Limited morbidity and possible radiographic benefit of C2

Background: The study aims to evaluate differences in alignment and clinical outcomes between surgical cervical deformity (CD) patients with a subaxial upper-most instrumented vertebra (UIV) and patients with a UIV at C2. Use of CD-corrective instrumentation in the subaxial cervical spine is considered risky due to narrow subaxial pedicles and vertebral artery anatomy. While C2 fixation provides increased stability, the literature lacks guidelines indicating extension of CD-corrective fusion from the subaxial spine to C2. Methods: Included: operative CD patients with baseline (BL) and 1-year postop (1Y) radiographic data, cervical UIV ≥ C2. Patients were grouped by UIV: C2 or subaxial (C3-C7) and propensity score matched (PSM) for BL cSVA. Mean comparison tests assessed differences in BL and 1Y patient-related, radiographic, and surgical data between UIV groups, and BL-1Y changes in alignment and clinical outcomes. Results: Following PSM, 31 C2 UIV and 31 subaxial UIV patients undergoing CD-corrective surgery were included. Groups did not differ in BL comorbidity burden (P=0.175) or cSVA (P=0.401). C2 patients were older (64 Conclusions: C2 UIV patients showed similar cervical range of motion and baseline to 1-year functional outcomes as patients with a subaxial UIV. C2 UIV patients also showed greater baseline to 1-year horizontal gaze improvement and had complication profiles similar to subaxial UIV patients, demonstrating the radiographic benefit and minimal functional loss associated with extending fusion constructs to C2. In the treatment of adult cervical deformities, extension of the reconstruction construct to the axis may allow for certain clinical benefits with less morbidity than previously acknowledged

Are We Focused on the Wrong Early Postoperative Quality Metrics? Optimal Realignment Outweighs Perioperative Risk in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

BACKGROUND: While reimbursement is centered on 90-day outcomes, many patients may still achieve optimal, long-term outcomes following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery despite transient short-term complications. OBJECTIVE: Compare long-term clinical success and cost-utility between patients achieving optimal realignment and suboptimally aligned peers. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected multicenter database. METHODS: ASD patients with two-year (2Y) data included. Groups were propensity score matched (PSM) for age, frailty, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and baseline deformity. Optimal radiographic criteria are defined as meeting low deformity in all three (Scoliosis Research Society) SRS-Schwab parameters or being proportioned in Global Alignment and Proportionality (GAP). Cost-per-QALY was calculated for each time point. Multivariable logistic regression analysis and ANCOVA (analysis of covariance) adjusting for baseline disability and deformity (pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL)) were used to determine the significance of surgical details, complications, clinical outcomes, and cost-utility. RESULTS: A total of 930 patients were considered. Following PSM, 253 optimal (O) and 253 not optimal (NO) patients were assessed. The O group underwent more invasive procedures and had more levels fused. Analysis of complications by two years showed that the O group suffered less overall major (38% vs. 52%, CONCLUSIONS: Fewer late complications (mechanical and reoperations) are seen in optimally aligned patients, leading to better long-term cost-utility overall. Therefore, the current focus on avoiding short-term complications may be counterproductive, as achieving optimal surgical correction is critical for long-term success

Barriers to Predicting the Mechanisms and Risk Factors of Non-Contact Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury

High incidences of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, frequent requirements for ACL reconstruction, and limited understanding of ACL mechanics have engendered considerable interest in quantifying the ACL loading mechanisms. Although some progress has been made to better understand non-contact ACL injuries, information on how and why non-contact ACL injuries occur is still largely unavailable. In other words, research is yet to yield consensus on injury mechanisms and risk factors. Biomechanics, video analysis, and related study approaches have elucidated to some extent how ACL injuries occur. However, these approaches are limited because they provide estimates, rather than precise measurements of knee - and more specifically ACL - kinematics at the time of injury. These study approaches are also limited in their inability to simultaneously capture many of the contributing factors to injury

Curve Laterality for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Adult Scoliosis Surgery: The Concave Versus Convex Controversy

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is an effective adjunct in adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) surgery. LLIF approaches performed from the concavity or convexity have inherent approach-related risks and benefits. OBJECTIVE: To analyze LLIF approach-related complications and radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with ADS. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review of a minimally invasive adult spinal deformity database was queried with a minimum of 2-yr follow-up. Patients were divided into 2 groups as determined by the side of the curve from which the LLIF was performed: concave or convex. RESULTS: No differences between groups were noted in demographic, and preoperative or postoperative radiographic parameters (all P >.05). There were 8 total complications in the convex group (34.8%) and 21 complications in the concave group (52.5%; P =.17). A subgroup analysis was performed in 49 patients in whom L4-5 was in the primary curve and not in the fractional curve. In this subset of patients, there were 6 complications in the convex group (31.6%) compared to 19 in the concave group (63.3%; P < .05) and both groups experienced significant improvements in coronal Cobb angle, Oswestry Disability Index, and Visual Analog Scale score with no difference between groups. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing LLIF for ADS had no statistically significant clinical or operative complication rates regardless of a concave or convex approach to the curve. Clinical outcomes and coronal plane deformity improved regardless of approach side. However, in cases wherein L4-5 is in the primary curve, approaching the fractional curve at L4-5 from the concavity may be associated with a higher complication rate compared to a convex approach

51. Is percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation associated with minimized risk of perioperative proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) in adult spinal deformity?

Numerous strategies are used to minimize PJK in (ASD). The use of PPS is one such strategy. Studying this topic is difficult as there is a lack of homogeneity in the patient population being studied. Investigate if PPS minimizes the risk of perioperative PJK compared to traditional open techniques. Retrospective review of prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity database Inclusion criteria are age >18, and one of the following: PT>25, PI-LL>10, or SVA>5 cm. NRS leg, ODI, SF-12, EQ5D, SRS-22. A prospective database was retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria are age >18, and one of the following: PT>25, PI-LL>10, or SVA>5 cm. Patients were grouped as MIS (all PPS no open component) or OPEN. Propensity matching was used to create 2 equal groups controlling for: age, BMI, Preop (PI-LL, PI, TPA), and post op (PI-LL correction and posterior levels fused). PJK was evaluated in 2 groups: Mild (PJK10) 10° change from preop and severe (PJK20) a 20° change, as previously reported. A total of 1,023 patients met criteria: 114 MIS and 909 OPEN. MIS were older with higher BMI. No significant difference was found between groups in preop alignment or SRS Schwab classification. OPEN had more levels fused (11.3 vs 5.5), change in PI-LL (14.9 vs 9.3) and LL (16.2 vs 9.7; all p0.59). PJK20 was 2.6% in OPEN vs 3.9% in MIS at 1YR (p=1). The PJK angle was not different (4.3 v 4.2). MIS had less EBL (510 v 1574 cc; p=0.000) longer OR time (448 v 373 min; p=0.022) and more interbodies (3.4 vs 2.1; p=0.000). There was no difference in rate of revision surgery (14.3% OPEN vs 10.4%). Major complications occurred more frequently in OPEN (23.4% vs 9.1%). While the use of percutaneous fixation intuitively seems protective for PJK, our study found that when controlling for radiographic deformity, deformity correction, demographics and the magnitude of surgical intervention that percutaneous fixation is equivalent to open techniques in rate of perioperative PJK. This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs

Limited morbidity and possible radiographic benefit of C2 vs. subaxial cervical upper-most instrumented vertebrae.

BackgroundThe study aims to evaluate differences in alignment and clinical outcomes between surgical cervical deformity (CD) patients with a subaxial upper-most instrumented vertebra (UIV) and patients with a UIV at C2. Use of CD-corrective instrumentation in the subaxial cervical spine is considered risky due to narrow subaxial pedicles and vertebral artery anatomy. While C2 fixation provides increased stability, the literature lacks guidelines indicating extension of CD-corrective fusion from the subaxial spine to C2.MethodsIncluded: operative CD patients with baseline (BL) and 1-year postop (1Y) radiographic data, cervical UIV ≥ C2. Patients were grouped by UIV: C2 or subaxial (C3-C7) and propensity score matched (PSM) for BL cSVA. Mean comparison tests assessed differences in BL and 1Y patient-related, radiographic, and surgical data between UIV groups, and BL-1Y changes in alignment and clinical outcomes.ResultsFollowing PSM, 31 C2 UIV and 31 subaxial UIV patients undergoing CD-corrective surgery were included. Groups did not differ in BL comorbidity burden (P=0.175) or cSVA (P=0.401). C2 patients were older (64 vs. 58 yrs, P=0.010) and had longer fusions (9 vs. 6 levels, P=0.002). Overall, patients showed BL-1Y improvements in TS-CL (P&lt;0.001), cSVA (P=0.005), McGS (P=0.004). Cervical flexibility was maintained at 1Y regardless of UIV, assessed by CL flexion (-0.2° vs. 6.0°, P=0.115) and extension (13.9° vs. 9.9°, P=0.366). While both subaxial and C2 patients showed BL-1Y improvements in McGS (both P&lt;0.030), C2 patients improved to a larger degree (7.3° vs. 6.2°). Between UIV groups, there were no differences in BL-1Y changes in HRQLs, overall complication rates, or operative complication rates (all P&gt;0.05).ConclusionsC2 UIV patients showed similar cervical range of motion and baseline to 1-year functional outcomes as patients with a subaxial UIV. C2 UIV patients also showed greater baseline to 1-year horizontal gaze improvement and had complication profiles similar to subaxial UIV patients, demonstrating the radiographic benefit and minimal functional loss associated with extending fusion constructs to C2. In the treatment of adult cervical deformities, extension of the reconstruction construct to the axis may allow for certain clinical benefits with less morbidity than previously acknowledged