Faculty Bibliography

Background/UNASSIGNED:Optimal acetabular component orientation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a necessity in achieving a stable implant. Although there has been considerable debate in the literature concerning the safe zone, to date, there has not been any review to determine if these references are consistent with the definition applied by Lewinnek et al. in 1978. Therefore, this article aims to examine the available literature in the PubMed database to determine how often a correct reference to the safe zone as defined by Lewinnek was applied to discussions regarding THA. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A search for literature in the PubMed database was performed for articles from 1978 to 2019. Search criteria included terms 'Lewinnek,' 'safe zone,' and 'total hip arthroplasty.' Exclusions included abstract-only articles, non-English articles, articles unrelated to THA, and those lacking full content. Results/UNASSIGNED:A review of literature yielded 147 articles for inclusion. Overall, only 11% (17) cited the Lewinnek article correctly. Forty-five percent (66) of articles referenced measurements in the supine position, 18% (26) referenced other positions, and 37% (55) did not specify. Nineteen percent (28) reported measurements of the acetabular cup orthogonal to the anterior pelvic plane, while 73% (108) did not, and 7% (11) did not specify. Twenty-three percent (34) measured from computed tomography scans instead of other methods. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:In the discussion of the safe zone regarding THA, only 11% of articles listed are consistent with the definition established by Lewinnek. This warrants further investigation into a consistent application of the term and its implications for THA implant stability and dislocation rates.

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.

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.

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: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/UNASSIGNED:Changes in spinopelvic and lower extremity alignment between standing and relaxed sitting have important clinical implications with regard to stability of total hip arthroplasty. This study aimed to analyze the effect of body mass index (BMI) on lumbopelvic alignment and motion at the hip joint. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review of patients who underwent full-body stereoradiographs in standing and relaxed sitting for total hip arthroplasty planning was conducted. Spinopelvic parameters measured included spinopelvic tilt (SPT), pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI minus LL (PI-LL), proximal femoral shaft angle (PFSA), and standing-to-sitting hip range of motion. Propensity score matching controlled for age, gender, PI, and hip ostoarthritis grade. Patients were stratified into normal (NORMAL; BMI, 18.5-24.9), overweight (OW; 25.0-29.9), and obese (OB; 30.0-34.9) groups. Alignment parameters were compared using one-way analysis of variance. Results/UNASSIGNED:< .001). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Significant differences in sitting and standing-to-sitting change in lumbopelvic alignment based on BMI suggest obese patients recruit more posterior spinopelvic tilt when sitting to compensate for soft-tissue impingement that occurs anterior to the hip joint and limiting hip flexion.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP) is increasingly utilized in minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF) in order to increase rate of fusion by promoting bone growth through the induction of osteoblast differentiation, awhile reducing morbidity related to iliac crest autograft. Despite these benefits, BMP use is still controversial due to its pro-inflammatory mechanism of action and potential to cause radiculitis. PURPOSE: To assess whether BMP is a risk factor for postoperative radiculitis in TLIF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Single-center retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 397 TLIFs from June 2012 to December 2018. OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative clinical characteristics, post-operative risk of radiculitis and complication, and future reoperation rates.
METHOD(S): Patients >= 18 years-old undergoing elective single-level TLIFs from 2012 to 2018 were included. Outcome measures included perioperative clinical characteristics, postoperative risk of radiculitis and complication, and future reoperation rates. Radiculitis was defined the delayed onset of radicular symptoms postoperatively in patients whom had initial resolution of radicular symptoms immediately postoperatively, in the absence of persistent neurological compression on postoperative imaging. Statistical analyses included independent t-tests and chi-square analysis. Propensity score matching was utilized to control for demographic differences between the groups. Independent predictors for post-operative radiculitis were assessed by multivariate logistic regression. Significance set at p<0.05.
RESULT(S): A total of 397 cases were included in the study (59.33 +/- 13.49 mean age, 28.98 +/- 6.29 mean BMI, 52.90% female, 2.29 +/- 1.92 average Charleston comorbidity Index). There were 223 open procedures and 174 MIS. For the entire cohort, 238 cases utilized BMP and 159 did not, with 102 MIS pairing with BMP use. The MIS TLIFs had a higher percentage of BMP use than open TLIFs (58.6% vs 25.7%, p<0.001), lower estimated blood loss (212.28 +/- 193.79 mL vs 410.91 +/- 337.98 mL, p<0.001) higher fluoroscopy dosage (52.43 +/- 48.61mGy vs 16.77 +/- 27.84mGy, p<0.001), and a lower length of stay (3.20 +/- 2.55 days vs 4.11 +/- 2.52 days, p<0.001). There were no other differences in perioperative clinical characteristics. There was a significantly higher rate of postoperative radiculitis in the MIS TLIFs compared to open (12.6% vs 6.8%, p=0.046) and use of BMP compared to no BMP (13.2% vs 6.7%, p=0.029). There was a 15.7% radiculitis rate when MIS was paired with BMP use. There were no other notable differences in complication rates or rates of reoperation. Individually, MIS had a 12.6% radiculitis rate (p=0.046) and BMP use had a 13.2% rate (p=0.029). Propensity score match controlled for the significant difference in CCI between the MIS and open groups (N=168 each). Multivariate regression indicated that MIS (p=0.314) and BMP (p=0.109) were not independent predictors individually when controlling for age, gender, and BMI. When technique was paired with biologic use the regression revealed MIS + BMP is a risk factor of post-operative radiculitis (2.265(4.753-1.079), p=0.031).
CONCLUSION(S): While BMP and MIS technique were not independent risk factors for postoperative radiculitis, there is an increased risk of radiculitis when using BMP in MIS TLIF. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Frailty is an increasingly recognized characteristic that has been validated across many studies as influencing operative risk. Utilization of frailty indices can allow for its identification of which spine patients may be too high risk for surgical intervention. This may be especially useful when it comes to surgeries that are minimally invasive and are supposed to have decrease perioperative outcomes. PURPOSE: Identify MIS techniques effects in postoperative outcomes in TLIF patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective database. PATIENT SAMPLE: TLIF spine patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Complications, length of stay (LOS), estimated blood loss (EBL).
METHOD(S): Pts that underwent a lumbar spine procedure in a single-center Comprehensive Spine Quality Database. Pts were stratified based on procedural approach (Open [OP] and Minimally invasive Surgery [MIS]). Frailty was then calculated for each resultant group by using 30 variables with a validated method. Based on these scores, pts were categorized no frailty [NF]: <0.09, frail [F]: 0.09-0.18, and severe frailty [SF] >0.18. Groups were then controlled for surgical invasiveness. Chi-squared tests identified the relationship between complications and length of stay among various frailty states given surgical approach (OP vs MIS). These patients were propensity score matched for levels fused. Hospital acquired complications (HACs) were identified based on frailty groups through the use of chi-squared and t-tests for other surgical factors. A logistic regression analysis identified the association between frailty status and surgical, regarding postoperative (postop) outcomes.
RESULT(S): A total of 1,300 TLIF spine patients were isolated (59yrs, 29.3kg/m2). After PSM for levels fused, there were 338 pts for both MIS and OP. MIS pts were older (56.1 vs 53.3; p<0.05) than Op pts and had similar BMI's (29.1 vs 29.7; respectively). However, OP received more posterior approaches and less anterior approaches than MIS pts (p<0.05). By surgical factors: MIS and OP patients had similar LOS (3 vs 2.9days) and EBL (282.8 vs 251.5cc) but differed by Op time (195.7 vs 247.1; p<0.05) respectively. Further breakdown by frailty displayed statistical significance between MIS and OP patients with MIS pts having more F (16% vs 12%) and SF pts (4.3% vs 1.9%) than OP (all p<0.05). FMIS patients had lower postop neurologic complications as compared to FOP pts (4.63% vs 14.8%). However, SFMIS patiens had more post-operative complications than SFOP pts (55.2% vs 23.1%) and increased a pt's likelihood of being SFMIS by 5.4x's (all p<0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): This study displays that when frailty status is taken into account, TLIF MIS patients benefit from this procedure type when analyzed against neurologic complications. However, these patients were seen to suffer more from postop complications but did not differ on any other specific complications or surgical variables. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The thoracolumbar junction poses increased risk for high stress on upper lumbar discs when not adequately fused. However, controversy persists. This study evaluates outcomes of upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) selection in the thoracic versus the upper lumbar spine when fusing to the sacrum. PURPOSE: To compare revision rates for thoracolumbar fusions to the sacrum and pelvis at 1- and 2-year follow-up, stratified by UIV selection. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study at a single institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 968 patients who had thoracolumbar fusion surgery between 2012-2018 with at least one year of postoperative follow-up. OUTCOME MEASURES: Reoperation rates from 1 and 2 years after revision surgery, reoperation diagnoses, body mass index (BMI), gender, Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI), perioperative complications, ASA grade (ASA), operative time (OT), and blood loss (EBL).
METHOD(S): A retrospective review of patients undergoing revision spinal fusion with lower instrumented vertebra of S1 or pelvis between 2012-2018 at a single institution was performed. Patients with less than 1 year of follow-up after their index procedure were excluded from the analysis. Patients were categorized based on UIV into 6 groups: T9-T11, L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5. Demographic and operative data were collected and compared between the different UIV groups in each cohort using chi-squared and ANOVA tests. Revision rates at 1- and 2-year follow-up and the reasons for revision were compared between groups.
RESULT(S): There were 168 revision spinal fusions that reached 1-year follow-up, with 54 having UIV at T9-T11, 2 fusions L1 to sacrum, 26 fusions L2 to sacrum, 25 fusions L3 to sacrum, 36 fusions L4 to sacrum, 23 fusions L5 to sacrum. There was significant difference in patient age, with oldest in the L1 group (65.5+/-3.5) and youngest in the L5 group (51+/-15.4 p<0.001). There was significant difference in gender as both cases in L2 was female and L5 fusions only had 39.1% females (p = 0.006). There were no differences in BMI, CCI, and ASA. EBL (1891.6mL+/-1226.9mL p <0.001) and length of stay (7.7+/-3.0 p <0.001) was highest in the T9-11 UIV group. Operative time was highest in the L1 (464.5+/-174.7 p<0.001) UIV group. Levels added on top of prior fusion were calculated by subtracting UIV of index fusion to past UIV. Adding on 2 levels had a 1-year revision rate of 14.3% (p = 0.032), while adding on 1 level had a 0% 1-year revision rate. Adding on 4 levels had a revision rate of 12.5%, and adding on 7 levels had a 50% 1-year revision rate. At 2 years, adding on 1 level had revision rate of 25% and adding on 2 levels had a revision rate of 20% (p = 0.769). There is no statistically significant difference in perioperative complication rates between UIV groups (p = 0.114). The reoperation rate at 1 year for all levels was 9% and highest in UIV at L1 (50%, p=0.06). At 2-year follow-up, the reoperation rate for the total cohort was 32.34% with the highest revision rate for fusion from L2 to sacrum (53.85%) followed by (T9-T11 sacrum fusion 42.31%, L4 to sacrum31.71%, L3 to sacrum 30%, L5 to sacrum 25.04%, L1 to sacrum 25%, p=0.195). Grouping the UIV into lower thoracic (T9-T11), upper lumbar (L2-L3), and lower lumbar (L4-L5) showed similar revision rates at one year (p=0.697). At two years, lower thoracic group had a revision rate of 40% versus, 23.3% in the upper lumbar group (p =0.399).
CONCLUSION(S): There is no statistically significant difference in reoperation rates for revision thoracolumbar fusions to the sacrum/pelvis associated with different UIV selection. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright