Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The Miller et al adult spinal deformity frailty index (ASD-FI) correlates with complication risk; however, its development was not rooted in clinical outcomes, and the 40 factors needed for its calculation limit the index's clinical utility. The present study aimed to develop a simplified, weighted frailty index for ASD patients METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of a single-center database. Component ASD-FI parameters contributing to overall ASD-FI score were assessed via Pearson correlation. Top significant, clinically relevant factors were regressed against ASD-FI score to generate the modified ASD-FI (mASD-FI). Component mASD-FI factors were regressed against incidence of medical complications, and factor weights were calculated from regression of these coefficients. Total mASD-FI score ranged from 0 to 21, and was calculated by summing weights of expressed parameters. Linear regression and published ASD-FI cutoffs generated corresponding mASD-FI frailty cutoffs: not frail (NF, <7), frail (7-12), severely frail (SF, >12). Analysis of variance assessed the relationship between frailty category and validated baseline measures of pain and disability at baseline. RESULTS:= .001). CONCLUSIONS:This study modifies an existing ASD frailty index and proposes a weighted, shorter mASD-FI. The mASD-FI relies less on patient-reported variables, and it weights component factors by their contribution to adverse outcomes. Because increasing mASD-FI score is associated with inferior clinical measures of pain and disability, the mASD-FI may serve as a valuable tool for preoperative risk assessment.

BACKGROUND:As the opioid crisis has gained national attention, there have been increasing efforts to decrease opioid usage. Simultaneously, patient satisfaction has been a crucial metric in the American health care system and has been closely linked to effective pain management in surgical patients. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of pain medication prescription and concurrent patient satisfaction in spine surgery patients. METHODS:test of independence was used to compare percentages, and 1-way analysis of variance was used to compare means across quarters. RESULTS:value range, .359-.988). CONCLUSIONS:Over the studied time period, opioid use decreased and nonopioid prescriptions increased during hospitalization, whereas satisfaction scores remained unchanged. These findings indicate an increasing effort in reducing opioid use among providers and suggest the ability to do so without affecting overall satisfaction rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:4. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:The opioid epidemic has highlighted the need to reduce opioid usage in orthopedic spine surgery. This study reviews the trends for inpatient management of post-op pain in orthopedic spine surgery patients in relation to patient satisfaction. There was a significant increase in non-opioid analgesic pain medications, and a reduction in opioids during the study period. During this time, patient satisfaction as measured by Press-Ganey surveys did not show a decrease. This demonstrates that treatment of post-operative pain in orthopedic spine surgery patients can be managed with less opioids, more multimodal analgesia, and patient satisfaction will not be affected.

STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:This study aims to report the incidence, risk factors, and recovery rate of neurological complications (NC) in patients with adult cervical deformity (ACD) who underwent corrective surgery. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:ACD patients undergoing surgery from 2013 to 2015 were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter database. Patients were separated into 2 groups according to the presence of neurological complications (NC vs no-NC groups). The types, timing, recovery patterns, and interventions for NC were recorded. Patients' demographics, surgical details, radiographic parameters, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were compared. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:106 patients were prospectively included. Average age was 60.8 years with a mean of 18.2 months follow-up. The overall incidence of NC was 18.9%; of these, 68.1% were major complications. Nerve root motor deficit was the most common complication, followed by radiculopathy, sensory deficit, and spinal cord injury. The proportion of complications occurring within 30 days of surgery was 54.5%. The recovery rate from neurological complication was high (90.9%), with most of the recoveries occurring within 6 months and continuing even after 12 months. Only 2 patients (1.9%) had continuous neurological complication. No demographic or preoperative radiographic risk factors could be identified, and anterior corpectomy and posterior foraminotomy were found to be performed less in the NC group. The final HRQOL outcome was not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Our data is valuable to surgeons and patients to better understand the neurological complications before performing or undergoing complex cervical deformity surgery.

This video will be demonstrating the surgical treatment of complete foot drop with partial tibial nerve transfer to the motor branch of the tibialis anterior. Foot drop occurs when there is injury to the deep peroneal nerve that results in the paralysis of the tibialis anterior muscle and subsequent loss of ankle dorsiflexion.1-5 The patient who is the subject of this video is a 27-yr-old female with a 6-mo history of foot drop. She presented with complete loss of ankle dorsiflexion and great toe extension due to traumatic fall on her left knee while running. Upon physical examination, she had all the features of complete foot drop with loss of ankle dorsiflexion and ankle eversion. She also had decreased sensation to light touch over left dorsal foot, left great toe, and left lateral lower leg. The patient has consented to this procedure. The partial tibial nerve transfer to the motor branch of tibialis anterior muscle is the preferred treatment option for foot drop as it restores ankle dorsiflexion with minimal donor site complications. At 12 mo postsurgery, she has regained 4/5 for ankle dorsiflexion on motor testing compared to the 0/5 she had preoperatively.

OBJECTIVE:The shared decision-making (SDM) process provides an opportunity to answer frequently asked questions (FAQs). The authors aimed to present a concise list of answers to FAQs to aid in SDM for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS:From a prospective, multicenter ASD database, patients enrolled between 2008 and 2016 who underwent fusions of 5 or more levels with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. All deformity types were included to provide general applicability. The authors compiled a list of FAQs from patients undergoing ASD surgery and used a retrospective analysis to provide answers. All responses are reported as either the means or the proportions reaching the minimal clinically important difference at the 2-year follow-up interval. RESULTS:Of 689 patients with ASD who were eligible for 2-year follow-up, 521 (76%) had health-related quality-of-life scores available at the time of that follow-up. The mean age at the initial surgery was 58.2 years, and 78% of patients were female. The majority (73%) underwent surgery with a posterior-only approach. The mean number of fused levels was 12.2. Revision surgery accounted for 48% of patients. The authors answered 12 FAQs as follows:1. Will my pain improve? Back and leg pain will both be reduced by approximately 50%.2. Will my activity level improve? Approximately 65% of patients feel improvement in their activity level.3. Will I feel better about myself? More than 70% of patients feel improvement in their appearance.4. Is there a chance I will get worse? 4.1% feel worse at 2 years postoperatively.5. What is the likelihood I will have a complication? 67.8% will have a major or minor complication, with 47.8% having a major complication.6. Will I need another surgery? 25.0% will have a reoperation within 2 years.7. Will I regret having surgery? 6.5% would not choose the same treatment.8. Will I get a blood transfusion? 73.7% require a blood transfusion.9. How long will I stay in the hospital? You need to stay 8.1 days on average.10. Will I have to go to the ICU? 76.0% will have to go to the ICU.11. Will I be able to return to work? More than 70% will be working at 1 year postoperatively.12. Will I be taller after surgery? You will be 1.1 cm taller on average. CONCLUSIONS:The above list provides concise, practical answers to FAQs encountered in the SDM process while counseling patients for ASD surgery.

