Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to define a treatment strategy for patients with severe cervical deformity(sCD). METHODS:Surgical patients with sCD were isolated based on preop radiographic parameters. We sent 10 sCD cases to 7 surgeons to find consensus on approach, upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV), lower instrumented vertebrae (LIV), osteotomy. We performed a descriptive analysis and created a treatment algorithm from the survey then analyzed a database of surgical patients to find the frequency of following our algorithm. RESULTS:We found consensus on 7 cases for posterior approach due to cervicothoracic deformity and of 15 patients within our sCD database that had cervicothoracic deformity, 13/15 had posterior approach. There was consensus on 2 cases for antero-posterior approach due to local kyphosis and of 25 patients that had local kyphosis, 18/25 had an anterior approach. In 4 cases there was consensus of UIV of C2 and of 35 cases that had posterior fusion >6 levels, 20/35 had a UIV of C2. In 3 cases there was consensus of a LIV below a previously fused spine. Of 36 patients that had a fusion of T6 or higher, 34 had a LIV below the previous UIV. In 6 cases there was consensus against an osteotomy due to cervical spine flexibility and 9/12 patients that had an osteotomy in our database had no flexibility on dynamic radiographs. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We outline here an algorithm for deciding approach, UIV, LIV and whether to do an osteotomy for patients with sCD based on consensus recommendations amongst spine surgeons.

OBJECTIVE:Although surgical treatment can provide significant improvement of symptomatic adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD), few reports have focused on the associated complications. The objective of this study was to assess complication rates at a minimum 1-year follow-up based on a prospective multicenter series of ACSD patients treated surgically. METHODS:A prospective multicenter database of consecutive operative ACSD patients was reviewed for perioperative (< 30 days), early (30-90 days), and delayed (> 90 days) complications with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Enrollment required at least 1 of the following: cervical kyphosis > 10°, cervical scoliosis > 10°, C2-7 sagittal vertical axis > 4 cm, or chin-brow vertical angle > 25°. RESULTS:Of 167 patients, 133 (80%, mean age 62 years, 62% women) had a minimum 1-year follow-up (mean 1.8 years). The most common diagnoses were degenerative (45%) and iatrogenic (17%) kyphosis. Almost 40% of patients were active or past smokers, 17% had osteoporosis, and 84% had at least 1 comorbidity. The mean baseline Neck Disability Index and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores were 47 and 13.6, respectively. Surgical approaches were anterior-only (18%), posterior-only (47%), and combined (35%). A total of 132 complications were reported (54 minor and 78 major), and 74 (56%) patients had at least 1 complication. The most common complications included dysphagia (11%), distal junctional kyphosis (9%), respiratory failure (6%), deep wound infection (6%), new nerve root motor deficit (5%), and new sensory deficit (5%). A total of 4 deaths occurred that were potentially related to surgery, 2 prior to 1-year follow-up (1 cardiopulmonary and 1 due to obstructive sleep apnea and narcotic use) and 2 beyond 1-year follow-up (both cardiopulmonary and associated with revision procedures). Twenty-six reoperations were performed in 23 (17%) patients, with the most common indications of deep wound infection (n = 8), DJK (n = 7), and neurological deficit (n = 6). Although anterior-only procedures had a trend toward lower overall (42%) and major (21%) complications, rates were not significantly different from posterior-only (57% and 33%, respectively) or combined (61% and 37%, respectively) approaches (p = 0.29 and p = 0.38, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:This report provides benchmark rates for ACSD surgery complications at a minimum 1-year (mean 1.8 years) follow-up. The marked health and functional impact of ACSD, the frail population it affects, and the high rates of surgical complications necessitate a careful risk-benefit assessment when contemplating surgery. Collectively, these findings provide benchmarks for complication rates and may prove useful for patient counseling and efforts to improve the safety of care.

