The lordosis distribution index (LDI) describes distribution of lumbar lordosis, measured as the % of lower lumbar lordosis (L4-S1) compared to global lordosis (L1-S1) with normal value 50–50%. Maldistributed LDI is associated with higher revision in short lumbar fusions, 4 vertebrae1. We hypothesise maldistributed LDI is also associated with mechanical failure in longer fusions. Retrospective review of 29 consecutive ASD patients, aged 55+, undergoing long lumbar fusion, 4 levels, with >3-years follow-up. LDI, pelvic incidence (PI) and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) were measured on pre- and post-op whole spine standing X-rays (Fig A and B). Patients were categorized according to their pelvic incidence (PI) and postoperative LDI: Normal (LDI 50 80), Hypolordotic (LDI < 50), or Hyperlordotic (LDI > 80) and assessed for failure rate compared to normal LDI and PI <60. Mean follow-up 4.5 years. 19 patients had mechanical failures including junctional failure and metalware fracture. PI >60o was associated with higher mechanical failure rates (Chi^2 p<0.05). Hypolordotic LDI was associated with 82% mechanical failure (Chi^2 p<0.001), Hyperlordotic 88% mechanical failure (Chi^2 p<0.001) and Normal 8% mechanical failure (Table 1). Maldistributed LDI, whether Hyperlordotic or Hypolordotic, correlated with 10× greater mechanical failure rate compared to Normal LDI in long fusions. LDI is a useful measurement that should be considered, especially in high PI patients

Aims. To report the development of the technique for minimally invasive lumbar decompression using robotic-assisted navigation. Methods. Robotic planning software was used to map out bone removal for a laminar decompression after registration of CT scan images of one cadaveric specimen. A specialized acorn-shaped bone removal robotic drill was used to complete a robotic lumbar laminectomy. Post-procedure advanced imaging was obtained to compare actual bony decompression to the surgical plan. After confirming accuracy of the technique, a minimally invasive robotic-assisted laminectomy was performed on one 72-year-old female patient with lumbar spinal stenosis. Postoperative advanced imaging was obtained to confirm the decompression. Results. A workflow for robotic-assisted lumbar laminectomy was successfully developed in a human cadaveric specimen, as excellent decompression was confirmed by postoperative CT imaging. Subsequently, the workflow was applied clinically in a patient with severe spinal stenosis. Excellent decompression was achieved intraoperatively and preservation of the dorsal midline structures was confirmed on postoperative MRI. The patient experienced improvement in symptoms postoperatively and was discharged within 24 hours. Conclusion. Minimally invasive robotic-assisted lumbar decompression utilizing a specialized robotic bone removal instrument was shown to be accurate and effective both in vitro and in vivo. The robotic bone removal technique has the potential for less invasive removal of laminar bone for spinal decompression, all the while preserving the spinous process and the posterior ligamentous complex. Spinal robotic surgery has previously been limited to the insertion of screws and, more recently, cages; however, recent innovations have expanded robotic capabilities to decompression of neurological structures. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(9):809–817

Study design. A retrospective study design. Objective. To comprehensively compare the 2-year clinical outcome of lumbar laminectomy alone versus lumbar laminetomy supplemented with dynamic stabilization (Dynesys system) in degenerative lumbar stenosis in elderly patients. Material and Methods. A total of 60 elderly patients with an average age of 65.1 years (range, 50 to 78 yrs) affected by lumbar stenosis that underwent lumbar laminectomy alone (30 cases) or lumbar laminectomy with supplementary Dynesys system (30 cases) at our Department were sorted and matched according to three criteria : similar patient age, similar degenerative lumbar desease, and identical operative methods (i.e. levels of laminectomy). Patients were compared according to Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland Morris, SF-36 and VAS outcomes scores. Results. The two cohorts were well matched at 2-years follow-up. Patients treated with lumbar laminectomy alone presented reduced operative time and intraoperative blood loss and reduced postoperative complications, with better clinical outcome compared with patients that received laminectomy with supplementary Dynesys system, for ODI score (28.9 vs 31), Roland Morris (8.25 vs 9.1) and VAS scores (leg pain 36 vs 44.3; back pain 31 vs 38.7), while SF-36 scores resulted similar in both groups of patients. Conclusions. In degenerative lumbar stenosis, supplementary dynamic stabilization in addition to decompressive laminectomy did not presented significant advantages, with respect to functional outcome, in comparison to lumbar laminectomy alone

Aims

We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences.

