Aims. The escalating demand for medical resources to address spinal diseases as society ages is an issue that requires careful evaluation. However, few studies have examined trends in spinal surgery, especially unscheduled hospitalizations or surgeries performed after hours, through large databases. Our study aimed to determine national trends in the number of spine surgeries in Japan. We also aimed to identify trends in after-hours surgeries and unscheduled hospitalizations and their impact on complications and costs. Methods. We retrospectively investigated data extracted from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, a representative inpatient database in Japan. The data from April 2010 to March 2020 were used for this study. We included all patients who had undergone any combination of laminectomy, laminoplasty, discectomy, and/or spinal arthrodesis. Results. This investigation included 739,474 spinal surgeries and 739,215 hospitalizations in Japan. There was an average annual increase of 4.6% in the number of spinal surgeries. Scheduled hospitalizations increased by 3.7% per year while unscheduled hospitalizations increased by 11.8% per year. In-hours surgeries increased by 4.5% per year while after-hours surgeries increased by 9.9% per year. Complication rates and costs increased for both after-hours surgery and unscheduled hospitalizations, in comparison to their respective counterparts of in-hours surgery and scheduled hospitalizations. Conclusion. This study provides important insights for those interested in improving spine care in an ageing society. The swift surge in after-hours spinal surgeries and unscheduled hospitalizations highlights that the medical needs of an increasing number of patients due to an ageing society are outpacing the capacity of existing medical resources. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):662–670

Objectives: To surgery the UK Specialist Orthopaedic Registrars (SpRs) to assess their perceptions of and attitudes towards spinal surgery, and to identify factors discouraging interest in spinal surgery. Introduction: In order to improve the provision of spinal surgery in the UK, the existing 175 Orthopaedic Surgeons with an interest in Spinal Surgery needs to increase by 25%. There is a predicted shortfall in the number of orthopaedic trainees intending to practise spinal surgery. Methods: A postal questionnaire was sent to all 578 SpRs. Results: Three hundred and seventy-four replied (71%). Sixty-nine percent intend to avoid spinal surgery. Thirtyfive (9%) intend becoming either Specialist Spinal Surgeons or Surgeons with a Spinal interest. Their perceptions will be discussed; the intellectual challenge and opportunities for research are widely recognised but are outweighed by poor perceptions of outcomes of surgery, psychological complications, and of badly organised clinics. There is also inadequate exposure to spinal surgery during training. Conclusions: Training in spinal surgery could be improved by exposure to spinal surgery at an earlier stage of training, and the development of more specialised units with properly structured spinal clinics to include triage systems to assess referrals and close liaison between the specialities required to treat these patients

Adverse events (AEs) are still a major problem in spinal surgery, despite advances in surgical techniques, innovative technologies available and the introduction of checklist and predictive score systems aimed at reducing surgical complications. We previously analysed the results of the introduction of the WHO Safety Surgical Checklist (SSC) in our Institution, comparing the incidence of complications between two periods: from January to December 2010 (without checklist) and from January 2011 and December 2012 (with checklist), in order to assess the checklist effectiveness. The sample size was 917 patients with an average of 30 months of follow-up. Complications were observed in 107 patients (11.6%) among 917 spinal surgery procedures performed, with 159 (17.3%) complications in total. The overall incidence of complications for trauma, infectious pathology, oncology, and degenerative disease was 22.2%, 19.2%, 18.4%, and 15.3%, respectively. We observed a reduction of the overall incidence of complications following the introduction of the WHO Surgical Checklist: in 2010 without checklist, the incidence of complications was 24.2%, while in 2011 and 2012, following the checklist introduction, the incidence of complications was 16.7% and 11.7%, respectively (mean 14.2%) (p<0.0005). Thus, the SSC appeared to be an effective tool to reduce complications in spinal surgery and we proposed to extend the use of checklist system also to the pre-operative and post-operative phases in order to further reduce the incidence of complications. We also believe that a correct capture and classification of complications is fundamental to generate a clinical decision support system aimed at improving patients’ safety in spinal surgery. In the period between January 2017 and January 2018 we prospectively recorded the adverse events and complications of patients undergoing spinal surgery in our department, without using any collection system. Then we retrospectively recorded the intraoperative and postoperative adverse events of surgically treated patients during the same one-year period, using the SAVES v2 system introduced by Rampersaud and collaborators (Rampersaud YR et al. J Neurosurg Spine 2016 Aug; 25 (2): 256-63) to classify them. In the one-year period from January 2017 to January 2018 a total of 336 patients underwent spinal surgery: 223 for degenerative conditions and 113 for spinal tumors. Comorbidities were collected (Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI]). Overall, a higher number of adverse events (AEs) was recorded using SAVES compared to the prospective recording without the use of any capture system and the increased number was statistically significant for early postoperative AEs (138/336 vs 44/336, p<0.001). 210 adverse events were retrospectively recorded using the SAVES system (30 intraoperative adverse events, 138 early postoperative and 42 late postoperative adverse events). 99 patients (29.5%) on the cohort had at least one complication. Furthermore, the correlation between some risk factors and the onset of complications or the prolonged length of stay was statistically analyzed. The risk factors taken into account were: age, presence of comorbidities (CCI), ASA score, previous surgery at the same level, type of intervention, location of the disease, duration of the surgery. In particular, the duration of the surgery (more than 3 hours) and the presence of previous surgeries resulted to be risk factors for complications in multivariate analyses

Introduction: Following the publication of our original survey in 2000 (. Eur. Sp. J. 11. (6):. 515. –8 . 2002. ) we have sought to re-evaluate the perceptions and attitudes towards spinal surgery of the current UK orthopaedic Specialist Registrars (SpR’s), and to identify factors influencing an interest in spinal surgery. At that time 175 orthopaedic spinal surgeons in the UK needed to increase by 25% to satisfy parity with other European countries. Methods: A postal questionnaire was sent to all 950 SpR’s. The questionnaire sought to identify perceptions in spinal surgery, levels of current training and practice, and intentions to pursue a career in spinal surgery. Results: As before, a 70% response rate has confirmed that 74% of trainees intend to avoid spinal surgery (69% in 2000). However 10% are committed to become a Specialist Spinal Surgeon (9% in 2000). Their perceptions were wide ranging but most concluded that the intellectual challenge and opportunities for research are widely recognised. However enthusiasm is dampened by poor perceptions of outcomes from surgery, negative somatization and depression associations, complications and the fear of litigation. In some areas there is inadequate exposure to spinal surgery during the first 4 years of training. Conclusions: Spinal surgery remains a career choice for 10% of surgical trainees (up 1% since 2000). With a large SpR expansion (578 to 950 SpRs in the last 5 years) an average of 16 new spinal surgeons annually will be produced over the next six years. This has improved on the figure of 8.6 per year from 2000 and represents a 200% increase in numbers per year. These figures suggest that by 2011 and allowing for retirement, there should be enough spinal surgeons to meet the desired UK/Europe ratio

Background. Over 55,000 spinal operations are performed annually in the NHS. Effective postoperative analgesia facilitates early mobilisation and assists rehabilitation and hospital discharge, but is difficult to achieve with conventional, opioid-based, oral analgesia. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of two alternative techniques, namely intrathecal opioid and the more novel erector-spinae plane blockade, is unknown. The Pain Relief After Instrumented Spinal Surgery (PRAISE) trial aims to evaluate these techniques. Methods. PRAISE is a multicentre, prospective, parallel group, patient-blinded, randomised trial, seeking to recruit 456 adult participants undergoing elective, posterior lumbar-instrumented spinal surgery from up to 25 NHS hospitals. Participants will be randomised 1:1:1 to receive (1) Usual Care with local wound infiltration, (2) Intrathecal Opioid plus Usual Care with local wound infiltration or (3) Erector Spinae Plane blockade plus Usual Care with no local wound infiltration. The primary outcome is pain on movement on a 100mm visual analogue scale at 24 hours post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include pain at rest, leg pain, quality of recovery (QoR-15), postoperative opioid consumption, time to mobilisation, length of hospital stay, health utility (EQ-5D-5L), adverse events and resource use. Parallel economic evaluation will estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results. Differences in the primary outcome at 24 hours will be estimated by mixed-effects linear regression modelling, with fixed effects for randomisation factors and other important prognostic variables, and random effects for centre, using the as-randomised population. Treatment effects with 95% confidence intervals will be presented. Conclusion. The study is due to open in May 2024 and complete in 2026. Conflicts of Interest. No conflicts of interest declared. Sources of Funding. NIHR Health Technology Award – grant number NIHR153170. Trial presentations so far. APOMP 2023 and 2024; RCOA conference, York, November 2023; Faculty of Pain Management training day, London, February 2024