BACKGROUND:Frailty is a relatively new area of study for patients with cervical deformity (CD). As of yet, little is known of how operative intervention influences frailty status for patients with CD. OBJECTIVE:To investigate drivers of postoperative frailty score and variables within the cervical deformity frailty index (CD-FI) algorithm that have the greatest capacity for change following surgery. METHODS:Descriptive analysis of the cohort were performed, paired t-tests determined significant baseline to 1 yr improvements of factors comprising the CD-FI. Pearson bivariate correlations identified significant associations between postoperative changes in overall CD-FI score and CD-FI score components. Linear regression models determined the effect of successful surgical intervention on change in frailty score. RESULTS:A total of 138 patients were included with baseline frailty scores of 0.44. Following surgery, mean 1-yr frailty score was 0.27. Of the CD-FI variables, 13/40 (32.5%) were able to improve with surgery. Frailty improvement was found to significantly correlate with baseline to 1-yr change in CBV, PI-LL, PT, and SVA C7-S1. HRQL CD-FI components reading, feeling tired, feeling exhausted, and driving were the greatest drivers of change in frailty. Linear regression analysis determined successful surgical intervention and feeling exhausted to be the greatest significant predictors of postoperative change in overall frailty score. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Complications, correction of sagittal alignment, and improving a patient's ability to read, drive, and chronic exhaustion can significantly influence postoperative frailty. This analysis is a step towards a greater understanding of the relationship between disability, frailty, and surgery in CD.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) is a quality of life metric that has gained increased popularity due to computer adaptive testing. Previous studies have shown that PROMIS correlates with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in patients with back pain and takes significantly less time to complete. However, the ability of PROMIS to capture disability from spinal malalignment relative to established metrics is unknown. The aim of the present study is to validate the correlation between ODI and PROMIS in patients with back pain, analyze correlations of PROMIS and legacy metrics to sagittal alignment, and identify major drivers of PROMIS scores and ODI in patients with back pain. METHODS:A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively collected outcome measures database (PROMIS, ODI, VAS Back, VAS Leg, VAS Neck, and VAS Arm) of spine patients > 18 years. Inclusion criteria for the present study was a chief complaint of back pain and full length weight bearing X-rays within 30 days of health related quality of life (HRQL) completion. Demographic information, radiographic alignment, psychiatric diagnoses, and comorbidities were recorded. PROMIS metrics were correlated to legacy metrics (ODI and VAS). Next, outcome metrics were correlated with sagittal alignment variables T1 Pelvic Angle (TPA), SVA, PT, and PI-LL. Patients were grouped based on the presence of spinal deformity (defined radiographically as any one of SVA > 4 cm, PI-LL > 10°, PT > 20°) and mean HRQL scores were investigated for the adult spinal deformity (ASD) and non-ASD groups. Finally, drivers of PROMIS PF scores and ODI scores were determined using multiple stepwise regression. RESULTS: = 0.376, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In a cohort of 150 patients with back pain, PROMIS correlated strongly with legacy outcome metrics, including VAS and ODI. PROMIS PF correlated more strongly with sagittal malalignment than ODI. Additionally, patients with spinal deformity had significantly worse PROMIS PF scores but similar ODI scores as patients without ASD. Finally, sagittal alignment was found to be a significant driver of PROMIS PF scores but not ODI scores. PROMIS PF should be utilized as a disability assessment tool in patients with spinal deformity due to ease of use, strong correlations with legacy metrics, and ability to capture disability resulting from sagittal alignment.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Predictors of long-term opioid usage in TLIF patients have not been previously explored in the literature. We examined the effect of pre-operative narcotic use in addition to other predictors of the pattern and duration of post-operative narcotic usage. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a single academic institution of patients undergoing a one- or two-level primary TLIF between 2014 and 2017. Total oral morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) for inpatient use were calculated and used as the common unit of comparison. RESULTS: = 0.547, specificity 95%, sensitivity 58%) demonstrated that a psychiatric or chronic pain diagnosis (OR 3.95, p = 0.013, 95% CI 1.34-11.6), pre-operative opioid use (OR 8.65, p < 0.001, 95% CI 2.59-29.0), ASA class (OR 2.95, p = 0.025, 95% CI 1.14-7.63), and inpatient total MME (1.002, p < 0.001, 95% CI 1.001-1.003) were positive predictors of prolonged opioid use at 6-month follow-up, while inpatient muscle relaxant use (OR 0.327, p = 0.049, 95% CI 0.108-0.994) decreased the probability of prolonged opioid use. Patients in the pre-operative opioid use group had a significantly higher rate of opioid usage at 6 weeks (79% vs. 46%, p < 0.001), 3 months (51% vs. 14%, p < 0.001), and 6 months (40% vs. 5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Pre-operative opioid usage is associated with higher total inpatient opioid use and a significantly higher risk of long-term opiate usage at 6 months. Approximately 40% of pre-operative narcotic users will continue to consume narcotics at 6-month follow-up, compared with 5% of narcotic-naïve patients. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Study Design/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective review of single institution. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To assess the relationship between Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores in thoracolumbar patients. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Included: Patients ≥18 years with a thoracolumbar spine condition (spinal stenosis, disc herniation, low back pain, disc degeneration, spondylolysis). Bivariate correlations assessed the linear relationships between ODI and PROMIS (Physical Function, Pain Intensity, and Pain Interference). Correlation cutoffs assessed patients with high and low correlation between ODI and PROMIS. Linear regression predicted the relationship of ODI to PROMIS. Results/UNASSIGNED:= 0.499) of the variance in Pain Intensity score. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:There is a large amount of variability with PROMIS that cannot be accounted for with ODI. ODI questions regarding walking, social life, and lifting ability correlate strongly with PROMIS while sitting, standing, and sleeping do not. These results reinforce the utility of PROMIS as a valid assessment for low back disability, while indicating the need for further evaluation of the factors responsible for variation between PROMIS and ODI.

OBJECTIVE:It is being increasingly recognized that adult cervical deformity (ACD) is correlated with significant pain, myelopathy, and disability, and that patients who undergo deformity correction gain significant benefit. However, there are no defined thresholds of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in Neck Disability Index (NDI) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. METHODS:Patients of interest were consecutive patients with ACD who underwent cervical deformity correction. ACD was defined as C2-7 sagittal Cobb angle ≥ 10° (kyphosis), C2-7 coronal Cobb angle ≥ 10° (cervical scoliosis), C2-7 sagittal vertical axis ≥ 4 cm, and/or chin-brow vertical angle ≥ 25°. Data were obtained from a consecutive cohort of patients from a multiinstitutional prospective database maintained across 13 sites. Distribution-based MCID, anchor-based MCID, and minimally detectable measurement difference (MDMD) were calculated. RESULTS:A total of 73 patients met inclusion criteria and had sufficient 1-year follow-up. In the cohort, 42 patients (57.5%) were female. The mean age at the time of surgery was 62.23 years, and average body mass index was 29.28. The mean preoperative NDI was 46.49 and mJOA was 13.17. There was significant improvement in NDI at 1 year (46.49 vs 37.04; p = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in preoperative and 1-year mJOA (13.17 vs 13.7; p = 0.12). Using multiple techniques to yield MCID thresholds specific to the ACD population, the authors obtained values of 5.42 to 7.48 for the NDI, and 1.00 to 1.39 for the mJOA. The MDMD was 6.4 for the NDI, and 1.8 for the mJOA. Therefore, based on their results, the authors recommend using an MCID threshold of 1.8 for the mJOA, and 7.0 for the NDI in patients with ACD. CONCLUSIONS:The ACD-specific MCID thresholds for NDI and mJOA are similar to the reported MCID following surgery for degenerative cervical disease. Additional studies are needed to verify these findings. Nonetheless, the findings here will be useful for future studies evaluating the success of surgery for patients with ACD undergoing deformity correction.

