Postoperative surgical site infection in patients treated with lumbosacral fusion has been believed to be caused by perioperative contamination (Perioperative Inside-Out infections) in patients with comorbidities. With the proximity of these incisions to the perianal region and limited patient mobility in the early post-operative period, local contamination from gastrointestinal and/or urogenital flora (Postoperative Outside-In infections) should be considered as a major source of complication.

A single center, retrospective review of adult patients treated with open posterior lumbosacral fusions between January 2014 and January 2021. We aimed to identify common factors in patients experiencing deep postoperative infections. Oncological, minimally invasive, primary infection, and index procedures carried out at other institutions were excluded.

We identified 489 eligible patients, 20 of which required debridement deep to the fascia (4.1%). Mean age (62.9 vs 60.8), operative time (420 vs 390 minutes), estimated blood loss (1772 vs 1790 mL) and median levels fused (8.5 vs 9) were similar between the infected and non-infected groups. There was a higher percentage of deformity patients (75% vs 29%) and increased BMI (32.7 vs 28.4) in the infected group. The mean time from primary procedure to debridement was 40.8 days. Four patients showed no growth on culture. Three showed Staphylococcus species (Perioperative Inside-Out infections) requiring debridement at a mean of 100.3 days (95%CI 0- 225 days). Thirteen patients showed infection with intestinal or urogenital pathogens (Postoperative Outside-In infections) requiring debridement at a mean of 20.0 days (95%CI 9-31 days). Postoperative Outside-In infections led to debridement 80.3 days earlier than Perioperative Inside-Out infections (p= 0.007).

In this series, 65% of deep infections were due to early local contamination by gastrointestinal and/or urogenital tracts pathogens. These infections were debrided significantly earlier than the Staphylococcus species infections. Due to the proximity of the incisions to the perianal region, there should be increased focus on post-operative local wound management to ensure these pathogens are away from the wound during the critical stages of wound healing.

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.

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.

This study aims to 1) determine reported cannabis use among patients waiting for thoracolumbar surgery and to 2) identify demographics and health differences between cannabis-users and non-cannabis users.

This observational cohort study is a retrospective national multicenter review data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry. Patients were dichotomized as cannabis users and non-cannabis users. Variables of interest: age, sex, BMI, smoking status, education, work status, exercise, modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI), the Numerical Rating Scales (NRS) for leg and back pain, tingling/numbness scale, SF-12 Quality of Life Questionnaire - Mental Health Component (MCS), use of prescription cannabis, recreational cannabis, and narcotic pain medication. Continuous variables were compared using an independent t-test and categorical variables were compared using chi-square analyses.

Cannabis-use was reported by 28.4% of pre-operative patients (N=704), 47% of whom used prescription cannabis. Cannabis-use was reported most often by patients in Alberta (43.55%), British Colombia (38.09%) and New Brunswick (33.73%). Patients who reported using cannabis were significantly younger (mean=52.9 versus mean=61.21,). There was a higher percentage of concurrent narcotic-use (51.54 %) and smoking (21.5%) reported in cannabis-users in comparison to non-cannabis users (41.09%,p=0.001; 9.51%, p=0.001, respectively). There were significant differences in cannabis-use based on pathology (p=0.01). Patients who report using cannabis had significantly worse MCS scores (difference=3.93, p=0.001), and PHQ-8 scores (difference=2.51, p=0.001). There was a significant difference in work status (p=0.002) with cannabis-users reporting higher rates (20%) of being employed, but not working compared to non-cannabis users (11.13%). Non-cannabis users were more likely to be retired (45.92%) compared to cannabis-users (31.31%). There were no significant differences based on cannabis use for sex, education, exercise, NRS-back, NRS-Leg, tingling-leg, mODI, or health state.

Thoracolumbar spine surgery patients are utilizing cannabis prior to surgery both through recreational use and prescription. Patients who are using cannabis pre-operatively did not differ in regards to reported pain or disability from non-users, though they did in demographic and mental health variables.

This study aims to 1) determine reported cannabis use among patients waiting for thoracolumbar surgery and to 2) identify demographics and health differences between cannabis-users and non-cannabis users.

This observational cohort study is a retrospective national multicenter review data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry. Patients were dichotomized as cannabis users and non-cannabis users. Variables of interest: age, sex, BMI, smoking status, education, work status, exercise, modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI), the Numerical Rating Scales (NRS) for leg and back pain, tingling/numbness scale, SF-12 Quality of Life Questionnaire - Mental Health Component (MCS), use of prescription cannabis, recreational cannabis, and narcotic pain medication. Continuous variables were compared using an independent t-test and categorical variables were compared using chi-square analyses.

Cannabis-use was reported by 28.4% of pre-operative patients (N=704), 47% of whom used prescription cannabis. Cannabis-use was reported most often by patients in Alberta (43.55%), British Colombia (38.09%) and New Brunswick (33.73%). Patients who reported using cannabis were significantly younger (mean=52.9 versus mean=61.21,). There was a higher percentage of concurrent narcotic-use (51.54 %) and smoking (21.5%) reported in cannabis-users in comparison to non-cannabis users (41.09%,p=0.001; 9.51%, p=0.001, respectively). There were significant differences in cannabis-use based on pathology (p=0.01). Patients who report using cannabis had significantly worse MCS scores (difference=3.93, p=0.001), and PHQ-8 scores (difference=2.51, p=0.001). There was a significant difference in work status (p=0.002) with cannabis-users reporting higher rates (20%) of being employed, but not working compared to non-cannabis users (11.13%). Non-cannabis users were more likely to be retired (45.92%) compared to cannabis-users (31.31%). There were no significant differences based on cannabis use for sex, education, exercise, NRS-back, NRS-Leg, tingling-leg, mODI, or health state.

