Abstract. Objectives. There is still controversy in the literature over whether Cervical Foraminotomy or Anterior Cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is best for treating cervical Radiculopathy. Numerous studies have focused on the respective complication rates of these procedures and outcome measures with a lack of due consideration to preoperative MRI findings. Proximal foraminal stenosis can theoretically be accessed via either approach. We aimed to investigate whether patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) favoured one approach over the other in patients with proximal foraminal stenosis. Methods. A single centre retrospective review of patients undergoing either ACDF or Cervical foraminotomy over the period 2012 to 2022. VAS, Neck disability index (NDI), EQ5DL and Patient Satisfaction on a Five Point Likert scale were obtained. Patients who had both an ACDF and a Foraminotomy were excluded. Axial MRI images were analysed and the location of the worst clinically relevant disc herniation stratified as follows: Central (1), Paracentral (2) and Foraminal (3). Correlations and average PROMs were analysed in SPSS. Results. PROMs scores were available for 33 ACDF patients and 37 Foraminotomy patients. Average surgery time in ACDF group was 167 minutes while Foraminotomy 142 minutes. Average Length of hospital stay was 6.24 days in the Foraminotomy group and 3.54 days in the ACDF group. 18 patients were excluded due to having both surgeries (2 of which developed CSF leaks postoperatively). Of the included patients there were no postoperative complications. 13 patients in the ACDF had Central or Paracentral stenosis in addition to proximal Foraminal stenosis, 3 patients in the Foraminotomy group had some significant Paracentral herniation just before the Proximal foramen. The majority of patients in both groups had pure proximal Foraminal stenosis (N= 17 (ACDF), 20 (Foraminotomy). The results showed no significant difference in PROMs between patients who received an ACDF or a Foraminotomy for Proximal foraminal stenosis (EQ5DL, NDI, and satisfaction, P= 0.268, 0.253 and 0.327). There was no correlation between location of the stenosis and PROM scores in either group. Conclusions. Our data suggest that Proximal foraminal stenosis can be effectively addressed by either an anterior ACDF or a Foraminotomy with no difference in complication rates. Foraminotomy has the benefit of no implant cost but longer hospital stay. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Background: To assess the clinical and radiological results of motion-segment sparing anterior cervical partial discectomy and foraminotomy surgery in patients with at least 1 year of follow-up. Methods: The study is a prospective, non-randomized, observational study. The patients all had symptoms of intrusive nerve root irritation with or without motor symptoms, refractory to conservative management for greater than 6 weeks duration. Patients were asked to complete questionnaires capturing) VAS (visual analogue) pain scores, NDI (neck disability index) and European myelopathy scores, patient satisfaction, and return to work details. Radiographic assessments were collected preoperatively, at 4 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Results: 58 patients have been assessed with at least 1year follow-up. The mean duration of symptoms prior to surgery was 24 weeks (6–20 weeks). 55 patients had single level surgeries (C5/C6-15, C6/C7-38, C7-T1-2), 3 patients had two level surgeries (C4/C5& C5/C6-1, C5/C6& C6/C7-2). In 34 patients sugery was for soft disc prolapse, in 12 patients surgery was for hard osteophytes and in 12 patients both pathologies contributed equally. Operation time ranged from 50–85 minutes. Average in patient stay was 2.6 days. There were no complications apart from 1 patient who had to return early to theatre for evacuation of haematoma and then made a full recovery. All patients reported pain intensity reductions. Pain decreased from 6.7 to 1.4 for arm pain on a 10-point scale. NDI scores improved from a preop mean of 42 to 16 on a 100 point score at 6 months post-surgery. All patients returned to their usual occupations with the exception of 2 patients who are involved in litigation against an employer or third party. No patient required repeat surgeries. Radiographic analysis at 1 year shows preservation of segmental motion in 75% patients, preservation of interbody height in 60% patients, spontaneous fusion in 12% patients. Conclusion: A clinical success rate of 90% was achieved (clinical success being defined as a patient rating of very satisfied or satisfied on a 5-point patient self-scoring outcome scale). 56 out of 58 patients would undergo the same procedure again and recommend it to friend

