Informed consent is a very important part of surgical treatment. In this paper, we report a number of legal judgements in spinal surgery where there was no criticism of the surgical procedure itself. The fault that was identified was a failure to inform the patient of alternatives to, and material risks of, surgery, or overemphasizing the benefits of surgery. In one case, there was a promise that a specific surgeon was to perform the operation, which did not ensue. All of the faults in these cases were faults purely of the consenting process. In many cases, the surgeon claimed to have explained certain risks to the patient but was unable to provide proof of doing so. We propose a checklist that, if followed, would ensure that the surgeon would take their patients through the relevant matters but also, crucially, would act as strong evidence in any future court proceedings that the appropriate discussions had taken place. Although this article focuses on spinal surgery, the principles and messages are applicable to the whole of orthopaedic surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:355–360

Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in the scores of patient-reported outcome measures allow clinicians to assess the outcome of intervention from the perspective of the patient. There has been significant variation in their absolute values in previous publications and a lack of consistency in their calculation. The purpose of this study was first, to establish whether these values, following spinal surgery, vary depending on the surgical intervention and their method of calculation and secondly, to assess whether there is any correlation between the two external anchors most frequently used to calculate the MCID. . We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data of adult patients who underwent elective spinal surgery between 1994 and 2009. A total of 244 patients were included. There were 125 men and 119 women with a mean age of 54 years (16 to 84); the mean follow-up was 62 months (6 to 199) The MCID was calculated using three previously published methods. Our results show that the value of the MCID varies considerably with the operation and its method of calculation. There was good correlation between the two external anchors. The global outcome tool correlated significantly better. We conclude that consensus needs to be reached on the best method of calculating the MCID. This then needs to be defined for each spinal procedure. Using a blanket value for the MCID for all spinal procedures should be avoided. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:366–71

In recent years, machine learning (ML) and artificial neural networks (ANNs), a particular subset of ML, have been adopted by various areas of healthcare. A number of diagnostic and prognostic algorithms have been designed and implemented across a range of orthopaedic sub-specialties to date, with many positive results. However, the methodology of many of these studies is flawed, and few compare the use of ML with the current approach in clinical practice. Spinal surgery has advanced rapidly over the past three decades, particularly in the areas of implant technology, advanced surgical techniques, biologics, and enhanced recovery protocols. It is therefore regarded an innovative field. Inevitably, spinal surgeons will wish to incorporate ML into their practice should models prove effective in diagnostic or prognostic terms. The purpose of this article is to review published studies that describe the application of neural networks to spinal surgery and which actively compare ANN models to contemporary clinical standards allowing evaluation of their efficacy, accuracy, and relatability. It also explores some of the limitations of the technology, which act to constrain the widespread adoption of neural networks for diagnostic and prognostic use in spinal care. Finally, it describes the necessary considerations should institutions wish to incorporate ANNs into their practices. In doing so, the aim of this review is to provide a practical approach for spinal surgeons to understand the relevant aspects of neural networks. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1442–1448

Aims. The current pandemic caused by COVID-19 is the biggest challenge for national health systems for a century. While most medical resources are allocated to treat COVID-19 patients, several non-COVID-19 medical emergencies still need to be treated, including vertebral fractures and spinal cord compression. The aim of this paper is to report the early experience and an organizational protocol for emergency spinal surgery currently being used in a large metropolitan area by an integrated team of orthopaedic surgeons and neurosurgeons. Methods. An organizational model is presented based on case centralization in hub hospitals and early management of surgical cases to reduce hospital stay. Data from all the patients admitted for emergency spinal surgery from the beginning of the outbreak were prospectively collected and compared to data from patients admitted for the same reason in the same time span in the previous year, and treated by the same integrated team. Results. A total of 19 patients (11 males and eight females, with a mean age of 49.9 years (14 to 83)) were admitted either for vertebral fracture or spinal cord compression in a 19-day period, compared to the ten admitted in the previous year. No COVID-19 patients were treated. The mean time between admission and surgery was 1.7 days, significantly lower than 6.8 days the previous year (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The structural organization and the management protocol we describe allowed us to reduce the time to surgery and ultimately hospital stay, thereby maximizing the already stretched medical resources available. We hope that our early experience can be of value to the medical communities that will soon be in the same emergency situation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):671–676

