Surgical approaches to apical thoracic malignancies

ObjectiveSeveral surgical approaches have been described to access apical thoracic malignancies extending into the thoracic inlet. However, most publications have focused on a specific approach and considered the thoracic inlet as 1 entity. In the present analysis, we divided the thoracic inlet into 5 different zones requiring specific surgical considerations to identify the best approach for each zone.MethodsA review of 22 consecutive patients undergoing surgery for apical thoracic malignancies extending into the thoracic inlet from January 2005 to November 2011 was performed.ResultsDifferent surgical approaches were used for each zone. The first (anterolateral) zone required a subclavicular approach to open the costoclavicular space and expose the subclavian vein with or without elevating or removing the clavicle (n = 4). The second (anterocentral) zone required a transverse supraclavicular approach with or without extension to a partial (trapdoor) or full sternotomy (n = 10). The third (posterosuperior) zone located between the top of the subclavian artery and the T1 vertebra along the posterior superior border of the first rib was the most difficult area to access (n = 5). The transclavicular approach was ideally suited to expose this zone in our experience. The fourth (posteroinferior) zone and fifth (inferolateral) zone located posteriorly and laterally along the inferior border of the first rib were accessed using a posterolateral and posterotransaxillary approach, respectively (n = 3).ConclusionsThe thoracic inlet could be divided into 5 zones requiring specific surgical considerations and different approaches. Division of the thoracic inlet into these zones could provide more clarity and guidance for thoracic surgeons to select the correct surgical approach

Agreement between orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons regarding a new algorithm for the treatment of thoracolumbar injuries: a multicenter reliability study

Journal ArticleIntroduction: Considerable variability exists in the management of thoracolumbar (TL) spine injuries. Although there are many influences, one significant factor may be the treating surgeon's specialty and training (ie, orthopedic surgery vs. neurosurgery). Our objective was to assess the agreement between spinal orthopedic and neurologic surgeons in rating the severity of TL spine injuries with a new treatment algorithm. This information could be important in establishing consensus-based protocols for managing these challenging injuries. Methods: Twenty-eight spinal surgeons (8 neurosurgeons and 20 orthopedic surgeons) reviewed 56 TL injury case histories. Each case was classified and scored according to the TL injury severity score (TLISS). The case histories were reordered and the physicians repeated the exercise 3 months later. At both intervals the surgeons were asked if they agreed with the final treatment recommendation of the TLISS algorithm. The reliability and decision validity of the TLISS was compared. Results: Between-group interrater reliability was similar to within group reliabilities. Intrarater reliability was also similar between groups. The between speciality interrater reliability of the TLISS management recommendation was moderate (74% agreement, k=0.532). Orthopedic and neurosurgeons agreed with the TLISS management recommendation 91.4% and 94.4% of the time, respectively. Conclusions: The TLISS demonstrated good reliability in terms of intraobserver and interobserver agreement on the algorithmic treatment recommendations. The recommendation for operation seems to be consistent between fellowship-trained orthopedic and neurosurgical spine surgeons. This type of classification system may reduce the existing variability and initial management decision for treatment of TL injuries

Variations in Practice Patterns among Neurosurgeons and Orthopaedic Surgeons in the Management of Spinal Disorders

Study design: This is a case series.Purpose: We wanted to identify variations in the practice patterns among neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons for the management of spinal disorders.Overview of literature: Spinal disorders are common in the clinical practice of both neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons. It has been observed that despite the availability of various guidelines, there is lack of consensus among surgeons about the management of various disorders.Methods: A questionnaire was distributed, either directly or via e-mail, to the both the neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons who worked at 5 tertiary care centers within a single region of Korea. The surgeons were working either in private practice or in academic institutions. The details of the questionnaire included demographic details and the specialty (orthopedic/neurosurgeon). The surgeons were classified according to the level of experience as up to 5 years, 6-10 years and \u3e 10 years. Questions were asked about the approach to lumbar discectomy (fragmentectomy or aggressive disc removal), using steroids for treating discitis, the fusion preference for spondylolisthesis, the role of an orthosis after fusion, the preferred surgical approach for spinal stenosis, the operative approach for spinal trauma (early within 72 hours or late \u3e 72 hours) and the role of surgery in complete spinal cord injury. The data was analyzed using SPSS ver 16. p-values \u3c 0.05 were considered to be significant.Results: Of the 30 surgeons who completed the questionnaire, 20 were neurosurgeons and 10 were orthopedic surgeons. Statistically significant differences were observed for the management of spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, using an orthosis after fusion, the type of lumbar discectomy and the value of surgical intervention after complete spinal cord injury.Conclusions: Our results suggest that there continues to exist a statistically significant lack of consensus among neurosurgeons and orthopedic spine surgeons when considering using an orthosis after fusion, the type of discectomy and the value of intervention after complete spinal injury

Regional variability in use of a novel assessment of thoracolumbar spine fractures: United States versus international surgeons

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Considerable variability exists in clinical approaches to thoracolumbar fractures. Controversy in evaluation and nomenclature contribute to this confusion, with significant differences found between physicians, between different specialties, and in different geographic regions. A new classification system for thoracolumbar injuries, the Thoracolumbar Injury Severity Score (TLISS), was recently described by Vaccaro. No assessment of regional differences has been described. We report regional variability in use of the TLISS system between United States and non-US surgeons.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Twenty-eight spine surgeons (8 neurosurgeons and 20 orthopedic surgeons) reviewed 56 clinical thoracolumbar injury case histories, which included pertinent imaging studies. Cases were classified and scored using the TLISS system. After a three month period, the case histories were re-ordered and the physicians repeated the exercise; 22 physicians completed both surveys and were used to assess intra-rater reliability. The reliability and treatment validity of the TLISS was assessed. Surgeons were grouped into US (n = 15) and non-US (n = 13) cohorts. Inter-rater (both within and between different geographic groups) and intra-rater reliability was assessed by percent agreement, Cohen's kappa, kappa with linear weighting, and Spearman's rank-order correlation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Non-US surgeons were found to have greater inter-rater reliability in injury mechanism, while agreement on neurological status and posterior ligamentous complex integrity tended to be higher among US surgeons. Inter-rater agreement on management was moderate, although it tended to be higher in US-surgeons. Inter-rater agreement between US and non-US surgeons was similar to within group inter-rater agreement for all categories. While intra-rater agreement for mechanism tended to be higher among US surgeons, intra-rater reliability for neurological status and PLC was slightly higher among non-US surgeons. Intra-rater reliability for management was substantial in both US and non-US surgeons. The TLISS incorporates generally accepted features of spinal injury assessment into a simple patient evaluation tool. The management recommendation of the treatment algorithm component of the TLISS shows good inter-rater and substantial intra-rater reliability in both non-US and US based spine surgeons. The TLISS may improve communication between health providers and may contribute to more efficient management of thoracolumbar injuries.</p

International comparative study of low back pain care pathways and analysis of key interventions

Purpose Low back pain (LBP) is a major public health problem worldwide. Significant practice variation exists despite guidelines, including strong interventionist focus by some practitioners. Translation of guidelines into pathways as integrated treatment plans is a next step to improve implementation. The goal of the present study was to analyze international examples of LBP pathways in order to identify key interventions as building elements for care pathway for LBP and radicular pain. Methods International examples of LBP pathways were searched in literature and grey literature. Authors of pathways were invited to fill a questionnaire and to participate in an in-depth telephone interview. Pathways were quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed, to enable the identification of key interventions to serve as pathway building elements. Results Eleven international LBP care pathways were identified. Regional pathways were strongly organized and included significant training efforts for primary care providers and an intermediate level of caregivers in between general practitioners and hospital specialists. Hospital pathways had a focus on multidisciplinary collaboration and stepwise approach trajectories. Key elements common to all pathways included the consecutive screening for red flags, radicular pain and psychosocial risk factors, the emphasis on patient empowerment and self-management, the development of evidence-based consultable protocols, the focus on a multidisciplinary work mode and the monitoring of patient-reported outcome measures. Conclusion Essential building elements for the construction of LBP care pathways were identified from a transversal analysis of key interventions in a study of 11 international examples of LBP pathways

Opioid use trends in patients undergoing elective thoracic and lumbar spine surgery

© 2020 Joule Inc. or its licensors Background: Opioid use in North America has increased rapidly in recent years. Preoperative opioid use is associated with several negative outcomes. Our objectives were to assess patterns of opioid use over time in Canadian patients who undergo spine surgery and to determine the effect of spine surgery on 1year postoperative opioid use. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on prospectively collected data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network for patients undergoing elective thoracic and lumbar surgery. Selfreported opioid use at baseline, before surgery and at 1 year after surgery was compared. Baseline opioid use was compared by age, sex, radiologic diagnosis and presenting complaint. All patients meeting eligibility criteria from 2008 to 2017 were included. Results: A total of 3134 patients provided baseline opioid use data. No significant change in the proportion of patients taking daily (range 32.3%–38.2%) or intermittent (range 13.7%–22.5%) opioids was found from pre2014 to 2017. Among patients who waited more than 6 weeks for surgery, the frequency of opioid use did not differ significantly between the baseline and preoperative time points. Significantly more patients using opioids had a chief complaint of back pain or radiculopathy than neurogenic claudication (p \u3c 0.001), and significantly more were under 65 years of age than aged 65 years or older (p \u3c 0.001). Approximately 41% of patients on daily opioids at baseline remained so at 1 year after surgery. Conclusion: These data suggest that additional opioid reduction strategies are needed in the population of patients undergoing elective thoracic and lumbar spine surgery. Spine surgeons can be involved in identifying patients taking opioids preoperatively, emphasizing the risks of continued opioid use and referring patients to appropriate evidencebased treatment programs

Patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis experience unique courses of pain and disability: A group-based trajectory analysis

© 2019 Hebert et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Objective Identify patient subgroups defined by trajectories of pain and disability following surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, and investigate the construct validity of the subgroups by evaluating for meaningful differences in clinical outcomes. Methods We recruited patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis from 13 surgical spine centers who were deemed to be surgical candidates. Study outcomes (leg and back pain numeric rating scales, modified Oswestry disability index) were measured before surgery, and after 3, 12, and 24 months. Group-based trajectory models were developed to identify trajectory subgroups for leg pain, back pain, and pain-related disability. We examined for differences in the proportion of patients achieving minimum clinically important change in pain and disability (30%) and clinical success (50% reduction in disability or Oswestry score ≤22) 12 months from surgery. Results Data from 548 patients (mean[SD] age = 66.7[9.1] years; 46% female) were included. The models estimated 3 unique trajectories for leg pain (excellent outcome = 14.4%, good outcome = 49.5%, poor outcome = 36.1%), back pain (excellent outcome = 13.1%, good outcome = 45.0%, poor outcome = 41.9%), and disability (excellent outcome = 30.8%, fair outcome = 40.1%, poor outcome = 29.1%). The construct validity of the trajectory subgroups was confirmed by between-trajectory group differences in the proportion of patients meeting thresholds for minimum clinically important change and clinical success after 12 postoperative months (p \u3c .001). Conclusion Subgroups of patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis can be identified by their trajectories of pain and disability following surgery. Although most patients experienced important reductions in pain and disability, 29% to 42% of patients were classified as members of an outcome trajectory subgroup that experienced little to no benefit from surgery. These findings may inform appropriate expectation setting for patients and clinicians and highlight the need for better methods of treatment selection for patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

PPARγ deficiency results in severe, accelerated osteoarthritis associated with aberrant mTOR signalling in the articular cartilage

Objectives: We have previously shown that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ), a transcription factor, is essential for the normal growth and development of cartilage. In the present study, we created inducible cartilage-specific PPARγ knockout (KO) mice and subjected these mice to the destabilisation of medial meniscus (DMM) model of osteoarthritis (OA) to elucidate the specific in vivo role of PPARγ in OA pathophysiology. We further investigated the downstream PPARγ signalling pathway responsible for maintaining cartilage homeostasis. Methods: Inducible cartilage-specific PPARγ KO mice were generated and subjected to DMM model of OA. We also created inducible cartilage-specific PPARγ/mammalian target for rapamycin (mTOR) double KO mice to dissect the PPARγ signalling pathway in OA. Results: Compared with control mice, PPARγ KO mice exhibit accelerated OA phenotype with increased cartilage degradation, chondrocyte apoptosis, and the overproduction of OA inflammatory/catabolic factors associated with the increased expression of mTOR and the suppression of key autophagy markers. In vitro rescue experiments using PPARγ expression vector reduced mTOR expression, increased expression of autophagy markers and reduced the expression of OA inflammatory/catabolic factors, thus reversing the phenotype of PPARγ KO mice chondrocytes. To dissect the in vivo role of mTOR pathway in PPARγ signalling, we created and subjected PPARγ-mTOR double KO mice to the OA model to see if the genetic deletion of mTOR in PPARγ KO mice (double KO) can rescue the accelerated OA phenotype observed in PPARγ KO mice. Indeed, PPARγ-mTOR double KO mice exhibit significant protection/reversal from OA phenotype. Significance PPARγ maintains articular cartilage homeostasis, in part, by regulating mTOR pathway