The pelvic girdle and spine vertebral column work as a long chain influenced by pelvic tilt. Spinal deformities or other musculoskeletal conditions may cause patients to compensate with excessive pelvic tilt, producing alterations in the degree of lumbar lordosis and subsequently causing pain. The objective of this study is to assess the effect of open and closed chain anterior or posterior pelvic tilt on lumbar spine kinematics using an in vitro cadaveric spine model. Three human cadaveric spines with intact pelvis were suspended with the skull fixed in a metal frame. Optotrak 3D motion system tracked real-time coordinates of pin markers on the lumbar spine. A force-torque digital gage applied consistent force to standardize the acetabular or sacral axis’ anterior and posterior pelvic tilt during simulated open and closed chain movements, respectively. In closed chain PPT, significant differences in relative intervertebral compression existed between L1/L2 [-2.54 mm] and L5/S1 [-11.84 mm], and between L3/L4 [-2.78 mm] and L5/S1 [-11.84 mm] [p <.05]. In closed chain APT, significant differences in relative intervertebral decompression existed between spinal levels L1/L2 [2.87mm] and L5/S1[24.48 mm] and between L3/L4 [2.94 mm] and L5/S1 [24.48 mm] [p <.05]. In open chain APT, significant differences in relative intervertebral decompression existed between spinal levels L4/L5 [1.53mm] and L5/S1 [25.14 mm] and between L2/L3 [1.68 mm] and L5/S1 [25.14 mm] [p<.05 for both]. Displacement during closed chain PPT was significantly greater than during open chain PPT, whereas APT showed no significant differences. In PPT, open chain pelvic tilts did not produce as much lumbar intervertebral displacement compared to closed chain. In contrast, APT saw no significant differences between open and closed chain. Additionally, results illustrate the increase in lumbar lordosis during APT and the loss of lordosis during PPT

Background. Lateral lumbar spine statistical shape models (SSM) have been used previously to describe associations with osteoarthritis and back pain. However, associations with factors such as osteoporosis, menopause and parity have not been explored. Methods and Results. A 143-point SSM, describing L1 to the top of L5, was applied to lateral spine iDXA scans from UK Biobank. Associations with self-reported osteoporosis, menopause, parity and back pain and the first 10 modes of variation were examined using adjusted binary logistic regression or linear regression (adjusted for age, height, weight and total spine BMD). We report odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for each standard deviation change in mode. Complete data were available for 2494 women. Mean age was 61.5 (± 7.4) years. 1369 women reported going through menopause, 96 women self-reported osteoporosis and 339 women reported chronic back pain. 80% of women reported at least 1 live birth. Lumbar spine shape was not associated with back pain in this cohort. Two modes were associated with menopause (modes 1 & 2), 1 mode with parity (mode 1) and 2 modes with osteoporosis (modes 3 & 5). Mode 1 (43.6% total variation), describing lumbar curvature was positively associated with both menopause [OR 1.15 95% CI 1.00–1.33, p=0.05] and parity [OR 1.058 95% CI 1.03–1.0, p=0.01]. Mode 3, describing decreased vertebral height was positively associated with osteoporosis [OR 1.40 95% CI 1.14–1.73, p=0.001]. Conclusion. Menopause and parity were associated with a curvier lumbar spine and osteoporosis with decreased vertebral height. Shape was not associated with back pain. No conflicts of interest.  . Sources of funding. Wellcome Trust collaborative award ref 209233