Purpose: Published series of minimally invasive cervical foraminotomy (MICF) have shown excellent short-term relief of cervical radiculopathy (85–98%) with minimal surgical morbidity. There have been no long-term clinical series documenting the stability of these results over time. This is the first long-term follow-up of MICF patients to determine the incidence of recurrent symptoms and need for additional cervical spine surgery. Methods: We conducted a multi-center retrospective chart review of 73 patients who had MICF. Clinical outcome measures were assessed from clinic records, operative records, and telephone surveys. Results: At 3 months, 70/73 patients (96%) reported relief of radicular pain compared to their preoperative state. By 40 months, 15 patients reported symptoms of cervical radiculopathy. 8 patients experienced recurrent symptoms, and the remaining 7 had a new radicular pattern. Of 7 patients with symptoms at new levels, 6 had pre-existing radiographic abnormality. 15 patients underwent additional cervical surgery after MICF. 3 patients underwent repeat MICF at the same level. An additional 2 patients had MICF at a different level. 7 patients had ACDF at the same level and 2 had fusion at a different level. There were no cases of frank instability or spondylolisthesis noted. Conclusions: At 40 month follow-up, 21% or patients had radicular symptoms with 11% reporting recurrence of preoperative symptoms and 9% with radicular symptoms in a different distribution. 12% (9/73 patients) of the group required ACDF within the follow-up period. Thus, 64/73 patients were spared fusion in this series. Assuming the 2.5% per year incidence of adjacent level fusion cited in the literature, there would have been 6 cases likely to have required another fusion if all 73 patients had been treated with ACDF initially. From this perspective, MICF continues to be our procedure of choice for properly selected patients with cervical radiculopathy

Background. Foraminal stenosis is often encountered in patients undergoing decompression for spinal stenosis. Given the increased resection of facets and the presence of the more sensitive dorsal root ganglion, it is hypothesized that patients with foraminal stenosis have poorer postoperative outcomes. Methods. Thirty-one patients undergoing decompression without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis were evaluated. The degree of foraminal stenosis was determined by 2 independent reviewers for absence of fat around the nerve roots. ImageJ digital imaging software was also used to evaluate the foraminal area. Patients with foraminal stenosis were compared with those without using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and a numerical pain scale for back and leg pain at a minimum of 1 year follow-up. Results. Twenty patients in the foraminal stenosis group were compared with 11 without foraminal stenosis. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding age, sex, comorbidities, number of levels operated on, preoperative ODI, back pain or leg pain scores. The foraminal area was significantly smaller in the foraminal stenosis group. Patients without foraminal stenosis reported significant improvements in ODI (mean 26.0), back pain (mean 3.1) and leg pain scores (mean 5.5). Patients with foraminal stenosis reported significant improvements in ODI (mean 18.8) and leg pain (mean 2.5) but not in back pain (mean 0.3). Comparing the 2 groups, the patients with foraminal stenosis had significantly less improvement in back pain (p = 0.02) and leg pain (p = 0.02). Conclusion. The results of this study suggest that presence of foraminal stenosis is a negative predictor for successful outcome following decompression surgery. This may be related to the increased instability that occurs when a foraminotomy is required. Spinal fusion may reduce this effect, and further study is required. NO DISCLOSURES

We evaluate the patients with lumbar spinal stenosis in multiple levels that were treated with posterior decompression and posterolateral fusion, using transpedicular screw fixation system. Twenty-six patients, mean age 65.7 years (range 49 to 77years), with lumbar spinal stenosis, in more than three levels, were treated surgically between 1994 and 2002. Indications for surgical treatment included low back pain and neurogenic claudication for more than 6 months. The diagnostic approach consisted of x-rays, MRI, myelography and myelo-CT. Oswestry disability score and VAS (visual analog scale), were used for the clinical evaluation of the patients. Surgical procedure consisted of wide posterior decompression, regarding laminectomy, complete or incomplete facetectomy and foraminotomy, combined with posterolateral fusion, using transpedicular screw systems and bone graft. Fusion in three levels was performed at seven patients, in four levels at ten, in five levels at seven, in six and seven levels at one patient respectively. Mean follow-up was 26.8 months (range 12 to 38 months). Oswestry score and VAS revealed improvement 40.75% and 5.4 levels respectively. The better results were concerned to pain (2.88 levels improvement) and the less good to lifting (1.58 levels improvement). Two cases with superficial infections were observed and treated with surgical debridement. Screw breakage was observed in 1 patient and treated conservatively. Loosening of two sacral screws, which were removed, was observed in one patient. We conclude that myelography and myelo-CT revealed with satisfactory accuracy intra and outer foraminal lumbar spinal stenosis. Posterior decompression and instrumented fusion, offer satisfactory clinical results in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis in multiple levels when performed by experienced surgical team

