospital stay was 3.0±1.6 days. The learning curves of a dual attending surgeon strategy in this study were established at the 115th case (operative time) and 196th case (total blood loss) respectively (p<.001). In comparison of cases before and after the cut-off points, mean operative time reduced significantly from 147.2±36.5 minutes to 129.5±28.9 minutes and mean total blood loss reduced significantly from 1015.1±506.6 mL to 770.4±357.3 mL (p<.001). No allogenic blood transfusion was required and there were 7 perioperative complications (n=7/415, 1.7%) recorded.

CONCLUSION

The learning curve of a dual surgeon strategy in single-staged PSF surgery based on operative time and total blood loss were established at 115th case and 196th case respectively (p<.001).

The value-added benefit of utilizing two attending surgeons for patients with scoliosis secondary to cerebral palsy

PURPOSE

The use of two attending surgeons during posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for cerebral palsy (CP) patients has been shown to improve perioperative outcomes. This study aims to determine if the use of two surgeons is associated with an increase in the number of subsequent surgeries that can be performed in the same operating room (OR) during business hours.

METHODS

Patients with scoliosis and CP treated with PSF with minimum 90-day follow-up were included. Patients were grouped based on whether one or two attending surgeons performed the case. The primary outcome was the number of surgeries that followed in the same OR before 5 PM. Secondary outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay, rate of surgical site infection, and rate of unplanned return to the operating room.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were included (10 with 1 surgeon and 26 with 2 surgeons). The two surgeon group had a significant increase in the average number of surgeries subsequently performed in the same OR during business hours (1.1 vs. 0.3, p = 0.01), as well as shorter mean operative time (159 vs. 307 min, p = 0.007) and EBL (554 vs. 840 cc, p = 0.01; 26 vs. 39%EBV, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The use of two attending surgeons was associated with a significant increase in the number of cases subsequently performed in the same OR during business hours, and significant decreases in operative time and EBL. Hospitals should consider the patient care and potential system-level improvements when considering implementation of two surgeon teams for PSF in CP patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III.

Single- versus Dual-Attending Surgeon Approach for Spine Deformity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of spine deformity is associated with significant morbidity. Recent literature has inconsistently demonstrated better outcomes after utilizing 2 attending surgeons for spine deformity.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on studies reporting outcomes following single- vs dual-attending surgeons for spine deformity.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane databases were last searched on July 16, 2020. A total of 1013 records were identified excluding duplicates. After screening, 10 studies (4 cohort, 6 case series) were included in the meta-analysis. Random-effect models were used to pool the effect estimates by study design. When feasible, further subgroup analysis by deformity type was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 953 patients were analyzed. Pooled results from propensity score-matched cohort studies revealed that the single-surgeon approach was unfavorably associated with a nonstatistically significant higher blood loss (mean difference = 421.0 mL; 95% CI: -28.2, 870.2), a statistically significant higher operative time (mean difference = 94.3 min; 95% CI: 54.9, 133), length of stay (mean difference = 0.84 d; 95% CI: 0.46, 1.22), and an increased risk of complications (Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio = 2.93; 95% CI: 1.12, 7.66). Data from pooled case series demonstrated similar results for all outcomes. Moreover, these results did not differ significantly between deformity types (adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and adult spinal deformity).

CONCLUSION

Dual-attending surgeon approach appeared to be associated with reduced operative time, shorter hospital stays, and reduced risk of complications. These findings may potentially improve outcomes in surgical treatment of spine deformity.

Learning Curve for a Dual Attending Surgeon Strategy in Posterior Spinal Fusion (PSF): An Analysis of 105 Severe Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients (Cobb Angle ≥90°)

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the learning curve of a dual attending surgeon strategy in severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The advantages of a dual attending surgeon strategy in improving the perioperative outcome in scoliosis surgery had been reported. However, the learning curve of this strategy in severe scoliosis had not been widely studied.

METHODS

A total of 105 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with Cobb angle of 90° or greater, who underwent posterior spinal fusion using a dual attending surgeon strategy were recruited. Primary outcomes were operative time, total blood loss, allogeneic blood transfusion requirement, length of hospital stay from time of operation and perioperative complications. Cases were sorted chronologically into group 1: cases 1 to 35, group 2: cases 36 to 70, and group 3: case 71 to 105. Mean operative time (≤193.3 min), total blood loss (≤1612.2 mL), combination of both and allogeneic blood transfusion were the selected criteria for receiver operating characteristic analysis of the learning curve.