Purpose: To review the sagittal lumbar and clinical profile of the two surgical procedures: TLIF (transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and ALIF (anterior lumbar interbody fusion). Materials and methods: We carried out a retrospective study of 46 patients who underwent circumferential fusion in 2000–2001. TLIF was used in the first group (21) and ALIF in the second (25). The posterior approach with pedicle instrumentation was used in all patients. Lateral radiographs of the lumbar spine in neutral position and bipedestation were used for evaluation before and after surgery and during follow-up. The results were compared statistically using the Wilcoxon matched pairs test. Results: Lumbar lordosis was achieved with both techniques: TLIF+PF(posterior fusion) −33° (preoperative), −46° (postoperative) and ALIF+ PF −49° (preoperative), −54° (postoperative). However the height of the disc improved significantly with the anterior approach: TLIF+ PF 0.62 (preoperative), 1.35 (postoperative) and ALIF+PF 1 (preoperative), 4.65 (postoperative). The duration of surgery, blood loss and hospital stay were greater with ALIF+PF than with TLIF+PF. Conclusions: TLIF+PF has clinical and economic advantages over ALIF+PF. Lumbar lordosis and the area of instrumented lordosis was achieved with both circumferential fusion procedures and the only radiographic difference was the restoration of the disc height with ALIF

Aims. People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial). Methods. An online cross-sectional survey was piloted by the multidisciplinary research team, then shared with clinical professional groups in the UK who are involved in the management of adults with severe, persistent LBP. The survey had seven sections that covered the demographic details of the clinician, five hypothetical case vignettes of patients with varying presentations, a series of questions regarding the preferred management, and whether or not each clinician would be willing to recruit the example patients into future clinical trials. Results. There were 72 respondents, with a response rate of 9.0%. They comprised 39 orthopaedic spine surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, one pain specialist, and 15 allied health professionals. Most respondents (n = 61,84.7%) chose conservative care as their first-choice management option for all five case vignettes. Over 50% of respondents reported willingness to randomize three of the five cases to either surgery or BCC, indicating a willingness to participate in the future randomized trial. From the respondents, transforaminal interbody fusion was the preferred approach for spinal fusion (n = 19, 36.4%), and the preferred method of BCC was a combined programme of physical and psychological therapy (n = 35, 48.5%). Conclusion. This survey demonstrates that there is uncertainty about the role of lumbar spine fusion surgery and BCC for a range of example patients with severe, persistent LBP in the UK. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(7):612–620

Aims. Repeated lumbar spine surgery has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine and quantify the impact of this association in a national clinical register cohort. Methods. This is a population-based study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine surgery (NORspine). We included 26,723 consecutive cases operated for lumbar spinal stenosis or lumbar disc herniation from January 2007 to December 2018. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), presented as the proportions reaching a patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS; defined as an ODI raw score ≤ 22) and ODI raw and change scores at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the Global Perceived Effect scale, the numerical rating scale for pain, the EuroQoL five-dimensions health questionnaire, occurrence of perioperative complications and wound infections, and working capability. Binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine how the number of previous operations influenced the odds of not reaching a PASS. Results. The proportion reaching a PASS decreased from 66.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 65.4 to 66.7) in cases with no previous operation to 22.0% (95% CI 15.2 to 30.3) in cases with four or more previous operations (p < 0.001). The odds of not reaching a PASS were 2.1 (95% CI 1.9 to 2.2) in cases with one previous operation, 2.6 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.0) in cases with two, 4.4 (95% CI 3.4 to 5.5) in cases with three, and 6.9 (95% CI 4.5 to 10.5) in cases with four or more previous operations. The ODI raw and change scores and the secondary outcomes showed similar trends. Conclusion. We found a dose-response relationship between increasing number of previous operations and inferior outcomes among patients operated for degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine. This information should be considered in the shared decision-making process prior to elective spine surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(4):422–430