Neurological complications in oncological and degenerative spine surgery represent one of the most feared risks of these procedures. Multimodal intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) mainly uses methods to detect changes in the patient's neurological status in a timely manner, thus allowing actions that can reverse neurological deficits before they become irreversible. The utopian goal of spinal surgery is the absence of neurological complications while the realistic goal is to optimize the responses to changes in neuromonitoring such that permanent deficits occur less frequently as possible. In 2014, an algorithm was proposed in response to changes in neuromonitoring for deformity corrections in spinal surgery. There are several studies that confirm the positive impact that a checklist has on care. The proposed checklist has been specifically designed for interventions on stable columns which is significantly different from oncological and degenerative surgery. The goal of this project is to provide a checklist for oncological and degenerative spine surgery to improve the quality of care and minimize the risk of neurological deficit through the optimization of clinical decision-making during periods of intraoperative stress or uncertainty. After a literature review on risk factors and recommendations for responding to IONM changes, 3 surveys were administered to 8 surgeons with experience in oncological and degenerative spine surgery from 5 hospitals in Italy. In addition, anesthesiologists, intraoperative neuro-monitoring teams, operating room nurses participated. The members participated in the optimization and final drafting of the checklist. The authors reassessed and modified the checklist during 3 meetings over 9 months, including a clinical validation period using a modified Delphi process. A checklist containing 28 items to be considered in responding to the changes of the IONM was created. The checklist was submitted for inclusion in the new recommendations of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (SINC) for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. The final checklist represents the consensus of a group of experienced spine surgeons. The checklist includes the most important and high-performance items to consider when responding to IONM changes in patients with an unstable spine. The implementation of this checklist has the potential to improve surgical outcomes and patient safety in the field of spinal surgery

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

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

Purpose of study and background. Spinal surgery is a high-risk surgical speciality, a patient's understanding of surgical interventions, alternative treatment options, and the benefits and risks must be ascertained to gain informed consent. This pilot study aims to evaluate if the provision of a digital recording of a patient's consultation enhances patient satisfaction, improves recall of clinical diagnosis, recall of treatment options and the risks and benefits of Spinal Surgery. Methodology and results. A coalition team was identified. A safe and secure process for recording and storage identified. Both qualitative and quantitative data was collected via questionnaires. 62 patients were invited to participate in the pilot, 12 declined. Data was collected immediately post consultation, and two weeks following the consultation via telephone. Comparison was made of the relative increase or decrease in patient recall of the clinical diagnosis, treatment options, and the benefits and the risks of spinal surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured pre- and post- consultation. 50 patients (81%) participated. 32 participants (52%) responded to follow up questionnaire at 2 weeks. Recall of risk for surgical intervention increased by 37%, and of benefit by 36%. Patient satisfaction was rated excellent or very satisfied in 93% at initial consultation and at 2 week follow up all participant's rated satisfaction as excellent or very satisfied. Conclusion. This pilot study was small. COVID delayed further recruitment. Initial outcomes demonstrated high levels of patient satisfaction and appear to demonstrate improved recall. Significant technological issues were identified. Further collaborative work needs to be undertaken. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained

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

During the pandemic of COVID-19, some patients with COVID-19 may need emergency surgeries. As spine surgeons, it is our responsibility to ensure appropriate treatment to the patients with COVID-19 and spinal diseases. A protocol for spinal surgery and related management on patients with COVID-19 has been reviewed. Patient preparation for emergency surgeries, indications, and contraindications of emergency surgeries, operating room preparation, infection control precautions and personal protective equipments (PPE), anesthesia management, intraoperative procedures, postoperative management, medical waste disposal, and surveillance of healthcare workers were reviewed. It should be safe for surgeons with PPE of protection level 2 to perform spinal surgeries on patients with COVID-19. Standardized and careful surgical procedures should be necessary to reduce the exposure to COVID-19

The Spine Surgery Unit of IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli is dedicated to the diagnosis and the treatment of vertebral pathologies of oncologic, degenerative, and post-traumatic origin. To achieve increasingly challenging goals, research has represented a further strength for Spinal Surgery Unit for several years. Thanks to the close synergy with the Complex Structure Surgical Sciences and Technologies, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, extensive research was carried out. The addition of the research activities intensifies a complementary focus and provides a unique opportunity of innovation. The overall goal of spine research for the Spine Surgery Unit and for the Complex Structure Surgical Sciences and Technologies is and has been to:. - investigate the factors that influence normal spine function;. - engineer and validate new and advanced strategies for improving segmental spinal instrumentation, fusion augmentation and grafting;. - develop and characterize advanced and alternative preclinical models of vertebral bone metastasis to test drugs and innovative strategies, taking into account patient individual characteristics and specific tumour subtypes so predicting patient specific responses;. - evaluate the clinical characteristics, treatment modalities, and potential contributing and prognostic factors in patients with vertebral bone metastases;. - realize customized prosthesis to replace vertebral bodies affected by tumours or major traumatic events, specifically engineered to reduce infections, and increase patients’ surgical options. These efforts have made possible to obtain important results that favour the translation of basic research to application at the patient's bedside, and from here to routine clinical practice (without excluding the opposite pathway, in which the evidence generated by clinical practice helps to guide research). Although translational research can provide patients with valuable therapeutic resources, it is not risk-free. Thus, it is therefore necessary an always close collaboration between researchers and clinicians in order to guarantee the ethicality of translational research, by promoting the good of individuals and minimising the risks

Introduction. To face the problem of surgical complications, which is generally relevant in surgical fields, an intraoperative checklist (Safety Surgical Checklist, SSC) was elaborated and released by the World Health Organization in 2008, and its use has been described in 2009. In our Institution, the WHO SSC was introduced in 2011. In spinal surgery, many preventive measures were investigated to reduce complications, but there is no report on the effectiveness of the WHO checklist in reducing complications. Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of complications between the two periods, from January to December 2010 (without checklist) and from January 2011 to December 2012 (with checklist), in order to assess the checklist effectiveness. Materials and Methods. A retrospective and single center study was carried out on patients who underwent spinal surgery during the three-year period from January 2010 to December 2012. Patients were classified according to the spine pathology and the different presentation of the complication. We registered the complications arising in patients treated from 2010 to 2012 during a 3 years follow up period for each patient, assessing the possible differences before and after the checklist's introduction. Results. The sample size was 917 patients, the mean age was 52.88 years. The majority of procedures were performed for oncological diseases (54.4%) and degenerative diseases (39.8%). 159 complications in total were detected (17.3%). The overall incidence of complications for trauma, infectious pathology, oncology, and degenerative disease was 22.2%, 19.2%, 18.4%, and 15.3%, respectively. No correlation was observed between the type of pathology and the complication incidence. We observed a reduction of the overall incidence of complications following the introduction of the SSC: in 2010 without checklist, the incidence of complications was 24.2%, while in 2011 and 2012, following the checklist introduction, the incidence of complications was 16.7% and 11.7%, respectively (mean 14.2%). Conclusion. Despite the limitations of the study, in particular the impossibility to carry out a randomized study, SSC seems to be an effective tool to reduce complications in spinal surgery. We propose to extend the use of checklist system also to the pre-operative and post-operative phases in order to further reduce the incidence of complications

There is an inherent risk of iatrogenic new neurological deficit (NND) arising at the spinal cord, cauda equina and nerve root during spinal surgery. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) can be employed to preserve spinal cord function during spinal surgery. IONM techniques include somatosensory and motor evoked potentials, amongst others. A Canadian survey of 95 spinal surgeons showed that 62.1% used IONM and a similar survey in France of 117 spinal surgeons showed that only 36% used IONM. Unavailability was a common reason for its disuse. Current literature by the British Society of Clinical Neurophysiology has outlined the importance of IONM in preventing NND and the need for the implementation of guidelines for IONM. The lack of an established guideline has resulted in a varied approach in the use of IONM in England. There has been no previous attempt to ascertain the current use of IONM in England. Our study is aimed at assessing the variability of the use of IONM in England as well as identifying the rationale amongst surgeons that dictate their use of IONM. We are in the process of investigating the indications of use of IONM for cervical and lumbar spine procedures in 252 spinal surgeons from 33 hospitals with spinal services. Our survey will illustrate the current use of IONM in spinal surgery in England. It will highlight some of the reasons for the variability of use of IONM and identify factors that can contribute to a more standardised use of IONM in spinal surgery

The COVID-19 pandemic creates unique challenges in the practice of spinal surgery. We aim to show how the use of a high-definition 3D digital exoscope can help streamline workflows, and protect both patients and healthcare staff

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

Introduction A prospective cohort study was conducted to assess the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in 300 patients undergoing elective spinal surgery. Although this subject has been extensively studied in patients undergoing joint replacement surgery, the true incidence of VTE related to spinal surgery remains unknown. We also sought to assess the efficacy of various forms of VTE prophylaxis, another area which has not been adequately studied. Methods Bilateral lower extremity venous duplex scans were performed pre-operatively, within one week postoperatively and at 4 to 6 weeks post-operatively. Information was collected regarding age, gender, body mass index, type and duration of surgical procedure, intra-operative blood loss and blood transfusion, pre- and post-operative mobility and other risk factors for VTE. All patients received vigorous mechanical prophylaxis with 56% of patients receiving pharmacological prophylaxis (unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin) according to surgeon preference. Results The overall incidence of post-operative deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was 3.4%. The incidence in those receiving pharmacological prophylaxis was 1.2% versus 6.3% in those who received mechanical prophylaxis alone (p< 0.05). Just under half of the post-operative DVTs (1.4%) occurred after hospital discharge with none of these patients receiving heparin. There were two cases of pulmonary embolism (0.7%), both occurring during hospitalization, and there were no deaths. There was no difference in blood loss or transfusion rates between patients receiving or not receiving pharmacological prophylaxis and there were no serious complications related to blood loss. There was a surprisingly high incidence of abnormalities detected on pre-operative scanning, with DVT occurring in 3.0% and superficial thrombophlebitis in 24.8%. Discussion The incidence of DVT in patients after spinal surgery was 3.4% and was significantly lower (1.2 %) in patients who received pharmacological prophylaxis. Given that the rates of bleeding-related complications were not different between the two groups, we conclude that it is both efficacious and safe to use pharmacological prophylaxis in combination with mechanical prophylaxis routinely in patients undergoing spinal surgery. A 27.8% incidence of pre-operative venous abnormalities may reflect pre-operative immobility due to pain in this group of patients, and justifies the use of ultrasound scanning as an important pre-operative screening tool. In addition, the high incidence of late-onset DVT justifies the need for follow-up scanning several weeks after discharge. This study is the amongst the largest of its type to date, however a larger, randomized and controlled trial is now necessary to confirm these results and allow the formulation of unambiguous guidelines for spinal surgery and VTE prophylaxis

Introduction. Guidelines from the North American Spine Society (2009 and 2013) are the best evidence-based instructions on venous thromboembolism (VTE) and antibiotic prophylaxis in spinal surgery. NICE guidelines exist for VTE prophylaxis but do not specifically address spinal surgery. In addition, the ruling of the UK Supreme Court in 2015 resulted in new guidance on consent being published by the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSEng). This study assesses our compliance in antibiotic, VTE prophylaxis and consent in spinal surgery against both US and UK standards. Methods. Retrospective review of spinal operations performed between August and December 2016. Case notes, consent forms and operation notes were analysed for consent, peri-operative antibiotic prescribing and post-operative VTE instructions. Results. Four Spinal surgeons performed 45 operations during this period. 31 patients (69%) received a copy of the signed consent with this process being formally documented in 22 (71%) of those cases. All patients were consented by a competent surgeon. 82% of cases consented prior to the date of procedure were countersigned on the day of operation. There was a mean time of 25.3 days between initial consent and operation (Range: 0–170). 37 (82%) cases had clear instructions for VTE and antibiotic prophylaxis. All prescribed post-operative antibiotics were administered. Discussion. The North American Guidelines state that prophylactic antibiotic is appropriate in all spinal surgery with prolonged cases requiring intraoperative re-dosing and only complex cases needing a postoperative regimen. Eight patients underwent a complex procedure and 7 appropriately received postoperative antibiotics. Of the 29 patients that underwent a simple procedure, 12 did not receive post-operative regimen, in line with the guidelines. However, the remainder 17 were over treated. The US Guidelines recommend mechanical VTE prophylaxis only in elective spinal surgery except in high risk patients. All our patients received VTE mechanical prophylaxis. RCSEng guidelines require consent being taken prior to procedure by a competent surgeon and confirmed on day of procedure. All patients in our cohort were consented prior to the date of operation allowing time for considering options and independent research. 82% of patients had consent confirmed on day of operation. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that we met guideline advice for all patients with regards VTE prophylaxis. We have a tendency to over treat with post-operative antibiotics and not all patients had their consent confirmed on day of procedure but was consented well before day of operation. North America still lead the way with guidelines on spinal surgery to which we should adhere, with NICE guidelines providing limited instructions. New consenting guidelines from RCSEng may not be currently widely known and thus should be a source of education for all surgeons

Introduction. Following the publication of our original survey in 2000 (Eur. Sp. J. 11(6):515-8 2002) we have sought to re-evaluate the perceptions and attitudes towards spinal surgery of the current UK orthopaedic Specialist Registrars (SpRs), and to identify factors influencing an interest in spinal surgery. At that time 175 orthopaedic spinal surgeons in the UK needed to increase by 25% to satisfy parity with other European countries. Methods. A postal questionnaire was sent to all 917 SpRs. The questionnaire sought to identify perceptions in spinal surgery, levels of current training and practice, and intentions to pursue a career in spinal surgery. Results. A 61% response rate has confirmed that 74% of trainees intend to avoid spinal surgery (69% in 2000). However 10% are committed to become a Specialist Spinal Surgeon (6.5% in 2000). Their perceptions were wide ranging but most concluded that the intellectual challenge and opportunities for research are widely recognised. However enthusiasm is dampened by poor perceptions of outcomes from surgery, negative somatisation and depression associations, complications and the fear of litigation. In some areas there is inadequate exposure to spinal surgery during the first 4 years of training. Conclusions. Spinal surgery remains a career choice for 10% of surgical trainees (up 3.5% since 2000). With a large SpR expansion (578 to 917 SpRs in the last 5 years) an average of 9 new spinal surgeons annually will be produced over the next six years. This has improved on the figure of 6 per year from 2000. These figures suggest that by 2011 and allowing for retirement, there should be enough spinal surgeons to meet the desired UK/Europe ratio

Lumbar spinal surgery may be associated with considerable pain in the early postoperative period. This often leads to a delay in patient mobilisation and a consequent increase in the risk of developing perioperative complications. Several studies have demonstrated the efficacy of intrathecal opioids for analgesia following spinal surgery. 1. –. 3. Morphine has been the most widely studied opioid and although improved analgesia has been reported with its use the risk of serious side effects such as respiratory depression has resulted in patients having to be nursed postoperatively in a high dependency unit. 2. Intrathecal diamorphine has been widely used for analgesia following lower limb joint replacement where it is an effective analgesic agent with a good safety profile. 4. –. 5. Its use for analgesia following lumbar spinal surgery has never been reported. We present our experience of using intrathecal diamorphine for analgesia following lumbar spinal surgery. Data were collected on all patients undergoing surgery who received intrathecal diamorphine and stored on a database (Microsoft Access). Results: 194 patients received intrathecal diamorphine following spinal surgery over a 30 month period. All patients underwent lower lumbosacral decompressive and/or fusion surgery. Mean dose of diamorphine administered was 1.6mg (range 1–4mg or 20–50mcg/kg). In all cases intrathecal diamorphine was administered by the anaesthetist once the patient was anaesthetised. Only 9% of patients had a pain score of 2 or greater within the first 24 hours (using a verbal rating scale 0–10). No patients required rescue analgesia with intravenous opiates. All patients except one were nursed on a regular orthopaedic ward. Side effects were rare. Respiratory depression occurred in one patient necessitating supplemental oxygen and monitoring in a high dependency unit for 12 hours. Hypotension was an infrequent finding (3.5%) but was most common upon return to the ward and in the following 24 hours. It was easily treated with the administration of intravenous fluids and vasopressors were never required. Sedation occurred in 4 of the patients whilst in the recovery ward but the incidence was nil once patients had been discharged to the orthopaedic ward. The most common complication recorded was pruritis, occurring in 9% of patients within the first 12 hours. Conclusion: Intrathecal diamorphine is an effective and safe method of providing analgesia following lumbar spinal surgery. High Dependency nursing care is not required as the incidence of serious side effects is low