RESULTS

The mean Cobb angle was 104.5° ± 12.3°. The operative time, total blood loss, and allogeneic blood transfusion requirement reduced significantly for group 1 (220.6 ± 54.8 min; 2011.3 ± 881.8 mL; 12 cases) versus group 2 (183.6 ± 36.7 min; 1481.6 ± 1035.5 mL; 3 cases) and group 1 versus group 3 (175.6 ± 38.4 min; 1343.7 ± 477.8 mL; 3 cases) (P < 0.05). There were six perioperative complications. Fifty-seven cases were required to achieve the preset criteria (mean operative time and mean total blood loss) (area under the curve 0.740; P < 0.001; sensitivity 0.675; specificity 0.662).

CONCLUSION

There was significant improvement in operative time and total blood loss when comparing group 1 versus group 2 and group 1 versus group 3. The cut-off point for the learning curve was 57 cases when the preset criteria were fulfilled (≤193.3 min operative time and ≤1612.2 mL of total blood loss).Level of Evidence: 4.

Operative time in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a need for a standard definition

Our objective is to report and define 'operative time' in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) posterior spinal fusion surgeries. Documenting key times during surgery are important to compare operative risks, assess learning curves, and evaluate team efficiency in AIS surgery. 'Operative time' in literature has not been standardized. Systematic review was performed by two reviewers. Keywords included operative time, duration of surgery, and scoliosis. One thousand nine hundred six studies were identified, 1092 duplicates were removed and 670 abstracts were excluded. Of the 144 articles, 67 met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies were evaluated for number of patients, operative time, and definition of operative time. Meta-analysis was not performed due to confounders. Of the 67 studies (6678 patients), only 14 (1565 patients) defined operative time, and all specified as incision to closure. From these 14 studies, the median operative time was 248 minutes (range 174-448 minutes). In the 53 studies (5113 patients) without a definition, one study reported time in a non-comparable format, therefore, data were analyzed for 52 studies (5078 patients) with a median operative time of 252 minutes (wider range 139-523 minutes). A clear standardized definition of operative or surgical time in spine surgery does not exist. We believe that operative time should be clearly described for each published study for accurate documentation and be defined from incision time to spine dressing completion time in order to standardize study results. Level of evidence: IV.

Dual surgeon operating to improve patient safety

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an unprecedented reduction in the delivery of surgical services worldwide, especially in non-urgent, non-cancer procedures. A prolonged period without operating (or ‘layoff period’) can result in surgeons experiencing skill fade (both technical and non-technical) and a loss of confidence. While senior surgeons in the UK may be General Medical Council (GMC) validated and capable of performing a procedure, a loss of ‘currency’ may increase the risk of error and intraoperative patient harm, particularly if unexpected or adverse events are encountered.

Dual surgeon operating may mitigate risks to patient safety as surgeons regain currency while returning to non-urgent operating and may also be beneficial after the greatly reduced activity observed during the COVID-19 pandemic for low-volume complex operations. In addition, it could be a useful tool for annual appraisal, sharing updated surgical techniques and helping team cohesion.

This paper explores lessons from aviation, a leading industry in human factors principles, for regaining surgical skills currency. We discuss real and perceived barriers to dual surgeon operating including finance, training, substantial patient waiting lists, and intraoperative power dynamics.

Comparison of a dual-surgeon versus single-surgeon approach for scoliosis surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Corrective surgery for scoliosis is a complex and challenging prospect for experienced spine surgeons due to the prolonged duration of surgery and the significant level of technical skill and expertise required. Traditionally, shorter operative time and lower blood loss have correlated well with improved outcomes and as such, efforts have been made to affect these metrics including the use of two attending surgeons for major cases in preference to one. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the available literature to further clarify the potential benefit that adopting a dual-surgeon approach offers over single-surgeon operations.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effect of dual-surgeon operating compared to single-surgeon with respect to a number of indicators including blood loss, operative duration and length of hospital stay. In addition, we evaluated whether blood transfusion or complication rates differed between the two groups.

RESULT

Seven studies met our inclusion criteria. Mean difference indicated shorter duration of surgery (- 90.5 min, 95% CI [- 103.3, - 77.6]) and a lower blood loss (- 379.1, 95% CI [- 572.2, - 230.9]) in the dual-surgeon group compared to the single-surgeon group. Six studies reported mean length of stay and also favoured the dual-surgeon group.

