Patients Requiring Both Total Hip Arthroplasty and Lumbar Spinal Fusion Have Lower Hip Functional Outcome Scores: A Matched Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

While patients who undergo both lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) have increased complication rates compared to patients who have not undergone LSF, there is a paucity of literature evaluating THA functional outcomes in patients with a history of LSF. This study was conducted to determine whether patients undergoing THA with a history of LSF have inferior functional outcomes compared to patients having no history of LSF.

METHODS

A retrospective matched case-control study was conducted at an academic center. Patients who underwent both THA and LSF (cases) were matched with controls who underwent THA without LSF. Inclusion criteria required a minimum of 1-year follow-up for the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement [HOOS-JR]. Following propensity matching for age, sex, race, body mass index, and comorbidities, 291 cases and 1,164 controls were included, with no demographic differences.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent both THA and LSF had a significantly lower preoperative HOOS-JR (47 versus 50; P < .001), postoperative HOOS-JR (77 versus 85; P < .001), a significant lower rate of achieving the patient acceptable symptom state (55 versus 67%; P < .001), with no significant difference in delta HOOS-JR (34 versus 34; P = .834). When comparing patients undergoing THA before LSF or LSF before THA, no differences existed for preoperative HOOS-JR (50 versus 47; P = .304), but patients undergoing THA before LSF had lower postoperative HOOS-JR scores (74 versus 81; P = .034), a lower-delta HOOS-JR (27 versus 35; P = .022), and a lower rate of reaching the HOOS-JR minimal clinically important difference (62 versus 76%; P = .031).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who have a history of LSF experience a similar improvement in hip function when undergoing THA compared to patients who do not have a history of LSF. However, due to lower preoperative function, they may have a lower postoperative functional outcome ceiling. Additionally, patients undergoing THA before LSF have worse hip functional outcomes than patients undergoing LSF before THA.

Does Surgical Approach Affect Dislocation Rate After Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Who Have Prior Lumbar Spinal Fusion? A Retrospective Analysis of 16,223 Cases

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) is a risk factor for dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The effect of the surgical approach on this association has not been investigated. This study examined the association between the surgical approach and dislocation following THA in patients who had prior LSF.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 16,223 primary elective THAs at our institution from June 2011 to September 2022. Patients who had LSF prior to THA were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Patients were stratified by LSF history, surgical approach, and intraoperative robot or navigation use to compare dislocation rates. There were 8,962 (55.2%) posterior, 5,971 (36.8%) anterior, and 1,290 (8.0%) laterally based THAs. Prior LSF was identified in 323 patients (2.0%). Binary logistic regressions were used to assess the association of patient factors with dislocation risk.

RESULTS

There were 177 dislocations identified in total (1.1%). In nonadjusted analyses, the dislocation rate was significantly higher following the posterior approach among all patients (P = .003). Prior LSF was associated with a significantly higher dislocation rate in all patients (P < .001) and within the posterior (P < .001), but not the anterior approach (P = .514) subgroups. Multivariate regressions demonstrated anterior (OR [odds ratio] = 0.64, 95% CI [confidence interval] 0.45 to 0.91, P = .013), and laterally based (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.96, P = .039) approaches were associated with decreased dislocation risk, whereas prior LSF (OR = 4.28, 95% CI 2.38 to 7.69, P < .001) was associated with increased dislocation risk. Intraoperative technology utilization was not significantly associated with dislocation in the multivariate regressions (OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.06, P = .095).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study confirmed that LSF is a significant risk factor for dislocation following THA; however, anterior and laterally based approaches may mitigate dislocation risk in this population. In multivariate analyses, including surgical approach, LSF, and several perioperative variables, intraoperative technology utilization was not found to be significantly associated with dislocation risk.

Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Stimulation in Lumbar Spine Fusion for Patients With Risk Factors for Pseudarthrosis

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion surgeries are increasing steadily due to an aging and ever-growing population. Patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery may present with risk factors that contribute to complications, pseudarthrosis, prolonged pain, and reduced quality of life. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation represents an adjunct noninvasive treatment intervention that has been shown to improve successful fusion and patient outcomes following spinal surgery.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter study investigated PEMF as an adjunct therapy to lumbar spinal fusion procedures in patients at risk for pseudarthrosis. Patients with at least 1 of the following risk factors were enrolled: prior failed fusion, multilevel fusion, nicotine use, osteoporosis, or diabetes. Fusion status was determined by radiographic imaging, and patient-reported outcomes were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were included in the analysis. Fusion status was assessed at 12 months follow-up where 88.0% (n = 125/142) of patients demonstrated successful fusion. Fusion success for patients with 1, 2+, or 3+ risk factors was 88.5%, 87.5%, and 82.3%, respectively. Significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes using the Short Form 36, EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) survey, Oswestry Disability Index, and visual analog scale for back and leg pain were also observed compared with baseline scores (P < 0.001). A favorable safety profile was observed. PEMF treatment showed a positive benefit-risk profile throughout the 6-month required use period.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of PEMF as an adjunct treatment in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery provided a high rate of successful fusion with significant improvements in pain, function, and quality of life, despite having risk factors for pseudarthrosis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

PEMF represents a useful tool for adjunct treatment in patients who have undergone lumbar spinal surgery. Treatment with PEMF may result in improved fusion and patient-reported outcomes, regardless of risk factors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03176303.

[Analgesic effect of buccal acupuncture on patients after lumbar spinal fusion: a randomized controlled trial]

OBJECTIVE

To observe the effect of buccal acupuncture on pain after lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

Sixty patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion were randomly divided into an observation group (30 cases, 1 case dropped off) and a control group (30 cases, 1 case was eliminated). The patients in the control group were treated with routine anesthesia. On the basis of the control group, the patients in the observation group were treated with buccal acupuncture at bilateral back point, waist point, and sacral point for 30 min per treatment. The first acupuncture was given before anesthesia induction, and then once a day postoperation for two days, totally 3 treatments. The dosage of sufentanil, the number of remedial analgesia, and the incidence of nausea and vomiting within 48 h after surgery were compared between the two groups; rest and motion visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at 2 (T1), 8 (T2), 12 (T3), 24 (T4), and 48 (T5) h after surgery were observed; the quality of recovery-15 scale (QoR-15) at 24 and 48 h after surgery were evaluated.

RESULTS

The dosage of sufentanil and the number of remedial analgesia within 48 h after surgery in the observation group were lower than those in the control group (P<0.01). There was no significant statistically difference in rest and motion VAS scores between the two groups in T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 (P>0.05). The QoR-15 scores in the observation group at 24 and 48 h after surgery were higher than those in the control group (P<0.01). The incidence of nausea in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Buccal acupuncture could reduce the amount of postoperative analgesic drugs of patients after lumbar spinal fusion, and promote early postoperative recovery.

Patients Who Have Had Three or More Levels Fused During Lumbar Spinal Fusion Have Worse Functional Outcomes After Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are commonly performed in patients who have concomitant spine and hip pathology. While patients who have three or more levels fused during LSF have increased postoperative opioid consumption after undergoing THA, it is unknown whether the number of levels fused during LSF affects THA functional outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary academic center for patients who underwent LSF first and then had a primary THA performed with a minimum of one-year follow-up for the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR). Operative notes were reviewed to determine the number of levels fused during LSF. There were 105 patients who underwent one-level LSF, 55 patients underwent two-level LSF, and 48 patients underwent three-or-more-level LSF. No significant differences existed in age, race, body mass index, and comorbidities between the cohorts.

RESULTS

While preoperative HOOS-JR was similar among the three cohorts, patients who had three-or-more-level LSF had significantly lower HOOS-JR scores than patients who had two-level or one-level LSF (71.4 versus 82.4 versus 78.2; P = .010) and a lower delta HOOS-JR (27.2 versus 39.4 versus 35.9; P = .014). Patients who had three-or-more-level LSF had a significantly lower rate of achieving minimal clinically important difference (61.7% versus 87.2% versus 78.7%; P = .011) and the patient acceptable symptom state (37.5% versus 69.1% versus 59.0%; P = .004) for the HOOS-JR, compared to patients who had two-level or one-level LSF, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons should counsel patients who have had three-or-more-level LSF that they may have a lower rate of hip function improvement and symptom acceptability after THA, compared to patients who have had a less number of levels fused during LSF.