Diagnostic indices for the determination of involved nerve root in cervical radiculopathy have been described by Yoss (1957), Murphey (1973) and Hoppenfeld (1976). However, there has been criticism that their indices are inappropriate for the diagnosis, because involved nerve root can not necessarily be determined using them. Difficulties in diagnosis have been attributed to the variable patterns of symptoms and signs caused by nerve root compression. Purpose: To develop the new diagnostic indices for determination of involved nerve root in cervical radiculopathy. Methods: Forty-five cases operated on through posterior foraminotomy were reviewed. The sites of neck pain(s) (in nape, in suprascapular, superior angle of scapula, interscapular, or scapular regions), and arm pain (anterior, lateral, posterior or medial) in anatomical position were preoperatively recorded. The finger(s) with subjective paraesthesia or objective sensory change, and the finger(s) of the most severe involvement were recorded. Affected muscle(s) (deltoid, biceps, wrist extensor, wrist flexor, triceps, finger extensor, or intrinsic), and the muscle(s) of the weakest were recorded. All of 45 cases were decompressed unilaterally at only 1 level, and showed improvements just after operation. Involved nerve roots and number of their cases were as follows: C5, 7; C6, 12; C7, 13; C8, 13. Results: Pain in the suprascapular region frequently (82%) indicated C5 or C6 radiculopathy. Interscapular or scapular pain always (100%) indicated C7 or C8 radiculopathy. Lateral, posterior, or medial arm pain frequently indicated C6, C7 or C8 radiculopathy, respectively. Involved nerve roots and number of patterns of finger paraesthesia [or sensory change] were as follows: C5, 0 [0]; C6, 4 [5]; C7, 8 [10]; C8, 4 [5]. However, when the most severe involvement was that of the thumb, the index or long finger, or the little finger, the indication was C6, C7 or C8 radiculopathy, respectively. Although patterns in affection of muscles were also variable, when the weakest muscle was deltoid, biceps or wrist extensor, wrist flexor or triceps, or intrinsic, the indication was C5, C6, C7 or C8 radiculopathy, respectively. Conclusion: The sites of the neck and arm pain are important for the diagnosis of the involved nerve root. Not the fingers with paraesthesia but the fingers with the most severe involvement lead to the diagnosis