Perioperative Factors Associated With Postoperative Delirium in Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery:An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

IMPORTANCE: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common and serious complication after surgery. Various predisposing factors are associated with POD, but their magnitude and importance using an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis have not been assessed.OBJECTIVE: To identify perioperative factors associated with POD and assess their relative prognostic value among adults undergoing noncardiac surgery.DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from inception to May 2020.STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included that (1) enrolled adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, (2) assessed perioperative risk factors for POD, and (3) measured the incidence of delirium (measured using a validated approach). Data were analyzed in 2020.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Individual patient data were pooled from 21 studies and 1-stage meta-analysis was performed using multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression after a multivariable imputation via chained equations model to impute missing data.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The end point of interest was POD diagnosed up to 10 days after a procedure. A wide range of perioperative risk factors was considered as potentially associated with POD.RESULTS: A total of 192 studies met the eligibility criteria, and IPD were acquired from 21 studies that enrolled 8382 patients. Almost 1 in 5 patients developed POD (18%), and an increased risk of POD was associated with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status 4 (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% CI, 1.42-4.14), older age (OR for 65-85 years, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.16-3.29; OR for &gt;85 years, 6.24; 95% CI, 4.65-8.37), low body mass index (OR for body mass index &lt;18.5, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.64-3.09), history of delirium (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.69-5.66), preoperative cognitive impairment (OR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.94-5.43), and preoperative C-reactive protein levels (OR for 5-10 mg/dL, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.59-3.50; OR for &gt;10 mg/dL, 3.56; 95% CI, 2.46-5.17). Completing a college degree or higher was associated with a decreased likelihood of developing POD (OR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data, several important factors associated with POD were found that may help identify patients at high risk and may have utility in clinical practice to inform patients and caregivers about the expected risk of developing delirium after surgery. Future studies should explore strategies to reduce delirium after surgery.</p

Early versus Delayed Decompression for Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: Results of the Surgical Timing in Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (STASCIS)

BACKGROUND:There is convincing preclinical evidence that early decompression in the setting of spinal cord injury (SCI) improves neurologic outcomes. However, the effect of early surgical decompression in patients with acute SCI remains uncertain. Our objective was to evaluate the relative effectiveness of early (<24 hours after injury) versus late (≥ 24 hours after injury) decompressive surgery after traumatic cervical SCI. METHODS:We performed a multicenter, international, prospective cohort study (Surgical Timing In Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study: STASCIS) in adults aged 16-80 with cervical SCI. Enrolment occurred between 2002 and 2009 at 6 North American centers. The primary outcome was ordinal change in ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grade at 6 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes included assessments of complications rates and mortality. FINDINGS:A total of 313 patients with acute cervical SCI were enrolled. Of these, 182 underwent early surgery, at a mean of 14.2(± 5.4) hours, with the remaining 131 having late surgery, at a mean of 48.3(± 29.3) hours. Of the 222 patients with follow-up available at 6 months post injury, 19.8% of patients undergoing early surgery showed a ≥ 2 grade improvement in AIS compared to 8.8% in the late decompression group (OR = 2.57, 95% CI:1.11,5.97). In the multivariate analysis, adjusted for preoperative neurological status and steroid administration, the odds of at least a 2 grade AIS improvement were 2.8 times higher amongst those who underwent early surgery as compared to those who underwent late surgery (OR = 2.83, 95% CI:1.10,7.28). During the 30 day post injury period, there was 1 mortality in both of the surgical groups. Complications occurred in 24.2% of early surgery patients and 30.5% of late surgery patients (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION:Decompression prior to 24 hours after SCI can be performed safely and is associated with improved neurologic outcome, defined as at least a 2 grade AIS improvement at 6 months follow-up