Risk of Dislocation and Revision Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Prior Lumbar Fusion With Spinopelvic Fixation

BACKGROUND

The effect of spinopelvic fixation in addition to lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) on dislocation/instability and revision in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been reported previously.

METHODS

The PearlDiver Research Program was used to identify patients aged 30 and above undergoing primary THA who received (1) THA only, (2) THA with prior single-level LSF, (3) THA with prior 2-5 level LSF, or (4) THA with prior LSF with spinopelvic fixation. The incidence of THA revision and dislocation/instability was compared through logistic regression and Chi-squared analysis. All regressions were controlled for age, gender, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI).

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2018, 465,558 patients without history of LSF undergoing THA were examined and compared to 180 THA patients with prior spinopelvic fixation, 5,299 with prior single-level LSF, and 1,465 with prior 2-5 level LSF. At 2 years, 7.8% of THA patients with prior spinopelvic fixation, 4.7% of THA patients with prior 2-5 level LSF, 4.2% of THA patients with prior single-level LSF, and 2.2% of THA patients undergoing only THA had a dislocation event or instability (P < .0001). After controlling for length of fusion, pelvic fixation itself was associated with higher independent risk of revision (at 2 years: 2-5 level LSF + spinopelvic fixation: aHR = 3.15, 95% CI 1.77-5.61, P < .0001 vs 2-5 level LSF with no spinopelvic fixation: aOR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.10-1.76, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

At 2 years, spinopelvic fixation in THA patients were associated with a greater than 3.5-fold increase in hip dislocation risk compared to those without LSF, and an over 2-fold increase in THA revision risk compared to those with LSF without spinopelvic fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

The SNAP Trial: 2-Year Results of a Double-Blind Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of a Silicon Nitride Versus a PEEK Cage in Patients After Lumbar Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES

Lumbar interbody fusion with cages is performed to provide vertebral stability, restore alignment, and maintain disc and foraminal height. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is commonly used. Silicon nitride (Si₃N₄) is an alternative material with good osteointegrative properties. This study was designed to assess if Si₃N₄ cages perform similar to PEEK.

METHODS

A non-inferiority double-blind multicenter RCT was designed. Patients presenting with chronic low-back pain with or without leg pain were included. Single- or double-level instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using an oblique PEEK or Si₃N₄ cage was performed. The primary outcome was the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The non-inferiority margin for the RMDQ was 2.6 points on a scale of 24. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI), Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), SF-36 Physical Function, patient and surgeon Likert scores, radiographic evaluations for subsidence, segmental motion, and fusion. Follow-up was planned at 3, 6, 12, and 24-months.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients were randomized (i.e. 48 to PEEK and 44 to Si₃N₄). Both groups showed good clinical improvements on the RMDQ scores of up to 5-8 points during follow-up. No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical and radiographic outcomes. Mean operative time and blood loss were statistically significantly higher for the Si₃N₄ cohort. Although not statistically significant, there was a higher incidence of complications and revisions associated with the Si₃N₄ cage.

CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to conclude that Si₃N₄ was non-inferior to PEEK.

Osteopenia and Sarcopenia as Potential Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection after Posterior Lumbar Fusion: A Retrospective Study

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a feared complication in spinal surgery, that leads to lower outcomes and increased healthcare costs. Among its risk factors, sarcopenia and osteopenia have recently attracted particular interest. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the influence of sarcopenia and osteopenia on the postoperative infection rate in patients treated with posterior fusion for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. This retrospective study included data from 308 patients. Charts were reviewed and central sarcopenia and osteopenia were evaluated through magnetic resonance images (MRI), measuring the psoas to lumbar vertebral index (PLVI) and the M score. Multivariate linear regression was performed to identify independent risk factors for infection. The postoperative SSI rate was 8.4%. Patients with low PLVI scores were not more likely to experience postoperative SSI (p = 0.68), while low M-score patients were at higher risk of developing SSI (p = 0.04). However, they did not generally show low PLVI values (p = 0.5) and were homogeneously distributed between low and high PLVI (p = 0.6). Multivariate analysis confirmed a low M score to be an independent risk factor for SSI (p = 0.01). Our results suggest that osteopenia could have significant impact on spinal surgery, and prospective studies are needed to better investigate its role.

Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients Have Lower Risk of Dislocation Following Total Hip Arthroplasty Compared with Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery

Purpose

Patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) surgery and patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have concomitant pathology of hip and lumbosacral spine. The purpose of our study is to compare the dislocation rate following total hip arthroplasty (THA) between patients with LSF and AS and reveal the differences of lumbar fusion secondary to LSF and AS.

Patients and methods

Fifty-nine patients (73 hips) were included in Group LSF and every patient was matched with two patients in Group AS. Follow-ups were conducted for information of surgical prognosis and dislocation events following THA. Multiple anatomic parameters were measured on preoperative and postoperative radiological images.

Results

The dislocation rate of patients in Group AS (0.68%) was obviously lower than that of patients in Group LSF (4.11%) and the hazard ratio of dislocation events following THA reached 6.1. Considering the low calculated power (1-β, 0.24), we supposed insufficient statistical evidence (p=0.118) could be attributed to small sample size. Postoperative hip flexion range of motion (ROM) in Group AS (102.1°±24.5°) was significantly lower than that in Group LSF (117.4°±14.2°) (p<0.0005). Postoperative flexion ROM of lumbar was also significantly lower in Group AS (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between two groups concerning postoperative acetabular inclination (p=0.988) and anteversion (p=0.25). However, patients in Group AS had a significantly lower sacral slope (p=0.025) and higher pelvic tilt (p<0.0005) than patients in Group LSF after THA.

Conclusion

Patients with AS have a lower risk of dislocation after THA compared with patients undergoing LSF. The lower risk is significantly relevant to severer stiffness and lower mobility along the spine-pelvis--hip axis in AS patients after THA. Acetabular orientation has no significant effect on the difference of dislocation rate between patients with LSF and AS.

Clinical Implication of the Acumen Hypotension Prediction Index for Reducing Intraoperative Haemorrhage in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Prospective Randomised Controlled Single-Blinded Trial

We investigated the clinical implication of the Hypotension Prediction Index (HPI) in decreasing amount of surgical haemorrhage and requirements of blood transfusion compared to the conventional method (with vs. without HPI monitoring). A prospective, randomised controlled-trial of 19- to 73-year-old patients (n = 76) undergoing elective lumbar spinal fusion surgery was performed. According to the exclusion criteria, the patients were divided into the non-HPI (n = 33) and HPI (n = 35) groups. The targeted-induced hypotension systolic blood pressure was 80−100 mmHg (in both groups), with HPI > 85 (in the HPI group). Intraoperative bleeding was lower in the HPI group (299.3 ± 219.8 mL) than in the non-HPI group (532 ± 232.68 mL) (p = 0.001). The non-HPI group had a lower level of haemoglobin at the end of the surgery with a larger decline in levels. The incidence of postoperative transfusion of red blood cells was higher in the non-HPI group than in the HPI group (9 (27.3%) vs. 1 (2.9%)). The use of HPI monitoring may play a role in providing timely haemodynamic information that leads to improving the quality of induced hypotension care and to ameliorate intraoperative surgical blood loss and postoperative demand for blood transfusion in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery.

The Influence of Rheumatoid Arthritis on Higher Reoperation Rates over Time Following Lumbar Spinal Fusion-A Nationwide Cohort Study

This study aimed to compare the rates of reoperation over time following first lumbar fusion in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and non-RA patients. This study was conducted using Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment (HIRA) data. We identified the RA group as 2239 patients who underwent their first lumbar fusion with RA and the control group as 11,195 patients without RA. This reflects a ratio of 1:5, and the participants were matched by sex, age, and index surgery date. The index dates were between 2012 and 2013. When comparing the rate of patients undergoing reoperation, the adjusted HR was 1.31 (95% CI: 1.10−1.6) in the RA group (p = 0.002). In terms of the three time intervals, the values in the time frames of <3 months and 3 months−1 year were not statistically significant. However, at 1 year post-surgery, there was a higher risk of reoperation in the RA group, as demonstrated by the Kaplan−Meier cumulative event analysis. This higher risk of reoperation continued to increase throughout 5 years of follow-up, after which it was stable until the last follow-up at 7 years. This population-based cohort study showed that the RA patients had a 1.31 times higher risk of reoperation following lumbar fusion than did the controls. This difference was more pronounced at 1 year post-surgery.

Minimally invasive versus open lumbar spinal fusion: a matched study investigating patient-reported and surgical outcomes

OBJECTIVE

With the expanding indications for and increasing popularity of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for lumbar spinal fusion, large-scale outcomes analysis to compare MIS approaches with open procedures is warranted.

METHODS

The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database for patients who underwent elective lumbar fusion for degenerative spine disease. They performed optimal matching, at a 1:2 ratio between patients who underwent MIS and those who underwent open lumbar fusion, to create two highly homogeneous groups in terms of 33 baseline variables (including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, indications, and operative details). The outcomes of interest were overall satisfaction, decrease in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and back and leg pain, as well as hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, reoperations, and incidental durotomy rate. Satisfaction was defined as a score of 1 or 2 on the North American Spine Society scale. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in ODI was defined as ≥ 30% decrease from baseline. Outcomes were assessed at the 3- and 12-month follow-up evaluations.

RESULTS

After the groups were matched, the MIS and open groups consisted of 1483 and 2966 patients, respectively. Patients who underwent MIS fusion had higher odds of satisfaction at 3 months (OR 1.4, p = 0.004); no difference was demonstrated at 12 months (OR 1.04, p = 0.67). Lumbar stenosis, single-level fusion, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System grade, and absence of spondylolisthesis were most prominently associated with higher odds of satisfaction with MIS compared with open surgery. Patients in the MIS group had slightly lower ODI scores at 3 months (mean difference 1.61, p = 0.006; MCID OR 1.14, p = 0.0495) and 12 months (mean difference 2.35, p < 0.001; MCID OR 1.29, p < 0.001). MIS was also associated with a greater decrease in leg and back pain at both follow-up time points. The two groups did not differ in operative time and incidental durotomy rate; however, LOS was shorter for the MIS group. Revision surgery at 12 months was less likely for patients who underwent MIS (4.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who underwent lumbar fusion for degenerative spinal disease, MIS was associated with higher odds of satisfaction at 3 months postoperatively. No difference was demonstrated at the 12-month follow-up. MIS maintained a small, yet consistent, superiority in decreasing ODI and back and leg pain, and MIS was associated with a lower reoperation rate.

Outcomes of lumbar spinal fusion in super-elderly patients aged 80 years and over: Comparison with patients aged 65 years and over, and under 80 years

Despite the increasing prevalence of spinal surgery in super-elderly (SE) patients, the outcomes and complication rates have not been fully elucidated. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and complications of lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) in SE patients aged 80 years and over with those in patients aged 65 years and over, and under 80 years.This study analyzed 160 patients who underwent spinal fusion for DLSS between January 2011 and November 2019. Thirty patients in the SE group (group SE, ≥80 years) and 130 patients in the elderly group (group E, ≥65 years and <80 years) were enrolled. The performance status was evaluated by preoperative American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score. Visual analog scales for back pain (VAS-BP) and leg pain (VAS-LP), and Korean Oswestry disability index (K-ODI) were used to assess clinical outcomes preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Percent changes of VAS-BP, VAS-LP and K-ODI were also analyzed. Fusion rates were evaluated by computed tomography 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Furthermore, bone mineral density, operative time, estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital days, hospitalization in intensive care unit and postoperative complications were compared.The average age of group SE was 82.0 years and that of group E was 71.6 years. There were no differences in preoperative ASA score, preoperative or postoperative VAS BP and VAS-LP, bone mineral density, operative time, estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital days, hospitalization in intensive care unit and fusion rates between the groups. Preoperative and postoperative K-ODI were higher in group SE than group E (all P < .05). However, percent changes of VAS-BP, VAS-LP and K-ODI showed no significant differences. Overall early and late complications were not significantly different between the groups; however postoperative delirium was more common in group SE than group E (P = .027). SE status was the only risk factor for postoperative delirium with odds ratio of 3.4 (P = .018).Spinal fusion surgery is considerable treatment to improve the quality of life of SE patients with DLSS, however careful perioperative management is needed to prevent postoperative delirium.

Lumbar Interbody Fusion Conducted on a Porcine Model with a Bioresorbable Ceramic/Biopolymer Hybrid Implant Enriched with Hyperstable Fibroblast Growth Factor 2

Many growth factors have been studied as additives accelerating lumbar fusion rates in different animal models. However, their low hydrolytic and thermal stability both in vitro and in vivo limits their workability and use. In the proposed work, a stabilized vasculogenic and prohealing fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF2-STAB®) exhibiting a functional half-life in vitro at 37 °C more than 20 days was applied for lumbar fusion in combination with a bioresorbable scaffold on porcine models. An experimental animal study was designed to investigate the intervertebral fusion efficiency and safety of a bioresorbable ceramic/biopolymer hybrid implant enriched with FGF2-STAB® in comparison with a tricortical bone autograft used as a gold standard. Twenty-four experimental pigs underwent L2/3 discectomy with implantation of either the tricortical iliac crest bone autograft or the bioresorbable hybrid implant (BHI) followed by lateral intervertebral fixation. The quality of spinal fusion was assessed by micro-computed tomography (micro-CT), biomechanical testing, and histological examination at both 8 and 16 weeks after the surgery. While 8 weeks after implantation, micro-CT analysis demonstrated similar fusion quality in both groups, in contrast, spines with BHI involving inorganic hydroxyapatite and tricalcium phosphate along with organic collagen, oxidized cellulose, and FGF2- STAB® showed a significant increase in a fusion quality in comparison to the autograft group 16 weeks post-surgery (p = 0.023). Biomechanical testing revealed significantly higher stiffness of spines treated with the bioresorbable hybrid implant group compared to the autograft group (p < 0.05). Whilst histomorphological evaluation showed significant progression of new bone formation in the BHI group besides non-union and fibrocartilage tissue formed in the autograft group. Significant osteoinductive effects of BHI based on bioceramics, collagen, oxidized cellulose, and FGF2-STAB® could improve outcomes in spinal fusion surgery and bone tissue regeneration.

Failure in Lumbar Spinal Fusion and Current Management Modalities

Lumbar spinal fusion is a commonly performed procedure to stabilize the spine, and the frequency with which this operation is performed is increasing. Multiple factors are involved in achieving successful arthrodesis. Systemic factors include patient medical comorbidities-such as rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis-and smoking status. Surgical site factors include choice of bone graft material, number of fusion levels, location of fusion bed, adequate preparation of fusion site, and biomechanical properties of the fusion construct. Rates of successful fusion can vary from 65 to 100%, depending on the aforementioned factors. Diagnosis of pseudoarthrosis is confirmed by imaging studies, often a combination of static and dynamic radiographs and computed tomography. Once pseudoarthrosis is identified, patient factors should be optimized whenever possible and a surgical plan implemented to provide the best chance of successful revision arthrodesis with the least amount of surgical risk.