With the identification of literature shortfalls on the techniques employed in intraoperative navigated (ION) spinal surgery, we outline a number of measures which have been synthesised into a coherent operative technique. These include positioning, dissection, management of the reference frame, the grip, the angle of attack, the drill, the template, the pedicle screw, the wire, and navigated intrathecal analgesia. Optimizing techniques to improve accuracy allow an overall reduction of the repetition of the surgical steps with its associated productivity benefits including time, cost, radiation, and safety. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(3):371–375

A dural tear is a common but troublesome complication of endoscopic spinal surgery. The limitations of space make repair difficult, and it is often necessary to proceed to an open operation to suture the dura in order to prevent leakage of cerebrospinal fluid. We describe a new patch technique in which a small piece of polyglactin 910 is fixed to the injured dura with fibrin glue. Three pieces are generally required to obtain a watertight closure after lavage with saline. We have applied this technique in seven cases. All recovered well with no adverse effects. MRI showed no sign of leakage of cerebrospinal fluid

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate improvements in the quality and safety of paediatric spinal surgery following the implementation of a specialist Paediatric Spinal Surgical Team (PSST) in the operating theatre. Patients and Methods. A retrospective consecutive case study of paediatric spinal operations before (between January 2008 and December 2009), and after (between January 2012 and December 2013) the implementation of PSST, was performed. A comparative analysis of outcome variables including surgical site infection (SSI), operating time (ORT), blood loss (BL), length of stay (LOS), unplanned staged procedures (USP) and transfusion rates (allogenic and cell-saver) was performed between the two groups. The rate of complications during the first two postoperative years was also compared between the groups. Results. There were 130 patients in the pre-PSST group and 277 in the post-PSST group. The age, gender, body mass index (BMI), preoperative Cobb angle of the major curve and the number of levels involved were similar between the groups. There were statistically significant differences in SSI, ORT, LOS, allogenic blood transfusion volume (ABTV), and USPs between the groups. There was a 94% decrease in the rate of SSI's in the post-PSST group. Patients in the post-PSST group had a mean reduction in ORT of 53 minutes (. sd. 7.7) (p = 0.013), LOS by 5.4 days (. sd. 1.8) (p = 0.019), and ABTV by 226.3 ml (. sd. 28.4) (p < 0.001). There were significantly more USPs in the pre-PSST group (6.2%) compared with the post-PSST group (2.9%) (p = 0.001). Multivariate regression showed that the effect of PSST remained significant for ORT, LOS, BL, ABVT and cell-saver amount transfused (p = 0.0001). The odds of having a SSI were tenfold higher and the odds of receiving a blood transfusion were 2.4 times higher, respectively, in the pre-PSST group (p = 0.004 and p = 0.011). The rate of complications within the first two postoperative years was significantly higher in the pre-PSST group (13.1%) compared with the post-PSST group (4.3%) (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The implementation of a PSST in the operating theatre significantly improves the outcomes in paediatric spinal surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:493–8

Wrong-level surgery is a unique pitfall in spinal surgery and is part of the wider field of wrong-site surgery. Wrong-site surgery affects both patients and surgeons and has received much media attention. We performed this systematic review to determine the incidence and prevalence of wrong-level procedures in spinal surgery and to identify effective prevention strategies. We retrieved 12 studies reporting the incidence or prevalence of wrong-site surgery and that provided information about prevention strategies. Of these, ten studies were performed on patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and two on patients undergoing lumbar, thoracic or cervical spine procedures. A higher frequency of wrong-level surgery in lumbar procedures than in cervical procedures was found. Only one study assessed preventative strategies for wrong-site surgery, demonstrating that current site-verification protocols did not prevent about one-third of the cases. The current literature does not provide a definitive estimate of the occurrence of wrong-site spinal surgery, and there is no published evidence to support the effectiveness of site-verification protocols. Further prevention strategies need to be developed to reduce the risk of wrong-site surgery.

Aims. The timing of surgical fixation in spinal fractures is a contentious topic. Existing literature suggests that early stabilization leads to reduced morbidity, improved neurological outcomes, and shorter hospital stay. However, the quality of evidence is low and equivocal with regard to the safety of early fixation in the severely injured patient. This paper compares complication profiles between spinal fractures treated with early fixation and those treated with late fixation. Methods. All patients transferred to a national tertiary spinal referral centre for primary surgical fixation of unstable spinal injuries without preoperative neurological deficit between 1 July 2016 and 20 October 2017 were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected retrospectively. Patients were divided into early and late cohorts based on timing from initial trauma to first spinal operation. Early fixation was defined as within 72 hours, and late fixation beyond 72 hours. Results. In total, 86 patients underwent spinal surgery in this period. Age ranged from 16 to 88 years. Mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was higher in the early stabilization cohort (p = 0.020). Age was the sole significant independent variable in predicting morbidity on multiple regression analysis (p < 0.003). There was no significant difference in complication rates based on timing of surgical stabilization (p = 0.398) or ISS (p = 0.482). Conclusion. Our results suggest that these patients are suitable for early appropriate care with spinal precautions and delayed definitive surgical stabilization. Earlier surgery conferred no morbidity benefit and had no impact on length of stay. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(5):627–631

