Early and Late Reoperation Rates With Various MIS Techniques for Adult Spinal Deformity Correction.

Study designA multicenter retrospective review of an adult spinal deformity database.ObjectiveWe aimed to characterize reoperation rates and etiologies of adult spinal deformity surgery with circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) and hybrid (HYB) techniques.MethodsInclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, and one of the following: coronal Cobb >20°, sagittal vertical axis >5 cm, pelvic tilt >20°, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis >10°. Patients with either cMIS or HYB surgery, ≥3 spinal levels treated with 2-year minimum follow-up were included.ResultsA total of 133 patients met inclusion for this study (65 HYB and 68 cMIS). Junctional failure (13.8%) was the most common reason for reoperation in the HYB group, while fixation failure was the most common reason in the cMIS group (14.7%). There was a higher incidence of proximal junctional failure (PJF) than distal junctional failure (DJF) within HYB (12.3% vs 3.1%), but no significant differences in PJF or DJF rates when compared to cMIS. Early (<30 days) reoperations were less common (cMIS = 1.5%; HYB = 6.1%) than late (>30 days) reoperations (cMIS = 26.5%; HYB = 27.7%), but early reoperations were more common in the HYB group after propensity matching, largely due to infection rates (10.8% vs 0%, P = .04).ConclusionsAdult spinal deformity correction with cMIS and HYB techniques result in overall reoperation rates of 27.9% and 33.8%, respectively, at minimum 2-year follow-up. Junctional failures are more common after HYB approaches, while pseudarthrosis/fixation failures happen more often with cMIS techniques. Early reoperations were less common than later returns to the operating room in both groups, but cMIS demonstrated less risk of infection and early reoperation when compared with the HYB group

Treatment of the Fractional Curve of Adult Scoliosis With Circumferential Minimally Invasive Surgery Versus Traditional, Open Surgery: An Analysis of Surgical Outcomes.

Study Design:Retrospective, multicenter review of adult scoliosis patients with minimum 2-year follow-up. Objective:Because the fractional curve (FC) of adult scoliosis can cause radiculopathy, we evaluated patients treated with either circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) or open surgery. Methods:A multicenter retrospective adult deformity review was performed. Patients included: age >18 years with FC >10°, ≥3 levels of instrumentation, 2-year follow-up, and one of the following: coronal Cobb angle (CCA) > 20°, pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) > 10°, pelvic tilt (PT) > 20°, and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 5 cm. Results:The FC was treated in 118 patients, 79 open and 39 cMIS. The FCs had similar coronal Cobb angles preoperative (17° cMIS, 19.6° open) and postoperative (7° cMIS, 8.1° open), but open had more levels treated (12.1 vs 5.7). cMIS patients had greater reduction in VAS leg (6.4 to 1.8) than open (4.3 to 2.5). With propensity matching 40 patients for levels treated (cMIS: 6.6 levels, N = 20; open: 7.3 levels, N = 20), both groups had similar FC correction (18° in both preoperative, 6.9° in cMIS and 8.5° postoperative). Open had more posterior decompressions (80% vs 22.2%, P < .001). Both groups had similar preoperative (Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] leg 6.1 cMIS and 5.4 open) and postoperative (VAS leg 1.6 cMIS and 3.1 open) leg pain. All cMIS patients had interbody grafts; 35% of open did. There was no difference in change of primary CCA, PI-LL, LL, Oswestry Disability Index, or VAS Back. Conclusion:Patients' FCs treated with cMIS had comparable reduction of leg pain compared with those treated with open surgery, despite significantly fewer cMIS patients undergoing direct decompression

Finite Element Analysis Comparing a PEEK Posterior Fixation Device Versus Pedicle Screws for Lumbar Fusion

BACKGROUND: Pedicle screw loosening and breakage are common causes of revision surgery after lumbar fusion. Thus, there remains a continued need for supplemental fixation options that offer immediate stability without the associated failure modes. This finite element analysis compared the biomechanical properties of a novel cortico-pedicular posterior fixation (CPPF) device with those of a conventional pedicle screw system (PSS). METHODS: The CPPF device is a polyetheretherketone strap providing circumferential cortical fixation for lumbar fusion procedures via an arcuate tunnel. Using a validated finite element model, we compared the stability and load transfer characteristics of CPPF to intact conditions under a 415 N follower load and PSS conditions under a 222 N preload. Depending on the instrumented levels, two different interbody devices were used: a lateral lumbar interbody device at L4-5 or an anterior lumbar interbody device at L5-S1. Primary outcomes included range of motion of the functional spinal units and anterior load transfer, defined as the total load through the disk and interbody device after functional motion and follower load application. RESULTS: Across all combinations of interbody devices and lumbar levels evaluated, CPPF consistently demonstrated significant reductions in flexion (ranging from 90 to 98%), extension (ranging from 88 to 94%), lateral bending (ranging from 75 to 80%), and torsion (ranging from 77 to 86%) compared to the intact spine. Stability provided by the CPPF device was comparable to PSS in all simulations (range of motion within 0.5 degrees for flexion-extension, 0.6 degrees for lateral bending, and 0.5 degrees for torsion). The total anterior load transfer was higher with CPPF versus PSS, with differences across all tested conditions ranging from 128 to 258 N during flexion, 89-323 N during extension, 135-377 N during lateral bending, 95-258 N during torsion, and 82-250 N during standing. CONCLUSION: Under the modeled conditions, cortico-pedicular fixation for supplementing anterior or lateral interbody devices between L4 and S1 resulted in comparable stability based on range of motion measures and less anterior column stress shielding based on total anterior load transfer measures compared to PSS. Clinical studies are needed to confirm these finite element analysis findings

Neurological Complications after Lateral Transpsoas Approach to Anterior Interbody Fusion with a Novel Flat-Blade Spine-Fixed Retractor

Introduction. The lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgical approach has potential advantages over other approaches but is associated with some unique neurologic risks due to the proximity of the lumbosacral plexus. The present study analyzed complications following LLIF surgical approach using a novel single flat-blade retractor system. Methods. A retrospective data collection of patients receiving LLIF using a novel single flat-blade retractor system at two institutions in the US. Inclusion criteria were all patients receiving an LLIF procedure with the RAVINE® Lateral Access System (K2M, Inc., Leesburg, VA, USA). There was no restriction on preoperative diagnosis or number of levels treated. Approach-related neurologic complications were collected and analyzed postoperatively through a minimum of one year. Results. Analysis included 253 patients with one to four treated lateral levels. Immediate postoperative neurologic complications were present in 11.1% (28/253) of patients. At one-year follow-up the approach-related neurologic complications resolved in all except 5 patients (2.0%). Conclusion. We observed an 11.1% neurologic complication rate in LLIF procedures. There was resolution of symptoms for most patients by 12-month follow-up, with only 2% of patients with residual symptoms. This supports the hypothesis that the vast majority of approach-related neurologic symptoms are transient

Two-level total disc replacement with Mobi-C(r) over 3-years

Objective: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two-level total disc replacement (TDR) using a Mobi-C(r) Cervical Artificial Disc at the 36 month follow-up. Methods: a Prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial of an artificial cervical disc (Mobi-C(r) Cervical Artificial Disc) was conducted under the Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE) and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) regulations. A total of 339 patients with degenerative disc disease were enrolled to receive either two-level treatment with TDR, or a two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) as control. The 234 TDR patients and 105 ACDF patients were followed up at regular time points for three years after surgery. Results: At 36 months, both groups demonstrated an improvement in clinical outcome measures and a comparable safety profile. NDI scores, SF-12 PCS scores, patient satisfaction, and overall success indicated greater statistically significant improvement from baseline for the TDR group, in comparison to the ACDF group. The TDR patients experienced lower subsequent surgery rates and a lower rate of adjacent segment degeneration. On average, the TDR patients maintained segmental range of motion through 36 months with no device failure. Conclusion: Results at three-years support TDR as a safe, effective and statistically superior alternative to ACDF for the treatment of degenerative disc disease at two contiguous cervical levels

Cost Utility Analysis of the Cervical Artificial Disc vs Fusion for the Treatment of 2-Level Symptomatic Degenerative Disc Disease:5-Year Follow-up

BackgroundThe cervical total disc replacement (cTDR) was developed to treat cervical degenerative disc disease while preserving motion.ObjectiveCost-effectiveness of this intervention was established by looking at 2-year follow-up, and this update reevaluates our analysis over 5 years.MethodsData were derived from a randomized trial of 330 patients. Data from the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey were transformed into utilities by using the SF-6D algorithm. Costs were calculated by extracting diagnosis-related group codes and then applying 2014 Medicare reimbursement rates. A Markov model evaluated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for both treatment groups. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the stability of the model. The model adopted both societal and health system perspectives and applied a 3% annual discount rate.ResultsThe cTDR costs $1687 more than anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) over 5 years. In contrast, cTDR had$34 377 less productivity loss compared with ACDF. There was a significant difference in the return-to-work rate (81.6% compared with 65.4% for cTDR and ACDF, respectively; P = .029). From a societal perspective, the incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) for cTDR was -$165 103 per QALY. From a health system perspective, the ICER for cTDR was$8518 per QALY. In the sensitivity analysis, the ICER for cTDR remained below the US willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY in all scenarios (-$225 816 per QALY to $22 071 per QALY).ConclusionThis study is the first to report the comparative cost-effectiveness of cTDR vs ACDF for 2-level degenerative disc disease at 5 years. The authors conclude that, because of the negative ICER, cTDR is the dominant modality.AbbreviationsACDF, anterior cervical discectomy and fusionAWP, average wholesale priceCE, cost-effectivenessCEA, cost-effectiveness analysisCPT, Current Procedural TerminologycTDR, cervical total disc replacementCUA, cost-utility analysisDDD, degenerative disc diseaseDRG, diagnosis-related groupFDA, US Food and Drug AdministrationICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratioIDE, Investigational Device ExemptionNDI, neck disability indexQALY, quality-adjusted life yearsRCT, randomized controlled trialRTW, return-to-workSF-12, 12-Item Short Form Health SurveyVAS, visual analog scaleWTP, willingness-to-pay

Interspinous Process Decompression: Expanding Treatment Options for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Interspinous process decompression is a minimally invasive implantation procedure employing a stand-alone interspinous spacer that functions as an extension blocker to prevent compression of neural elements without direct surgical removal of tissue adjacent to the nerves. The Superion® spacer is the only FDA approved stand-alone device available in the US. It is also the only spacer approved by the CMS to be implanted in an ambulatory surgery center. We computed the within-group effect sizes from the Superion IDE trial and compared them to results extrapolated from two randomized trials of decompressive laminectomy. For the ODI, effect sizes were all very large (>1.0) for Superion and laminectomy at 2, 3, and 4 years. For ZCQ, the 2-year Superion symptom severity (1.26) and physical function (1.29) domains were very large; laminectomy effect sizes were very large (1.07) for symptom severity and large for physical function (0.80). Current projections indicate a marked increase in the number of patients with spinal stenosis. Consequently, there remains a keen interest in minimally invasive treatment options that delay or obviate the need for invasive surgical procedures, such as decompressive laminectomy or fusion. Stand-alone interspinous spacers may fill a currently unmet treatment gap in the continuum of care and help to reduce the burden of this chronic degenerative condition on the health care system

Interspinous Process Decompression Improves Quality of Life in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Lumbar spinal stenosis has been shown to negatively impact health-related quality of life. Interspinous process decompression (IPD) is a minimally invasive procedure that utilizes a stand-alone spacer to serve as a joint extension blocker to relieve neural compression in patients with spinal stenosis. Using the 5-year results from an FDA randomized controlled trial of IPD, the quality of life in 189 patients treated with the Superion® spacer was evaluated with the SF-12. Physical and mental component summary (PCS, MCS) scores were computed preoperatively and at annual intervals. For the PCS, mean scores improved from 29.4 ± 8.1 preoperatively to 41.2 ± 12.4 at 2 years (40%) and to 43.8 ± 11.6 at 5 years (49%) (p0.10 for both comparisons). These results demonstrate that the significant impairment in physical well-being found in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis can be ameliorated, in large part, by IPD treatment