Purpose: To review the existing practice of coding in spinal surgery and ascertain its accuracy for surgical procedures, co-morbidities and complications. Methods: A retrospective review of 70 cervical and 100 lumbar consecutive spinal surgeries performed since April 2006 was conducted. The clinical coding data and hospital notes were reviewed. Results: Coding data of 5 cervical spine surgeries were not available. Of the 165 cases, the accuracy of primary procedural codes was 93.9% (90.8% cervical & 96% lumbar). This reduced to 77.6% (75.4% cervical & 79% lumbar) when the accuracy for entire description of performed surgery was considered. Medical co-morbidities were coded appropriately in 64.2% of the patients (55% cervical & 70% lumbar). The procedural codes did not specifically reflect the surgery performed and lacked reproducibility. Surgical levels were coded incorrectly in 9% of the cases. Cervical surgeries were coded as lumbar in 4 and posterior surgery as anterior in 3 cases respectively. The commonly missed co-morbidities were drug allergies, hypercholesterolemia, smoking and alcoholism. Post-op adverse events were coded in 75% of the cases (16/20 cervical & 5/8 lumbar). The accuracy was better for lumbar as compared to cervical spinal surgeries. Conclusion: Coding is a universal language of communication and its accuracy is important not just for PbR, but for data quality, audit and research purposes too. The financial implications regarding PbR governed by HRG codes (dictated by OPCS 4.4 & ICD–10 codes) are discussed. Following this study, a clinical coding facilitation form has been introduced to improve data quality. Ethics approval: None. Interest statement: None

Aim. The aim of this study is to evaluate the causes of litigation in spinal surgery and to identify preventable causes. Methods. Retrospective analysis of all claim data made available under Freedom of information act from NHS Litigation Authority between years 2000 to 2010. Results. A total of 581 (331 Orthopaedics and 250 Neurosurgery) claims were filed in England and Wales, of these 543 cases were settled while 38 cases were pending. 371 (69%) of 543 settled resulted in payout but 172 (31%) claims were successfully defended by the NHSLA. Average payout was £63,573 total £ 36935933 maximum payout of £ 1800000). This figure rose to average of £ 95125, (Total £553627720) when defence and claimant costs were included. The allegations categories were 123 failure or delay in diagnosis, 108 intra operative problems, 90 failure or delay in treatment, 45 suboptimal consent and in 40 failure to recognise complications. The successful litigations were result of neurological injury in 143, un necessary operation in 37, avoidable pain in 29, death 15 and Misc 31. Conclusion. Litigation can in part be attributed to the “no win no fee” culture; steps that can be taken to reduce the number of successful claims. Failure or delay in diagnosis and Intra operative problems can partially be attributed to lack of resources and or expertise emphasising the need for spinal surgery to be concentrated in specialist centres. Documented informed consent can also potentially decrease litigation. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained. This abstract has not been previously published in whole or substantial part nor has it been presented previously at a national meeting

Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common complication following major joint surgery. While attention has focused on VTE following joint arthroplasty their exists a gap in the literature examining the incidence of VTE in spinal surgery; with a shortage of epidemiological data, guidelines for optimal prophylaxis are limited. This survey, undertaken at the 2009 BASS Annual Meeting, sought to examine prevailing trends in VTE thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery and to compare selections made by Orthopaedic and Neurosurgeons. We developed a questionnaire based around eight clinical scenarios. Participants were asked to supply details on their speciality (orthopaedics or neurosurgery) and level of training (grade) and to select which method(s) of thromboprophylaxis they would employ for each scenario. Thirty-nine participants provided responses to the eight scenarios; complete details, including speciality and grade of those surveyed, were complied for 27 of the 39 questionnaires completed. LMWH was the preferred pharmacological method of thromboprophylaixs selected 31% and 72% of the time by orthopaedic and neurosurgeons respectively. For each of the eight clinical scenarios LMWH and BK TEDS were selected more frequently by neurosurgeons than orthopaedic surgeons who elected to employ early mobilisation and mechanical prophylaxis. Neurosurgeons were more likely to employ more than method of thromboprophylaxis. Thromboprophylactic selections differed between the two groups; Neurosurgeons preferred LMWH and BK TEDS whilst Early Mobilisation and Mechanical prophylaxis were the preferred methods of thromboprophylaxis amongst orthopaedic surgeons. Based on the results of this survey neurosurgeons more closely adhered to guidelines outlined by NICE/BASS

Between January 1999 and December 2000, 82 patients who had undergone previous spinal surgery were diagnosed with fibromyalgia. Fifty of the patients completed questionnaires about their medical histories, demographic details, symptoms, quality of life and preoperative and postoperative function. The Medical Research Council performed statistical analysis of the questionnaires. The ages of the respondents varied, with 70% falling into the 40 to 60-year age group. The majority (80%) were married and reported good to excellent ties with spouse and family. Matriculants made up 76%, and 56% had tertiary education. In 70%, chronic tiredness impaired their daily activity, and 88% reported sleep disturbances. Only 10% believed that surgery had alleviated their neck or back symptoms, and 62% were unhappy with the results of surgery. Before surgery 82% had chronic pain, and after surgery 80% still had pain. Even after treatment for fibromyalgia, 68% still had back pain. There was no significant difference in preoperative and postoperative evaluations of quality of life, and the impact of spinal surgery on function was negative. The demographic profile of our patients compares with that in the literature. The symptoms of fibromyalgia are diverse and current treatment regimes do not give satisfactory control. In our study, we found that spinal surgery neither ameliorates the symptoms nor improves the poor quality of life of fibromyalgia patients

To review blood transfusion practices during elective spinal surgery procedures. Prospective clinical audit. All patients who underwent elective spinal surgery between January 2009 and March 2009. Crossmatch: Transfusion ratio (C: T ratio); Transfusion index (TI) (Evaluates cost-effective crossmatch). British Haematological society standards are C:T ratio= 2.5:1 and TI>0.5. Data was collected from electronic records of blood bank, pathology system (NOTIS) and review of patient notes. A total of 194 patients underwent elective spinal surgery in our unit. (Cervical spine = 15, Thoracic spine = 3, Vertebroplasty = 10, Lumbar spine = 142, Deformity = 31, other = 8). Of these, 62 patients had 197 blood products crossmatched but only 37 units were used. C:T ratio in lumbar spine surgery was 22:1. However C: T ratio in cervical spine procedures, thoracic spine and deformity correction were 6:1, 11:0 and 4:1 respectively. TI was <0.5 in all procedures except deformity surgery (TI=1). Over- ordering of blood products is still common in spinal surgery as routine blood transfusion may not be required in most elective procedures. Therefore implementing Electronic Issue (EI) of blood products for elective spinal procedures for non deformity procedures can be a cost effective and safe practice

Introduction. Many journals require outcome data at 2 years post-operative for the assessment of operative procedures in spinal surgery. This study seeks to clarify the timescale of improvement after surgery to see if a shorter period of assessment will indicate the final outcome. Methods. Outcome data for 185 consecutive patients who underwent spinal surgery was analysed. All were given a global outcome assessment questionnaire (as used in the Swedish Spinal Fusion study) at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years following surgery. Results were analysed according to the type of spinal surgery undertaken. Results. Six patients had incomplete data and were excluded. 124 of 179 patients were ‘much better’ or ‘better’ at 6 months. There was no significant change in the outcome of this group at 2 years (p<0.05). Only 18 showed any deterioration at 1 year and 2 years post surgery. Conclusion. Of the 55 patients who were ‘same’ or ‘worse’ at 6 months, most had no significant improvement in outcome at 2 years. Only 6 showed any significant improvement. Sixty four patients underwent disc replacement or spinal fusion. Of these, 19 patients improved between 6 months and 2 years follow-up. Eight patients got worse during the same period. Fifty eight patients underwent decompressive surgery. Of these 12 had a better outcome at 2 years than 6 months, and 17 had a worse outcome. Data from the remaining 57 patients was too heterogenous to analyse by subgroup

