Percutaneous instrumentation with cement augmentation for traumatic hyperextension thoracic and lumbar fractures in ankylosing spondylitis: a single-institution experience

The typical traumatic thoracolumbar (TL) fracture in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a hyperextension injury involving all three spinal columns, which is associated with unfavorable outcomes. Although a consensus on the management of these highly unstable injuries is missing, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been progressively accepted as a treatment option, since it is related to lower morbidity and mortality rates. This study aimed to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes after percutaneous instrumentation with cement augmentation for hyperextension TL fractures in patients with AS at a single institution

Aggressive Vertebral Hemangioma Causing Acute Spinal Cord Compression

A 46-year-old woman presented to our emergency department with sudden onset of lower extremity weakness after physical activity. She referred only dorsal back pain before these symptoms. Neurologic examination revealed weakness 2/5 of lower limbs, hyperreflexia of deep tendon reflex of lower limbs, hypoesthesia under D7 level, and no sphincteric dysfunction. A computed tomography scan showed an accentuation of trabecular markings within the vertebral body and areas of lysis ([Figs. 1A] [F]). Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images show diffuse abnormal marrow signal throughout the T6 vertebral body with epidural components with spinal cord compression ([Fig. 1B] [H]

Stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) for the treatment of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after previous posterior lumbar fusion: clinical and radiological outcomes and comparison with posterior revision surgery

Background: Radiological evidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) has been reported to have a prevalence of more than 30% and several risk factors have been reported. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with symptomatic ASD treated with stand-alone OLIF and compare results with a posterior revision surgery cohort. Methods: This is a retrospective case-control study. Clinical-patient-reported outcomes were obtained at preoperative, postoperative and final follow-up visits using the Short Form (SF-36) scale, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS). Radiological measures include lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, segmental coronal Cobb angle and intervertebral disc height (DH). The data are compared with a retrospective series of patients that underwent a posterior revision surgery for ASD. Results: Twenty-eight patients in the OLIF group and 25 patients in the posterior group meet inclusion criteria. The mean ages at the time of the surgery are 65.1 years and 67.5, respectively. The mean follow-up time is 36.1 months (range of 14-56). The clinical outcomes significantly improve from preoperative values from the surgery in both groups. The radiological parameters are significantly improved postoperatively and were maintained at the last follow-up in both groups. A statistically significant difference is observed between the two groups for minor complication rate, length of surgery, blood loss and DH restoration. Conclusions: Stand-alone OLIF is an effective and safe technique with low morbidity and complication rates for the treatment of selected patients with symptomatic ASD following a previous lumbar fusion

Introductory Chapter: Spinal Cord Injury

The annual global incidence of traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) was estimated by the Global Burden of Disease Study in 2016, and it resulted in as high as 0.93 million (0.78–1.16 million) per year, with an age-standardized incidence rate of 13 (11–16) per 100,000 population [1]. In the USA, the principal causes of SCI are represented by motor vehicle accidents (36–48%), violence (5–29%), falls (17–21%), and recreational activities (7–16%) [2]. The socioeconomic burden is extremely high due to the young age, the severity of acquired disabilities, and both direct and indirect health-related costs. In fact, the annual national cost in 2009 was as high as $1,7 billion [3], and for each patient ranged from$30,770 to $62,563 in 2016 [4]. The most significant cost derived from the severity of disability and complications developed during the hospitalization such as pressure ulcers and infections [5]. The SCI burden is extended also to the psychology of the younger patients, suddenly experiencing paraplegia or quadriplegia [6, 7]. It has been reported that people suffering from SCI are 2–5 times more likely to die prematurely compared to the healthy population [8, 9]. In SCI, the timing for intervention is crucial. Several studies have shown that early medical-surgical intervention could effectively improve functional outcomes. According to the Advanced Traumatic Life Support (ATLS) guidelines, any obstruction of upper airways should be restored while paying attention to neck and spine mobilization. The immobilization procedures should be fastidiously observed even in penetrating trauma without interfering with resuscitation efforts [10]. After immobilization, the patient should be quickly transferred to the closest trauma center hospital

Carmustine wafers implantation in patients with newly diagnosed high grade glioma: is it still an option?

Background: The implantation protocol for Carmustine Wafers (CWs) in high grade glioma (HGG) was developed to offer a bridge between surgical resection and adjuvant treatments, such as radio- and chemotherapy. In the last years, however, a widespread use of CWs has been limited due to uncertainties regarding efficacy, in addition to increased risk of infection and elevated costs of treatment. Objective: The aims of our study were to investigate the epidemiology of patients that underwent surgery for HGG with CW implantation, in addition to the assessment of related complications, long-term overall survival (OS), and associated prognostic factors. Methods: Three different medical databases were screened for conducting a systematic review of the literature, according to the PRISMA statement guidelines, evaluating the role of BCNU wafer implantation in patients with newly diagnosed HGG. The search query was based on a combination of medical subject headings (MeSH): "high grade glioma " [MeSH] AND "Carmustine " [MeSH] and free text terms: "surgery " OR "BCNU wafer " OR "Gliadel " OR "systemic treatment options " OR "overall survival. " Results: The analysis of the meta-data demonstrated that there was a significant advantage in using CWs in newly diagnosed GBM in terms of OS, and a very low heterogeneity among the included studies [mean difference 2.64 (95% CI 0.85, 4.44); p = 0.004; I2149 = 0%]. Conversely, no significant difference between the two treatment groups in terms of PFS wad detected (p = 0.55). The analysis of complications showed a relatively higher rate in Carmustine implanted patients, although this difference was not significant (p = 0.53). Conclusions: This meta-analysis seems to suggest that CWs implantation plays a significant role in improving the OS, when used in patients with newly diagnosed HGG. To minimize the risk of side effects, however, a carful patient selection based mainly on patient age and tumor volume should be desirable

