Efficacy of common surgical compounds in preventing articular chondrocyte death from desiccation

Purpose: Purpose of this study was to identify potential substances that prevent desiccation of chondrocytes. Methods: Macroscopically normal bovine cartilage explants (n = 80) were exposed to room air, or covered with surgical lubricant, Lactated ringer (LR) or Seprafilm (Genzyme Biosurgery, Cambridge, MA) for 0, 30, 60 or 120 min. The viability of superficial chondrocytes was measured after 48 h of incubation in tissue culture media at 37 °C by Live/Dead staining. Chondrotoxicity was measured as the extent of cell death below the articular surface. Statistical analysis was performed with a two-way analysis of variance on the data set and a subsequent Tukey’s post hoc test. Results: Chondrocyte death correlated positively with the length of exposure, regardless of the treatment (p < 0.0001). The extent of superficial chondrocyte death was minimally lower in the LR (89.1 ± 2.6 %, 80.8 ± 1.2 %) and surgical lube (84.3 ± 1.8 %, 75.9 ± 2.7 %) groups than the control (82 ± 5.7 %, 65.6 ± 13.3 %) and Seprafilm group (77.6 ± 3.9 %, 63.3 ± 6.9 %) (p < 0.001) at the first two time points, with no significant difference between the latter groups. After 60 and 120 min, surgical lube resulted in less chondrocyte death than all other groups (70.4 ± 6.8 % and 60.9 ± 5.9 %, all p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The data suggest that depending on the expected length of exposure of the articular cartilage surface, different compounds appear to be protective. For exposures exceeding 60 min, surgical lubricant demonstrated the highest protective potential. Results from this study indicate that protecting exposed articular surfaces with surgical lubricant for orthopaedic procedures lasting more than 1 h lead to decreased chondrocyte death and suggest improved cartilage functional outcomes postoperatively

Perceptions of Community Involvement in the Peruvian Mental Health Reform Process Among Clinicians and Policy-Makers: A Qualitative Study

Background: The global burden of mental health conditions has led to the implementation of new models of care for persons with mental illness. Recent mental health reforms in Peru include the implementation of a community mental health model (CMHM) that, among its core objectives, aims to provide care in the community through specialized facilities, the community mental health centers (CMHCs). Community involvement is a key component of this model. This study aims to describe perceptions of community engagement activities in the current model of care in three CMHCs and identify barriers and potential solutions to implementation.Methods: A qualitative research study using in-depth semi-structured interviews with clinicians from three CMHCs and with policy-makers involved in the implementation of the mental health reforms was conducted in two regions of Peru. The interviews, conducted in Spanish, were digitally recorded with consent, transcribed and analyzed using principles of grounded theory applying a framework approach. Community engagement activities are described at different stages of patient care.Results: Twenty-five full-time employees (17 women, 8 men) were interviewed, of which 21 were clinicians (diverse health professions) from CMHCs, and 4 were policy-makers. Interviews elucidated community engagement activities currently being utilized including: (1) employing community mental health workers (CMHWs); (2) home visits; (3) psychosocial clubs; (4) mental health workshops and campaigns; and (5) peer support groups. Inadequate infrastructure and financial resources, lack of knowledge about the CMHM, poorly defined catchment areas, stigma, and inadequate productivity approach were identified as barriers to program implementation. Solutions suggested by participants included increasing knowledge and awareness about mental health and the new model, implementation of peer-training, and improving productivity evaluation and research initiatives.Conclusion: Community engagement activities are being conducted in Peru as part of a new model of care. However, their structure, frequency, and content are perceived by clinicians and policy-makers as highly variable due to a lack of consistent training and resources across CMHCs. Barriers to implementation should be quickly addressed and potential solutions executed, so that scale-up best optimizes the utilization of resources in the implementation process

The Role of Machine Learning in Spine Surgery: The Future Is Now

The recent influx of machine learning centered investigations in the spine surgery literature has led to increased enthusiasm as to the prospect of using artificial intelligence to create clinical decision support tools, optimize postoperative outcomes, and improve technologies used in the operating room. However, the methodology underlying machine learning in spine research is often overlooked as the subject matter is quite novel and may be foreign to practicing spine surgeons. Improper application of machine learning is a significant bioethics challenge, given the potential consequences of over- or underestimating the results of such studies for clinical decision-making processes. Proper peer review of these publications requires a baseline familiarity of the language associated with machine learning, and how it differs from classical statistical analyses. This narrative review first introduces the overall field of machine learning and its role in artificial intelligence, and defines basic terminology. In addition, common modalities for applying machine learning, including classification and regression decision trees, support vector machines, and artificial neural networks are examined in the context of examples gathered from the spine literature. Lastly, the ethical challenges associated with adapting machine learning for research related to patient care, as well as future perspectives on the potential use of machine learning in spine surgery, are discussed specifically

Sustained Release of Amnion-Derived Cellular Cytokine Solution Facilitates Achilles Tendon Healing in Rats

Objective: In the United States, around 50% of all musculoskeletal injuries are soft tissue injuries including ligaments and tendons. The objective of this study is to assess the role of amnion-derived cellular cytokine solution (ACCS) in carboxy-methyl cellulose (CMC) gel in the healing of Achilles tendon in a rat model, and to examine its effects on mechanical properties and collagen content. Methods: Achilles tendons of Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed and transected. The distal and proximal ends were injected with either saline or ACCS in CMC, in a standardized fashion, and then sutured using a Kessler technique. Tendons from both groups were collected at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks postoperatively and assessed for material properties. Collagen studies were performed, including collagen content, collagen cross-linking, tendon hydration, and immunohistochemistry. Tendons were also evaluated histologically for cross-sectional area. Results: Mechanical testing demonstrated that treatment with ACCS in CMC significantly enhances breaking strength, ultimate tensile strength, yield strength, and Young's modulus in the tendon repair at early time points. In context, collagen content, as well as collagen cross-linking, was also significantly affected by the treatment. Conclusion: The application of ACCS in CMC has a positive effect on healing tendons by improving mechanical properties at early time points. Previous studies on onetime application of ACCS (not in CMC) did not show significant improvement on tendon healing at any time point. Therefore, the delivery in a slow release media like CMC seems to be essential for the effects of ACCS demonstrated in this study

Variation in global treatment for subaxial cervical spine isolated unilateral facet fractures.

PURPOSE To determine the variation in the global treatment practices for subaxial unilateral cervical spine facet fractures based on surgeon experience, practice setting, and surgical subspecialty. METHODS A survey was sent to 272 members of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System Validation Group worldwide. Questions surveyed surgeon preferences with regard to diagnostic work-up and treatment of fracture types F1-F3, according to the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System, with various associated neurologic injuries. RESULTS A total of 161 responses were received. Academic surgeons use the facet portion of the AO Spine classification system less frequently (61.6%) compared to hospital-employed and private practice surgeons (81.1% and 81.8%, respectively) (p = 0.029). The overall consensus was in favor of operative treatment for any facet fracture with radicular symptoms (N2) and for any fractures categorized as F2N2 and above. For F3N0 fractures, significantly less surgeons from Africa/Asia/Middle East (49%) and Europe (59.2%) chose operative treatment than from North/Latin/South America (74.1%) (p = 0.025). For F3N1 fractures, significantly less surgeons from Africa/Asia/Middle East (52%) and Europe (63.3%) recommended operative treatment than from North/Latin/South America (84.5%) (p = 0.001). More than 95% of surgeons included CT in their work-up of facet fractures, regardless of the type. No statistically significant differences were seen in the need for MRI to decide treatment. CONCLUSION Considerable agreement exists between surgeon preferences with regard to unilateral facet fracture management with few exceptions. F2N2 fracture subtypes and subtypes with radiculopathy (N2) appear to be the threshold for operative treatment

An international validation of the AO spine subaxial injury classification system.