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY. The anterior approach to the thoracic and lumbar spine is used with increasing frequency for various indications. With the advent of prosthetic intervertebral disc replacement, its use has become even more frequent and has often been associated with serious complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate vascular complications in patients who underwent anterior spinal surgery of the thoracic and lumbar spine. MATERIAL. We performed a total of 531 operations of the thoracolumbar spine from the anterior approach. In 12 cases, after exposure of the body of the first or second thoracic vertebrae, we employed the Smith-Robinson technique to expose the cervical spine. We used sternotomy in six, posterolateral thoracotomy in 209, pararectal retroperitoneal approach in 239, anterolateral lumbotomy in 58 and the transperitoneal approach in seven patients. The aim of surgery was somatectomy in 190 patients and discectomy in 341 patients. Sternotomy and transperitoneal approaches were carried out by a thoracic or vascular surgeon and all the other procedures were done by the first author. The indications for spinal surgery included an accident in 171, tumour in 56, spondylodiscitis in 43 and a degenerative disease in 261 patients. METHODS. The Smith-Robinson approach was used for exposure of T1 or T2. Sternotomy was indicated for treatment of T2–T4 and also T1 in the patients with a short, thick neck. Access to T3–L1 was gained by posterolateral thoracotomy, in most cases performed as a minimally invasive transpleural procedure. For access to the lumbar spine we usually used the retroperitoneal approach from a pararectal incision or lumbotomy. We preferred the pararectal retroperitoneal approach in L2–S1 degenerative disease, L5 fractures, and L5–S1 spondylodiscitis. We carried out lumbotomy in patients with trauma, tumors and L1–L4 spondylodiscitis. The transperitoneal approach from lower middle laparotomy was used only in tumors at L5 or L4. The patients were followed up for 2 to 96 months (average, 31.4 months) after anterior spinal surgery. RESULTS. In 12 patients treated by the Smith-Robinson procedure and in six patients undergoing sternotomy, neither early nor late signs of any injury to major blood vessels or internal organs were recorded. The 209 patients with posterolateral thoracotomy were also free from any signs of vascular injury, but trauma to the thoracic duet was recorded in one case. We found injury to major blood vessels in three patients in the group treated by the pararectal retroperitoneal procedure. In the total of 531 anterior spinal surgery procedures this accounts for 0.56 %; of the 304 lumbar operations and 239 pararectal retroperitoneal operations it is 0.99 % and 1.26 %, respectively. In one patient the vascular injury was associated with trauma to the ureter. CONCLUSIONS. The technique of anterior approach is safe only in the hands of experienced spinal surgeons with long experience. In institutions where anterior spinal surgery is not a routine method it is advisable to involve a vascular or cardiac surgeon. However, the most important point is to know when not to operate

To evaluate the prevalence of infection after elective spinal surgery, a prospective study of patients was carried out over 10 years to 2002. Demographic details, diagnosis and indications for surgery, duration of surgery, time delay before surgery and concomitant diseases were recorded. The management and outcome of patients who developed infection postoperatively were noted. During the period, 1050 elective cases were done for scoliosis, tuberculous spine, tumours, trauma, biopsy and degenerative disorders. There were four deep and six superficial infections. Deep infections were treated by debridement and implant removal, with good outcomes. Superficial sepsis settled with local therapy. The rate of sepsis following elective spinal surgery was 0.95% and infections responded well to treatment

Introduction: In order to improve the provision of Spinal Surgery in the United Kingdom, the number of Specialist Spinal Surgeons and Surgeons with an Interest in Spinal Surgery needs to increase by 25% from the existing 175 surgeons. There is an expected shortage of Orthopaedic Specialist Registrars (SpRs) planning careers in Spinal Surgery not only to maintain the status quo, with one third of Specialist Spinal Surgeons due to retire in the next three years, but also to provide the needed expansion in numbers. Methods and results: A postal survey of the 528 SpRs was performed with a response rate fo 71%. The critical question was the post accreditation intention as either a Specialist Spinal Surgeon (greater than 70% of elective work), as a Surgeon with an Interest in Spinal Surgery (more than 30% of elective work), a surgeon doing occasional Spinal Surgery (less than 30% of elective work) or one who avoids all Spinal Surgery. This attitude could then be taken into account when analysing the training provided and the perceptions of Spinal Surgery to identify factors which could be discouraging an interest in Spinal Surgery. Sixty-nine per cent indicated that they intended to avoid all Spinal Surgery. Thirty-five (9%) intended becoming either Specialist Spinal Surgeons or Surgeons with a Spinal Interest but only nine (2%) are in their final two years of training. The declared intention to avoid Spinal Surgery increases from 54% in the first two years of training, to 70% in the middle two years, and to 75% in the final two years and post C.C.S.T. fellowships. There should be 24 newly accredited Specialist Spinal Surgeons based on a projection of the 4.3% response intending to become Specialist Spinal Surgeons. This leaves a shortfall of 34 Specialist Spinal Surgeons by 2005. The survey has revealed three main features of Spinal Surgery which appear to have a negative effect on the attitude of the SpRs to Spinal Surgery and overwhelm the potentially attractive features. These are badly organised clinics; the perceived psychological complications of spinal patients; and a perceived inadequate exposure to Spinal Surgery during their training. Conclusion: It is clear from the response of SpRs that there are important misconceptions concerning Spinal Surgery, together with the shortcomings of training and of the provision of services within the NHS. These have to be addressed urgently if the speciality is to become more attractive to them. Areas where positive action can be taken include the modification of training programmes so that all SpRs are exposed to Spinal Surgery in the formative first three years; properly structured spinal clinics; and above all the need for Spinal Surgeons to be encouraging and enthusiastic about a field of surgery which provides some of the exciting challenges in Orthopaedic Surgery

Background. The majority of studies assessing minimal clinical important difference in outcome do so for management of chronic low back pain. Those that identify MCID following spinal surgical intervention fail to differentiate between the different pathologies and treatments or use variable methods and anchors in the calculation. Aim. To identify the MCID in scores across the most common spinal surgical procedures using standardised methods of calculation. Method. Prospective longitudinal study following elective lumbar spinal surgery. All patients had a complete set of spinal outcome assessments (ODI and VAS) and self perceived rating of the global and Mcnab criteria. MCID was calculated as defined by Hagg et al. Results. 244 patients of average age 53 years were followed up for 62 months post surgery. The MCID across the range of spinal surgeries was a 10 point change in ODI and 28 points for the VAS. A MCID following lumbar decompression surgery was a 3 point change in ODI and 29 points for VAS; 24 points in ODI and 37 points in the VAS for a discectomy, and 13 points in ODI and 23 point change in VAS for revision surgery. This value also varied depending on the anchor and method used for calculation. Conclusion. The MCID in score varies between different spinal procedures, method of calculation and the external anchor used. Standardised methods of calculating MCID in outcome measures should be used to allow comparative research and assessment. Generalisation of MCID in scores across a range of spinal procedures should be strongly discouraged. Conflicts of Interest. None. Source of Funding. None. This abstract has not been previously published in whole or substantial part nor has it been presented previously at a national meeting

Aims. With resumption of elective spine surgery services in the UK following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a multicentre British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) collaborative study to examine the complications and deaths due to COVID-19 at the recovery phase of the pandemic. The aim was to analyze the safety of elective spinal surgery during the pandemic. Methods. A prospective observational study was conducted from eight spinal centres for the first month of operating following restoration of elective spine surgery in each individual unit. Primary outcome measure was the 30-day postoperative COVID-19 infection rate. Secondary outcomes analyzed were the 30-day mortality rate, surgical adverse events, medical complications, and length of inpatient stay. Results. In all, 257 patients (128 males) with a median age of 54 years (2 to 88) formed the study cohort. The mean number of procedures performed from each unit was 32 (16 to 101), with 118 procedures (46%) done as category three prioritization level. The majority of patients (87%) were low-medium “risk stratification” category and the mean length of hospital stay was 5.2 days. None of the patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection, nor was there any mortality related to COVID-19 during the 30-day follow-up period, with 25 patients (10%) having been tested for symptoms. Overall, 32 patients (12%) developed a total of 34 complications, with the majority (19/34) being grade 1 to 2 Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications. No patient required postoperative care in an intensive care setting for any unexpected complication. Conclusion. This study shows that safe and effective planned spinal surgical services can be restored avoiding viral transmission, with diligent adherence to national guidelines and COVID-19-secure pathways tailored according to the resources of the individual spinal units. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1096–1101