Abstract. Background. Elderly patients with degenerative lumbar disease are increasingly undergoing posterior lumbar decompression without instrumented stabilisation. There is a paucity of studies examining clinical outcomes, morbidity & mortality associated with this procedure in this population. Methods. A retrospective analysis of aged 80–100 years who underwent posterior lumbar decompression without instrumented stabilisation at University Hospitals of Derby &Burton between 2016–2020. Results. Total 167 eligible patients, 163 octogenarians & 4 nonagenarians. Mean age was 82.78 ± 3.07 years. Mean length of hospital stay 4.79 ± 10.92 days. 76% were pain free at 3months following decompression. The average Charleston co-morbidity index (CCI) was 4.87. No association found with CCI in predicting mortality (ODD ratio 0.916, CI95%). 17patients suffered complications; dural tear (0.017%), post-op paralysis (0.017%), SSI(0.01%), and 0.001% of hospital acquired pneumonia, delirium, TIA, urinary retention, ileus, anaemia. High BMI (35+) was associated with increased incidence of complication (CI 95%, p<0.002). There was significant social drift following discharge as 147 patients went home and 4 patients to rehabilitation facility (p<0.001FE test). The mean operative time was 91.408±41.17 mins and mean anaesthetic time was 36.8±16.06 mins. Prolonged operative time was not associated with increased mortality.2year revision decompression rate was 0.011%. Conclusion. Posterior lumbar decompression without instrumented stablisation in elderly is safe & associated with low mortality with 99.5%survival at 1 year. It significantly improves PROMs & has extremely low revision rate. Incidence of post-op complication is <0.05% and 54% of patients get discharged within 72hours of surgery. Careful selection & optimising patients with high BMI would reduced perioperative morbidity and mortality

Mechanical failure of spine posterior fixation in the lumbar region Is suspected to occur more frequently when the sagittal balance is not properly restored. While failures at the proximal extremity have been studied in the literature, the lumbar distal junctional pathology has received less attention. The aim of this work was to investigate if the spinopelvic parameters, which characterize the sagittal balance, could predict the mechanical failure of the posterior fixation in the distal lumbar region. All the spine surgeries performed in 2017-2019 at Rizzoli Institute were retrospectively analysed to extract all cases of lumbar distal junctional pathology. All the revision surgeries performed due to the pedicle screws pull-out, or the breakage of rods or screws, or the vertebral fracture, or the degenerative disc disease, in the distal extremity, were included in the junctional (JUNCT) group. A total of 83 cases were identified as JUNCT group. All the 241 fixation surgeries which to date have not failed were included in the control (CONTROL) group. Clinical data were extracted from both groups, and the main spinopelvic parameters were assessed from sagittal standing preoperative (pre-op) and postoperative (post-op) radiographs with the software Surgimap (Nemaris). In particular, pelvic incidence (PI), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt (PT), T1 pelvic angle (TPA), sacral slope (SS) and lumbar lordosis (LL) have been measured. In JUNCT, the main failure cause was the screws pull-out (45%). Spine fixation with 7 or more levels were the most common in JUNCT (52%) in contrast to CONTROL (14%). In CONTROL, PT, TPA, SS and PI-LL were inside the recommended ranges of good sagittal balance. For these parameters, statistically significant differences were observed between pre-op and post-op (p<0.0001, p=0.01, p<0.0001, p=0.004, respectively, Wilcoxon test). In JUNCT, the spinopelvic parameters were out of the ranges of the good sagittal balance and the worsening of the balance was confirmed by the increase in PT, TPA, SVA, PI-LL and by the decrease of LL (p=0.002, p=0.003, p<0.0001, p=0.001, p=0.001, respectively, paired t-test) before the revision surgery. TPA (p=0.003, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) and SS (p=0.03, unpaired t-test) differed significantly in pre-op between JUNCT and CONTROL. In post-op, PI-LL was significantly different between JUNCT and CONTROL (p=0.04, unpaired t-test). The regression model of PT vs PI was significantly different between JUNCT and CONTROL in pre-op (p=0.01, Z-test). These results showed that failure is most common in long fused segments, likely due to long lever arms leading to implant failure. If the sagittal balance is not properly restored, after the surgery the balance is expected to worsen, eventually leading to failure: this effect was confirmed by the worsening of all the spinopelvic parameters before the revision surgery in JUNCT. Conversely, a good sagittal balance seems to avoid a revision surgery, as it is visible is CONTROL. The mismatch PI-LL after the fixation seems to confirm a good sagittal balance and predict a good correction. The linear regression of PT vs PI suggests that the spine deformity and pelvic conformation could be a predictor for the failure after a fixation

Background. Surgical site infection following spine surgery is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and increased cost for the health care system. The reported pooled incidence is 3%. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is a key factor in lowering the risk of acquiring an infection. Previous studies have assessed perioperative cefuroxime concentrations in the anterior column of the cervical spine with an anterior surgical approach. However, the majority of surgeries are performed in the posterior column and often involve the lumbar spine. Accordingly, the objective was to compare the perioperative tissue concentrations of cefuroxime in the anterior and posterior column of the same lumbar vertebra using microdialysis in an experimental porcine model. Method. The lumbar vertebral column was exposed in 8 female pigs. Microdialysis catheters were placed for sampling in the anterior column (vertebral body) and posterior column (posterior arch) within the same vertebra (L5). Cefuroxime (1.5 g) was administered intravenously over 10 min. Microdialysates and plasma samples were continuously obtained over 8 hours. Cefuroxime concentrations were quantified by Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Microdialysis is a catheter-based pharmacokinetic tool, that allows dynamic sampling of unbound and pharmacologic active fraction of drugs e.g., cefuroxime. The primary endpoint was the time with cefuroxime above the clinical breakpoint minimal inhibitory concentration (T>MIC) for Staphylococcus aureus of 4 µg/mL as this has been suggested as the best predictor of efficacy for cefuroxime. The secondary endpoint was tissue penetration (AUC. tissue. /AUC. plasma. ). Results. Mean T>MIC 4 µg/mL (95% confidence interval) was 123 min (105–141) in plasma, 97 min (79–115) in the anterior column and 93 min (75–111) in the posterior column. Tissue penetration (95% confidence interval) was incomplete for both the anterior column 0.48 (0.40–0.56) and posterior column 0.40 (0.33–0.48). Conclusions. Open lumbar spine surgery often involves extensive soft tissue dissection, stripping and retraction of the paraspinal muscles which may impair the local blood flow exposing the lumbar vertebra to postoperative infections. A single intravenous administration of 1.5 g cefuroxime resulted in comparable T>MIC between the anterior and posterior column of the lumbar spine. Mean cefuroxime concentrations decreased below the clinical breakpoint MIC for S. aureus of 4 µg/mL after 123 min (plasma), 97 min (anterior column) and 93 min (posterior column). This is shorter than the duration of most lumbar spine surgeries, and therefore alternative dosing regimens should be considered in posterior open lumbar spine surgeries lasting more than 1.5 hours

Lumbar fusion surgery is an established procedure for the treatment of several spinal pathologies. Despite numerous techniques and existing devices, common surgical trends in lumbar fusion surgery are scarcely investigated. The purpose of this Canada-based study was to provide a descriptive portrait of current surgeons’ practice and implant preferences in lumbar fusion surgery while comparing findings to similar investigations performed in the United Kingdom. Canadian Spine Society (CSS) members were sampled using an online questionnaire which was based on previous investigations performed in the United Kingdom. Fifteen questions addressed the various aspects of surgeons’ practice: fusion techniques, implant preferences, and bone grafting procedures. Responses were analyzed by means of descriptive statistics. Of 139 eligible CSS members, 41 spinal surgeons completed the survey (29.5%). The most common fusion approach was via transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) with 87.8% performing at least one procedure in the previous year. In keeping with this, 24 surgeons (58.5%) had performed 11 to 50 cases in that time frame. Eighty-six percent had performed no lumbar artificial disc replacements over their last year of practice. There was clear consistency on the relevance of a patient specific management (73.2%) on the preferred fusion approach. The most preferred method was pedicle screw fixation (78%). The use of stand-alone cages was not supported by any respondents. With regards to the cage material, titanium cages were the most used (41.5%). Published clinical outcome data was the most important variable in dictating implant choice (87.8%). Cage thickness was considered the most important aspect of cage geometry and hyperlordotic cages were preferred at the lower lumbar levels. Autograft bone graft was most commonly preferred (61.0%). Amongst the synthetic options, DBX/DBM graft (64.1%) in injectable paste form (47.5%) was preferred. In conclusion, findings from this study are in partial agreement with previous work from the United Kingdom, but highlight the variance of practice within Canada and the need for large-scale clinical studies aimed to set specific guidelines for certain pathologies or patient categories

