Cement Augmentation of Vertebral Compression Fractures May Be Safely Considered in the Very Elderly

Objective The objective of the current study was to perform a retrospective review of a national database to assess the safety of cement augmentation for vertebral compression fractures in geriatric populations in varying age categories. Methods The 2005–2016 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program databases were queried to identify patients undergoing kyphoplasty or vertebroplasty in the following age categories: 60–69, 70–79, 80–89, and 90+ years old. Demographic variables, comorbidity status, procedure type, provider specialty, inpatient/outpatient status, number of procedure levels, and periprocedure complications were compared between age categories using chi-square analysis. Multivariate logistic regressions controlling for patient and procedural variables were then performed to assess the relative periprocedure risks of adverse outcomes of patients in the different age categories relative to those who were 60–69 years old. Results For the 60–69, 70–79, 80–89, and 90+ years old cohorts, 486, 822, 937, and 215 patients were identified, respectively. After controlling for patient and procedural variables, 30-day any adverse events, serious adverse events, reoperation, readmission, and mortality were not different for the respective age categories. Cases in the 80- to 89-year-old cohort were at increased risk of minor adverse events compared to cases in the 60- to 69-year-old cohort. Conclusion As the population ages, cement augmentation is being considered as a treatment for vertebral compression fractures in increasingly older patients. These results suggest that even the very elderly may be appropriately considered for these procedures (level of evidence: 3)

Postoperative bracing practices after elective lumbar spine surgery: A questionnaire study of U.S. spine surgeons

Background: There is limited data available on the use of orthoses across varying elective spine surgeries. When previously studied in 2009, inconsistent lumbar postoperative bracing practices were reported. The present study aimed to provide a ten-year update regarding postoperative bracing practices after elective lumbar surgery among United States (U.S.) spine surgeons. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to attendees of the Lumbar Spine Research Society Annual Meeting (April 2019). The questionnaire collected demographic information, and asked surgeons to identify if they used orthoses postoperatively after ten elective lumbar surgeries. Information regarding type of brace, duration of use, and reason for bracing was also collected. Chi-square tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for comparisons. Results: Seventy-three of 88 U.S. attending surgeons completed the questionnaire (response rate: 83%). The majority of respondents were orthopaedic surgery-trained (78%), fellowship-trained (84%), and academic surgeons (73%). The majority of respondents (60%) did not use orthoses after any lumbar surgery. Among the surgeons who braced, the overall bracing frequency was 26%. This rate was significantly lower than that reported in the literature ten years earlier (p<0.0001). Respondents tended to use orthoses most often after stand-alone lateral interbody fusions (43%) (p<0.0001). The average bracing frequency after lumbar fusions (34%) was higher than the average bracing frequency after non-fusion surgeries (16%) (p<0.0001). The most frequently utilized brace was an off the shelf lumbar sacral orthosis (66%), and most surgeons braced patients to improve pain (42%). Of surgeons who braced, most commonly did so for 2–4 months (57%). Conclusion: Most surgeon respondents did not prescribe orthoses after varying elective lumbar surgeries, and the frequency overall was lower than a similar study conducted in 2009. There continues to be inconsistencies in postoperative bracing practices. In an era striving for evidence-based practices, this is an area needing more attention