PURPOSE To validate the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System with participants of various experience levels, subspecialties, and geographic regions. METHODS A live webinar was organized in 2020 for validation of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System. The validation consisted of 41 unique subaxial cervical spine injuries with associated computed tomography scans and key images. Intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System were calculated for injury morphology, injury subtype, and facet injury. The reliability and reproducibility of the classification system were categorized as slight (ƙ = 0-0.20), fair (ƙ = 0.21-0.40), moderate (ƙ = 0.41-0.60), substantial (ƙ = 0.61-0.80), or excellent (ƙ = > 0.80) as determined by the Landis and Koch classification. RESULTS A total of 203 AO Spine members participated in the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System validation. The percent of participants accurately classifying each injury was over 90% for fracture morphology and fracture subtype on both assessments. The interobserver reliability for fracture morphology was excellent (ƙ = 0.87), while fracture subtype (ƙ = 0.80) and facet injury were substantial (ƙ = 0.74). The intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology and subtype were excellent (ƙ = 0.85, 0.88, respectively), while reproducibility for facet injuries was substantial (ƙ = 0.76). CONCLUSION The AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System demonstrated excellent interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology, substantial reliability and reproducibility for facet injuries, and excellent reproducibility with substantial reliability for injury subtype

Development of Online Technique for International Validation of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System.

STUDY DESIGN Global cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE To develop and refine the techniques for web-based international validation of fracture classification systems. METHODS A live webinar was organized in 2018 for validation of the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System, consisting of 35 unique computed tomography (CT) scans and key images with subaxial spine injuries. Interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility was calculated for injury morphology, subtype, and facet injury according to the classification system. Based on the experiences from this webinar and incorporating rater feedback, adjustments were made in the organization and techniques used and in 2020 a repeat validation webinar was performed, evaluating images of 41 unique subaxial spine injuries. RESULTS In the 2018 session, the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System demonstrated fair interobserver reliability for fracture subtype (κ = 0.35) and moderate reliability for fracture morphology and facet injury (κ=0.45, 0.43, respectively). However, in 2020, the interobserver reliability for fracture morphology (κ = 0.87) and fracture subtype (κ = 0.80) was excellent, while facet injury was substantial (κ = 0.74). Intraobserver reproducibility for injury morphology (κ =0.49) and injury subtype/facet injury were moderate (κ = 0.42) in 2018. In 2020, fracture morphology and subtype reproducibility were excellent (κ =0.85, 0.88, respectively) while reproducibility for facet injuries was substantial (κ = 0.76). CONCLUSION With optimized webinar-based validation techniques, the AO Spine Subaxial Injury Classification System demonstrated vast improvements in intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability. Stringent fracture classification methodology is integral in obtaining accurate classification results

The Influence of Regional Differences on the Reliability of the AO Spine Sacral Injury Classification System.

STUDY DESIGN Global cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE To explore the influence of geographic region on the AO Spine Sacral Classification System. METHODS A total of 158 AO Spine and AO Trauma members from 6 AO world regions (Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin and South America, Middle East, and North America) participated in a live webinar to assess the reliability, reproducibility, and accuracy of classifying sacral fractures using the AO Spine Sacral Classification System. This evaluation was performed with 26 cases presented in randomized order on 2 occasions 3 weeks apart. RESULTS A total of 8320 case assessments were performed. All regions demonstrated excellent intraobserver reproducibility for fracture morphology. Respondents from Europe (k = .80) and North America (k = .86) achieved excellent reproducibility for fracture subtype while respondents from all other regions displayed substantial reproducibility. All regions demonstrated at minimum substantial interobserver reliability for fracture morphology and subtype. Each region demonstrated >90% accuracy in classifying fracture morphology and >80% accuracy in fracture subtype compared to the gold standard. Type C morphology (p2 = .0000) and A3 (p1 = .0280), B2 (p1 = .0015), C0 (p1 = .0085), and C2 (p1 =.0016, p2 =.0000) subtypes showed significant regional disparity in classification accuracy (p1 = Assessment 1, p2 = Assessment 2). Respondents from Asia (except in A3) and the combined group of North, Latin, and South America had accuracy percentages below the combined mean, whereas respondents from Europe consistently scored above the mean. CONCLUSIONS In a global validation study of the AO Spine Sacral Classification System, substantial reliability of both fracture morphology and subtype classification was found across all geographic regions

Effect of surgical experience and spine subspecialty on the reliability of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System.

OBJECTIVE The objective of this paper was to determine the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on surgeon experience ( 20 years) and surgical subspecialty (orthopedic spine surgery, neurosurgery, and "other" surgery). METHODS A total of 11,601 assessments of upper cervical spine injuries were evaluated based on the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System. Reliability and reproducibility scores were obtained twice, with a 3-week time interval. Descriptive statistics were utilized to examine the percentage of accurately classified injuries, and Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to screen for potentially relevant differences between study participants. Kappa coefficients (κ) determined the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS The intraobserver reproducibility was substantial for surgeon experience level ( 20 years: 0.70) and surgical subspecialty (orthopedic spine: 0.71 vs neurosurgery: 0.69 vs other: 0.68). Furthermore, the interobserver reliability was substantial for all surgical experience groups on assessment 1 ( 20 years: 0.62), and only surgeons with > 20 years of experience did not have substantial reliability on assessment 2 ( 20 years: 0.59). Orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons had substantial intraobserver reproducibility on both assessment 1 (0.64 vs 0.63) and assessment 2 (0.62 vs 0.63), while other surgeons had moderate reliability on assessment 1 (0.43) and fair reliability on assessment 2 (0.36). CONCLUSIONS The international reliability and reproducibility scores for the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System demonstrated substantial intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability regardless of surgical experience and spine subspecialty. These results support the global application of this classification system

Establishing the Injury Severity of Subaxial Cervical Spine Trauma: Validating the Hierarchical Nature of the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System.

STUDY DESIGN Global cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE To validate the AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification by examining the perceived injury severity by surgeon across AO geographical regions and practice experience. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Previous subaxial cervical spine injury classifications have been limited by subpar interobserver reliability and clinical applicability. In an attempt to create a universally validated scheme with prognostic value, AO Spine established a subaxial cervical spine injury classification involving four elements: (1) injury morphology, (2) facet injury involvement, (3) neurologic status, and (4) case-specific modifiers. METHODS A survey was sent to 272 AO Spine members across all geographic regions and with a variety of practice experience. Respondents graded the severity of each variable of the classification system on a scale from zero (low severity) to 100 (high severity). Primary outcome was to assess differences in perceived injury severity for each injury type over geographic regions and level of practice experience. RESULTS A total of 189 responses were received. Overall, the classification system exhibited a hierarchical progression in subtype injury severity scores. Only three subtypes showed a significant difference in injury severity score among geographic regions: F3 (floating lateral mass fracture, p:0.04), N3 (incomplete spinal cord injury, p:0.03), and M2 (critical disk herniation, p:0.04). When stratified by surgeon experience, pairwise comparison showed only 2 morphological subtypes, B1 (bony posterior tension band injury, p:0.02) and F2 (unstable facet fracture, p:0.03), and one neurologic subtype (N3, p:0.02) exhibited a significant difference in injury severity score. CONCLUSIONS The AO Spine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System has shown to be reliable and suitable for proper patient management. The study shows this classification is substantially generalizable by geographic region and surgeon experience; and provides a consistent method of communication among physicians while covering the majority of subaxial cervical spine traumatic injuries.Level of Evidence: 4