Aims. The risk factors for abnormal spinopelvic mobility (SPM), defined as an anterior rotation of the spinopelvic tilt (∆SPT) ≥ 20° in a flexed-seated position, have been described. The implication of pelvic incidence (PI) is unclear, and the concept of lumbar lordosis (LL) based on anatomical limits may be erroneous. The distribution of LL, including a unusual shape in patients with a high lordosis, a low pelvic incidence, and an anteverted pelvis seems more relevant. Methods. The clinical data of 311 consecutive patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty was retrospectively analyzed. We analyzed the different types of lumbar shapes that can present in patients to identify their potential associations with abnormal pelvic mobility, and we analyzed the potential risk factors associated with a ∆SPT ≥ 20° in the overall population. Results. ΔSPT ≥ 20° rates were 28.3%, 11.8%, and 14.3% for patients whose spine shape was low PI/low lordosis (group 1), low PI anteverted (group 2), and high PI/high lordosis (group 3), respectively (p = 0.034). There was no association between ΔSPT ≥ 20° and PI ≤ 41° (odds ratio (OR) 2.01 (95% confidence interval (CI)0.88 to 4.62), p = 0.136). In the multivariate analysis, the following independent predictors of ΔSPT ≥ 20° were identified: SPT ≤ -10° (OR 3.49 (95% CI 1.59 to 7.66), p = 0.002), IP-LL ≥ 20 (OR 4.38 (95% CI 1.16 to 16.48), p = 0.029), and group 1 (OR 2.47 (95% CI 1.19; to 5.09), p = 0.0148). Conclusion. If the PI value alone is not indicative of SPM, patients with a low PI, low lordosis and a lumbar apex at L4-L5 or below will have higher rates of abnormal SPM than patients with a low PI anteverted and high lordosis. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):668–675

Using deep learning and image processing technology, a standardized automatic quantitative analysis systerm of lumbar disc degeneration based on T2MRI is proposed to help doctors evaluate the prognosis of intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration. A semantic segmentation network BianqueNet with self-attention mechanism skip connection module and deep feature extraction module is proposed to achieve high-precision segmentation of intervertebral disc related areas. A quantitative method is proposed to calculate the signal intensity difference (SI) in IVD, average disc height (DH), disc height index (DHI), and disc height-to-diameter ratio (DHR). According to the correlation analysis results of the degeneration characteristic parameters of IVDs, 1051 MRI images from four hospitals were collected to establish the quantitative ranges for these IVD parameters in larger population around China. The average dice coefficients of the proposed segmentation network for vertebral bodies and intervertebral discs are 97.04% and 94.76%, respectively. The designed parameters of intervertebral disc degeneration have a significant negative correlation with the Modified Pfirrmann Grade. This procedure is suitable for different MRI centers and different resolution of lumbar spine T2MRI (ICC=.874~.958). Among them, the standard of intervertebral disc signal intensity degeneration has excellent reliability according to the modified Pfirrmann Grade (macroF1=90.63%~92.02%). we developed a fully automated deep learning-based lumbar spine segmentation network, which demonstrated strong versatility and high reliability to assist residents on IVD degeneration grading by means of IVD degeneration quantitation