BACKGROUND: Bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) and allograft containing mesenchymal stem cells (live cell) are popular biologic substitutes for iliac crest autograft used in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Use of these agents in the pathogenesis of postoperative radiculitis remains controversial. Recent studies have independently linked minimally invasive (MIS) TLIF with increased radiculitis risk compared to open TLIF. The purpose of this study was to assess the rate of postoperative radiculitis in open and MIS TLIF patients along with its relationship to concurrent biologic adjuvant use. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years undergoing single-level TLIF from June 2012 to December 2018 with minimum 1-year follow-up were included. Outcome measures were rate of radiculitis, intra- and postoperative complications, revision surgery; length of stay (LOS), and estimated blood loss (EBL). RESULTS:= .038, N = 336) compared to other combinations of surgical approach and biologic use. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the MIS approach nor BMP use is an independent risk factor for post-TLIF radiculitis. However, risk of radiculitis significantly increases when they are used in tandem. This should be considered when selecting biological adjuvants for MIS TLIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS: 3.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This study is a single-center retrospective radiographic review. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study is to evaluate a novel measurement parameter, mandibular slope (MS), as a measure of horizontal gaze. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Assessment of sagittal spinal alignment is essential in the evaluation of spinal deformity patients. Ability to achieve a horizontal gaze, a parameter of sagittal alignment, is needed for the performance of daily activities. Standard measures of horizontal gaze, including the gold-standard chin-brow to vertical angle (CBVA) and the surrogate measures McGregor's line (McGS) and Chamberlain's line (CS), require high-quality imaging, precise head positioning, and reliance on difficult to view visual landmarks. A novel measurement parameter, MS, utilizing the caudal margin of the mandible on standard lateral spine radiographs is proposed. METHODS:90 radiographs from spine deformity patients with or without spinal implants from a single center were evaluated. Three spine surgery fellows independently measured CBVA, McGS, CS, and MS at two timepoints at least one week apart to assess accuracy and reliability. MS was measured as the angle created by the inferior edge of the mandibular body and the horizontal. Formulas for calculating CBVA based on the above parameters were derived and compared to the actual CBVA. RESULTS:Mean age was 49.7 years, 76 females and 14 males. CBVA correlated with CS, McGS, and MS, r = 0.85, 0.81, and 0.80, respectively (p < 0.001). Standard error between real CBVA and calculated CBVA using CS (0.4 ± 4.79) and McGS (0.4 ± 3.9) was higher than that calculated using MS (- 0.2 ± 4.3). ICC demonstrated the highest inter-observer reliability with MS (0.999). MS had the highest intra-observer reliabilities 0.975, 0.981, and 0.988 (p < 0.001); CS and McGS also demonstrated high intra-observer reliability. CONCLUSIONS:MS is a promising measure of horizontal gaze that correlates highly with CBVA, has excellent intra- and inter-observer reliability with CBVA, and is easily measured using standard lateral spine radiographs.

The aim of this study was to investigate the cost utility of treating non-frail versus frail or severely frail adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients. 79 surgical ASD patients >18 years with available frailty and ODI data at baseline and 2-years post-surgery (2Y) were included. Utility data was calculated using the ODI converted to the SF-6D. QALYs utilized a 3% discount rate to account for decline to life expectancy (LE). Costs were calculated using the PearlDiver database. ICER was compared between non-operative (non-op.) and operative (op.) NF and F/SF patients at 2Y and LE. When compared to non-operative ASD, the ICER was $447,943.96 vs. $313,211.01 for NF and F/SF at 2Y, and $68,311.35 vs. $47,764.61 for NF and F/SF at LE. Frail and severely frail patients had lower cost per QALY compared to not frail patients at 2Y and life expectancy, and had lower ICER values when compared to a non-operative cohort of ASD patients. While these results support operative correction of frail and severely frail patients, it is important to note that these patients are often at worse baseline disability, which is closely related to frailty scores, and have more opportunity to improve postoperatively. Furthermore, there may be a threshold of frailty that is not operable due to the risk of severe complications that is not captured by this analysis. While future research should investigate economic outcomes at extended follow up times, these findings support the cost effectiveness of ASD surgery at all frailty states.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective analysis of outcomes in single-level spine and primary hip and knee arthroplasty patients. OBJECTIVE:Compare baseline and post-operative outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery procedures with total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to further define outcomes in orthopedic surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Computer-adaptive Patient Reported Outcome Information System (PROMIS) allows for standardized assessment of the Health Related Quality of Life across different disease states. METHODS:Patients who underwent spine surgery (anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc replacement, lumbar laminectomy, microscopic lumbar discectomy, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion or adult reconstruction surgery (THA, TKA) were grouped. Mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Baseline (BL) and 6-month (6 M) PROMIS scores of Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity were determined. Paired t-tests compared differences in CCI, BL, 6 M, and change in PROMIS scores for spine and adult reconstruction procedures. RESULTS:304 spine surgery patients (Age=58.1 ± 15.6; 42.9% Female) and 347 adult reconstruction patients (Age=62.9 ± 11.8; 54.1% Female) were compared. Spine surgery groups had more disability and pain at baseline than adult reconstruction patients according to Physical Function [(21.0, 22.2, 9.07, 12.6, 10.4) vs (35.8, 35.0), respectively, p < .01], Pain Interference [(80.1, 74.1, 89.6, 92.5, 90.6) vs (64.0, 63.9), respectively, p < .01] and Pain Intensity [(53.0, 53.1, 58.3, 58.5, 56.1) vs (53.4, 53.8), respectively, p < .01]. At 6 M, spine surgery patients remained more disabled and had more pain compared to adult reconstruction patients. Over the 6-month timespan, spine patients experienced greater improvements than adult reconstruction patients in terms of Physical Function [(+8.7, +22.2, +9.7, +12.9, +12.1) vs (+5.3, +3.9), respectively, p < .01] and Pain Interference scores [(-15.4, -28.1, -14.7, -13.1, -12.3) vs (-8.3, -6.0), respectively, p < .01]. CONCLUSIONS:Spinal surgery patients had lower BL and 6 M PROMIS scores, but greater relative improvement in PROMIS scores compared to adult reconstruction patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: This study evaluates the necessity of a multi-rod construct to help prevent a pseudarthrosis in ASD surgery of lesser magnitude. Regardless of an interbody at L5/S1, a multi-rod construct does not decrease the risk of developing a pseudarthrosis. If a pseudarthrosis develops in patients who undergo an interbody fusion at L5/S1, it is more likely to occur above the L5/S1 level and the number of rods used does not decrease this risk. PURPOSE: To examine the necessity of IBF and multi-rod use to prevent pseudarthrosis in these lesser magnitude ASD surgeries. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a multicenter database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 483 patients met our inclusion criteria of pelvic fixation, > 2 year follow up, >5 levels fused, no 3-column osteotomy (3CO), and no multi-level interbody fusions. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pseudarthrosis rate and location in ASD patients.
METHOD(S): A multi-center database was evaluated to identify patients with pelvic fixation, > 2 year follow up, >5 levels fused, and no 3-column osteotomy (3CO). We define a lesser magnitude ASD surgery as surgeries that do not include 3CO or multi-level interbody fusions. In this cohort, ASD patients with and without an IBF at L5/S1 were assessed to evaluate if the number of rods had an impact on the pseudarthrosis rate. Pseudarthrosis was determined by intraoperative findings or record review. Fisher's exact tests, univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify predictors of pseudo.
RESULT(S): A total of 483 patients met our inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 48 months. Of those, 321 (66%) had interbody at L5/S1 (IBF). Twenty-three percent of IBF patients had a MR construct and 77% had a SR construct. In the non-IBF group, 33% had a MR construct. In the IBF group, the MR construct did not impact the pseudarthrosis rate compared to a SR construct, (6.8% vs 5.2% respectively, p=.35). In the IBF group, 29% (4) of MR patients and 75% (6) of SR patients with pseudo received BMP. However, regardless of the rod construct, ASD patients with an interbody at L5/S1 had an increased risk of having a pseudarthrosis above this level (OR.096, p=.045). Also, the MR construct did not decrease the risk of developing a pseudarthrosis in the non-IBF group (0% vs 4.5%, p=.18).
CONCLUSION(S): In ASD surgery of lesser magnitude, a multi-rod construct does not decrease the risk of developing a pseudarthrosis. Patients who have an interbody fusion at L5/S1 are more likely to develop a pseudarthrosis above this level, regardless of the rod construct. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright