Faculty Bibliography

STUDY DESIGN:This was a retrospective database study. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to investigate preoperative risk factors and incidence of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) after cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:VTEs are preventable complications that may occur after spinal procedures. Globally, VTEs account for a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Preoperative risks factors associated with increased VTE incidence after cervical spine surgery have not been well-characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF); posterior cervical fusion (PCF); discectomy; and decompression from 2007 to 2017 were identified using the PearlDiver Database. International Classification of Diseases (ICD) Ninth and 10th Revision codes were used to identify VTEs at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperative as well as preoperative risk factors. RESULTS:Risk factors with the highest incidence of VTE at 3 months were primary coagulation disorder [ACDF=7.82%, odds ratio (OR)=3.96; decompression=11.24%, OR=3.03], central venous line (ACDF=5.68%, OR=2.11; PCF=12.58%, OR=2.27; decompression=10.17%, OR=2.80) and extremity paralysis (ACDF=6.59%, OR=2.73; PCF=18.80%, OR=2.99; decompression=11.86, OR=3.74). VTE incidence at 3 months for populations with these risks was significant for all surgery types (P<0.001) with the exception of patients with primary coagulation disorder who underwent PCF. Tobacco use had the lowest VTE incidence for all surgery types. CONCLUSIONS:The total cumulative incidence of VTEs at 3-month follow-up was 3.10%, with the highest incidence of VTEs occurring within the first postoperative week (0.65% at 1 wk, 0.61% at 1 mo, 0.53% at 3 mo for ACDF; 2.56% at 1 wk, 1.93% at 1 mo, 1.45% at 3 mo for PCF; 1.37% at 1 wk, 0.93% at 1 mo, 0.91% at 3 mo for decompression). Several preoperative risk factors were found to be significant predictors for postoperative VTEs and can be used to suggest those at increased risk as well as decrease the incidence of preventable VTEs after cervical spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level III.

STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Systematic review. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To systematically review, critically appraise and synthesize evidence on use of autologous stem cells sources for fusion in the lumbar spine. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov through February 20, 2020 was conducted comparing autologous cell grafts to other biologics for lumbar spine fusion. The focus was on studies comparing distinct patient groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:From 343 potentially relevant citations, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria set a priori. Seven studies compared distinct patient groups, with BMA being used in combination with allograft or autograft not as a standalone material. No economic evaluations were identified. Most observational studies were at moderately high risk of bias. When used for primary lumbar fusion, no statistical differences in outcomes or complications were seen between BMA+autograft/or +allograft compared to autograft/allograft alone. Compared with allograft, data from a RCT suggested statistically better fusion and lower complication rates with concentrated BMA+allograft. When used in revisions, no differences in outcomes were seen between BMA+allograft and either autograft or rh-BMP-2 but fusion rates were lower with BMA+allograft, leading to additional revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:There was substantial heterogeneity across studies in patient populations, sample size, biologic combinations, and surgical characteristics making direct comparisons difficult. The overall quality of evidence for fusion rates and the safety of BMA in lumbar fusion procedures was considered very low, with studies being at moderately high or high risk of bias.

BACKGROUND:Malignant spinal tumors are common, continually increasing in incidence as a function of improved survival times for patients with cancer. Using predictive analytics and propensity score matching, we evaluated the influence of frailty on postoperative complications compared with age in patients with malignant neoplasms of the lumbar spine. METHODS:We used the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2016 and 2017 to identify patients with malignant neoplasms of the lumbar spine who received a fusion procedure. Patient frailty was queried using the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups. Propensity score matching for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, surgical approach, and number of levels fused was implemented between frail and nonfrail patients, identifying 533 frail patients and 538 nonfrail patients. The area under the curve (AUC) of each ROC served as a proxy for model performance. RESULTS:Frail patients reported significantly higher inpatient lengths of stay, costs, infection, posthemorrhagic anemia, and urinary tract infections (P < 0.05). In addition, frail patients were more often discharged to skilled nursing facilities and short-term hospitals compared with nonfrail patients (P < 0.0001). Regression models for mortality (AUC = 0.644), nonroutine discharge (AUC = 0.600), and acute infection (AUC = 0.666) were improved when using frailty as the primary predictor. These models were also improved using frailty when predicting 30-day readmission and 90-day hardware failure. CONCLUSIONS:Frailty demonstrated a significant relationship with increased postoperative patient complications, length of stay, costs, and acute complications in patients receiving fusion following resection of a malignant neoplasm of the lumbar spine region. Frailty demonstrated better predictive validity of outcomes compared with patient age.

BACKGROUND:Over the last several decades, various osteobiologics including allograft, synthetics, and growth factors have been used for lumbar spinal fusion surgery. However, the data on these osteobiologic products remain controversial with conflicting evidence in the literature. This study evaluates the influence of osteobiologic type selection on perioperative complications and hospital-reported charges in single-level and multilevel lumbar fusion. METHODS:Using the 2016 and 2017 Nationwide Readmission Database, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 125,143 patients who received lumbar fusion with either autologous tissue substitute, nonautologous tissue substitute, or synthetic substitute. This cohort was split into single-level and multilevel fusion procedures, and one-to-one age and sex propensity score matching was implemented. This resulted in cohorts each consisting of 1967 patients for single-level fusion, and cohorts each consisting of 1657 patients for multilevel fusion. Statistical analysis included one-way analysis of variance and Tukey multiple comparisons of means. RESULTS:= .044) for single-level fusion compared with the nonautologous group. Lastly, for both cohorts, the total accrued inpatient hospital charges during admission for patients receiving nonautologous grafts were the most expensive and those for patients receiving autologous grafts were the least expensive. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Significant differences were found between the groups with respect to rates of complications, including infection, postoperative pain, and neurologic injury. Furthermore, the hospital-reported charges of each procedure varied significantly. As the field of biologics continues to expand, it is important to continually evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of these novel materials and techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: With increased utilization of osteobiologics and spinal fusion being a common procedure, longitudinal data on readmissions, and post-operative complications are critical in guiding evidence-based practice.

PURPOSE:This study aimed to analyse the trends and patterns of IVD degeneration in different age groups at each level of the thoracic spine. METHODS:This cross-sectional MRI study included 1000 symptomatic patients who had undergone upright thoracic spine MRI. A total of 13,000 thoracic IVDs from C7/T1 to T12/L1 were classified into five grades using Pfirrmann classification. Patients were divided according to their ages into five groups (n = 200/group). The severity and pattern of IVD degeneration were analysed in each age group. A predictive model of the severity and pattern of IVD degeneration in each age group was proposed. RESULTS:The total grade of IVD degeneration and the number of degenerated levels increased with increasing age (P < 0.001). The most common degenerated level was T6/7 (13.3%), while the least common degenerated level was T12/L1 (1.8%). The most common grades were grade I in group 1 (60.5%), grade II in groups 2 (39%) and 3 (37.3%), and grade III in groups 4 (42.5%) and 5 (44.6%). Adjacent-level degenerations were more common than skip-level degenerations. Severe disc degeneration (Pfirrmann grades IV or V) could be predicted to occur more in group 5 (patients with 60 years and above) (margin = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.73-0.84, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:The severity of thoracic IVD degeneration and the number of degenerated levels increased with age. Disc degeneration was more accelerated in the mid-thoracic spine. Adjacent-level degeneration was more common than skip-level degenerations.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective cohort study using the 2013-2017 National Readmission Database. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to quantify the influence of body mass index (BMI) on complication and readmission rates following lumbar spine fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Compared to controls, patients with BMI ≥35 had greater odds of readmission, infection, and wound complications following lumbar spine fusion. METHODS:Patients who underwent elective lumbar spine fusion within the population-based sample were considered for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included nonelective lumbar spine fusions, malnourished, anorexic, or underweight patients, and surgical indications of trauma or neoplasm. Patients were grouped by BMI: 18.5 to 29.9 (controls), 30 to 34.9 (obesity I), 35 to 39.9 (obesity II), and ≥40 (obesity III). Multivariate regression was performed to analyze differences in complications and readmissions between groups. Predictive modeling was conducted to estimate the impact of BMI on 30- and 90-day infection, wound complication, and readmissions rates. RESULTS:A total of 86,697 patients were included for analysis, with an average age of 58.9 years and 58.9% being female. The obesity II group had significantly higher odds of infection (odds ratio [OR]: 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28-2.62, P = 0.001), wound dehiscence (OR: 3.08, 95% CI: 1.70-6.18, P = 0.0006), and 30-day readmission (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.11-1.58, P = 0.002), whereas the obesity III group had significantly higher odds of acute renal failure (OR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.20-4.06, P = 0.014), infection (OR: 2.43, 95% CI: 1.72-3.48, P < 0.0001), wound dehiscence (OR: 3.76, 95% CI: 2.08-7.51, P < 0.0001), 30-day readmission (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.36-1.93, P < 0.0001), and 90-day readmission (OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.31-1.79, P < 0.0001) compared with controls. Predictive modeling showed cumulative increases of 6.44% in infection, 3.69% in wound dehiscence, and 1.35% in readmission within 90-days for each successive BMI cohort. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Progressively higher risks for infection, wound complications, and hospital readmission were found with each progressive BMI level.Level of Evidence: 3.

STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Systematic review. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To systematically review, critically appraise and synthesize evidence on use of stem cells from autologous stem cells from bone marrow aspirate, adipose, or any other autologous sources for fusion in the cervical spine compared with other graft materials. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE was conducted for literature published through October 31, 2018 and through February 20, 2020 for EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov comparing autologous cell sources for cervical spine fusion to other graft options. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:From 36 potentially relevant citations identified, 10 studies on cervical fusion met the inclusion criteria set a priori. Two retrospective cohort studies, one comparing cancellous bone marrow (CBM) versus hydroxyapatite (HA) and the other bone marrow aspirate (BMA) combined with autograft and HA versus autograft and HA alone, were identified. No statistical differences were seen between groups in either study for improvement in function, symptoms, or fusion; however, in the study evaluating BMA, the authors reported a statistically greater fusion rate and probability of fusion over time in the BMA versus the non-BMA group. Across case series evaluating BMA, authors reported improved function and pain and fusion ranged from 84% to 100% across the studies. In general, complications were poorly reported. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:The overall quality (strength) of evidence of effectiveness and safety of autologous BMA for cervical arthrodesis in the current available literature was very low. Based on currently available data, firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness or safety of BMA in cervical fusions cannot be made.

STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:The impact of modifiable risk factors (MRFs) on complications, costs, and readmission rates at 30, 90, and 180-days following lumbar spine fusion. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Patients with lumbar spine fusions within the 2016-2017 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD). Patients were stratified by the following MRFs: Alcohol use, tobacco/nicotine use, nutritional malnourishment, dyslipidemia, and primary hypertension. Differences in complications, non-elective readmission rates, costs, and length of stay were compared between MRFs and the non-MRF group. Statistical analysis was conducted using Tukey multiple comparisons of means, 1-way ANOVA, Wald testing, unpaired Welch 2-sample t-tests, multivariate analysis, and predictive modeling. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:<0.001). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:These findings highlight the negative impact each MRF has on patients following lumbar spinal fusion. Further longitudinal research is necessary to comprehensively characterize the effects of various MRFs on spine surgery outcomes.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Modifiable risk factors (MRFs) represent patient variables associated with increased complication rates that may be prevented. There exists a paucity of studies that comprehensively analyze MRF subgroups and their independent association with postoperative complications in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare outcomes between patients receiving cervical spine surgery with reported MRFs. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) from the years 2016 and 2017, a publicly available and purchasable data source, to include adult patients undergoing cervical fusion. MRF cohorts were separated into three categories: substance abuse (alcohol, tobacco/nicotine, opioid abuse); vascular disease (hypertension, dyslipidemia); and dietary factors (malnutrition, obesity). Three-way nearest-neighbor propensity score matching for demographics, hospital, and surgical characteristics was implemented. Findings/UNASSIGNED: = 0.0037). However, those with substance abuse had the highest readmission rate and were more commonly readmitted for delayed procedure-related infections. Interpretation/UNASSIGNED:A large proportion of patients who receive cervical spine surgery have potential MRFs that uniquely influence their postoperative outcomes. A thorough understanding of patient-specific MRF subgroups allows for improved preoperative risk stratification, tailored patient counseling, and postoperative management planning. Funding/UNASSIGNED:None.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the use of guidelines for lumbar spine fusions among spine surgeons in North America. METHODS:An anonymous survey was electronically sent to all AO Spine North America members. Survey respondents were asked to indicate their opinion surrounding the suitability of instrumented fusion in a variety of clinical scenarios. Fusion indications in accordance with North America Spine Society (NASS) guidelines for lumbar fusion were considered NASS-concordant answers. Respondents were considered to have a NASS-concordant approach if ≥ 70% (13 of 18) of their answers were NASS-concordant answers. Comparisons were performed using bivariable statistics. RESULTS:A total of 105 responses were entered with complete data available on 70. Sixty percent of the respondents (n = 42) were considered compliant with NASS guidelines. NASS-discordant responses did not differ between surgeons who stated that they include the NASS guidelines in their decision-making algorithm (5.10 ± 1.96) and those that did not (4.68 ± 2.09) (p = 0.395). The greatest number of NASS-discordant answers in the United States. was in the South (5.75 ± 2.09), with the lowest number in the Northeast (3.84 ± 1.70) (p < 0.01). For 5 survey items, rates of NASS-discordant answers were ≥ 40%, with the greatest number of NASS-discordant responses observed in relation to indications for fusion in spinal deformity (80%). Spine surgeons utilizing a NASS-concordant approach had a significant lower number of NASS-discordant answers for synovial cysts (p = 0.03), axial low back pain (p < 0.01), adjacent level disease (p < 0.01), recurrent stenosis (p < 0.01), recurrent disc herniation (p = 0.01), and foraminal stenosis (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study serves an important role in clarifying the rates of uptake of clinical practice guidelines in spine surgery as well as to identify barriers to their implementation.