Two-level corpectomy and fusion vs. three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without plating: long-term clinical and radiological outcomes in a multicentric retrospective analysis

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) represent effective alternatives in the management of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). A consensus on which of these techniques should be used is still missing. Methods: The databases of three centers were reviewed (January 2011-December 2018) for patients with three-level CSM, who underwent three-level ACDF without plating or two-level ACCF with expandable cage (VBRC) or mesh (VBRM). Demographic data, surgical strategy, complications, and implant failure were analyzed. The Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the cervical lordosis were compared between the two techniques at 3 and 12 months. Logistic regression analyses investigated independent factors influencing clinical and radiological outcomes. Results: Twenty-one and twenty-two patients were included in the ACDF and ACCF groups, respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months. ACDFs were associated with better clinical outcomes at 12 months (NDI: 8.3% vs. 19.3%, p < 0.001; VAS: 1.3 vs. 2.6, p = 0.004), but with an increased risk of loss of lordosis correction & GE; 1 & DEG; (OR = 4.5; p = 0.05). A higher complication rate in the ACDF group (33.3% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.05) was recorded, but it negatively influenced only short-term clinical outcomes. ACCFs with VBRC were associated with a higher risk of major complications but ensured better 12-month lordosis correction (p = 0.002). No significant differences in intraoperative blood loss were noted. Conclusions: Three-level ACDF without plating was associated with better clinical outcomes than two-level ACCF despite worse losses in lordosis correction, which is ideal for fragile patients without retrovertebral compressions. In multilevel CSM, the relationship between the degree of lordosis correction and clinical outcome advantages still needs to be investigated

Two-Level Corpectomy and Fusion vs. Three-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion without Plating: Long-Term Clinical and Radiological Outcomes in a Multicentric Retrospective Analysis

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) represent effective alternatives in the management of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). A consensus on which of these techniques should be used is still missing. Methods: The databases of three centers were reviewed (January 2011-December 2018) for patients with three-level CSM, who underwent three-level ACDF without plating or two-level ACCF with expandable cage (VBRC) or mesh (VBRM). Demographic data, surgical strategy, complications, and implant failure were analyzed. The Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the cervical lordosis were compared between the two techniques at 3 and 12 months. Logistic regression analyses investigated independent factors influencing clinical and radiological outcomes. Results: Twenty-one and twenty-two patients were included in the ACDF and ACCF groups, respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months. ACDFs were associated with better clinical outcomes at 12 months (NDI: 8.3% vs. 19.3%, p < 0.001; VAS: 1.3 vs. 2.6, p = 0.004), but with an increased risk of loss of lordosis correction & GE; 1 & DEG; (OR = 4.5; p = 0.05). A higher complication rate in the ACDF group (33.3% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.05) was recorded, but it negatively influenced only short-term clinical outcomes. ACCFs with VBRC were associated with a higher risk of major complications but ensured better 12-month lordosis correction (p = 0.002). No significant differences in intraoperative blood loss were noted. Conclusions: Three-level ACDF without plating was associated with better clinical outcomes than two-level ACCF despite worse losses in lordosis correction, which is ideal for fragile patients without retrovertebral compressions. In multilevel CSM, the relationship between the degree of lordosis correction and clinical outcome advantages still needs to be investigated

Global Validation of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification.

STUDY DESIGN Global Cross Sectional Survey. OBJECTIVE To determine the classification accuracy, interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on an international group of AO Spine members. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Previous upper cervical spine injury classifications have primarily been descriptive without incorporating a hierarchical injury progression within the classification system. Further, upper cervical spine injury classifications have focused on distinct anatomical segments within the upper cervical spine. The AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System incorporates all injuries of the upper cervical spine into a single classification system focused on a hierarchical progression from isolated bony injuries (type A) to fracture dislocations (type C). METHODS A total of 275 AO Spine members participated in a validation aimed at classifying 25 upper cervical spine injuries via computed tomography (CT) scans according to the AO Spine Upper Cervical Classification System. The validation occurred on two separate occasions, three weeks apart. Descriptive statistics for percent agreement with the gold-standard were calculated and Pearson's chi square test evaluated significance between validation groups. Kappa coefficients (ƙ) determined the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. RESULTS The accuracy of AO Spine members to appropriately classify upper cervical spine injuries was 79.7% on assessment 1 (AS1) and 78.7% on assessment 2 (AS2). The overall intraobserver reproducibility was substantial (ƙ=0.70), while the overall interobserver reliability for AS1 and AS2 was substantial (ƙ=0.63 and ƙ=0.61, respectively). Injury location had higher interobserver reliability (AS1: ƙ = 0.85 and AS2: ƙ=0.83) than the injury type (AS1: ƙ=0.59 and AS2: 0.57) on both assessments. CONCLUSION The global validation of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System demonstrated substantial interobserver agreement and intraobserver reproducibility. These results support the universal applicability of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System

Timing of surgery following SARS‐CoV‐2 infection: an international prospective cohort study

Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4–1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0–2 weeks, 3–4 weeks and 5–6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1% (3.3–4.8), 3.9% (2.6–5.1) and 3.6% (2.0–5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5% (0.9– 2.1%)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2–8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4–3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6–2.0%), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay

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 (< 5 years, 5–10 years, 10–20 years, and > 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 (< 5 years: 0.74 vs 5–10 years: 0.69 vs 10–20 years: 0.69 vs > 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 (< 5 years: 0.67 vs 5–10 years: 0.62 vs 10–20 years: 0.61 vs > 20 years: 0.62), and only surgeons with > 20 years of experience did not have substantial reliability on assessment 2 (< 5 years: 0.62 vs 5–10 years: 0.61 vs 10–20 years: 0.61 vs > 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