To quantify the expected shortage of Orthopaedic Specialist Registrars (SpRs) planning careers in Spinal Surgery with one third of Specialist Spinal Surgeons due to retire in the next 3 years and to provide the needed expansion of 25% in the existing number of 175 surgeons. A postal survey of the 528 SpRs was performed with a response rate of 71%. The critical question was the post accreditation intention as either a Specialist Spinal Surgeon (greater than 70% of elective work), as a Surgeon with an Interest in Spinal Surgery (more than 30% of elective work), a surgeon doing occasional Spinal Surgery (less than 30% of elective work) or one who avoids all Spinal Surgery. This attitude could then be taken into account when analysing the training provided and the perceptions of Spinal Surgery to identify factors which could be discouraging an interest in Spinal Surgery. Sixty nine percent indicated that they intended to avoid all Spinal Surgery. Thirty five (9%) intended becoming either Specialist Spinal Surgeons or Surgeons with a Spinal Interest but only 9 (2%) are in their final two years of training. The declared intention to avoid Spinal Surgery increases from 54% in the first 2 years of training, to 70% in the middle 2 years, and to 75% in the final 2 years and post CCST fellowships. Based on a projection of the 4. 3% response intending to become Specialist Spinal Surgeons there will be a shortfall of 34 Specialist Spinal Surgeons by 2005. The features of Spinal Surgery which appear to have a negative affect and overwhelm the potentially attractive features are badly organised clinics; the perceived psychological complications of spinal patients; and a perceived inadequate exposure to spinal surgery during SpR training. The modification of training programmes so that all SpRs are exposed to Spinal Surgery in the formative first three years; properly structured spinal clinics; and a need for Spinal Surgeons to be encouraging and enthusiastic about this field of surgery are essential

An independent audit of Lumbar Spinal surgery performed by a single surgeon over a 4 year period is presented. The three groups evaluated included Lumbar fusion, decompression and discectomy. Patients were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Questionairre and five other questions related to overall outcome and patient satisfaction. The minimum follow-up was 6 months. Patient response rate was 74%. The overall outcome was 81% Excellent/Good vs 19% Fair/Poor. The best outcomes were in the discectomy group. The decompression group showed a variable and unpredictable outcome. Complications encountered in the three subgroups are discussed. Lumbar spinal surgery offers lasting and predictable outcomes to a large majority of well selected patients. Independent surgical audits form an important part of evaluating one’s surgical practice

Background: Autologous bone graft remains the “gold standard”, but the associated morbidity and finite supply of tissue has resulted in surgeons seeking methods of enhancing healing with bone graft substitutes and bone morphogenic proteins (BMPs). There are 54 bone graft substitutes and 2 BMPs currently on sale in the UK. The aim of this study was to review the published clinical evidence in support of their use in spinal surgery. Methods: The 19 manufacturers of bone graft substitutes and BMPs were contacted asking for details of their products on the market. A systematic literature review was conducted using the ISI Web of Knowledge, EMBASE (1980–2008) and OVID databases. Publications providing clinical data were classified according to the hierarchy of clinical evidence published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Am in 2003. Level I evidence is a prospective randomised control trial with definitive results to support the use of an intervention in a clinical setting. Level V evidence is isolated case reports. A Grade of recommendation A-i was accredited to each product to assist the clinical spinal surgeon in making decisions on which product to use based on the evidence in the literature. Results: 102 clinical studies found, most of which were level IV or V evidence. Both BMPs, InductOS® and OP-1® have Level I papers and have Grade A recommendation. There is very poor evidence for the use of bone graft substitutes in spinal surgery with no products receiving Grade A recommendation and only 6 out of 54 products having Grade B recommendation. Conclusions: There is a lack of evidenced based clinical data for the use of bone graft substitutes in spinal surgery. Regarding BMPs there is good evidence for the use of these products in spinal surgery but surgeons must be aware of the reported complications

This study was conducted to quantify the incidence of gastrointestinal morbidity and identify risk factors for developing gastrointestinal morbidity following spinal surgery in children. A retrospective review was conducted on 253 surgical spinal procedures performed over a 5 year period at Starship Children’s Hospital. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant risk factors. Seventy eight (77.9%) percent of the study population developed gastrointestinal morbidity and this significantly prolonged the median post-operative hospital stay (8 days vs. 4 days; p< 0.0001). Emesis (50.6%), paralytic ileus (42.3%) and constipation (22.5%) were the most frequent gastrointestinal morbidities. Significant risk factors for developing gastrointestinal morbidity were fusion surgery, co-morbidities and duration of post-operative opioid use. The high incidence of gastrointestinal morbidity after paediatric spinal surgery and consequent prolonged hospital stay has clinical implications to both the patient and the institution. Awareness of those with significant risk factors identified by this study could assist in the timely implementation of appropriate treatment

Introduction. Traditionally complex spinal surgery in Belfast has been performed at the Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH). Since an amalgamation the RVH has become effectively the level 1 trauma centre for the province. The ever increasing complexity of spinal surgery in addition to changes in practice such as the management of metastatic spinal cord, are placing significant demands on the service. At a time when resources are scarce trends in patient profiles are highly important to allow adequate planning of our service. Aim. To establish trends in patient profiles in a level one trauma centre also managing spinal pathology over the last 10 years and to examine the impact of this on our service. Methods. The Fracture Outcome Research Data base (FORD) was interrogated to provide data for patient profiles from 2000 to 2010. The Hospital planning and performance department contacted for finance data. Results. In 2000 the most common admission was for a fractured neck of femur (n=1014). This has not significantly changed over the ten years. In 2000 fractured tibia (n= 386), fractured forearms (n= 324), fractured ankles (n= 312) and spinal cases (n=335) were admitted. By 2010 a 49% increase had occurred in spinal admissions making them the second most common patient admitted to the unit. Of spinal case admissions, tumours have increased by 333%, spinal fractures by 10%, cervical disc surgery by 163% and suspected cauda equine cases by a staggering 537%. Conclusions. The throughput of spinal admissions to the unit has significantly increased between 2000 and 2010 making them now the second most common admission to the unit. The impact of this on bed days, theatre usage and oncall arrangements is huge and must be taken into account in stratregic planning of our service especially given the background of ongoing financial constraint

Introduction This study was conducted to quantify the incidence of gastrointestinal morbidity and identify risk factors for developing gastrointestinal morbidity following spinal surgery in children. Method A retrospective review was conducted on 253 surgical spinal procedures performed over a 5 year period at Starship Children’s Hospital. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant risk factors. Co-morbidity included co-existing cardiac, respiratory, genitorurinary or central nervous system problems, or delayed development. Results Seventy eight (77.9%) percent of the study population developed gastrointestinal morbidity and this significantly prolonged the median post-operative hospital stay (8 days vs.4 days; p< 0.0001). Emesis (50.6%), paralytic ileus (42.3%) and constipation (22.5%) were the most frequent gastrointestinal morbidities. Significant risk factors for developing gastrointestinal morbidity were fusion surgery (p< 0.01), co-morbidities (p-value) and duration of post-operative opioid use (p-value). Discussion There is a high incidence of gastrointestinal morbidity after paediatric spinal surgery. The consequent prolonged hospital stay has clinical implications to both the patient and the institution. We have further identified risk factors for developing gastrointestinal morbidity, of which the duration of post-operative opioid use is modifiable. Awareness of those with the other significant risk factors identified by this study could assist in the timely implementation of appropriate treatment

