Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objectives Odontoid fractures are the most common cervical spine fractures in the elderly. The optimal treatment remains controversial. The aim of this... Show moreStudy Design Retrospective cohort study. Objectives Odontoid fractures are the most common cervical spine fractures in the elderly. The optimal treatment remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare results of a low-threshold-for-surgery strategy (surgery for dislocated fractures in relatively healthy patients) to a primarily-conservative strategy (for all patients). Methods Patient records from 5 medical centers were reviewed for patients who met the selection criteria (e.g. age & GE;55 years, type II/III odontoid fractures). Demographics, fracture types/characteristics, fracture union/stability, clinical outcome and mortality were compared. The influence of age on outcome was studied (& GE;55-80 vs & GE;80 years). Results A total of 173 patients were included: 120 treated with low-threshold-for-surgery (of which 22 primarily operated, and 23 secondarily) vs 53 treated primarily-conservative. No differences in demographics and fracture characteristics between the groups were identified. Fracture union (53% vs 43%) and fracture stability (90% vs 85%) at last follow-up did not differ between groups. The majority of patients (56%) achieved clinical improvement compared to baseline. Analysis of differences in clinical outcome between groups was infeasible due to data limitations. In both strategies, patients & GE;80 years achieved worse union (64% vs 30%), worse stability (97% vs 77%), and - as to be expected - increased mortality <104 weeks (2% vs 22%). Conclusions Union and stability rates did not differ between the treatment strategies. Advanced age (& GE;80 years) negatively influenced both radiological outcome and mortality. No cases of secondary neurological deficits were identified, suggesting that concerns for the consequences of under-treatment may be unjustified. Show less
Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Objective: Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) was introduced as a less invasive procedure to treat sciatica. Even though the PTED... Show moreStudy Design: Randomized controlled trial. Objective: Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) was introduced as a less invasive procedure to treat sciatica. Even though the PTED has a small scar size, it is unknown if PTED also leads to better scar-related patient-reported outcomes. Therefore, we aimed to compare scar-related outcomes between patients undergoing PTED vs open microdiscectomy. Methods: Patients with at least 6 weeks of radiating leg pain were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to PTED or open microdiscectomy. Scar-related patient-reported outcomes were measured using the Body Image Score (BIS), Cosmesis Scale (CS) and a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) on scar esthetic. Results: Of the 530 included patients, 286 patients underwent PTED and 244 underwent open microdiscectomy as allocated. At 12 months of follow-up, 95% of the patients had data available. At 12 months, the BIS was 6.2 +/- 1.7 in the PTED-group and 6.6 +/- 1.9 in the open microdiscectomy group (between-group difference .4, 95% CI .2 to .7). CS was 21.3 +/- 3.0 in the PTED-group and 18.6 +/- 3.4 in the open microdiscectomy group (between-group difference -2.7, 95% CI -3.1 to -2.3). Average NRS for scar esthetic was 9.2 +/- 1.3 and 7.8 +/- 1.6 in the PTED and open microdiscectomy groups, respectively (between-group difference -1.4, 95% CI -1.6 to -1.2). Conclusions: PTED leads to a higher self-rated scar esthetic as compared to open microdiscectomy, while self-reported body image seems to be comparable between both groups. Therefore, from an esthetic point, PTED seems to be the preferred technique to treat sciatica. Show less
Study Design: Questionnaire-based survey.Objectives: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication in spine surgery but universal guidelines for SSI prevention are lacking. The objectives... Show moreStudy Design: Questionnaire-based survey.Objectives: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication in spine surgery but universal guidelines for SSI prevention are lacking. The objectives of this study are to depict a global status quo on implemented prevention strategies in spine surgery, common themes of practice and determine key areas for future research.Methods: An 80-item survey was distributed among spine surgeons worldwide via email. The questionnaire was designed and approved by an International Consensus Group on spine SSI. Consensus was defined as more than 60% of participants agreeing to a specific prevention strategy.Results: Four hundred seventy-two surgeons participated in the survey. Screening for Staphylococcus aureus (SA) is not common, whereas preoperative decolonization is performed in almost half of all hospitals. Body mass index (BMI) was not important for surgery planning. In contrast, elevated HbAIc level and hypoalbuminemia were often considered as reasons to postpone surgery. Cefazoline is the common drug for antimicrobial prophylaxis. Alcohol-based chlorhexidine is mainly used for skin disinfection. Double-gloving, wound irrigation, and tissue-conserving surgical techniques are routine in the operating room (OR). Local antibiotic administration is not common. Wound closure techniques and postoperative wound dressing routines vary greatly between the participating institutions.Conclusions: With this study we provide an international overview on the heterogeneity of SSI prevention strategies in spine surgery. We demonstrated a large heterogeneity for pre-, peri- and postoperative measures to prevent SSI. Our data illustrated the need for developing universal guidelines and for testing areas of controversy in prospective clinical trails. Show less
Study Design: Literature review.Objective: To describe whether practice variation studies on surgery in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease used adequate study methodology to identify... Show moreStudy Design: Literature review.Objective: To describe whether practice variation studies on surgery in patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease used adequate study methodology to identify unwarranted variation, and to inform quality improvement in clinical practice. Secondary aim was to describe whether variation changed over time.Methods: Literature databases were searched up to May 4th, 2021. To define whether study design was appropriate to identify unwarranted variation, we extracted data on level of aggregation, study population, and case-mix correction. To define whether studies were appropriate to achieve quality improvement, data were extracted on outcomes, explanatory variables, description of scientific basis, and given recommendations. Spearman's rho was used to determine the association between the Extreme Quotient (EQ) and year of publication.Results: We identified 34 articles published between 1990 and 2020. Twenty-six articles (76%) defined the diagnosis. Prior surgery cases were excluded or adjusted for in 5 articles (15%). Twenty-three articles (68%) adjusted for case-mix. Variation in outcomes was analyzed in 7 articles (21%). Fourteen articles (41%) identified explanatory variables. Twenty-six articles (76%) described the evidence on effectiveness. Recommendations for clinical practice were given in 9 articles (26%). Extreme Quotients ranged between 1-fold and 15-fold variation and did not show a significant change over time (rho= -.33, P= .09).Conclusions: Practice variation research on surgery in patients with degenerative disc disease showed important limitations to identify unwarranted variation and to achieve quality improvement by public reporting. Despite the availability of new evidence, we could not observe a significant decrease in variation over time. Show less
Study Design: A narrative literature review. Objectives: To review the neurological recovery patterns in traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) patients with a complete lack of motor and sensory... Show moreStudy Design: A narrative literature review. Objectives: To review the neurological recovery patterns in traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) patients with a complete lack of motor and sensory function below the level of injury (ie, ASIA A [American Spinal Injury Association scale]), as well as the impact of level of injury and timing of surgical intervention. Results: Spontaneous neurological recovery in patients with complete tSCI differs per level of injury: patients with cervical and thoracolumbar tSCI recover >= 1 ASIA grade in 17.3% to 34.0% 1 year after injury, compared with 10.7% to 18.6% in thoracic tSCI. Surgical decompression within 24 hours has a beneficial effect on neurological recovery in patients with complete cervical tSCI, whereas this effect is less clear for thoracic and thoracolumbar tSCI. A 1- or 2-grade improvement in the ASIA scale does not necessarily result in functional recovery. Conclusion: In complete tSCI, the level of injury as well as surgical timing affect neurological recovery. There appears to be a beneficial effect of early surgical decompression in patients with complete cervical tSCI, more so than for thoracic and thoracolumbar tSCI. Frequently, the effect of surgical intervention is evaluated by an improvement in ASIA grade, but it is unclear whether this scale is sensitive enough to evaluate meaningful effectiveness of the intervention and desired outcome for patients with tSCI. Show less