Two-year results of a double-blind multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) versus silicon nitride spinal fusion cages in patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders

Background

During lumbar spinal fusion, spacer cages are implanted to provide vertebral stability, restore sagittal alignment, and maintain disc and foraminal height. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is commonly used by most spine surgeons. Silicon nitride (Si₃N₄) is a less well-known alternative although it was first used as a spacer in lumbar fusion over 30 years ago. The present study was designed to see if Si₃N₄ cages would perform similarly to PEEK in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods

A non-inferiority multicenter 100-patient study was designed where both the observer and patient were blinded. Single- or double-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation using an oblique PEEK or Si₃N₄ cage was performed. The primary non-inferiority outcome was the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). Secondary measures included the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) for back and leg pain, SF-36 Physical and Mental Function indices, patient and surgeon Likert scores on perceived recovery, and X-ray and CT radiological evaluations for subsidence, segmental motion, and fusion. Follow-up evaluations occurred at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months.

Results

After exclusions for protocol violations and canceled surgeries, 92 patients were randomized (i.e., 48 for PEEK and 44 for Si₃N₄). There were no differences in baseline demographics, pre-operative disabilities, or pain scores between the groups. Both treatment arms showed significant improvements in disability, pain, and recovery scores. No significant differences were observed for subsidence, segmental motion, or fusion. For the primary outcome (i.e., RMDQ scores), the non-inferiority of Si₃N₄ compared to PEEK could not be established using the original protocol criteria. However, the comparison was undermined by larger than anticipated patient fallout coupled with higher than expected RMDQ score standard deviations. A post hoc analysis coupled with a more extensive review of the literature was conducted which resulted in the selection of a revised clinically justified non-inferiority margin; and using this method, the non-inferiority of Si₃N₄ was affirmed.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that the use of either PEEK or Si₃N₄ cages is safe and effective for patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion for chronic degenerative disc disease.

Early Discharged Lumbar Spine Fusion Reduced Postoperative Readmissions: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Early discharge (ED) has emerged and gained popularity in spine surgery. However, the benefits of ED in lumbar fusion have not yet been validated by large cohort studies. To evaluate the effects of ED on readmissions and reoperations in lumbar fusion, this study utilized a national database to enroll patients who had undergone lumbar fusion surgery at age 50–70 years, and grouped them into an ED group or a comparison group. In the comprehensive follow-up of 180 days post-operation, the two groups were compared. There were 18,008 patients in the cohort, including 2172 in the ED group and 15,836 in the comparison group. The ED group was slightly younger (59.9 vs. 60.7 years, p < 0.001), more male predominant (44.9% vs. 36.9%, p < 0.001), and had fewer medical comorbidities. The ED group had less incidences of readmission than the comparison group. (Crude hazard ratio = 0.73, and adjusted HR = 0.75, both p < 0.001). Overall, the cumulative incidences of readmission in the ED group (9.5%) were lower than those in the comparison group (12.8%, p < 0.001), whereas reoperations were insignificantly different (1.5% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.189). For patients aged 50–70 years and who require lumbar fusion surgery, ED could yield a 25% reduced risk of readmission for any cause within 180 days post-operation. Since the reoperation rates remained similar, our results suggest that ED may be a promising option for elderly patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Does It Matter: Total Hip Arthroplasty or Lumbar Spinal Fusion First? Preoperative Sagittal Spinopelvic Measurements Guide Patient-Specific Surgical Strategies in Patients Requiring Both

BACKGROUND

In patients requiring both total hip arthroplasty (THA) and lumbar spinal fusion (LSF), consideration of preoperative sagittal spinopelvic measurements can aid in the prediction of postfusion compensatory changes in pelvic tilt (PT) and inform adjustments to traditional THA cup anteversion. This study aims to identify relationships between spinopelvic measurements and post-THA hip instability and to determine if procedure order reveals a difference in hip dislocation rate.

METHODS

Patients at a single practice site who received both THA and LSF between 2005 and 2015 (292: 158 = LSF prior to THA, 134 = THA prior to LSF) were retrospectively reviewed for incidents of THA instability. Those with complete radiograph series (89) had their sagittal (standing) spinopelvic profiles measured preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 1.5 years, and 2 years postoperatively. Measured parameters included lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), PT, and sacral slope (SS).

RESULTS

No significant differences in dislocation rates between operative order groups were elicited (7/73 LSF first, 4/62 THA first; Z = 0.664, P = .509). Compared to nondislocators, dislocators had lower LL (-10.9) and SS (-7.8), and higher PT (+4.3) and PI-LL (+7.3). Additional risk factors for dislocation included sacral fusion (relative risk [RR] = 3.0) and revision fusion (RR = 2.7) . Predictive power of the model generated through multiple regression to characterize individual profiles of post-LSF PT compensation based on perioperative measurements was most significant at 1 year (R² = 0.565, F = 0.000456, P = .028) and 2 years (R² = 0.741, F = 0.031, P = .001) postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

In performing THA after LSF, it is theoretically ideal to proceed with THA at a postfusion interval of at least 1 year, beyond which further compensatory PT change is minimal. However, the order of surgical procedure revealed no statistical difference in hip instability rates. In cases characterized by large PI-LL mismatch (larger or less predictable compensation profiles) or large SS or LL loss (considerably atypical muscle recruitment), consideration of full functional anteversion range between sitting and standing positions to account for abnormalities not appreciated with standing radiographic assessment alone may be warranted.

Early Rehabilitation Program and Vitamin D Supplementation Improves Sensitivity of Balance and the Postural Control in Patients after Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The introduction of early rehabilitation exercise is the foundation of treatment post-Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery, and the search for additional sources of reinforcement physiotherapy seems to be very important.

METHODS

The patients were randomly divided into the vitamin D3 (n = 15; D3) supplemented group and received 3200 IU per day for five weeks before surgery and the placebo group (n = 18; Pl) received vegetable oil during the same time. The patients began the supervisor rehabilitation program four weeks after surgery.

RESULTS

The limits of stability (LOS) were significantly improved in the D3 group after 5 and 14 weeks (p < 0.05), while in the Pl group, progress was only observed after 14 weeks (p < 0.05). The LOS were also higher in the D3 group than in the Pl group after five weeks of supervised rehabilitation (p < 0.05). In the postural stability (PST) test, significant progress was observed in the D3 group after 14 weeks (p < 0.02). In addition, neither rehabilitation nor supplementation had significant effects on the risk of falls (RFT).

CONCLUSIONS

Vitamin D supplementation seems to ameliorate the effects of an early postoperative rehabilitation program implemented four weeks after posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Early physiotherapy treatment after PLIF surgery combined with vitamin D supplementation appears to be a very important combination with regard to the patients' recovery process.

Paraspinal Lean Muscle Mass Measurement Using Spine MRI as a Predictor of Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Fusion: A Propensity Score-Matched Case-Control Analysis

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare paraspinal muscle mass between patients with and without adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Fifty patients with ASD (mean age, 61.4 years; ratio of male to female patients: 13:37; mean body mass index [BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters], 25.1) were matched to 50 control patients on the basis of age, sex, BMI, and fusion segment. The total cross-sectional area (CSA) and functional CSA (FCSA; i.e., the area containing lean muscle tissue only) of the paraspinal muscle group (the multifidus and erector spinae muscles) and the psoas muscles were measured on preoperative MRI. The ratio of the FCSA to the total CSA and the skeletal muscle index (SMI; calculated as muscle area [expressed as centimeters squared] divided by the square of the patient's height in meters]) were calculated and compared between the two groups with use of the independent-sample t test. RESULTS. The mean FCSA (2178.6 mm² vs 2594.0 mm²; p = 0.004), the ratio of the FCSA to the total CSA (45.4% vs 52.2%; p = 0.001), and the SMI of the FCSA (8.8 vs 10.6; p = 0.001) of the paraspinal muscle group were significantly smaller in patients with ASD compared to the control group. When the paraspinal and psoas muscle groups were combined, the mean FCSA (3680.8 mm² vs 4268.2 mm²; p = 0.013), the ratio of FCSA to total CSA (53.3% vs 58.6%; p = 0.004), the SMI of the total CSA (27.7 vs 29.3; p = 0.049), and the SMI of the FCSA (14.9 vs 17.3; p = 0.002) were significantly lower in patients with ASD than in control patients. CONCLUSION. Patients with ASD had smaller lean muscle mass (FCSA), a lower ratio of FCSA to total CSA, and a lower SMI of the FCSA of the paraspinal muscle group on pre-operative MRI, compared with control patients.

Local infiltration with cocktail analgesics during 2 level lumbar spinal fusion surgery: Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite introducing novel analgesics, pain management for spine surgery remains a challenge. Multimodal pain control has recently gained popularity in surgical spine care. We proposed a novel management approach using multimodal cocktail analgesics. Injection to skin surrounding surgical incision site will be given perioperatively. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of cocktail analgesic injection on pain management following lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients with degenerative lumbar spinal diseases on the waiting list for lumbar spinal fusion surgery will be recruited. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive either cocktail analgesic injection or sterile saline before surgical wound closure. All patients will routinely receive postoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) with sufentanil on an as-needed basis without a basal dose. The primary outcome is perceived pain intensity as measured by visual analog pain score. Secondary outcomes include sufentanil consumption, time to first use of IV-PCA, rescue analgesics consumption, and the presence of adverse effects. Findings of this interventional trial will provide novel evidence supporting the superior effect of cocktail analgesic injection during surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR-IPR-17013094.

Lumbar Spinal Fusion Affects Sitting Disability on the Floor

Background

Lumbar spinal fusion is a standard of care for certain lumbar spinal diseases. However, its impact on sitting, especially on the floor, has not been assessed, even in the countries where people usually sit on the floor instead of using a chair.

Methods

A total of 100 Korean patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion and 47 patients who underwent decompression surgery were enrolled. In a postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire, an additional section 11 (Sitting on the Floor) was inserted, in which the phrase "sitting in a chair" of section 5 was replaced with "sitting on the floor." The ODI scores were calculated twice using either the section with "sitting in a chair" or the section with "sitting on the floor" and comparing the two.

Results

In the fusion group, the mean postoperative ODI calculated with "sitting on the floor" is significantly worse than that with "sitting in a chair" (P < .0001). This difference was the same regardless of whether the fusion was done at a single level (P < .0001) or 2 or more levels (P = .006) or whether location was at L4-L5 (P = .002) or L5-S1 (P = .02) in a single-level fusion. The scores of the decompression group showed no difference. Though preoperative and postoperative ODI showed no difference between groups, the postoperative ODI using "sitting on the floor" was significantly worse in the fusion group than the decompression group (P = .009).

Conclusion

ODI scores using "sitting on the floor" after lumbar fusion were significantly worse than those with "sitting in a chair." A sitting disability on the floor after lumbar arthrodesis has not been appreciated adequately so far and should be seriously considered if a lumbar arthrodesis is planned in a society where people's usual style of sitting is on the floor.

Budget impact analysis of demineralized bone matrix in combination with autograft in lumbar spinal fusion procedures for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the budget impact (BI) of introducing local autograft (LA) combined with demineralized bone matrix (LA + DBM) in lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) procedures to treat lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) in Spain.

METHODS

A decision tree model was developed to evaluate the 4-year BI associated with introducing LA + DBM putty to replace currently available grafting methods, including iliac crest bone graft (ICBG), LA alone, and LA combined with beta-tricalcium phosphate (LA + ceramics), with 30%, 40%, and 30% market shares, respectively. The analysis was conducted for a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients with LDDD receiving LSF, assuming LA + DBM would replace 100% of the standard of care mix. The fusion rates extracted from the literature were validated by an expert panel. Costs (€2017) were obtained from different Spanish sources. Budget impact and incremental cost per successful fusion were calculated from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS).

RESULTS

Over 4 years, replacing currently available options with LA + DBM for 100 patients resulted in an additional cost of €12,330 (€123/patient), and an additional 14 successful fusions, implying a cost of €881 per additional successful fusion. When costs of productivity loss were included, the introduction of LA + DBM resulted in cost savings of €70,294 (€703/patient).

LIMITATIONS

The lack of high-quality, homogeneous, head-to-head research studying the efficacy of grafting procedures available to patients undergoing LSF, in addition to a lack of long-term follow-up in existing studies. Therefore, the number of fusions occurring within the model's time horizon may be underestimated.

CONCLUSIONS

Acquisition costs of DBM were partially offset by costs of failed fusions, adverse events and reoperation when switching 100 hypothetical LDDD patients undergoing LSF procedures from standard of care grafting methods to LA + DBM from the perspective of the Spanish NHS. DBM cost was entirely offset when costs of lost productivity were considered.

Development and validation of two clinical prediction models to inform clinical decision-making for lumbar spinal fusion surgery for degenerative disorders and rehabilitation following surgery: protocol for a prospective observational study

INTRODUCTION

Potential predictors of poor outcome will be measured at baseline: (1) preoperatively to develop a clinical prediction model to predict which patients are likely to have favourable outcome following lumbar spinal fusion surgery (LSFS) and (2) postoperatively to predict which patients are likely to have favourable long-term outcomes (to inform rehabilitation).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Prospective observational study with a defined episode inception of the point of surgery. Electronic data will be collected through the British Spine Registry and will include patient-reported outcome measures (eg, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire) and data items (eg, smoking status). Consecutive patients (≥18 years) undergoing LSFS for back and/or leg pain of degenerative cause will be recruited.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

LSFS for spinal fracture, inflammatory disease, malignancy, infection, deformity and revision surgery. 1000 participants will be recruited (n=600 prediction model development, n=400 internal validation derived model; planning 10 events per candidate prognostic factor). The outcome being predicted is an individual's absolute risk of poor outcome (disability and pain) at 6 weeks (objective 1) and 12 months postsurgery (objective 2). Disability and pain will be measured using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and severity of pain in the previous week with a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 0-10), respectively. Good outcome is defined as a change of 1.7 on the NRS for pain, and a change of 14.3 on the ODI. Both linear and logistic (to dichotomise outcome into low and high risk) multivariable regression models will be fitted and mean differences or ORs for each candidate predictive factor reported. Internal validation of the derived model will use a further set of British Spine Registry data. External validation will be geographical using two spinal registries in The Netherlands and Switzerland.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval (University of Birmingham ERN_17-0446A). Dissemination through peer-reviewed journals and conferences.

Revision Surgery for Short Segment Fusion Influences Postoperative Low Back Pain and Lower Extremity Pain: A Retrospective Single-Center Study of Patient-Based Evaluation

Introduction

Patients treated with revision surgery after lumbar decompression with fusion typically have persistent low back pain and lower extremity numbness compared with patients treated with only primary surgery. No well-designed study has investigated the persistence and degree of pain after revision surgery following instrumented operation. The purpose of this study is to compare residual pain among patients who underwent reoperation and those who underwent only primary surgery for lumbar degenerative disorder using patient-based evaluation.

Methods

We reviewed 350 consecutive patients (143 men, 207 women, mean age 63 years) treated with primary lumbar instrumented surgery between October 2010 and February 2014 at our institution and followed up for ≥2 years postoperatively. Patients were categorized into three groups based on number of levels fused: 1-segment, 2-segment, and ≥3-segment fusion (1F, 2F, and ≥3F groups, respectively). We used the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) and visual analog scales (VASs) for low back pain and lower extremity pain to evaluate pain intensity pre- and postoperatively.

Results

Salvage surgery for late-phase complications was required in 5 cases (2.4%), 6 cases (11.3%), and 11 cases (12.1%) in the 1F, 2F, and ≥3F groups, respectively. In the 1F and 2F groups, patients treated with revision surgery had unsatisfactory improvement in the pain domain of JOABPEQ and VASs for low back pain and lower extremity pain compared with patients with only primary short fusion surgery. The ≥3F group showed no significant differences between patients who underwent reoperation and those who underwent only primary surgery.

Conclusion

Low back pain and lower extremity pain often persist after revision surgery in patients treated with short fusion (≤2-segment) operation. We need to follow pain states in such patients.