Hip instability is one of the most common causes for total hip arthroplasty (THA) revision surgery. Studies have indicated that lumbar fusion (LF) surgery is a risk factor for hip dislocation. Instrumented spine fusion surgery decreases pelvic tilt, which might lead to an increase in hip motion to accommodate this postural change. To the best of our knowledge, spine-pelvis-hip kinematics during a dynamic activity in patients that previously had both a THA and LF have not been investigated. Furthermore, patients with a combined THA and LF tend to have greater disability. The purpose was to examine spine-pelvis-hip kinematics during a sit to stand task in patients that have had both THA and LF surgeries and compare it to a group of patients that had a THA with no history of spine surgery. The secondary purpose was to compare pain, physical function, and disability between these patients. This cross-sectional study recruited participants that had a combined THA and LF (n=10; 6 females, mean age 73 y) or had a THA only (n=11; 6 females, mean age 72 y). Spine, pelvis, and hip angles were measured using a TrakSTAR motion capture system sampled at 200 Hz. Sensors were mounted over the lateral thighs, base of the sacrum, and the spinous process of the third lumbar,12th thoracic, and ninth thoracic vertebrae. Participants completed 10 trials of a standardized sit-to-stand-to-sit task. Hip, pelvis, lower lumbar, upper lumbar, and lower thoracic sagittal joint angle range of motion (ROM) were calculated over the entire task. In addition, pain, physical function, and disability were measured with clinical outcomes: Hip Disability Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (pain and physical function), Oswestry Low Back Disability Questionnaire (disability), and Harris Hip Score (pain, physical function, motion). Physical function performance was measured using 6-Minute Walk Test, Stair Climb Test, and 30s Chair Test. Angle ROMs during the sit-to-stand-to-sit task and clinical outcomes were compared between THA+LF and THA groups using independent t-tests and effect sizes (d). The difference in hip ROM was approaching statistical significance (p=0.07). Specifically, the THA+LF group had less hip ROM during the sit-to-stand-to-sit task than the THA only group (mean difference=11.17, 95% confidence interval=-1.13 to 23.47), which represented a large effect size (d=0.83). There were no differences in ROM for pelvis (p=0.54, d=0.28) or spinal (p=0.14 to 0.97; d=0.02 to 0.65) angles between groups. The THA+LF group had worse clinical outcomes for all measures of pain, physical function, and disability (p=0.01 to 0.06), representing large effect sizes (d=0.89 to 2.70). Hip ROM was not greater in the THA+LF group, and thus this is unlikely a risk factor for hip dislocation during this specific sit-to-stand-to-sit task. Other functional tasks that demand greater excursions in the joints should be investigated. Furthermore, the lack of differences in spinal and pelvis ROM were likely due to the task and the THA+LF group had spinal fusions at different levels. Combined THA+LF results in worse clinical outcomes and additional rehabilitation is required for these patients

Background. It has become increasingly important to conduct studies assessing clinical outcomes, reoperation rates, and revision rates to better define the indications and efficacy of lumbar spinal procedures and its association with symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (sASD). Adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) is defined as the radiographic change in the intervertebral discs adjacent to the surgically treated spinal level. SASD represents adjacent segment degeneration which causes pain or numbness due to post-operative spinal instability or nerve compression at the same level. The most common reason for early reoperation and late operation is sASD, therefore is in our best interest to understand the causes of ASD and make steps to limit the occurrence. Method. A comprehensive literature search was performed selecting Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or prospective studies published up to December 2023. Meta-analysis was performed on 38 studies that met the inclusion criteria and included data of clinical outcomes of patients who had degenerative disc disease, disc herniation, radiculopathy, and spondylolisthesis and underwent lumbar fusion or motion-preservation device surgery; and reported on the prevalence of ASD, sASD, reoperation rate, visual analogue score (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) improvement. Results. When compared to fusion surgery, a significant reduction of ASD, sASD and reoperation was observed in the cohort of patients that underwent motion-preserving surgery. Conclusion. Dynamic fusion constructs are treatment options that may help to prevent sASD. Conflicts of interest. This research was funded by Paradigm Spine. Sources of funding. Paradigm Spine

