Spine surgeon specialty differences in single-level percutaneous kyphoplasty

Can the Unipedicular Approach Replace Bipedicular Percutaneous Balloon Kyphoplasty for the Management of Metastatic Vertebral Lesions?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical and radiographic results of bipedicular and unipedicular approaches(UPK and BPK) in the management of metastatic vertebral lesions MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-two patients with 159 metastatic vertebral lesions who underwent UPK(25 cases, 69 lesions) or BPK(57 cases, 90 lesions) were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical results were assessed mainly depending on the Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) and Quality of Life(QoL). Radiographic outcomes were evaluated primarily on the basis of bone cement distribution and changes in vertebral body height(VBH). Major and minor complications were systematically evaluated and compared to assess the safety of the 2 procedures.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed in age, sex, types of lesions, location of lesions, posterior vertebral body and/or pedicle involvement, percentage of vertebra invasion between the groups(p=0.17-0.83). The radiographic parameter VBH was similarly improved in both groups(p=0.26-0.93). There was a significant improvement in the clinical parameters VAS score, ODI, and QoL at each follow-up examination compared with the preoperative results(p<0.001). Significant improvement was observed in the VBH at each follow-up point(p<0.05) compared to pre-procedure. UPK was superior to BPK in terms of the operative duration(p<0.001), cement volume(p=0.004), and surgical complications(p=0.04).

CONCLUSION

Both UPK and BPK resulted in similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients with metastatic vertebral lesions. The UPK had advantages including a shorter operation and lower cement volume than the BPK, which may have played an important role in reducing the incidence of complications. UPK can replace BPK in the treatment of metastatic vertebral lesions.

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.

Kyphoplasty and Vertebroplasty Performed by Surgeons versus Nonsurgeons: Trends in Procedure Rates, Complications, and Revisions

BACKGROUND

Vertebral compression fractures are the most common fragility fractures affecting osteoporotic patients. This study evaluated volume trends and outcomes across specialties performing cement augmentation procedures.

METHODS

Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes for vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty from 2010 to 2019. Patients were grouped by surgical providers (orthopedic surgery and neurological surgery) or nonsurgical providers (anesthesia, pain medicine, radiology, and physical medicine and rehabilitation). Outcomes recorded included reoperation rates and postoperative complications occurring within 30 days. Logistic regression was employed to account for potential confounding variables, and odds ratios were obtained.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met by 80,864 patients who received cement augmentation. Surgeon specialists performed 51.7% of all procedures. Of procedures carried out by nonsurgeon specialists, radiologists performed the most. Despite a stable number of procedures performed over the period, the percentage of procedures performed by surgeons decreased from 58.8% to 49.9% (P < 0.001). Patients with procedures performed by surgeons experienced lower odds of reoperation at 30 days (P < 0.001) and 1 year (P < 0.001), but 5-year and overall rates were not significant (P > 0.05). Surgical patients had lower odds of acute kidney injury (P < 0.004) and pulmonary embolism (odds ratio = 0.62, P < 0.001), yet increased odds of surgical site infection (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Kyphoplasties and vertebroplasties are increasingly performed by nonsurgeon specialists. Although early reoperation rates are higher for nonsurgeon specialists, 5-year and overall reoperation rates were similar. Differing complication rates may relate to patient selection rather than operative technique and can be investigated with future studies.

Cement Augmentation of Vertebral Compression Fractures May Be Safely Considered in the Very Elderly

Objective

The objective of the current study was to perform a retrospective review of a national database to assess the safety of cement augmentation for vertebral compression fractures in geriatric populations in varying age categories.

Methods

The 2005–2016 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program databases were queried to identify patients undergoing kyphoplasty or vertebroplasty in the following age categories: 60–69, 70–79, 80–89, and 90+ years old. Demographic variables, comorbidity status, procedure type, provider specialty, inpatient/outpatient status, number of procedure levels, and periprocedure complications were compared between age categories using chi-square analysis. Multivariate logistic regressions controlling for patient and procedural variables were then performed to assess the relative periprocedure risks of adverse outcomes of patients in the different age categories relative to those who were 60–69 years old.

Results

For the 60–69, 70–79, 80–89, and 90+ years old cohorts, 486, 822, 937, and 215 patients were identified, respectively. After controlling for patient and procedural variables, 30-day any adverse events, serious adverse events, reoperation, readmission, and mortality were not different for the respective age categories. Cases in the 80- to 89-year-old cohort were at increased risk of minor adverse events compared to cases in the 60- to 69-year-old cohort.

Conclusion

As the population ages, cement augmentation is being considered as a treatment for vertebral compression fractures in increasingly older patients. These results suggest that even the very elderly may be appropriately considered for these procedures (level of evidence: 3).