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine whether the sequential application of povidone iodine-alcohol (PVI) followed by chlorhexidine gluconate-alcohol (CHG) would reduce surgical wound contamination to a greater extent than PVI applied twice in patients undergoing spinal surgery. Patients and Methods. A single-centre, interventional, two arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial was undertaken, involving 407 patients who underwent elective spinal surgery. For 203 patients, the skin was disinfected before surgery using PVI (10% [w/w (1% w/w available iodine)] in 95% industrial denatured alcohol, povidone iodine; Videne Alcoholic Tincture) twice, and for 204 patients using PVI once followed by CHG (2% [w/v] chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% [v/v] isopropyl alcohol; Chloraprep with tint). The primary outcome measure was contamination of the wound determined by aerobic and anaerobic bacterial growth from samples taken after disinfection. Results. The detection of viable bacteria in any one of the samples taken after disinfection (culture-positive) was significantly lower in the group treated with both PVI and CHG than in the group treated with PVI alone (59 (29.1%) versus 85 (41.7%), p = 0.009; odds ratio 0.574; 95% confidence interval, 0.380 to 0.866). Conclusions. Antisepsis of the skin with the sequential application of PVI and CHG more effectively reduces the contamination of a surgical wound than PVI alone. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1354–65

We investigated the efficacy of a single dose of 1 g of cephazolin in reducing postoperative infections in patients undergoing 'clean' operations on the lumbar spine. In a double-blind, randomised, trial there were 21 wound or urinary infections in the 71 patients who received placebo and nine in the 70 who received cephazolin (p < 0.05). Nine of the placebo patients (12.7%) developed wound infections (complicated by bacteraemia in two) compared with three (4.3%) in the cephazolin group (p = 0.07). Hospital stay was longer for infected patients than for non-infected patients (p < 0.05). Cephazolin-resistant pathogens were isolated more frequently from patients who received cephazolin than from those who received placebo.

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a complex 3D deformity of the spine. Its prevalence is between 2% and 3% in the general population, with almost 10% of patients requiring some form of treatment and up to 0.1% undergoing surgery. The cosmetic aspect of the deformity is the biggest concern to the patient and is often accompanied by psychosocial distress. In addition, severe curves can cause cardiopulmonary distress. With proven benefits from surgery, the aims of treatment are to improve the cosmetic and functional outcomes. Obtaining correction in the coronal plane is not the only important endpoint anymore. With better understanding of spinal biomechanics and the long-term effects of multiplanar imbalance, we now know that sagittal balance is equally, if not more, important. Better correction of deformities has also been facilitated by an improvement in the design of implants and a better understanding of metallurgy. Understanding the unique character of each deformity is important. In addition, using the most appropriate implant and applying all the principles of correction in a bespoke manner is important to achieve optimum correction.

In this article, we review the current concepts in AIS surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:415–24.

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. Methods. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded. Results. Five-year follow-up was completed by 213 (95%) of the eligible patients (mean age 67 years; 155 female (67%)). After five years, ODI was similar irrespective of treatment, with a mean of 25 (SD 18) for decompression alone and 28 (SD 22) for decompression with fusion (p = 0.226). Mean EQ-5D was higher for decompression alone than for fusion (0.69 (SD 0.28) vs 0.59 (SD 0.34); p = 0.027). In the no-DS subset, fewer patients reported decreased leg pain after fusion (58%) than with decompression alone (80%) (relative risk (RR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.97). The frequency of subsequent spinal surgery was 24% for decompression with fusion and 22% for decompression alone (RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.8)). Conclusion. Adding fusion to decompression in spinal stenosis surgery, with or without spondylolisthesis, does not improve the five-year ODI, which is consistent with our two-year report. Three secondary outcomes that did not differ at two years favoured decompression alone at five years. Our results support decompression alone as the preferred method for operating on spinal stenosis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):705–712