Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Neurofibromatosis-1 (NF1) dystrophic scoliosis is a challenging disease to manage surgically, with multiplanar curves progressing rapidly and unpredictably. Conservative management with bracing is often unsuccessful, and many patients necessitate instrumented fusion to halt progression of their curves. In rare cases, patients can present with spontaneous vertebral subluxation, significantly complicating the surgical management of this already complex disease process. The objective here was to describe 2 cases of vertebral subluxation in NF1-associated dystrophic scoliosis along with their surgical corrections and clinical courses. METHODS:A retrospective review of 2 cases at the authors' institution was performed to describe their preoperative symptom complexes, surgical corrections, and postoperative courses. A narrative review of the literature surrounding NF1-associated dystrophic scoliosis and subluxation is also presented. RESULTS:Two cases of vertebral subluxation at T4-5 and C7-T1 are presented. Both patients had significant dystrophic features throughout their spines, and halo-gravity traction was unsuccessful in 1 patient and led to vertebral and subclavian artery injuries in the other. One patient underwent an uncomplicated deformity correction with partial vertebral column resection to facilitate his deformity correction. The other patient, after her vascular injuries, ultimately suffered a spinal cord injury after a fall and underwent emergent instrumentation, decompression, and partial vertebral column resection at the site of subluxation, with improvement in her neurological function afterward. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Dystrophic scoliosis in NF1 remains a difficult disease to treat, and deformity correction in patients with subluxation is particularly complex. These cases here highlight the unpredictability and possible complications of halo-gravity traction, need for good fixation to facilitate subluxation reduction, high chance of hardware complications and proximal or distal failure, and importance of cooperative management of these patients in conjunction with other surgical services.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Three-column osteotomy (3CO) offers substantial spinal deformity correction. Thoracic neurovascular bundle sacrifice is often required, and anterior spinal artery (ASA) perfusion can be compromised. Spinal angiography allows localization of variable ASA vascular contribution. This study's objective was to describe a series of patients who underwent preoperative spinal angiography and discuss the impact on surgical planning and execution of thoracic 3CO for deformity correction. METHODS:Patients who underwent preoperative spinal angiograms and thoracic 3CO for deformity correction were reviewed. Preoperative, angiographic, and postoperative information was recorded. A literature review on preoperative spinal angiography in deformity surgery was performed. RESULTS:Eight patients were identified: single-level pedicle subtraction osteotomies (1), single-level vertebral column resections (2), and multilevel vertebral column resections (5). The average age was 40.0 years, and 75.0% were female. Thoracic scoliosis ranged from 0 to 105° preoperatively and 0 to 45.1° postoperatively. Thoracic kyphosis ranged from 29° to 120° preoperatively and 20.6° to 54.9° postoperatively. Twelve ASA supply vessels were identified bilaterally in 6 patients. Four patients had nontraditional ASA supply at T4 (1), T6 (1), and L2 (2), and 4 had multiple ASA feeders. Based on angiographic results, osteotomy site was changed (1), and neurovascular bundles were spared (2), a 37.5% rate of surgical plan alteration. There were no permanent neuromonitoring changes or postoperative neurologic deficits. No articles reported on using spinal angiography specifically for deformity surgery. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Spinal angiography is low risk and provides critical information regarding ASA supply to potentially mitigate ischemic risk during neurovascular bundle takedown during thoracic 3CO. Further case series are warranted to evaluate the benefits in larger populations, but its clinical applications appear practical.