There is increasing knowledge regarding the functional outcome of patients following posterior lumbar spinal surgery for degenerative conditions of the spine. There is less known regarding the expectations patients have for spinal surgery and how that may relate to commonly reported surgical outcome measures. It was the purpose of this study to evaluate the results of elective lumbar spinal surgery as it relates to patient expectations for outcome. and outcome as quantified by both physician reported outcome and patient derived generic and disease-specific measures. Patient expectations for surgery were evaluated in one hundred and fifty-five consecutive patients undergoing posterior lumbar surgery for degenerative conditions (single institution, two surgeons). SF-36+Oswestry disability was quantified preoperatively, and serially postoperatively. Preoperative expectations (pain relief, sleep, recreational, ADL, work return) were documented and postoperative expectations quantified at time of anticipated maximal medical improvement (6mos decompressions,1yr with fusions). Mean preoperative SF-36 MCS and PCS scores were 3.4 and 1.2 S.D. below age/gender matched Canadian norms. Although patients reported improvements in SF-36+Oswestry scores following surgery, mean SF-36 MCS and PCS scores were still 2 and 1.5 S.D. below norms. Mean Oswestry disability improved from 48.7%±1.7% to 23.1±1.9%. Expectations for surgery were met in 81%(responders:143/155). Of 19%(27/143) where expectations were not met, 6/27 have either nonunion, technical, or medical factors. There was no difference in mean age, gender, comorbidity, procedure type and follow-up comparing patients where expectations were met to those that were not. Patients where expectations were not met reported lower preoperative SF-36 (GH and VT) domain scores (p=0.02 and 0.04, respectively), however, preoperative Oswestry, SF-36 MCS and PCS scores were not significantly different. Patients were less satisfied if they had prior lumbar surgery (p=0.02) or involved in WCB/litigation (p< 0.001). We note 15%(21/143) where expectations were not met and there were no apparent surgical or medical confounds to account. There are likely other factors that may influence patient perception and expectation for treatment which requires further study

Objective: To analyse the incidence and gravity of reported complications that arise in spinal surgery and assess the comparative safety, or otherwise, of Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty. Methods: The Spinal Foundation, Rochdale, has performed 958 Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty procedures and holds a comprehensive database of the results of all operations carried out in this manner. The records of these procedures provided the basis for a comparison of the safety of Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty to that found for other spinal surgical techniques as reported in the literature. Nine hundred and fifty eight procedures have been performed on 716 patients. Complications that arose during the operation and the postoperative phase of six weeks following the procedure were elicited from patient records. This data was correlated and compared to a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trial data available on complications arising during and after conventional spinal surgery. The ‘SPSS’ and ‘CIA’ statistical packages were used to draw conclusions as to the safety of endoscopically assisted laser spinal surgery. Results: The cohort integrity of operative and review records at six weeks after surgery was 100%. In 958 ELFs performed, 24 complications occurred in 23 patients. There were nine cases of discitis (one infective) (0.9%), one dural tear (0.1%), one deep wound infection (0.1%), two patients suffered a foot drop (one transient) (0.2%), one myocardial infarction (0.1%), one erectile dysfunction (0.1%) and one patient who developed panic attacks post-operatively (0.1%). This amounts to an overall surgical complication rate of 1.6%. MRI follow up of clinically symptomatic patients highlighted eight residual disc herniations (0.8%). Meta analysis of randomised controlled trials of conventional spinal surgery for adult onset degenerative disc disease and/or sciatic pain reported overall complication rates for fusion (11.8%), decompression (7.6%), discectomy (6.0%) and chemonucleolysis (9.6%). Conclusions: The complication rate of Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty is shown to be significantly lower than that reported following conventional spinal surgery (P < 0.01). From these results it must therefore be concluded that ELF as a treatment for chronic low back pain and sciatica presents less risk to a patient than conventional methods of spinal surgery

Purpose: Purpose of the study was to evaluate the incidence of spinal surgery for patients with back pain. Methods and results: During past five years 5145 patients were seen in the back pain screening clinic. 823 patients (16%) were referred to the spine clinic (p< 0.001). 127 patients (2.47%) were operated on (p< 0.001).106 patients (2.1%) had lumbar discectomy/decompression, 9 (0.59%) cervical discectomy, 3 (0.06%) pars reconstruction, 9 (0.17%) fusion and PLIF for spondylolisthesis, 5 (0.1%) decompression for spinal stenosis and 1 (0.01%) subtraction osteotomy for kyphosis. 5 patients (0.1%) were referred with “red flag” symptoms: 4 with spinal stenosis and 1 with tumour. 17 patients (0.3%) had discogram. 4 of them went for surgery: 1 had L4/5 PLIF, 2 L5/S1PLIF and 1 L5/S1 discectomy. 289 patients (5.6%) had nerve root blockade. Following NRB 47 patients (0.9%) had discectomy/decompression (p< 0.001). 62 patients had discectomy/decompression without previous NRB. L5/S1 discectomy was the most common (48 pts; 0.9%). 86 patients (1.7%) had facet joint injections. 8 patients (0.15%) had surgery following FJI (p< 0.001). 1 patient had L4 nerve root decompression, 3 L4/5 discectomy, 1 L5/S1 nerve rot decompression, 1 alartransverse fusion and 1 L5/S1 PLIF. 465 patients (9%) did not have nerve root blocks or facet joint injections. 3 patients (0.06%) had epidural injections of local anaesthetic and steroid. Conclusion: Spinal surgery is not commonly performed in patients with back pain. Majority of patients can be treated conservatively. Prior to surgery nerve root blocks and facet joint injections are useful in selected patients

Purpose: Back pain is a significant problem in Europe with important socio-economic impact. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of spinal surgery for patients with back pain. Sudy design: This was a retrospective Level II type study. Patient sample included five thousand and forty five patients with a five year follow up. Methods and results: During past five years 5145 patients were seen in the back pain screening clinic. 823 patients (16%) were referred to the spine clinic (p< 0.001). 127 patients (2.47%) were operated on (p< 0.001). 106 patients (2.1%) had lumbar discectomy/decompression, 9 (0.59%) cervical discectomy, 3 (0.06%) pars reconstruction, 9 (0.17%) fusion and PLIF for spondylolisthesis, 5 (0.1%) decompression for spinal stenosis and 1 (0.01%) subtraction osteotomy for kyphosis. 5 patients (0.1%) were referred with “red flag” symptoms: 4 with spinal stenosis and 1 with tumour. 17 patients (0.3%) had discogram. 4 of them went for surgery: 1 had L4/5 PLIF, 2 L5/S1PLIF and 1 L5/S1 discectomy. 289 patients (5.6%) had nerve root blockade. Following NRB 47 patients (0.9%) had discectomy/decompression (p< 0.001). 62 patients had discectomy/decompression without previous NRB. L5/S1 discectomy was the most common (48 pts; 0.9%). 86 patients (1.7%) had facet joint injections. 8 patients (0.15%) had surgery following FJI (p< 0.001). 1 patient had L4 nerve root decompression, 3 L4/5 discectomy, 1 L5/S1 nerve rot decompression, 1 alartransverse fusion and 1 L5/S1 PLIF. 465 patients (9%) did not have nerve root blocks or facet joint injections. 3 patients (0.06%) had epidural injections of local anaesthetic and steroid. Conclusion: Spinal surgery is not commonly performed in patients with back pain. Majority of patients can be treated conservatively. Prior to surgery nerve root blocks and facet joint injections are useful in selected patients

Aim: To establish the effectiveness of using the intra-operative cell saver in spinal surgery. Methods: Patients undergoing posterior instrumental lumber spine fusion with iliac crest bone graft were selected to have intra-operative red cell salvage using the cell saver machine (Dideco Electra-Auto-transfusion Cell Separator). 20 patients were in the study group. The control group consisted of 28 patients who had undergone similar surgery prior to introducing the cell saver. The parameters identified were: pre and post operative haemoglobin, clotting state, volume of transfused allogenic blood, volume of transfused autollogous blood using the cell saver and indications for transfusion. Statistical analysis: the chi-square and the t-test. Results: The average age in the cell saver group was 43.8 years and in the control group 48.3 (p> 0.09). The number of levels fused was comparable between the two groups (p> 0.1). There was no difference in the pre and post operative haemoglobin level in the two groups (p> 0.7 & p> 0.3 respectively). No patient had a pre-operative coagulopathy. Two patients (10%) in the cell saver group received an intra-operative allogenic transfusion, 14 patients (50%) in the non-cell saver group received a transfusion. The difference was significant (p< 0.004). Conclusion: The use of the cell saver significantly reduces the need for allogenic blood transfusion in major spinal surgery. We therefore recommend its routine use in such procedures