CONCLUSION

This review observed that there are no randomised control trials evaluating dual-surgeon versus single-surgeon operating for scoliosis. We provide aggregated data and analysis of available literature, suggesting that outcomes in complex scoliosis surgery may be improved by adopting a dual-surgeon approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Improving Safety and Efficacy in the Surgical Management of Low-tone Neuromuscular Scoliosis: Integrated Approach With a 2-attending Surgeon Operative Team and Modified Anesthesia Protocol

BACKGROUND

Substantially increased operative time and amount of bleeding may complicate the course of surgical treatment in neuromuscular scoliosis. A well-organized team approach is required to reduce morbidity. The aim of this study is to review our early, short-term surgical outcomes with our new integrated approach that includes a 2-attending surgeon team and modifications in the anesthesia protocol in low-tone neuromuscular scoliosis and compare with a matched cohort of our historic patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our patients with (1) neuromuscular scoliosis with collapsing spine deformity, (2) low-tone neuromuscular etiology, (3) multilevel posterior column osteotomies with posterior all pedicle screw spinal fusion, and (4) more than 1-year follow-up. Patients were grouped into 2: group 1 consisted of patients managed with the integrated surgical team approach, group 2 included the matched historic patients.

RESULTS

There were 16 patients in group 1 and 17 patients in group 2. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding age, sex, body mass index, number of levels fused, major coronal deformity magnitude, pelvic obliquity, number of posterior column osteotomies, or amount of deformity correction. However, significantly shorter operative time (241 vs. 297 min, P=0.006), less intraoperative bleeding (1082 vs. 1852 mL, P=0.001), less intraoperative blood transfusion (2.1 vs. 3.1 U, P=0.028), less postoperative intensive care unit admission (23% vs. 100%, P=0.001), and shorter hospital stay (4.7 vs. 5.9 d, P=0.013) were observed in group 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that spinal deformity surgery in patients with underlying low-tone neuromuscular disease may not be as intimidating as previously thought. Our surgical team approach integrating a 2-attending surgeon operative team, a new anesthetic protocol that includes a modification of perioperative blood management is effective in reducing operative times, blood loss, transfusion rates, intensive care unit admission, and length of hospital stay.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Dual surgeon operating lists for complex revision arthroplasty surgery: changing orthopaedic surgical practice

There is an increasing trend towards dual surgeon operating in complex surgeries in various specialties. This is driven by regionalisation of services, increasing complexity of surgical procedures, the ageing population and challenges imposed by changes in surgical training. Dual surgeon cases have lower complication rates and better quality of patient care. This practice not only facilitates professional and personal development, but also provides valuable support to surgeons in the early part of their career. There is a paucity of literature to support this practice, however, and prospective studies are required to demonstrate the benefit of this approach.

Single- versus dual-attending strategy for spinal deformity surgery: 2-year experience and systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is complex and associated with high morbidity and complication rates. There is growing evidence in the literature for the beneficial effects of an approach to surgery in which two attending physicians rather than a single attending physician perform surgery for and oversee the surgical care of a single patient in a dual-attending care model. The authors developed a dual-attending care collaboration in August 2017 in which a neurosurgeon and an orthopedic surgeon mutually operated on patients with ASD.

METHODS

The authors recorded data for 2 years of experience with ASD patients operated on by dual attending surgeons. Analyses included estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusions, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, complication rates, emergency room visits and readmissions, subjective health status improvement, and disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score) and pain (visual analog scale [VAS] score) at last follow-up. In addition, the pertinent literature for dual-attending spinal deformity correction was systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

The study group comprised 19 of 254 (7.5%) consecutively operated patients who underwent thoracolumbar fusion during the period from January 2017 to June 2019 (68.4% female; mean patient age 65.1 years, ODI score 44.5, VAS pain score 6.8). The study patients were matched by age, sex, anesthesia risk, BMI, smoking status, ODI score, VAS pain score, prior spine surgeries, and basic operative characteristics (type of interbody implants, instrumented segments, pelvic fixation) to 19 control patients (all p > 0.05). There was a trend toward less EBL (mean 763 vs 1524 ml, p = 0.059), fewer intraoperative red blood cell transfusions (mean 0.5 vs 2.3, p = 0.079), and fewer 90-day readmissions (0% vs 15.8%, p = 0.071) in the dual-attending group. LOS and discharge disposition were similar, as were the rates of any < 30-day postsurgery complications, < 90-day postsurgery emergency room visits, and reoperations, and ODI and VAS pain scores at last follow-up (all p > 0.05). At last follow-up, 94.7% vs 68.4% of patients in the dual- versus single-attending group stated their health status had improved (p = 0.036). In the authors' literature search of prior articles on spinal deformity correction, 5 of 8 (62.5%) articles reported lower EBL and 6 of 8 (75%) articles reported significantly lower operation duration in dual-attending cases. The literature contained differing results with regard to complication- or reoperation-sparing effects associated with dual-attending cases. Similar clinical outcomes of dual- versus single-attending cases were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing a dual-attending care management platform for ASD correction was feasible at the authors' institution. Results of the use of a dual-attending strategy at the authors' institution were favorable. Positive safety and outcome profiles were found in articles on this topic identified by a systematic literature review.

