Surgical management of PJI remains challenging with patients failing treatment despite the best efforts. An important question is whether these later failures reflect reinfection or the persistence of infection. Proponents of reinfection believe hosts are vulnerable to developing infection and new organisms emerge. The alternative hypothesis is that later failure is a result of an organism that was present in the joint but was not picked up by initial culture or was not a pathogen initially but became so under antibiotic pressure. This multicenter study explores the above dilemma. Utilizing next-generation sequencing (NGS), we hypothesize that failures after two stage exchange arthroplasty can be caused by an organism that was present at the time of initial surgery but not isolated by culture. This prospective study involving 15 institutions collected samples from 635 revision total hip (n=310) and knee (n=325) arthroplasties. Synovial fluid, tissue and swabs were obtained intraoperatively for NGS analysis. Patients were classified per 2018 Consensus definition of PJI. Treatment failure was defined as reoperation for infection that yielded positive cultures, during minimum 1-year follow-up. Concordance of the infecting pathogen cultured at failure with NGS analysis at initial revision was determined.Introduction
Methods
Study design: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 448 patients with a variety of spinal metastases. To compare the predictive value of the Tokuhashi scoring system (T12) and its revised edition (T15) for life expectancy both in the entire study group as well as in the various primary tumor subgroups. In 1990 Tokuhashi and coworkers formulated a one point-addition-type prognostic scoring system with a total sum of 12 points for preoperative prediction of life expectancy as an adjunct in selecting appropriate treatment. Because the site of the primary tumor influences ultimate survival, the scoring system was revised in 2005 to a total sum of 15 points based on the origin of the primary tumor.Objective
Summary of background data
To identify risk factors for the presence of distal adding-on in Lenke 1A scoliosis and compare different treatment strategies. Distal adding-on is often accompanied by unsatisfactory clinical outcome and high risk of reoperation. However, very few studies have focused on distal adding-on and its attendant risk factors and optimal treatment strategies remain controversial.Objective
Summary of Background Data
How translation of different parts of spine responds to selective thoracic fusion has not been well investigated. Furthermore, how posterior pedicle-screw-only constructs affect spontaneous lumbar curve correction (SLCC) remains unknown. In a retrospective study, we aimed to investigate the balance change after selective thoracic fusion in Lenke 1C type adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) treated with posterior pedicle-screw-only constructs. All AIS cases, surgically treated between 2002 and 2008 in our institute, were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were: patients with Lenke 1C scoliosis treated with posterior pedicle-screw-only constructs; the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) ended at L1 level or above; and a minimum 2-year radiographic follow-up. Standing anteroposterior (AP) and lateral digital radiographs from different timepoints (preoperative, immediately postoperative, 3 months postoperative, and final follow-up) were reviewed. In each standing AP radiograph, centre sacral vertical line (CSVL) was drawn first, followed by measurement of the translation (deviation from the CSVL) of some key vertebrae, such as the LIV, LIV+1 (the first vertebra below LIV), LIV+2 (the second vertebra below LIV), LIV+3 (the third vertebra below LIV), lumbar apical vertebra, thoracic apical vertebra, and T1. Additionally, the Cobb angles of major thoracic and lumbar curve were measured at different timepoints, and the correction rate was calculated. Furthermore, clinical photos of patients' back appearance were taken preoperatively and postoperatively.Introduction
Methods
Distal adding-on is often accompanied by unsatisfactory clinical outcome and high risk of reoperation. However, very few studies have focused on distal adding-on and its attendant risk factors, and optimum treatment strategies remain controversial. In a retrospective study, we aimed to identify risk factors for the presence of distal adding-on in Lenke 1A scoliosis and to compare different treatment strategies. Data for all surgically treated patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) were retrieved from one institutional database. Inclusion criteria included: patients with Lenke 1A scoliosis treated with posterior pedicle screw-only constructs; and a minimum 1-year radiographic follow-up. Distal adding-on was defined as a progressive increase in the number of vertebrae included distally within the primary curve combined with either an increase of more than 5 mm in deviation of the first vertebra below instrumentation from the centre sacral vertical line (CSVL), or an increase of more than 5° in the angulation of the first disc below the instrumentation at 1 year follow-up. Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Fisher's exact test, and Spearman's correlation test were used to identify the risk factors for adding-on. A multiple logistic regression model was built to identify independent predictive factors. Risk factors included: age at surgery; preoperative Cobb angle; correction rate; the gap difference of stable vertebra (SV) and lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV), neutral vertebra (NC) and LIV, and end vertebra (EV) and LIV (gap difference means, for example, if SV is at L2 and LIV is at Th12, then the difference of SV-LIV is 2); and the preoperative deviation of LIV+1 (the first vertebra below the instrumentation) from the CSVL (the vertical line that bisects proximal sacrum). Five methods for determining LIV were compared in both the adding-on group and the no adding-on group.Introduction
Methods
The purpose of our study is to analyze retrospectively our patients, who had received conservative treatment or either posterior or combined approach.
The diagnosed was based on clinical examination, cultures, bone histology, X-rays, bone scan and MRI with gadolinium. The location of the infection was in 13 (8%) patients the cervical spine, in 62 (38%) the thorachic, in 10 (6%) the thoracolumbar junction and in 78 (48%) the lumbo-sacral spine. In 95 cases, concomitant diseases were present. In 67 (41%) patients was not able to detect any microorganism. From the remaining patients, 53 (33%) were infected by staph.aureus and 22 (13%) by mycob tuberculosis. The patients according to the treatment provided, were divided in three groups:
Group A: 70 patients, which had conservative treatment with antibiotics and bracing. Group B: 56 patients, which, sustained posterior decompression alone Group C: 37 patients, which had anterior debridemant and posterior decompression and stabilizations or anterior stabilization.