Low back pain is the single most common cause for disability in individuals aged 45 years or younger, it carries tremendous weight in socioeconomic considerations. Degenerative aging of the structural components of the spine can be associated with genetic aspects, lifetime of tissue exposure to mechanical stress & loads and environmental factors. Mechanical consequences of the disc degenerative include loss of disc height, segment instability and increase the load on facets joints. All these can lead to degenerative changes and osteophytes that can narrow the spinal canal. Surgery is indicated in patients with spinal stenosis who have intractable pain, altered quality of life, substantially diminished functional capacity, failed non-surgical treatment and are not candidates for non-surgical treatment. The aim was to determine the reasons for refusal of surgery in patients with established degenerative lumber spine pathology eligible for surgery. All patients meeting the study criteria, patients older than 18 years, patients with both clinical and radiological established symptomatic degenerative lumbar spine pathology and patients eligible for surgery but refusing it were recruited. Questionnaire used to investigate reasons why they are refusing surgery. Results 59 were recruited, fifty-one (86.4 %) females and eight (13.6 %) males. Twenty (33.8 %) were between the age of 51 and 60 years, followed by nineteen (32.2 %) between 61 and 70 years, and fourteen (23.7 %) between 71 and 80 years. 43 (72 %) patients had lumber spondylosis complicated by lumber spine stenosis, followed by nine (15.2 %) with lumbar spine spondylolisthesis and four (6.7 %) had adjacent level disease. 28 (47.4 %) were scared of surgery, fifteen (25.4 %) claimed that they are too old for surgery and nine (15.2 %) were not ready. Findings from this study outlined that patients lack information about the spinal surgery. Patients education about spine surgery is needed

The use of intraoperative navigation and robotic surgery for minimally invasive lumbar fusion has been increasing over the past decade. The aim of this study is to evaluate postoperative clinical outcomes, intraoperative parameters, and accuracy of pedicle screw insertion guided by intraoperative navigation in patients undergoing lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis. Patients who underwent posterior lumbar fusion interbody using intraoperative 3D navigation since December 2021 were included. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36) were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 1, 3, and 6 months. Screw placement accuracy, measured by Gertzbein and Robbins classification, and facet joint infringement, measured by Yson classification, were assessed by intraoperative Cone Beam CT scans performed at the end of instrumentation. Finally, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and screw insertion time were evaluated. This study involved 50 patients with a mean age of 63.7 years. VAS decreased from 65.8±23 to 20±22 (p<.01). ODI decreased from 35.4%±15 to 11.8%±14 (p<.01). An increase of SF-36 from 51.5±14 to 76±13 (p<.01) was demonstrated. The accuracy of “perfect” and “clinically acceptable” pedicle screw fixation was 89.5% and 98.4%, respectively. Regarding facet violation, 96.8% of the screws were at grade 0. Finally, the average screw insertion time was 4.3±2 min, hospital stay was 4.2±0.8 days, operation time was 205±53 min, and blood loss was 169±107 ml. Finally, a statistically significant correlation of operation time with hospital stay, blood loss and placement time per screw was found. We demonstrated excellent results for accuracy of pedicle screw fixation and violation of facet joints. VAS, ODI and SF-36 showed statistically significant improvements from the control at one month after surgery. Navigation with intraoperative 3D images represents an effective system to improve operative performance in the surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis

The primary objective is to compare revision rates for lumbar disc replacement (LDR) and fusion at the same or adjacent levels in Ontario, Canada. The secondary objectives include acute complications during hospitalization and in 30 days, and length of hospital stay. A population-based cohort study was conducted using health administrative databases including patients undergoing LDR or single level fusion between October 2005 to March 2018. Patients receiving LDR or fusion were identified using physician claims recorded in the Ontario Health Insurance Program database. Additional details of surgical procedure were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information hospital discharge abstract. Primary outcome measured was presence of revision surgery in the lumbar spine defined as operation greater than 30 days from index procedure. Secondary outcomes were immediate/ acute complications within the first 30 days of index operation. A total of 42,024 patients were included. Mean follow up in the LDR and fusion groups were 2943 and 2301 days, respectively. The rates of revision surgery at the same or adjacent levels were 4.7% in the LDR group and 11.1% in the fusion group (P=.003). Multivariate analysis identified risk factors for revision surgery as being female, hypertension, and lower surgeon volume. More patients in the fusion group had dural tears (p<.001), while the LDR group had more “other” complications (p=.037). The LDR group had a longer mean hospital stay (p=.018). In this study population, the LDR group had lower rates of revision compared to the fusion group. Caution is needed in concluding its significance due to lack of clinical variables and possible differences in indications between LDR and posterior decompression and fusion