Introduction: While anterior cervical decompression and fusion has been shown to be clinically effective in cases of myelopathy or radiculopathy, several studies have suggested an increased risk of development of adjacent segment degeneration. The Bryan Cervical Disc Pros-thesis was developed to address this complication and was fi rst used clinically in Europe in January 2000. The author began to use the device in June of 2001 and since that time has implanted 30 prostheses in 22 patients. The present prospective study was commenced at the time (concurrently with an ASERNIPS study) with a view to examine the clinical efficacy and safety of this device. The results in the author’s first 14 patients are reported, all with a minimum follow-up of 12 months (mean 20 months). Methods: An observational audit of 14 consecutive patients with cervical radiculopathy (6 patients), myelopathy (6 patients) or discogenic neck pain (2 patients) operated upon between July 2001 and November 2002. Average age was 48 years (range 27 – 61 years). 5 patients underwent two level procedures. Operative / post-op complications and clinical / radiological outcomes were recorded at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12 months and January 2004. Results: Follow-up data is available at > 12 months on 13 of the 14 patients at an average 23 months post op (Range: 14–30 months). The patient for whom data is not available is known to have had a poor clinical outcome. She developed an unusual symptom complex with complex regional pain syndrome and is very unhappy with the surgery. Of the other 13 patients, 12 consider their outcome to have been excellent and 1 fair. In the two patients who underwent surgery purely for discogenic neck pain, substantial relief was reported. In the 8 patients with pre-operative arm pain, 6 reported complete relief, 1 substantial relief and one partial relief. There were no intra-operative complications. Two patients developed dysphagia which resolved after several months, one has described a clicking sensation in his neck for which no cause has been identified and one experiences persistent ‘neural surges’. One patient required surgery for a disc herniation at an adjacent level, 9 months post-op while in another patient, on routine 12 month follow-up MRI scan, an asymptomatic disc herniation adjacent to the operated segment had resolved spontaneously. One patient underwent foraminotomy for recurrent arm pain, 19 months post-op. All prostheses appear mobile on dynamic x-rays but it is apparent that the Bryan device does not correct any pre-operative degenerative deformity using the current technique. Discussion: The current study appears to indicate satisfactory clinical outcomes at an average of 23 months post surgery in this group of patients. Longer follow-up and larger patient numbers are required as well as comparative studies

Introduction and Objectives: This is a retrospective study on the treatment of lumbar degenerative disk disease (LDDD) using intervertebral arthroplasty. The lack of uniformity in the treatment of LDDD, persistence of pain even with solid fusion, and the possibility of changes over the fusion site have encouraged us to seek other solutions for this condition. Total intervertebral arthroplasty has been proposed as a possible alternative for selected cases of LDDD. Materials and Methods: Between November 1999 and July 2002, 16 patients with LDDD were treated surgically using third-generation total intervertebral arthroplasty (Link SB Charité III) with a chromium-cobalt alloy and ultra-high molecular weight (UHMW) poly-ethylene. Average follow-up time was 14 months (6-36 months), and average age was 42 years (35–52). There were 11 females and 5 males. All patients underwent radi-olographic studies, CT scan, MRI, and discography (minimum 2 levels). Indications included LDDD of one to three segments, absence of root tension signs, absence of complete disc collapse, and iconography including concordant discography. LDDD was primary in 11 cases and post-discectomy in 5 cases. Surgery was indicated when at least 6 months of conservative treatment failed to yield results. Blood loss and length of hospital stay were compared to a similar group that underwent posterolateral arthrodesis. Pain, function, and degree of disability were evaluated before and after surgery using GEER (1999) instruments for the evaluation of degenerative lumbar pathology. Increase in height of the posterior intervertebral space and segmentary lordosis were also measured. Results: Preoperative VAS: 7.8; postoperative VAS: 2.3. Disability index (Oswestry) was 41.3% preoperative and 10.8% postoperative. Average increase in height of posterior intervertebral space was 2.4mm, and mean segmental lordosis was 19.5°, which remained constant through the end of the follow-up period. Average hospital stay was 4.8 days (3–15) compared with 7.5 (5–18) for a group of patients who underwent suspended arthrodesis of L4–L5 with a much smaller quantity of blood loss. No infections were found. Complications: One patient developed an epidural haematoma, which was treated conservatively. Another developed a postoperative retroperitoneal haematoma, which was also treated conservatively. In neither case was there an adverse effect on the outcome of the procedure. One patient showed malpositioning of the prosthetic components on follow-up radiographs, with poor clinical progression at one year postoperative. The patient was treated with posterolateral fusion and right L5 foraminotomy. No infections were seen. Discussion and Conclusions: Treatment of LDDD with intervertrebral arthroplasty was shown to be effective in the short term, if strict guidelines are followed. Aggressive surgical management is highly inferior to conventional arthrodesis. A longer follow-up period is needed to confirm the validity of this treatment. Technical error in malpositioning of the components in one case caused a poor result

Aims

To evaluate safety outcomes and patient satisfaction of the re-introduction of elective orthopaedic surgery on ‘green’ (non-COVID-19) sites during the COVID-19 pandemic.