Cervical alignment has become increasingly important in the planning of spine surgery. A relationship between the slope of T1 (T1S), the cervical lordosis (CL), and the overall cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) has previously been demonstrated, but the exact nature of this relationship is poorly understood. In this study, we derive theoretical and empirical equations to better understand how T1S and CL affect cSVA. The first equation was developed on a theoretical basis using inherent trigonometric relationships of the cervical spine. By treating the cervical spine as the arc of a circumference, and by taking into account the cervical height (CH), the geometric relationship between theT1S, CL, and cSVA was described via a trigonometric identity utilizing a novel angle δ subtended by the CH and cSVA (δ = T1S-CL/2). The second equation was developed on an empiric basis by performing a multiple linear regression on data obtained from a retrospective review of a large multicenter deformity database. The theoretical equation determined that the value of cSVA could be expressed as: $cSVA\ = \ CH*{\rm{tan}}( {\pi /180*( {T1S - CL/2} )} )$. The empirical equation determined that value of cSVA could be expressed as: $cSVA=({1.1*T1} )\ - ( {0.43*CL} ) + 6.69$. In both, the sagittal alignment of the head over the shoulders is directly proportional to the T1S and inversely proportional to CL/2. These 2 equations may allow surgeons to better understand how the CL compensates for the T1S, to accurately predict the postoperative cSVA, and to customize cervical interbody grafts by taking into consideration each individual patient's specific cervical spine parameters.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:Lateral lumbar interbody fusion is a popular technique used in spine surgery. It is minimally invasive, provides indirect decompression, and allows for coronal plane deformity correction. Despite these benefits, the approach to lateral lumbar interbody fusion has been linked to complications associated with the lumbosacral plexus and vascular anatomy. As a result, vascular surgeons may be recruited for the exposure portion of the procedure. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to compare exposure related complication and post-operative (postop) neuropraxia rates between exposure (EXP) and spine surgeon only (SSO) groups when performing the approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING/METHODS:Retrospective analysis of patients treated at a single institution PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients undergoing LLIF procedures between 2012-2018 OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative time, estimated blood loss, fluoroscopy, length of stay, intra- and post-operative complications, and physiologic measures including pre- and post-operative motor examinations and unresolved neuropraxia METHODS: Patients who underwent LLIF were separated into EXP and SSO groups based on the presence or absence of vascular/general surgeon during the approach. The entire clinical history of patients with a decrease in pre and postop motor examination were reviewed for the presence of neuropraxia. All other intra- and postop exposure related complications were recorded for comparison. PSM was performed to account for age, Charlston Comorbity Index (CCI) % LLIFs including L4-L5, and number levels fused. Independent T-test and Chi-squared analyses were used to identify significant differences between EXP and SSO groups. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS:Two hundred seventy-five patients underwent LLIF procedures, 155 SSO and 120 EXP. Post-operatively, 26 patients (11.1%) experienced a drop in any MRC score, and two patients (0.7%) experience unresolved quadriceps palsies. The mean recovery time for MRC scores was 84.4 days. Other complications included 2 pneumothoraces (0.7%), 1 iliac vein injury (0.4%), 14 cases of ileus (5.1%), 3 pulmonary emboli (1.1%), 2 deep vein thrombosis (0.7%), 3 cases of abdominal wall paresis (1.1%), and one abdominal hematoma (0.4%). After PSM, demographics including age, gender, BMI, CCI, levels fused and operative time were similar between cohorts. Twenty patients had changes in pre- to postop motor scores (SSO 9.4%, EXP 12.4%, p>0.05). Iliopsoas motor scores decreased at the highest rate (EXP 12.4%, 8.2% SSO, p>0.05) followed by quadriceps (EXP 5.2%, SSO 4.7%, p>0.05). One SSO patient's postop course was complicated by a foot drop but returned to baseline within 1-year. One patient in EXP group developed an unresolved quadriceps palsy (EXP 1.0%, SSO 0.0% p>0.05). Intra-op exposure complications included one pneumothorax (EXP 1.0%, SSO 0.0%, p>0.05). There were no differences in PE/DVT, Ileus, or LOS. In the EXP cohort, three patients experienced abdominal wall paresis (EXP 2.9%, SSO 0.00%, p=0.246). CONCLUSIONS:Comparing the LLIF exposures performed by EXP and SSO, we found no significant difference in the rates of complications. Additional research is needed to determine the etiology of the abdominal wall complications. In conclusion, neuropraxia- and approach-related complications are similarly low between exposure and spine surgeons.