The group A patients had not neurological symptoms. In group B, 11 had altered neurology and the operation was beneficial for 5 of them (45.5%), 4 remained unchanged and in 2 was deteriorate. In group C, 11 patients had altered neurology, from which 9 (81.8%) were improved and 2 remained unchanged. The in-hospital complications were: 2 pulmonary embolism, 2 post operative haematomas, 1 persistent anaimia, 1 diafragm paralysis, 2 atelectasia and 1 cerebral thrombosis. In addition 3 patients had residual psoas abscess, 2 pancreas abscess, 1 cerebelum abscess and 3 lung infection. The in-hospital mortality was 3 patients, other 17 patients died during the follow up
The conservative management in selected patients is effective up to 89%. From the operations performed the decompression alone had unacceptable high re-operation rate and also, it wasn’t so beneficial regarding the neurological improvement. If it is combined with anterior reconstruction and posterior stabilization provides better results.
Introduction: In the attempt to improve fusion rates in spondylodesis surgery, focus has been applied on numerous factors, including surgical strategies, instrumentation-devices and –material, technical preparation of the fusion bed, stringency of radiological outcome criteria, patient-related factors such as age, sex, tobacco consumption, and severity of underlying pathology. In recent years the development of new techniques for exploring mechanisms in cellular and molecular biology have further directed focus toward more advanced biological techniques and considerations. To the authors’ knowledge, little or no attention has been focused on one of the basic and important factors in the attempt to achieve fusion, ie the impact of bone graft quantity placed at the fusion bed. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of autologous bone graft quantity in posterolateral instrumented spinal fusion (PLF) in respect to fusion rates. Methods and results: A prospective clinical study in 76 patients, in which CD-instrumented posterolateral lumbar or lumbosacral spine fusion surgery was performed. The quantity of autologous bone graft applied at the fusion bed was recorded peroperatively. Spinal fusion rates were assessed by AP/lateral radiographs at one-year follow-up by two independent observers, according to our strict classification system. The impact of bone graft quantity, tobacco consumption, age and sex of the patients were analysed in respect to fusion-rates by logistic regression. According to our classification “fusion” was seen in 76% of the patients, “non-union” in 12.7% and “doubtful”fusion in 11.3%. In “fusion” segments, the median amount of bone used was 24.4 (13–53) g and 14.7 (12.5–23.4) g in “non-union” segments. The “non-union” rate was 7.1% for non-smokers in contrast to 21.4% for patients who smoked during the first six post-operative months. The impact on fusion rates by graft quantity and cigarette smoking were significant, p<
0.006 respectively 0.035. Age and gender did not influence fusion rates. Thirty-three percent of patients with “non-union” had a corresponding failure of the implant. Conclusions: The quantity of graft used at the fusion bed is critical for successful fusion. Based on the results presented here, we recommend a minimum of 24 g of autogenous bone graft at each intervention segment in auto-grafted posterolateral spinal spondylodesis surgery. In addition, this study underlines the importance of tobacco arrest, in at least the first six post-operative months. The data presented here strongly support the importance of quantifying or optimally standardising the amount of graft placed at each intervention segment.
Introduction: Lumbar spine fusion is now an evidence based treatment principle of low back pain. However, much controversy still exists on the choice of surgical technique. Since the source of pain may be located in the intervertebral disc, a disc removal seems logical. Instrumented and non-instrumented fusion as well as PLIF have failed to restore lumbar lordosis. Aim: The aim of the present study was to study fusion rates, functional outcome, lumbar lordosis and complications in a RCT design using radiolucent cages and titanium instrumentation. Materials and methods: 148 patients were bloc randomised to either PLF (72) or ALIF + PLF (76) from April 1996 to February 2000. Inclusion criteria were disc degeneration or spondylolisthesis groups 1 and 2; Age>
20 years and <
65 years. Life quality was assessed pre-operatively, one and two years post-operatively by Dallas Pain Questionnaires and by Back and Leg Pain rating scales from 0 to 10. Results and discussion: A preliminary follow-up at one year post-op of 56 patients in each group showed no difference in admission or blood loss (921/1008 ml) and peroperative morbidity, although the operation time was significantly longer in the ALIF+ group (mean 219/344 minutes). Sagittal lordosis was restored and maintained in the ALIF+ group (p<
0.01), in contrast to the PLF group. There was no difference in functional outcome. Average back pain lasting 14 days scored 4.5 in each group, and leg pain 3.2 in the ALIF+ group versus 4 in the PLF group (NS). The re-operation rate was significantly higher in PLF after both one and two years with 9% refusion versus no refusion in the ALIF+ group. Global patient satisfaction was equal in both groups: 78% versus 76% at one year and at two years 75% versus 80% in PLF and ALIF+ groups. Conclusion: ALIF+ fusion demands higher operative resources compared to PLF, however ALIF+ restores lordosis and provides the highest union rate and significantly fewer reoperations. A cost/effectiveness analysis after long-term follow-up may also favour the ALIF+ treatment due to improved lordosis and perhaps less degeneration of adjacent motion segments.