Thoracolumbar spine surgery patients are utilizing cannabis prior to surgery both through recreational use and prescription. Patients who are using cannabis pre-operatively did not differ in regards to reported pain or disability from non-users, though they did in demographic and mental health variables.

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic meant that proceeding with elective surgery was restricted to minimise exposure on the wards. In order to maintain throughput of elective cases, our hospital was forced to convert as many cases as possible to same day procedures rather than overnight admission. In this retrospective analysis we review the cases performed as same day arthroplasty surgeries compared to the same period 12 months previous.

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasties in a three month period between October and December in 2019 and again in 2020, in the middle of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Patient demographics, number of out-patient primary arthroplasty cases, length of stay for admissions, 30-day readmission and complications were collated.

In total, 428 patient charts were reviewed for the months of October-December of 2019 (n=195) and 2020 (n=233). Of those, total hip arthroplasties comprised 60% and 58.8% for 2019 and 2020, respectively. Demographic data was comparable with no statistical difference for age, gender contralateral joint replacement or BMI. ASA grade I was more highly prevalent in the 2020 cohort (5.1x increase, n=13 vs n=1). Degenerative disc disease and fibromyalgia were less significantly prevalent in the 2020 cohort. There was a significant increase in same day discharges for non-DAA THAs (2x increase) and TKA (10x increase), with a reciprocal decrease in next day discharges. There were significantly fewer reported superficial wound infections in 2020 (5.6% vs 1.7%) and no significant differences in readmissions or emergency department visits (3.1% vs 3.0%).

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic meant that hospitals and patients were hopeful to minimise the exposure to the wards and to not put strain on the already taxed in-patient beds. With few positives during the Coronavirus crisis, the pandemic was the catalyst to speed up the outpatient arthroplasty program that has resulted in our institution being more efficient and with no increase in readmissions or early complications.

Pain management in spine surgery can be challenging. Cannabis might be an interesting choice for analgesia while avoiding some side effects of opioids. Recent work has reported on the potential benefits of cannabinoids for multimodal pain control, but very few studies focus on spinal surgery patients. This study aims to examine demographic and health status differences between patients who report the use of (1) cannabis, (2) narcotics, (3) cannabis and narcotics or (4) no cannabis/narcotic use.

Retrospective cohort study of thoracolumbar patients enrolled in the CSORN registry after legalization of cannabis in Canada. Variables included: age, sex, modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI), Numerical Rating Scales (NRS) for leg and back pain, tingling/numbness leg sensation, SF-12 Quality of Life- Mental Health Component (MCS), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and general health state. An ANCOVA with pathology as the covariate and post-hoc analysis was run.

The majority of the 704 patients enrolled (mean age: 59; female: 46.9%) were non-users (41.8%). More patients reported narcotic-use than cannabis-use (29.7% vs 12.9%) with 13.4% stating concurrent-use. MCS scores were significantly lower for patients with concurrent-use compared to no-use (mean of 39.95 vs 47.98, p=0.001) or cannabis-use (mean=45.66, p=0.043). The narcotic-use cohort had significantly worse MCS scores (mean=41.37, p=0.001) than no-use. Patients reporting no-use and cannabis-use (mean 41.39 vs 42.94) had significantly lower ODI scores than narcotic-use (mean=54.91, p=0.001) and concurrent-use (mean=50.80, p=0.001). Lower NRS-Leg pain was reported in cannabis-use (mean=5.72) compared to narcotic-use (mean=7.19) and concurrent-use (mean=7.03, p=0.001). No-use (mean=6.31) had significantly lower NRS-Leg pain than narcotic-use (p=0.011), and significantly lower NRS-back pain (mean=6.17) than narcotic-use (mean=7.16, p=0.001) and concurrent-use (mean=7.15, p=0.012). Cannabis-use reported significantly lower tingling/numbness leg scores (mean=4.85) than no-use (mean=6.14, p=0.022), narcotic-use (mean=6.67, p=0.001) and concurrent-use (mean=6.50, p=0.01). PHQ-9 scores were significantly lower for the no-use (mean=6.99) and cannabis-use (mean=8.10) than narcotic-use (mean=10.65) and concurrent-use (mean=11.93) cohorts. Narcotic-use reported a significantly lower rating of their overall health state (mean=50.03) than cannabis-use (mean=60.50, p=0.011) and no-use (mean=61.89, p=0.001).

Patients with pre-operative narcotic-use or concurrent use of narcotics and cannabis experienced higher levels of disability, pain and depressive symptoms and worse mental health functioning compared to patients with no cannabis/narcotic use and cannabis only use. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first and largest study to examine the use of cannabis amongst Canadian patients with spinal pathology. This observational study lays the groundwork to better understand the potential benefits of adding cannabinoids to control pain in patients waiting for spine surgery. This will allow to refine recommendations about cannabis use for these patients.

Aims

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic meant that proceeding with elective surgery was restricted to minimize exposure on wards. In order to maintain throughput of elective cases, our hospital (St Michaels Hospital, Toronto, Canada) was forced to convert as many cases as possible to same-day procedures rather than overnight admission. In this retrospective analysis, we review the cases performed as same-day arthroplasty surgeries compared to the same period in the previous 12 months.