Introduction: Surgical Site Infection (SSI) in spinal surgery at the James Cook University Hospital was investigated and compared with the published rates of 1 – 12%. Variables of instrumentation, laminar air flow, duration of operation, and blood units transfused in the first 48 hours were examined. Methods: 556 spinal operations were carried out in 2005–6. 147 of these involved the use of instrumentation. Infections were defined as positive wound or blood cultures. The duration of surgery, presence of laminar air flow and units of blood transfused were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using Fishers exact test. Results: 9 cases of SSI were identified in the 147 instrumented spinal operations in comparison to zero in the 409 non-instrumented patients (p < 0.0001). The mean duration of surgery was 4 hours 19mins. The results for operation duration < 5hours vs. operation duration > 5hours (3/96 vs 6/51) were not statistically significant. (p=0.065). Of the 147 instrumented spinal operations, 8 of the infected were performed in a laminar air flow system and 1 without (not statistically significant, p=0.69). The results for blood transfusion < 2units vs. blood transfusion ≥2 units (4/85 vs 5/62) were not significant (P=0.49). Conclusion: The rate of SSI at the James Cook University Hospital in instrumented spinal surgery was 6%. SSI in spinal surgery was heavily influenced by instrumentation, but was not reduced by laminar airflow. Duration of operation and number of units of blood transfused were not significant factors

Objective: To analyse the incidence and gravity of reported complications that arise in spinal surgery and assess the comparative safety, or otherwise, of Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty. Design: Prospective independently analysed study of complications arising during the six weeks following Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty was correlated and compared to a meta-analysis of reported data on complications in conventional spinal surgery. Subjects: Nine hundred and fifty-eight procedures performed on 716 patients. Outcome measures: Occurrence of complications. Results: The cohort integrity of operative and review records at six weeks after surgery was 100%. Twenty four complications occurred in 23 patients: nine cases of discitis (one infective) (0.9%), one dural tear (0.1%), one deep wound infection (0.1%), two patients suffered a foot drop (one transient) (0.2%), one myocardial infarction (0.1%), one erectile dysfunction (0.1%) and one post operative panic attacks (0.1%). MRI later demonstrated eight residual disc herniations (0.8%). The overall surgical complication rate was 1.6%. Meta-analysis of conventional spinal surgery reported overall complication rates for fusion (11.8%), decompression (7.6%), discectomy (6.0%) and chemonucleolysis (9.6%). Conclusions: The complication rate of Endoscopic Laser Foraminoplasty is significantly lower than that reported following conventional spinal surgery (P < 0.01)

Introduction: Surgical Site Infection (SSI) in spinal surgery at the James Cook University Hospital was investigated and compared with the published rates of 1–12%. Variables of instrumentation, laminar air flow, duration of operation, and blood units transfused in the first 48 hours were examined. Methods: 556 spinal operations were carried out in 2005–6. 147 of these involved the use of instrumentation. Infections were defined as positive wound or blood cultures. The duration of surgery, presence of laminar air flow and units of blood transfused were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using the Fisher’s Exact Test. Results: Nine cases of SSI were identified in the 147 instrumented spinal operations in comparison to Zero in the 409 non-instrumented patients (p < 0.0001). The mean duration of instrumented surgery was 4 hours 19mins. The infection rates for operation duration < 5 h versus operation duration > 5 h (3/96 Vs 6/51) were not statistically significant (p = 0.065). Of the 147 instrumented spinal operations, 8 of 117 operations performed in a laminar air flow system and 1 of 30 performed without laminar air flow were infected (p = 0.69). Infection rates for those patients transfused < 2 units (4/85) were not significantly different to those in patients transfused > 2 units (5/62), p = 0.49. Conclusion: The rate of SSI at the James Cook University Hospital in instrumented spinal surgery was 6%. SSI in spinal surgery was heavily influenced by instrumentation, but was not reduced by laminar airflow. Duration of operation and number of units of blood transfused were not significant factors

Aims: To determine outcomes in somatised patients and identify factors of clinical utility that help predict favourable and unfavourable results. Introduction: Somatisation is a tendency to experience and express somatic distress and symptoms unaccounted for by pathological findings and to attribute them to physical illness, often with excess seeking of medical help for them. Somatised patients undergoing spinal surgery have less favourable outcomes than the normal surgical population. However a range of outcomes occur. Methods: Prospective data from a single centre was obtained. Pre-operative modified somatic perception (MSP) and modified Zung depression (MZD) scores were available on 993 patients. The 46 patients with high somatic scores were identified as a discrete sub-group. Some patients did extremely well some patients had poor outcomes. Quantification of the number of consultants seen, outpatient clinic (OPD) reviews and duration of symptoms were compared to indicators of poor outcome (unchanged or increased visual analogue score (VAS), increased or < 10 point decrease in Oswestry disability index (ODI)) at 6 and 12 months of follow up. Results: In the 46 patients the mean pre surgical scores were ODI 64.9 (SD 12.75) MSP 16 (SD 7.74); MZD 38 (SD 10.4); Prior to surgery they had a mean of 9.6 OPD attendances, the average number of consultants seen was 3.28 (SD 2.83). Overall the post-operative mean ODI was 36.81 (SD 24.58) a clinically satisfactory improvement. At 6 months patients who have a good outcome (ODI) had had an increased number of orthopaedic consultations (60% vs. 39.7%) but this was not statistically significant; p=0.16. At 12 months patients with a good outcome (ODI) had waited a lower number of months before surgery (5.5 vs. 11; p=0.026). Across all other parameters, including gender, age, surgical procedure undertaken, no other significant correlation exists between OPD, consultants seen and the changes in VAS, ODI at 6 and 12 months of follow up. Conclusions: Dramatic differences exist between somatised patients who have good and poor outcome following spinal surgery. The number of months from decision to operate to surgery appears to predict good outcome at 12 months. No other identifiable pre-op factors were found

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

Aim of Study: The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of muscle retractors on intramuscular pressure in the posterior spinal muscles during posterior spinal surgery. Methods: Twenty patients undergoing posterior spinal surgery were recruited into this study and recordings of intramuscular pressure during surgery were performed using a Stryker® compartment pressure monitoring system, prior to insertion of retractors, 5, 30 and 60 minutes into surgery and on removal of retractors. Prior to and following use of the retractors, muscle biopsies were taken from the erector spinae muscle for analysis. Results: A significant increase in intramuscular pressure (p< 0.001) was observed during surgery, with pressure rising from 7.1±4.1 mmHg pre-operatively to 26.4±16.0 mmHg 30 minutes into the operation. On removal of retractors, this pressure returned to or near to the original value. Analysis of muscle biopsies using calcium-activated ATPase birefringence revealed a reduction in muscle function following prolonged use of self-retaining retractors. Discussion: This study demonstrates a substantial rise in pressure in the erector spinae muscle during posterior spinal surgery. Following retraction, marked changes were noted in the function of the muscles. This could be an important factor in the generation of operative scar tissue and post-operative dysfunction of the spinal muscles, and therefore, may be a cause of persistent back pain frequently observed in post-operative patients. Currently, this work is being extended to investigate the relationship between loss of muscle function and duration of retraction, and to study the long term implications of loss of muscle function with respect to surgical outcome and chronic back pain

Since several spinal conditions are currently treated with spinal fusion, alternatives to autogenous bone graft in spinal surgery have been under study for many years. Results have shown that, compared to other non.-spinal conditions, such as filling bone cavities, spinal fusion, in particular posterolateral fusion, is much more challenging due to the reduced area of the graft bed. As a result, most of the bone substitutes are still under investigation and their effectiveness in the clinical setting has yet to be demonstrated. In recent years the authors analysed several bone graft substitutes using an animal model which has been widely used in experimental spinal fusion. In particular, porous ceramics have been used alone or with osteoin-ductive material such as fresh bone marrow or cultured mesenchymal stem cells. The results of these studies have shown that with ceramic alone a percentage of solid fusion similar to that with autogenous bone graft cannot be achieved. However, compared to the latter, more favorable results have been obtained when ceramics are loaded with mesenchymal stem cells. The addition of fresh bone marrow to ceramics also increases the fusion rates; however, in this case new bone formation was mainly found in the peripheral portions of the graft and to a lesser extent than when cultured mesenchymal stem cells were used