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) salvage is frequently used in contemporary spine surgery, despite clinical concern in its efficacy as a surrogate for blood-banked allogeneic packed RBCs (pRBCs). During spine surgery, salvaged RBCs (sRBCs) are exposed to injurious high-heat electrocautery, prolonged stasis, and abrasive pharmaceuticals, potentially making sRBCs a poor blood substitute. We therefore sought to scientifically and objectively define the quality of sRBCs in the context of complex spine surgery. METHODS:This is a single-center, prospective, nonrandomized controlled trial of patients undergoing posterior-based multilevel thoracolumbar instrumented fusion for spinal deformity with planned use of intraoperative RBC salvage between June 2022 and July 2023. Surgeries were performed by fellowship-trained spinal neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. The participants were split based on transfusion of sRBCs (given sufficient yield) vs no sRBC transfusion. Primary outcomes were RBC electrolyte composition, indices, deformability, and integrity, which were evaluated in comparison blood samples: Baseline, pRBC, and sRBC. Secondary outcomes were related to clinical effects of sRBC transfusion. Morphological assessment used Stimulated Raman Histology and machine learning. Deformability was assessed using ektacytometry. RESULTS:A total of 174 patients were included. The mean age was 50.2years ±25.4, 58.6% was female, the mean level fused was 10.0 ± 3.9, and 58.0% received sRBCs (median 207.0 mL). sRBCs differed significantly on standard laboratory measures, had a high proportion (30.7%) of shrunken and irregularly spiculated morphologies, and demonstrated abnormal deformability and relaxation kinetics. The hemolysis index was significantly elevated in sRBCs (2.9 ± 1.8) compared with Baseline samples and pRBCs (P < .01). Transfusion of sRBCs was associated with suboptimal resuscitation and provided no practical clinical benefit. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:RBCs salvaged during posterior thoracolumbar spine surgery are irreversibly injured, with hemolysis index exceeding Food and Drug Administration and Council of Europe transfusion standards in all samples, questioning their efficacy and safety as a blood substitute.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Instrumented spinal fusion constructs sometimes fail because of fatigue loading, frequently necessitating open revision surgery. Favorable outcomes after percutaneous juxtapedicular cement salvage (perc-cement salvage) of failing instrumentation have been described; however, this approach is not widely known among spine surgeons , and its biomechanical properties have not been evaluated. We report our institutional experience with perc-cement salvage and investigate the relative biomechanical strength of this technique as compared with 3 other common open revision techniques. METHODS:A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent perc-cement salvage was conducted. Biomechanical characterization of revision techniques was performed in a cadaveric model of critical pedicle screw failure. Three revision cohorts involved removal and replacement of hardware: (1) screw upsizing, (2) vertebroplasty, and (3) fenestrated screw with cement augmentation. These were compared with a cohort with perc-cement salvage performed using a juxtapedicular trajectory with the failed primary screw remaining engaged in the vertebral body. RESULTS:Ten patients underwent perc-cement salvage from 2018 to 2022 to address screw haloing and/or endplate fracture threatening construct integrity. Pain palliation was reported by 8/10 patients. Open revision surgery was required in 4/10 patients, an average of 8.9 months after the salvage procedure (range 6.2-14.7 months). Only one revision was due to progressive hardware dislodgement. The remainder avoided open revision surgery through an average of 1.9 years of follow-up. In the cadaveric study, there were no significant differences in pedicle screw pullout strength among any of the revision cohorts. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Perc-cement salvage of failing instrumentation is reasonably efficacious. The technique is biomechanically noninferior to other revision strategies that require open surgery for removal and replacement of hardware. Open revision surgery may be avoided by perc-cement salvage in select cases.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Clinical registries are critical for modern surgery and underpin outcomes research, device monitoring, and trial development. However, existing approaches to registry construction are labor-intensive, costly, and prone to manual error. Natural language processing techniques combined with electronic health record (EHR) data sets can theoretically automate the construction and maintenance of registries. Our aim was to automate the generation of a spine surgery registry at an academic medical center using regular expression (regex) classifiers developed by neurosurgeons to combine domain expertise with interpretable algorithms. METHODS:We used a Hadoop data lake consisting of all the information generated by an academic medical center. Using this database and structured query language queries, we retrieved every operative note written in the department of neurosurgery since our transition to EHR. Notes were parsed using regex classifiers and compared with a random subset of 100 manually reviewed notes. RESULTS:A total of 31 502 operative cases were downloaded and processed using regex classifiers. The codebase required 5 days of development, 3 weeks of validation, and less than 1 hour for the software to generate the autoregistry. Regex classifiers had an average accuracy of 98.86% at identifying both spinal procedures and the relevant vertebral levels, and it correctly identified the entire list of defined surgical procedures in 89% of patients. We were able to identify patients who required additional operations within 30 days to monitor outcomes and quality metrics. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates the feasibility of automatically generating a spine registry using the EHR and an interpretable, customizable natural language processing algorithm which may reduce pitfalls associated with manual registry development and facilitate rapid clinical research.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Spine surgery has advanced in concert with our deeper understanding of its elements. Narrowly focused bibliometric analyses have been conducted previously, but never on the entire corpus of the field. Using big data and bibliometrics, we appraised the entire corpus of spine surgery publications to study the evolution of the specialty as a scholarly field since 1900. METHODS:We queried Web of Science for all contents from 13 major publications dedicated to spine surgery. We next queried by topic [topic = (spine OR spinal OR vertebrae OR vertebral OR intervertebral OR disc OR disk)]; these results were filtered to include articles published by 49 other publications that were manually determined to contain pertinent articles. Articles, along with their metadata, were exported. Statistical and bibliometric analyses were performed using the Bibliometrix R package and various Python packages. RESULTS:Eighty-five thousand five hundred articles from 62 journals and 134 707 unique authors were identified. The annual growth rate of publications was 2.78%, with a surge after 1980, concurrent with the growth of specialized journals. International coauthorship, absent before 1970, increased exponentially with the formation of influential spine study groups. Reference publication year spectroscopy allowed us to identify 200 articles that comprise the historical roots of modern spine surgery and each of its subdisciplines. We mapped the emergence of new topics and saw a recent lexical evolution toward outcomes- and patient-centric terms. Female and minority coauthorship has increased since 1990, but remains low, and disparities across major publications persist. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The field of spine surgery was borne from pioneering individuals who published their findings in a variety of journals. The renaissance of spine surgery has been powered by international collaboration and is increasingly outcomes focused. While spine surgery is gradually becoming more diverse, there is a clear need for further promotion and outreach to under-represented populations.

Over the past generation, outcome measures in spine care have evolved from a reliance on clinician-reported assessment toward recognizing the importance of the patient's perspective and the wide incorporation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). While patient-reported outcomes are now considered an integral component of outcomes assessments, they cannot wholly capture the state of a patient's functionality. There is a clear need for quantitative and objective patient-centered outcome measures. The pervasiveness of smartphones and wearable devices in modern society, which passively collect data related to health, has ushered in a new era of spine care outcome measurement. The patterns emerging from these data, so-called "digital biomarkers," can accurately describe characteristics of a patient's health, disease, or recovery state. Broadly, the spine care community has thus far concentrated on digital biomarkers related to mobility, although the researcher's toolkit is anticipated to expand in concert with advancements in technology. In this review of the nascent literature, we describe the evolution of spine care outcome measurements, outline how digital biomarkers can supplement current clinician-driven and patient-driven measures, appraise the present and future of the field in the modern era, as well as discuss present limitations and areas for further study, with a focus on smartphones (see Supplemental Digital Content , http://links.lww.com/NEU/D809 , for a similar appraisal of wearable devices).

OBJECTIVE:By minimizing imaging artifact and particle scatter, carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CF-PEEK) spinal implants are hypothesized to enhance radiotherapy (RT) planning/dosing and improve oncological outcomes. However, robust clinical studies comparing tumor surgery outcomes between CF-PEEK and traditional metallic implants are lacking. In this paper, the authors performed a systematic review of the literature with the aim to describe clinical outcomes in patients with spine tumors who received CF-PEEK implants, focusing on implant-related complications and oncological outcomes. METHODS:A systematic review of the literature published between database inception and May 2022 was performed in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The PubMed database was queried using the terms "carbon fiber" and "spine" or "spinal." The inclusion criteria were articles that described patients with CF-PEEK pedicle screw fixation and had a minimum of 5 patients. Case reports and phantom studies were excluded. RESULTS:This review included 11 articles with 326 patients (237 with CF-PEEK-based implants and 89 with titanium-based implants). The mean follow-up period was 13.5 months, and most tumors were metastatic (67.1%). The rates of implant-related complications in the CF-PEEK and titanium groups were 7.8% and 4.7%, respectively. The rate of pedicle screw fracture was 1.7% in the CF-PEEK group and 2.4% in the titanium group. The rates of reoperation were 5.7% (with 60.0% because of implant failure or junctional kyphosis) and 4.8% (all because of implant failure or junctional kyphosis) in the CF-PEEK and titanium groups, respectively. When reported, 72.5% of patients received postoperative RT (41.0% stereotactic body RT, 30.8% fractionated RT, 25.6% proton, 2.6% carbon ion). Four articles suggested that implant artifact was reduced in the CF-PEEK group. Local recurrence occurred in 14.4% of CF-PEEK and 10.7% of titanium-implanted patients. CONCLUSIONS:While CF-PEEK harbors similar implant failure rates to traditional metallic implants with reduced imaging artifact, it remains unclear whether CF-PEEK implants improve oncological outcomes. This study highlights the need for prospective, direct comparative clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE:Dysphagia is the most commonly reported complication of annterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. However, the incidence of dysphagia post-ACDF varies widely-partly attributable to differing outcome measures used to capture dysphagia. Our objective was to conduct a scoping review of the literature to quantify which dysphagia outcome measures have been employed post-ACDF and examine trends by study design, year, and location. METHODS:After removing duplicates, 2396 abstracts were screened for inclusion. A total of 480 studies were eligible for full-text review. After applying exclusion criteria, data was extracted from 280 studies. We extracted the dysphagia outcome measure(s), study design (prospective vs retrospective), year, and location (country). Approximately 10% of studies were repeated for intra-rater agreement. RESULTS:In total, 317 dysphagia outcome measures were reported in 280 studies (primarily retrospective-63%). The largest proportion of outcome measures were categorized as "unvalidated patient-reported outcome measures" (46%), largely driven by use of the popular Bazaz scale. The next most common categories were "insufficient detail" and "validated patient-reported outcome measures" (both 16%) followed by "chart review/database" (13%) and instrumental assessment (7%). Studies examining dysphagia post-ACDF steadily increased over the years and the use of validated measures increased in the past 10 years. CONCLUSIONS:This scoping review of the literature highlights that nearly half of the ACDF dysphagia literature relies on unvalidated patient-reported outcome measures. The current understanding of the mechanism, timeline, and presentation of dysphagia post-ACDF are likely limited due to the metrics that are most commonly reported in the literature.

Introduction: The objective of this analysis was to compare sociodemographic characteristics and outcomes between cohorts of patients receiving separation surgery for spinal metastases at two neighboring institutions, one private and one public, affiliated with a major academic medical center in a large metropolitan area.
Method(s): Patients who received separation surgery for spinal metastases between 2013 and 2021 were included in this analysis. Sociodemographic factors, treatment characteristics, and outcomes were compared between those treated at a private hospital and those treated at a neighboring public hospital using Rao-Scott chi square tests.
Result(s): Compared to those treated at our private hospital, patients treated at our public hospital were more often younger (p=0.005), of Black or Hispanic race (70% vs. 14.9%, p<0.001), and insured via Medicaid or Emergency Medicaid (48.6% vs. 3.2%, p<0.001). They more frequently presented with ESCC grade 3 compression (81.6% vs. 49.2%), potentially unstable or unstable lesions as denoted by SINS >7 (64.1% vs. 37.7%), and increased neurologic impairment as denoted by ASIA Impairment Scale scores of A, B, or C (35% vs. 7.9%). Local progression was less frequently observed in patients treated at our public hospital (28.2% vs. 54.7%, p=0.001), although this is likely due to poorer clinical and radiographic follow-up amongst this cohort. Median survival was significantly lower in patients treated at our public hospital (Median [Range]: 81 [11-1,873] days vs. 264 [0-3,092] days, p<0.001), although this is also likely confounded by lower rates of follow-up.
Conclusion(s): This study highlights substantial disparities amongst patients treated for spinal metastases at neighboring institutions affiliated with a major academic medical center. Further work is needed to identify reasons for these disparities and create avenues by which to mitigate them