Intraoperative biomechanics of lumbar pedicle screw loosening following successful arthrodesis

Pedicle screw loosening has been implicated in recurrent back pain after lumbar spinal fusion, but the degree of loosening has not been systematically quantified in patients. Instrumentation removal is an option for patients with successful arthrodesis, but remains controversial. Here, we quantified pedicle screw loosening by measuring screw insertion and/or removal torque at high statistical power (beta = 0.02) in N = 108 patients who experienced pain recurrence despite successful fusion after posterior instrumented lumbar fusion with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (L2-S1). Between implantation and removal, pedicle screw torque was reduced by 58%, indicating significant loosening over time. Loosening was greater in screws with evoked EMG threshold under 11 mA, indicative of screw misplacement. A theoretical stress analysis revealed increased local stresses at the screw interface in pedicles with decreased difference in pedicle thickness and screw diameter. Loosening was greatest in vertebrae at the extremities of the fused segments, but was significantly lower in segments with one level of fusion than in those with two or more.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

These data indicate that pedicle screws can loosen significantly in patients with recurrent back pain and warrant further research into methods to reduce the incidence of screw loosening and to understand the risks and potential benefits of instrumentation removal. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:2673-2681, 2017.

Topical use of tranexamic acid can effectively decrease hidden blood loss during posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery: A retrospective study

In spinal fusion surgery, total blood loss (TBL) is composed of visible blood loss from the surgical field and wound drainage, and hidden blood loss (HBL). Until now, no published studies exist reporting the effect of topical use of tranexamic acid (tTXA) on HBL in patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery. This study aimed to explore the effect of tTXA on HBL during primary posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery. Between September 2014 and September 2016, 100 adult patients (age > 18 years) with lumbar disc herniation or lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing primary posterior lumbar instrumented spinal fusions at 1 institution were divided into tTXA and control groups. The primary outcome was HBL. Secondary outcomes include TBL, intraoperative blood loss (IBL), postoperative blood loss (PBL), hemoglobin (HGB) levels on preoperative (Pre-op) and postoperatively (days 1-3, POD1, POD2, POD3, respectively), and amount of allogeneic blood transfusion. Complications occurring perioperatively until hospitalization discharge were also collected. In the tTXA group (n = 50 patients), wound surface was soaked with TXA (1 g in 100 mL saline solution) for 5 minutes before wound closure. For the control group (n = 50 patients), wound surface was soaked with the same volume of normal saline. There were no significant differences in demographics, surgical traits between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in IBL or perioperative blood transfusion requirements between the 2 groups. However, in the tTXA group, TBL, PBL, and HBL were significantly lower than those in the control group (550 ± 268 vs 833 ± 298 mL, 53.5 ± 43.9 vs 136.7 ± 87.9 mL, 356.7 ± 254.8 vs 501.1 ± 216.9 mL, P < .001, respectively). HGB levels were significantly higher in the tTXA group (P < .001) on POD1 and had a slower decline on POD2 and POD3 than the control group. No complications associated with TXA were observed. From these data, we conclude that tTXA can effectively reduce HBL, without significant complications in adult patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Impact of the Economic Downturn on Elective Lumbar Spine Surgery in the United States: A National Trend Analysis, 2003 to 2013

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective database analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The impact of the 2008-2009 economic downtown on elective lumbar spine surgery is unknown. Our objective was to investigate the effect of the economic downturn on the overall trends of elective lumbar spine surgery in the United States.

METHODS

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used in conjunction with US Census and macroeconomic data to determine historical trends. The economic downturn was defined as 2008 to 2009. Codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM), were used in order to identify appropriate procedures. Confidence intervals were determined using subgroup analysis techniques.

RESULTS

From 2003 to 2012, there was a 19.8% and 26.1% decrease in the number of lumbar discectomies and laminectomies, respectively. Over the same time period, there was a 56.4% increase in the number of lumbar spinal fusions. The trend of elective lumbar spine surgeries per 100 000 persons in the US population remained consistent from 2008 to 2009. The number of procedures decreased by 4.5% from 2010 to 2011, 7.6% from 2011 to 2012, and 3.1% from 2012 to 2013. The R² value between the number of surgeries and the S&P 500 Index was statistically significant (P ≤ .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The economic downturn did not affect elective lumbar fusions, which increased in total from 2003 to 2013. The relationship between the S&P 500 Index and surgical trends suggests that during recessions, individuals may utilize other means, such as insurance, to cover procedural costs and reduce out-of-pocket expenditures, accounting for no impact of the economic downturn on surgical trends. These findings can assist multiple stakeholders in better understanding the interconnectedness of macroeconomics, policy, and elective lumbar spine surgery trends.

Early Outcomes of Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty After Prior Lumbar Spinal Fusion

BACKGROUND

The coexistence of degenerative hip disease and spinal pathology is not uncommon with the number of surgical treatments performed for each condition increasing annually. The limited research available suggests spinal pathology portends less pain relief and worse outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesize that primary THA patients with preexisting lumbar spinal fusions (LSF) experience worse early postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective matched cohort study. Primary THA patients at 1 institution who had undergone prior LSF (spine arthrodesis-hip arthroplasty [SAHA]) were identified and matched to controls of primary THA without LSF. Early outcomes (<90 days) were compared.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2014, 35 SAHA patients were compared to 70 matched controls. Patients were similar in age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, body mass index, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. SAHA patients had higher rates of complications (31.4% vs 8.6%, P = .008), reoperation (14.3% vs 2.9%, P = .040), and general anesthesia (54.3% vs 5.7%, P = .0001). Bivariate analysis demonstrated SAHA to predict reoperation (odds ratio, 5.67; P = .045) and complications (odds ratio, 4.89; P = .005). With the numbers available, dislocations (0% vs 2.8%), infections (0% vs 8.6%), readmissions, postoperative walking distance, and disposition only trended to favor controls (P > .05). Comparing controls to SAHA patients with <3 or ≥3 levels fused, longer fusions had increased cumulative postoperative narcotic consumption (mean morphine equivalents, 44.3 vs 46.9 vs 169.4; P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with preexisting LSF experience worse early outcomes after primary THA including higher rates of complications and reoperation. Lower rates of neuraxial anesthesia and increased narcotic usage represent potential contributors. The complex interplay between the lumbar spine and hip warrants attention and further investigation.

A population-based review of bone morphogenetic protein: associated complication and reoperation rates after lumbar spinal fusion

OBJECT The authors compared the rates of postoperative adverse events and reoperation of patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion with bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) to those of patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion without BMP. METHODS The authors retrospectively analyzed the PearlDiver Technologies, Inc., database, which contains the Medicare Standard Analytical Files, the Medicare Carrier Files, the PearlDiver Private Payer Database (UnitedHealthcare), and select state all-payer data sets, from 2005 to 2010. They identified patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion with and without BMP. The ICD-9-CM code 84.52 was used to identify patients who underwent spinal fusion with BMP. ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes identified complications that occurred during the initial hospital stay. ICD-9-CM procedural codes were used to identify reoperations within 90 days of the index procedure. The relative risks (and 95% CIs) of BMP use compared with no BMP use (control) were calculated for the association of any complication with BMP use compared with the control. RESULTS Between 2005 and 2010, 460,773 patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion were identified. BMP was used in 30.7% of these patients. The overall complication rate in the BMP group was 18.2% compared with 18.7% in the control group. The relative risk of BMP use compared with no BMP use was 0.976 (95% CI 0.963-0.989), which indicates a significantly lower overall complication rate in the BMP group (p < 0.001). In both treatment groups, patients older than 65 years had a statistically significant higher rate of postoperative complications than younger patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In this large-scale institutionalized database study, BMP use did not seem to increase the overall risk of developing a postoperative complication after lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Evaluation of a Hybrid Dynamic Stabilization and Fusion System in the Lumbar Spine: A 10 Year Experience

INTRODUCTION

The development of adjacent-segment disease is a recognized consequence of lumbar fusion surgery. Posterior dynamic stabilization, or motion preservation, techniques have been developed which theoretically decrease stress on adjacent segments following fusion. This study presents the experience of using a hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion construct for degenerative lumbar spine pathology in place of rigid arthrodesis.

METHODS

A clinical cohort investigation was conducted of 66 consecutive patients (31 female, 35 male; mean age: 53 years, range: 25 - 76 years) who underwent posterior lumbar instrumentation with the Dynesys Transition Optima (DTO) implant (Zimmer-Biomet Spine, Warsaw, IN) hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion system over a 10-year period. The median length of follow-up was five years. DTO consists of pedicle screw fixation coupled to a rigid rod as well as a flexible longitudinal connecting system. All patients had symptoms of back pain and neurogenic claudication refractory to non-surgical treatment. Patients underwent lumbar arthrodesis surgery in which the hybrid system was used for stabilization instead of arthrodesis of the stenotic adjacent level.

RESULTS

Indications for DTO instrumentation were primary degenerative disc disease (n = 52) and failed back surgery syndrome (n = 14). The most common dynamically stabilized and fused segments were L3-L4 (n = 37) and L5-S1 (n = 33), respectively. Thirty-eight patients (56%) underwent decompression at the dynamically stabilized level, and 57 patients (86%) had an interbody device placed at the level of arthrodesis. Complications during the follow-up period included a single case of screw breakage and a single case of pseudoarthrosis. Ten patients (15%) subsequently underwent conversion of the dynamic stabilization portion of their DTO instrumentation to rigid spinal arthrodesis.

CONCLUSION

The DTO system represents a novel hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion construct. This 10-year experience found the device to be highly effective as well as safe. The technique may serve as an alternative to multilevel arthrodesis. Implantation of a motion-preserving dynamic stabilization device immediately adjacent to a fused level instead of extending a rigid construct may reduce the subsequent development of adjacent-segment disease in this patient population.

Effects of a Commercial Insurance Policy Restriction on Lumbar Fusion in North Carolina and the Implications for National Adoption

STUDY DESIGN

An analysis of the State Inpatient Database of North Carolina, 2005 to 2012, and the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, including all inpatient lumbar fusion admissions from nonfederal hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to examine the influence of a major commercial policy change that restricted lumbar fusion for certain indications and to forecast the potential impact if the policy were adopted nationally.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Few studies have examined the effects of recent changes in commercial coverage policies that restrict the use of lumbar fusion.

METHODS

We included adults undergoing elective lumbar fusion or re-fusion operations in North Carolina. We aggregated data into a monthly time series to report changes in the rates and volume of lumbar fusion operations for disc herniation or degeneration, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or revision fusions. Time series regression models were used to test for significant changes in the use of fusion operation following a major commercial coverage policy change initiated on January 1, 2011.

RESULTS

There was a substantial decline in the use of lumbar fusion for disc herniation or degeneration following the policy change on January 1, 2011. Overall rates of elective lumbar fusion operations in North Carolina (per 100,000 residents) increased from 103.2 in 2005 to 120.4 in 2009, before declining to 101.9 by 2012. The population rate (per 100,000 residents) of fusion among those under age 65 increased from 89.5 in 2005 to 101.2 in 2009, followed by a sharp decline to 76.8 by 2012. There was no acceleration in the already increasing rate of fusion for spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or revision procedures, but there was a coincident increase in decompression without fusion.

CONCLUSION

This commercial insurance policy change had its intended effect of reducing fusion operations for indications with less evidence of effectiveness without changing rates for other indications or resulting in an overall reduction in spine surgery. Nevertheless, broader adoption of the policy could significantly reduce the national rates of fusion operations and associated costs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization instead of arthrodesis for symptomatic adjacent-segment degenerative stenosis: description of a novel technique

OBJECTIVE The development of symptomatic adjacent-segment disease (ASD) is a well-recognized consequence of lumbar fusion surgery. Extension of a fusion to a diseased segment may only lead to subsequent adjacent-segment degeneration. The authors report the use of a novel technique that uses dynamic stabilization instead of arthrodesis for the surgical treatment of symptomatic ASD following a prior lumbar instrumented fusion. METHODS A cohort of 28 consecutive patients was evaluated who developed symptomatic stenosis immediately adjacent to a previous lumbar instrumented fusion. All patients had symptoms of neurogenic claudication refractory to nonsurgical treatment and were surgically treated with decompression and dynamic stabilization instead of extending the fusion construct using a posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization system. Preoperative symptoms, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, and perioperative complications were recorded. Clinical outcome was gauged by comparing VAS scores prior to surgery and at the time of last follow-up. RESULTS The mean follow-up duration was 52 months (range 17-94 months). The mean interval from the time of primary fusion surgery to the dynamic stabilization surgery was 40 months (range 10-96 months). The mean patient age was 51 years (range 29-76 years). There were 19 (68%) men and 9 (32%) women. Twenty-three patients (82%) presented with low-back pain at time of surgery, whereas 24 patients (86%) presented with lower-extremity symptoms only. Twenty-four patients (86%) underwent operations that were performed using single-level dynamic stabilization, 3 patients (11%) were treated at 2 levels, and 1 patient underwent 3-level decompression and dynamic stabilization. The most commonly affected and treated level (46%) was L3-4. The mean preoperative VAS pain score was 8, whereas the mean postoperative score was 3. No patient required surgery for symptomatic degeneration rostral to the level of dynamic stabilization during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS The use of posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization may offer a valid and safe option for the management of patients who develop ASD rostral to a previously instrumented arthrodesis. The technique may serve as an alternative to multilevel arthrodesis in this patient population. By implanting a dynamic stabilization device instead of an extension of a rigid construct, this might translate into a reduction in the development of yet another level of ASD.

Cognitive-Behavioral-Based Physical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Pain Undergoing Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of a cognitive-behavioral-based physical therapy (CBPT) program for improving outcomes in patients after lumbar spine surgery. A randomized controlled trial was conducted on 86 adults undergoing a laminectomy with or without arthrodesis for a lumbar degenerative condition. Patients were screened preoperatively for high fear of movement using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. Randomization to either CBPT or an education program occurred at 6 weeks after surgery. Assessments were completed pretreatment, posttreatment and at 3-month follow-up. The primary outcomes were pain and disability measured by the Brief Pain Inventory and Oswestry Disability Index. Secondary outcomes included general health (SF-12) and performance-based tests (5-Chair Stand, Timed Up and Go, 10-Meter Walk). Multivariable linear regression analyses found that CBPT participants had significantly greater decreases in pain and disability and increases in general health and physical performance compared with the education group at the 3-month follow-up. Results suggest a targeted CBPT program may result in significant and clinically meaningful improvement in postoperative outcomes. CBPT has the potential to be an evidence-based program that clinicians can recommend for patients at risk for poor recovery after spine surgery.

PERSPECTIVE

This study investigated a targeted cognitive-behavioral-based physical therapy program for patients after lumbar spine surgery. Findings lend support to the hypothesis that incorporating cognitive-behavioral strategies into postoperative physical therapy may address psychosocial risk factors and improve pain, disability, general health, and physical performance outcomes.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery Techniques for Lumbar Spinal Fusion in Italy and the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared with open surgery (OS) techniques for one- or two-level lumbar spinal fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal conditions in the United Kingdom and Italy.

METHODS

A health economic model was developed on the basis of results from a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to determine the cost-effectiveness of MIS compared with OS for lumbar spinal fusion. The analysis was conducted from a health care payer perspective. Parameters included in the model were surgery, blood loss, duration of hospitalization, postoperative complications, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Cost-effectiveness was determined by the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

RESULTS

MIS was the dominant strategy compared with OS (i.e., yielding both cost savings and improved HRQOL). Cost savings were driven mainly by shorter length of hospital stay, reduced blood loss, and fewer complications such as surgical site infection. The total cost saving per procedure was €973 for Italy and €1666 for the United Kingdom, with an improvement of 0.04 quality-adjusted life-year over 2 years in HRQOL. One-way sensitivity analyses and predefined scenario(s) analyses confirmed the robustness of the model.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS is a less expensive and a more effective treatment compared with OS for spinal lumbar fusion in both Italy and the United Kingdom. Lower downstream costs and increased HRQOL in the MIS group compensate for potential higher upfront costs of MIS implants and surgery equipment.

A 10-year follow-up of transpedicular screw fixation and intervertebral autogenous posterior iliac crest bone graft or intervertebral B-Twin system in failed back surgery syndrome

Background:

The spine surgeons have been combining anterior and posterolateral fusion (circumferential fusion) as the final solution to treat spinal disorders and many have been using it to treat failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). In present study, we analyzed and compared the clinical and radiological outcomes in patients with transpedicular screw fixation and intervertebral autogenous posterior iliac crest bone graft or in patients with transpedicular screw fixation and intervertebral B-Twin system for FBSS with a follow-up period of 10 years after the surgery.

Materials and Methods:

This study was a retrospective case study performed on 55 patients with FBSS. Clinical and radiological changes were compared between the two groups of patients on the basis of improvement of back pain, radicular pain, and work capacity. Outcome was measured in terms of Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index, and the changes in pain and function were documented every year from before surgery until 2012. We analyzed the evolution of 55 cases of FBSS those underwent segmental circumferential posterior fusions from June 2001 to February 2003, operated by a single surgeon and followed up during 10 years until February 2012. The patients were divided into 2 groups: In 25 patients, posterolateral fusions with Legacy™ (Medtronic, Inc. NYSE: MDT) screws and intersomatic autogenous posterior iliac crest bone graft was performed, and, in 30 patients, posterolateral fusions with the same screws and intersomatic fusion B-Twin (Biomet Spain Orthopaedics, S.L.) system was performed. In all cases, we used posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) approach for intervertebral graft, and the artrodesis was supplemented at intertransverse level with Autologus Growth Factor (AGF-MBA INCORPORADO, S.A.). The outcome was measured in terms of Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index, and the changes in pain and function were documented every year and compared from before surgery to the final follow-up visit. Preoperative and postoperative scores were available for all patients.

Results:

The average age of these patients was comparable in both groups (mean age 42.6 versus 50.2 years). The average follow-up period was 200.6 months in the first group (screws and intersomatic bone) and 184.4 months in the second group (screws and B-Twin). In the autologus bone graft group, the CT scan and Rx study revealed loss of height of intervertebral space between 25% and 45% of 24 h postoperative height of intervertebral operated disc, and the patients continued to lose the height until 20 months after the surgery. In the B Twin group, the CT scan and Rx study revealed a loss of height of the intervertebral level of 8-12% over a period of 9 months follow-up, followed by stability. A total of 31 patients (55%) had improved Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index >40% of the total possible points, although this did not reflect in PSI or return to work rate.

Conclusions:

The patients with rigid fixation do well in terms of correction of lumbar lordosis, but they do not do well in terms of recurrence of pain. Furthermore, they need some kind of intervention to control pain after the first year after surgery. In patients in whom bone graft is used, although they do not maintain and sustain the lumbar lordosis in the long term, they have less recurrence of pain with less chances of intervention for pain control.

Impact of total disc arthroplasty on the surgical management of lumbar degenerative disc disease: Analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2000 to 2008

Background:

Spinal fusion is the most rapidly increasing type of lumbar spine surgery for various lumbar degenerative pathologies. The surgical treatment of lumbar spine degenerative disc disease may involve decompression, stabilization, or arthroplasty procedures. Lumbar disc athroplasty is a recent technological advance in the field of lumbar surgery. This study seeks to determine the clinical impact of anterior lumbar disc replacement on the surgical treatment of lumbar spine degenerative pathology. This is a retrospective assessment of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS).

Methods:

The NIS was searched for ICD-9 codes for lumbar and lumbosacral fusion (81.06), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (81.07), and posterolateral lumbar fusion (81.08), as well as for procedure codes for revision fusion surgery in the lumbar and lumbosacral spine (81.36, 81.37, and 81.38). To assess lumbar arthroplasty, procedure codes for the insertion or replacement of lumbar artificial discs (84.60, 84.65, and 84.68) were queried. Results were assayed from 2000 through 2008, the last year with available data. Analysis was done using the lme4 package in the R programming language for statistical computing.

Results:

A total of nearly 300,000 lumbar spine fusion procedures were reported in the NIS database from 2000 to 2008; assuming a representative cross-section of the US health care market, this models approximately 1.5 million procedures performed over this time period. In 2005, the first year of its widespread use, there were 911 lumbar arthroplasty procedures performed, representing 3% of posterolateral fusions performed in this year. Since introduction, the number of lumbar spine arthroplasty procedures has consistently declined, to 653 total procedures recorded in the NIS in 2008. From 2005 to 2008, lumbar arthroplasties comprised approximately 2% of lumbar posterolateral fusions. Arthroplasty patients were younger than posterior lumbar fusion patients (42.8 ± 11.5 vs. 55.9 ± 15.1 years, P < 0.0000001). The distribution of arthroplasty procedures was even between academic and private urban facilities (48.5% and 48.9%, respectively). While rates of posterolateral lumbar spine fusion steadily grew during the period (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.06, P < 0.0000001), rates of revision surgery and anterior spinal fusion remained static.

Conclusions:

The impact of lumbar arthroplasty procedures has been minimal. Measured as a percentage of more common lumbar posterior arthrodesis procedures, lumbar arthroplasty comprises only approximately 2% of lumbar spine surgeries performed in the United States. Over the first 4 years following the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, the frequency of lumbar disc arthroplasty has decreased while the number of all lumbar spinal fusions has increased.

Assessing the stiffness of spinal fusion in animal models

The clinical goal of spinal fusion is to reduce motion and the associated pain. Therefore, measuring motion under loading is critical. The purpose of this study was to validate four-point bending as a means to mechanically evaluate simulated fusions in dog and rabbit spines. We hypothesized that this method would be more sensitive than manual palpation and would be able to distinguish unilateral vs bilateral fusion. Spines from four mixed breed dogs and four New Zealand white rabbits were used to simulate posterolateral fusion with polymethyl methacrylate as the fusion mass. We performed manual palpation and nondestructive mechanical testing in four-point bending in four planes of motion: flexion, extension, and right and left bending. This testing protocol was used for each specimen in three fusion modes: intact, unilateral, and bilateral fusion. Under manual palpation, all intact spines were rated as not fused, and all unilateral and bilateral simulated fusions were rated as fused. In four-point bending, dog spines were significantly stiffer after unilateral fusion compared with intact in all directions. Additionally, rabbit spines were stiffer in flexion and left bending after unilateral fusion. All specimens exhibited significant differences between intact and bilateral fusion except the rabbit in extension. For unilateral vs bilateral fusion, significant differences were present for right bending in the dog model and for flexion in the rabbit. Unilateral fusion can provide enough stability to constitute a fused grade by manual palpation but may not provide structural stiffness comparable to bilateral fusion.

Synframe: a preliminary report

Both endoscopic lumbar spinal surgery and the non-standardized and unstable retractor systems for the lumbar spine presently on the market have disadvantages and limitations in relation to the minimally invasive surgical concept, which have been gradually recognized in the last few years. In an attempt to resolve some of these issues, we have developed a highly versatile retractor system, which allows access to and surgery at the lumbar, thoracic and even cervical spine. This retractor system - Synframe - is based on a ring concept allowing 360 degrees access to a surgical opening in anterior as well as posterior surgery. The ring is concentrically laid over the surgical opening for the approach and is used as a carrier for retractor arms, which are instrumented with either different sizes or types of blades and/or different sizes of Hohmann hooks. In posterior surgery, nerve root retractors can also be installed. This ring also functions as a carrier for fiberoptic illumination devices and different sizes of endoscopes, used to transmit the surgical procedure out of the depth of the surgical exposure for both teaching purposes and for the surgical team when it has no longer direct visual access to the procedure. The ring is stable, being fixed onto the operating table, allowing precise minimally open approaches and surgical procedures under direct vision with optimal illumination. This ring system also opens perspectives for an integrated minimally open surgical concept, where the ring may be used as a reference platform in computer-navigated surgery.