A dual-team approach benefits standard-volume surgeons, but has minimal impact on outcomes for a high-volume surgeon in AIS patients

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

This study seeks to evaluate the effect of number of surgeons, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on AIS surgery. Recent literature suggests that utilizing two surgeons for spine deformity correction surgery can improve perioperative outcomes. However, the surgeon's experience and surgical volume are likely as important.

METHODS

AIS patients undergoing PSF from 2009 to 2019 were included. Patient demographics, X-ray and perioperative outcomes were collected and collated based on primary surgeon. Analysis was performed for single versus dual surgeons, surgeon experience (≤ 10 years in practice), and surgical volume (less/greater than 50 cases/year). Median (IQR) values, Wilcoxon Rank Sums test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Fisher's exact test were utilized.

RESULTS

519 AIS cases, performed by 4 surgeons were included. Two surgeons were highly experienced, 1 of whom was also high volume. Five cohorts were studied: a single senior high volume (S1) (n = 302), dual-junior surgeons (DJ) (n = 73), dual senior-junior (SJ) (n = 36), dual-senior (DS) (n = 21) and a single senior, standard-volume surgeon alone (S2) (n = 87). Radiographic parameters were similar between the groups (p > 0.05). Preoperative Cobb was significantly higher for DS compared to S1 (p = 0.034) Pre- and post-op kyphosis were similar (p > 0.05). Cobb correction was similar (p > 0.05). Levels fused, fixation points, anesthesia and surgical times were similar (p > 0.05). When the standard-volume surgeon operated with a second surgeon, radiographic parameters were similar (p > 0.05), but anesthesia time, surgical time, and hospital length of stay were significantly shorter (p < 0.05). Additionally, DJ had significantly shorter anesthesia and operative times (p < 0.001) and length of stay (p < 0.001) compared to S2.

CONCLUSION

Standard-volume surgeons have better outcomes with a dual surgeon approach. Junior surgeons benefit operating with an experienced surgeon. A high-volume surgeon, however, does not benefit from a dual surgeon approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Team Approach: Safety and Value in the Practice of Complex Adult Spinal Surgery

Surgical management of complex adult spinal deformities is of high risk, with a substantial risk of operative mortality. Current evidence shows that potential risk and morbidity resulting from surgery for complex spinal deformity may be minimized through risk-factor optimization. The multidisciplinary team care model includes neurosurgeons, orthopaedic surgeons, physiatrists, anesthesiologists, hospitalists, psychologists, physical therapists, specialized physician assistants, and nurses. The multidisciplinary care model mimics previously described integrated care pathways designed to offer a structured means of providing a comprehensive preoperative medical evaluation and evidence-based multimodal perioperative care. The role of each team member is illustrated in the case of a 66-year-old male patient with previous incomplete spinal cord injury, now presenting with Charcot spinal arthropathy and progressive vertebral-body destruction resulting in lumbar kyphosis.

Two Surgeon Approach for Complex Spine Surgery: Rationale, Outcome, Expectations, and the Case for Payment Reform

There is an increased trend in complex spine deformity cases toward a two attending surgeon approach, but the practice has not become widely accepted by payers. Multiple studies have shown that spine surgery complications increase with the duration of case, estimated blood loss, and use of transfusions, as well as in certain high-risk populations or those requiring three-column osteotomies. Dual-surgeon cases have been shown to decrease estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, surgical times, and therefore complication rates. Although this practice comes at an uncertain price to medical training and short-term costs, the patient's quality of care should be prioritized by institutions and payers to include dual-surgeon coverage for these high-risk cases. Because we enter an era where the value of spine care and demonstrating cost-effectiveness is essential, dual surgeon attending approaches can enhance these tenets.

Perioperative Outcome of Single Stage Posterior Spinal Fusion for Severe Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) (Cobb Angle ≥90°): The Role of a Dual Attending Surgeon Strategy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the perioperative outcome of dual attending surgeon strategy for severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients with Cobb angle more than or equal to 90°.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The overall complication rate for AIS remains significant and is higher in severe scoliosis. Various operative strategies had been reported for severe scoliosis. However the role of dual attending surgeon strategy in improving the perioperative outcome in severe scoliosis has not been investigated.

METHODS

The patients were stratified into two groups, Cobb angles 90° to 100° (Group 1) and more than 100° (Group 2). Demographic, intraoperative, preoperative, and postoperative day 2 data were collected. The main outcome measures were intraoperative blood loss, use of allogeneic blood transfusion, operative time, duration of hospital stay postsurgery, and documentation of any perioperative complications.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were recruited. The mean age for the whole cohort was 16.2 ± 5.2 years old. The mean age of Group 1 was 16.7 ± 5.7 and Group 2 was 15.6 ± 4.8 years old. The majority of the patients in both groups were Lenke 2 curves with the average Cobb angle of 93.9 ± 3.0° in Group 1 and 114.2 ± 10.2° in Group 2. The average operative time was 198.5 ± 47.5 minutes with an average blood loss of 1699.5 ± 939.3 mL. The allogeneic blood transfusion rate was 17.6%. The average length of stay postoperation was 71.6 ± 22.5 hours. When comparing the patients between Group 1 and Group 2, the operating time, total blood loss, allogeneic transfusion rate showed significant intergroup differences. Five complications were documented (one intraoperative seizure, one massive blood loss, one intraoperative loss of somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) signal, and two superficial wound breakdown).

CONCLUSION

Dual attending surgeon strategy in severe AIS more than or equal to 90° demonstrated an average operative time of 199 minutes, intraoperative blood loss of 1.7 L, postoperative hospital stay of 71.6 hours, and a complication rate of 5.9% (5/85 patients). Curves with Cobb angle more than 100° lead to longer operating time, greater blood loss, and allogeneic transfusion rate.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Bilateral mastectomies: can a co-surgeon technique offer improvements over the single-surgeon method?

PURPOSE

Bilateral mastectomy (BM) is traditionally performed using a single-surgeon (SS) technique (SST); a co-surgeon (CS) technique (CST), where each attending surgeon concurrently performs a unilateral mastectomy, offers an alternative approach. We sought to compare the CST and SST for BM with respect to operative times and complications.

METHODS

Patients undergoing BM without reconstruction at our institution between 2005 and 2015 were identified using operative caselogs and stratified into CS- and SS-cohorts. Operative time (OT; incision to closure) was calculated. Patient age, cancer presence/stage, hormone receptor/BRCA status, breast weight, axillary procedure, and 30-day complications were extracted. Differences in OT, complications, and demographics between cohorts were assessed with t tests and Chi-square tests. A multivariate linear regression model was fit to identify factors independently associated with OT.

RESULTS

Overall, 109 BM cases were identified (CS, n = 58 [53.2%]; SS, n = 51 [46.8%]). Average duration was significantly shorter for the CST by 33 min (21.6% reduction; CS: 120 min vs. SS: 153 min, p < 0.001), with no difference in complication rates (p = 0.65). Demographic characteristics did not differ between cohorts except for total breast weight (TBW) (CS: 1878 g vs. SS: 1452 g, p < 0.05). Adjusting for TBW, CST resulted in a 27.8% reduction in OT (44-min savings, p < 0.001) compared to SST.

CONCLUSIONS

The CST significantly reduces OT for BM procedures compared to the SST without increasing complication rates. While time-savings was < 50% and may not be ideal for every patient, the CST offers an alternative BM approach potentially best-suited for large TBW patients and those undergoing axillary procedures.

Feasibility and Outcome of an Accelerated Recovery Protocol in Asian Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of an accelerated recovery protocol for Asian adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There has been successful implementation of an accelerated recovery protocol for AIS patients undergoing PSF in the western population. No similar studies have been reported in the Asian population.

METHODS

Seventy-four AIS (65 F, 9 M) patients scheduled for PSF surgery were recruited. The accelerated protocol encompasses preoperative regime, preoperative day of surgery counseling, intraoperative strategies, an accelerated postoperative rehabilitation and pain management regime. All patients were operated using a dual attending surgeon strategy. Outcome measures included pain scores at five time intervals, length of stay, and detailed recovery milestones. Any complications or readmissions during the first 4 months postoperative period were recorded.

RESULTS

Mean duration of operation was 2.2 ± 0.3 hours with a mean blood loss of 824.3 ± 418.2 mL. No patients received allogenic blood transfusion. The mean length of stay was 3.6 ± 0.6 days. Surgical wound pain score was 6.4 ± 2.1 at 12 hours, which reduced to 5.0 ± 2.0 at 60 hours. Abdominal pain peaked at 36 hours with pain scores 2.4 ± 2.9. First liquid intake was at 5.2 ± 7.5 hours, urinary catheter removal at 18.7 ± 4.8 hours, sitting up at 20.6 ± 9.1 hours, ambulation at 27.2 ± 0.5 hours, consumption of solid food at 32.2 ± 0.5 hours, first flatus at 39.0 ± 0.7 hours, and first bowel movement at 122.1 ± 2.0 hours. The complication rate was 1.4% due to superficial wound infection with one patient failed to comply with the accelerated protocol.

CONCLUSION

An accelerated recovery protocol following PSF for AIS is feasible without increasing the complication or readmission rates. The total length of stay was 3.6 days and this is comparable with the outcome in western population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Adult Scoliosis Deformity Surgery: Comparison of Outcomes Between One Versus Two Attending Surgeons

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

Assess outcomes of adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery performed by one versus two attending surgeons.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ASD centers have developed two attending teams to improve efficiency; their effects on complications and outcomes have not been reported.

METHODS

Patients with ASD with five or more levels fused and more than 2-year follow-up were included. Estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), operating room (OR) time, complications, quality of life (Health Related Quality of Life), and x-rays were analyzed. Outcomes were compared between one-surgeon (1S) and two-surgeon (2S) centers. A deformity-matched cohort was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 188 patients in 1S and 77 in 2S group were included. 2S group patients were older and had worse deformity based on the Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab classification (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in levels fused (P = 0.57), LOS (8.7 vs 8.9 days), OR time (445.9 vs 453.2 min), or EBL (2008 vs 1898 cm; P > 0.05). 2S patients had more three-column osteotomies (3CO; P < 0.001) and used less bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2; 79.9% vs 15.6%; P < 0.001). The 2S group had fewer intraoperative complications (1.3% vs 11.1%; P = 0.006). Postoperative (6 wk to 2 yr) complications were more frequent in the 2S group (4.8% vs 15.6%; P < 0.002). After matching for deformity, there were no differences in (9.1 vs 10.1 days), OR time (467.8 vs 508.4 min), or EBL (3045 vs 2247 cm; P = 0.217). 2S group used less BMP-2 (20.6% vs 84.8%; P < 0.001), had fewer intraoperative complications (P = 0.015) but postoperative complications due to instrumentation failure/pseudarthrosis were more frequent (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were found in LOS, OR time, or EBL between the 1S and 2S groups, even when matching for severity of deformity. 2S group had less BMP-2 use, fewer intraoperative complications but more postoperative complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis with emphasis on complications and reoperations

BACKGROUND

Incidence of complications and reoperations between pedicle screw (PS) and hybrid instrumentations (HI) are still controversial in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare overall complications, reoperations, and radiographic outcomes between the 2 constructs.

METHODS

Strictly followed the PRISMA 2009 guidelines, the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were used to search for literatures up to April 2016, addressing PS versus HI in AIS patients. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was adopted to assess the quality of the studies. Data on complications, reoperations, Cobb angle of major curve, thoracic kyphosis, and proximal junctional measurement were extracted from the included studies. RevMan 5.3 and SPSS 21.0 were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four case-control studies with a total of 3042 AIS patients (1582 PS, 1460 HI) were included, consisting of 1 randomized controlled trial, 1 prospective study, and 22 retrospective studies. Decreased overall complications (95% CI 0.42-0.87, P = .007; I = 38%) and reoperations (95% CI 0.22-0.62, P = .0001; I = 0%) were found in PS group compared with HI group. As regard to reasons for reoperations, increased incidence of pseudarthrosis (P = .005), dislodged instrumentation (P = .005), and deep infection (P = .016) occurred in HI group. PS group achieved a better coronal correction (95% CI -7.06 to -4.54, P < .00001; I = 34%), but HI group was more powerful in restoring thoracic kyphosis (95% CI -7.88 to -3.70, P < .00001; I = 60%), and no significant differences were found in proximal junctional measurement (95% CI -0.88 to 1.54, P = .59; I = 0%) between the 2 constructs.

CONCLUSION

Compared with hybrid instrumentation, pedicle screw construct provides better coronal correction but less thoracic kyphosis restoring, with decreased incidence of overall complications and reoperations in AIS patients. As regard to the pedicle screw construct, the most common reasons for reoperation are malposition, deep infection, pseudarthrosis, and prominent implant.

Results of the 2015 Scoliosis Research Society Survey on Single Versus Dual Attending Surgeon Approach for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

An electronic survey administered to Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) membership.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize surgeon practices and views regarding the use of two attending surgeons for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The use of two experienced attending surgeons can decrease the operative time, estimated blood loss, and perioperative complication rates. However, the current practice patterns for the use of two attending surgeons remains unknown.

METHODS

An electronic, 27-question survey regarding single/dual attending surgeons was administered to the SRS membership. Determinants included: surgeon/practice demographics, assistant type/level of training, and questions regarding use of two attending surgeons. Overall reporting and comparisons between groups were made: US versus international, academic versus private practice, and experience <15 years versus >15 years.

RESULTS

A total of 199 surgeons responded from 27 different countries. Overall and between the groups, the respondents significantly reported believing that two attending spine surgeons improves safety, decreases complications, and improves outcomes (P < 0.01). Approximately, 67.3% reported using a second attending ≤25% of the time (33.2% do not), and 24.1% use one ≥51% of the time (similar between groups); 51.1% that have a second attending feel it's limited by reimbursement and access concerns and 71.9% have difficulty getting the second attending reimbursed. 72.3% use a second attending for ALL of the following reasons (no difference between groups): "it's safer/reduces complications," "it decreases operative time," "it decreases blood loss," "it results in improved outcomes," "it's less work and stress for me." If reimbursement was equal/assured for a second attending, 67.5% would use one "more often" or "always."

CONCLUSION

The respondents feel that having a second attending surgeon improves patient care, however most do not use one often. Reasons include reimbursement/access concerns and the majority would use one if reimbursement was equal and assured. Based on the current literature and these results, there is a need for working with third party payers to improve dual surgeon reimbursement rates in complex cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Does a dual attending surgeon strategy confer additional benefit for posterior selective thoracic fusion in Lenke 1 and 2 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)? A prospective propensity matching score analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

With an increased cost of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) surgery over the past 10 years, improvement of patient safety and optimization of the surgical management of AIS has become an important need. A dual attending surgeon strategy resulted in reduction of blood loss and complication rate.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the perioperative outcome of posterior selective thoracic fusion in Lenke 1 and 2 AIS patients comparing a single versus a dual attending surgeon strategy.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study was carried out.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The study sample comprised 60 patients OUTCOME MEASURE: Operative duration, blood loss, postoperative hemoglobin, need for transfusion, morphine usage, and duration of hospital stay were the outcome measures.

METHODS

A total of 116 patients who underwent posterior selective thoracic fusion from two centers were prospectively recruited. The patients were grouped into Group 1 (single surgeon) and Group 2 (two surgeons). One-to-one matching analysis using "propensity score-matched cohort patient sampling method" was done for age, gender, height, weight, preoperative Cobb angle, number of fusion level, and Lenke classification. The outcome measures included operative duration, blood loss, postoperative hemoglobin, need for transfusion, morphine usage, and duration of hospital stay. This study was self-funded with no conflict of interest.

RESULTS

From 86 patients who were operated by the two surgeons (Group 2), 30 patients were matched with 30 patients who were operated by a single surgeon (Group 1). Group 2 (164.0±25.7 min) has a significantly shorter operation duration (p=.000) compared with Group 1 (257.3±51.4 min). The total blood loss was significantly more (p=.009) in Group 1 (1254.7±521.5 mL) compared with Group 2 (893.7±518.4 mL). There were seven patients (23.3%) in Group 1 who received allogenic blood transfusion (p<.05). The morphine usage and average hospital stay were significantly lower in Group 2, 22.4±10.7 mg and 3.4±0.7 days, respectively (p<.05). In Group 1, there was one patient who developed a superficial wound infection. No other major complications were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

A dual attending surgeon strategy was superior to a single surgeon strategy in posterior selective thoracic fusion in Lenke 1 and 2 AIS patients and will lead to a faster operation, reduced intraoperative blood loss, reduced risk of allogenic transfusion, reduced morphine requirement, and shorter hospital stay.

Posterior spinal instrumented fusion for idiopathic scoliosis in patients with multisystemic neurodegenerative disorder: a report of two cases

Mitochondrial myopathy, encephalopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke (MELAS) syndrome is a progressive multisystemic neurodegenerative disorder. MELAS syndrome impairs oxidative phosphorylation and predisposes patients to lactic acidosis, particularly under metabolic stress. We report 2 siblings with MELAS-associated idiopathic scoliosis who underwent posterior spinal instrumented fusion with measures taken to minimise anaesthetic and surgical stress, blood loss, and operating time.

Perioperative Outcome in Posterior Spinal Fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Prospective Study Comparing Single Versus Two Attending Surgeons Strategy

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the perioperative outcome of posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients comparing a single attending surgeon strategy (G1) versus a dual attending surgeon strategy (G2).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The complication rate for surgical correction in AIS is significant. There are no prospective studies that investigate dual attending surgeon strategy for posterior spinal fusion in AIS.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients (30 patients in each arm) were recruited. The patients were comparable for age, gender, Lenke classification, major Cobb angle magnitude, and number of fusion levels. The anesthetic, surgical, and postoperative protocol was standardized. The outcome measures included the operative duration, blood loss, postoperative hemoglobin, need for transfusion, morphine usage, duration of hospital stay, intraoperative lactate levels, and pH. The timing of the operation at six critical stages of the operation was recorded.

RESULTS

The mean operative time for G2 was 173.6 ± 27.0 minutes versus 248.0 ± 49.9 minutes in G1 (P < 0.000). Mean blood loss in G2 was 0.92 ± 0.4 L and 1.25 ± 0.6 L in G1 (P < 0.05). None of the patients in G2 required any allogenic transfusion. Four patients in G1 (13.3%) required allogenic blood product transfusion. The day 2 postoperative hemoglobin levels in both groups were similar, but this was taken after blood product transfusion in G1. The amount of morphine usage was 20.4 ± 11.5 mg in G2 and 42.5 ± 24.0 mg in G1 (P < 0.000). G2 patients had a shorter hospital stay. One patient in G1 had superficial wound infection. G2 was faster than G1 during exposure, instrumentation, facetectomy, and bone grafting.

CONCLUSION

The involvement of two attending surgeons significantly reduced operative time, blood loss, need for allogenic blood transfusion, patient-controlled analgesia morphine requirement and led to faster patient recovery during the perioperative period.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

One-step (standard) versus two-step surgical approach in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis posterior spinal fusion: Which is better?

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study with IRB approval.

INTRODUCTION

Significant blood loss remains an important concern in terms of the performance of the posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Several strategies have been reported to minimize blood loss during surgery. In order to address the need to minimize blood loss without sacrificing the quality of the fusion, in our hospital, we adopted a two-step surgical approach. This surgical approach consist of the exposure and instrumentation of the lumbar region prior to and followed by an extension of the surgical incision to the thoracic region for its subsequent instrumentation. The main purpose of this study was to compare a two-step surgical approach with the one-step (standard) approach.

METHODS

This study was a review of all the data on consecutive posterior spinal fusion surgeries performed by a specific two-surgeon team during 2004-2013. Demographics, surgical variables, radiographic findings, and outcomes regarding blood loss, morbidity, and the duration of the procedure were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients underwent the standard surgical exposure, and 41 patients underwent the two-step surgical technique. With the exception of BMI, neither group showed any statistically preoperative variable significant differences. None of the postoperative outcome variables were statistically significant between both surgical approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were detected in terms of using a two-step surgical approach versus the one-step standard surgical approach regarding perioperative blood loss, surgical time, or complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level of evidence III.

Does "Two is Better Than One" Apply to Surgeons? Comparing Single-Surgeon Versus Co-surgeon Bilateral Mastectomies

BACKGROUND

Bilateral mastectomies (BM) are traditionally performed by single surgeons (SS); a co-surgeon (CS) technique, where each surgeon concurrently performs a unilateral mastectomy, offers an alternative approach. We examined differences in general surgery time (GST), overall surgery time (OST), and patient complications for BM performed by CS and SS.

METHODS

Patients undergoing BM with tissue expander reconstruction (BMTR) between January 2010 and May 2014 at our center were identified through operative case logs. GST (incision to end of BM procedure), reconstruction duration (RST) (plastic surgery start to end of reconstruction) and OST (OST = GST + RST) was calculated. Patient age, presence/stage of cancer, breast weight, axillary procedure performed, and 30-day postoperative complications were extracted from medical records. Differences in GST and OST between CS and SS cases were assessed with a t test. A multivariate linear regression was fit to identify factors associated with GST.

RESULTS

A total of 116 BMTR cases were performed [CS, n = 67 (57.8 %); SS, n = 49 (42.2 %)]. Demographic characteristics did not differ between groups. GST and OST were significantly shorter for CS cases, 75.8 versus 116.8 min, p < .0001, and 255.2 versus 278.3 min, p = .005, respectively. Presence of a CS significantly reduces BMTR time (β = -38.82, p < .0001). Breast weight (β = 0.0093, p = .03) and axillary dissection (β = 28.69, p = .0003) also impacted GST.

CONCLUSIONS

The CS approach to BMTR reduced both GST and OST; however, the degree of time savings (35.1 and 8.3 %, respectively) was less than hypothesized. A larger study is warranted to better characterize time, cost, and outcomes of the CS-approach for BM.