Cervical spine fusion have gained interest in the literature since these procedures are now ever more frequently being performed in an outpatient setting with few complications and acceptable results. The purpose of this study was to assess the rate of blood transfusion after cervical fusion surgery, and its effect, if any on complication rates. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was used to identify patients that underwent cervical fusion surgery from 2010 to 2013. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis was used to determine post-operative complications associated with transfusion and cervical fusion. We identified 11,588 patients who had cervical spine fusion between 2010 and 2013. The overall rate of transfusion was found to be 1.47%. All transfused patients were found to have increased risk of: venous thromboembolism (TBE) (OR 3.19, CI: 1.16–8.77), myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 9.12, CI: 2.53–32.8), increased length of stay (LOS) (OR 28.03, CI: 14.28–55.01) and mortality (OR 4.14, CI: 1.44–11.93). Single level fusion had increased risk of: TBE (OR 3.37, CI: 1.01–11.33), MI (OR 10.5, CI: 1.88–59.89), and LOS (OR 14.79, CI: 8.2–26.67). Multilevel fusion had increased risk of: TBE (OR 5.64, CI: 1.15–27.6), surgical site infection (OR 16.29, CI: 3.34–79.49), MI (OR 10.84, CI: 2.01–58.55), LOS (OR 26.56, CI: 11.8–59.78) and mortality (OR 10.24, CI: 2.45–42.71). ACDF surgery had an increased risk of: TBE (OR 4.87, CI: 1.04–22.82), surgical site infection (OR 9.73, CI: 2.14–44.1), MI (OR 9.88, CI: 1.87–52.2), LOS (OR 28.34, CI: 13.79–58.21) and mortality (OR 6.3, CI: 1.76–22.48). Posterior fusion surgery had increased risk of: MI (OR 10.45, CI: 1.42–77.12) and LOS (OR 4.42, CI: 2.68–7.29). Our results demonstrate that although cervical fusions can be done as outpatient procedures special precautions and investigations should be done for patients who receive transfusion after cervical fusion surgery. These patients are demonstrated to have higher rate of MI, DVT, wound infection and mortality when compared to those who do not receive transfusion

In multilevel posterior cervical instrumented fusions, extending the fusion across the cervico-thoracic junction at T1 or T2 (CTJ) has been associated with decreased rate of re-operation and pseudarthrosis but with longer surgical time and increased blood loss. The impact on patient reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective was to determine whether extending the fusion through the CTJ influenced PROs at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Secondary objectives were to compare the number of patients reaching the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) for the PROs and mJOA, operative time duration, intra-operative blood loss (IOBL), length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, adverse events (AEs), re-operation within 12 months of the surgery, and patient satisfaction. This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a multicenter observational cohort study of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Patients who underwent a posterior instrumented fusion of 4 levels of greater (between C2-T2) between January 2015 and October 2020 with 12 months follow-up were included. PROS (NDI, EQ5D, SF-12 PCS and MCS, NRS arm and neck pain) and mJOA were compared using ANCOVA, adjusted for baseline differences. Patient demographics, comorbidities and surgical details were abstracted. Percentafe of patient reaching MCID for these outcomes was compared using chi-square test. Operative duration, IOBL, AEs, re-operation, discharge disposittion, LOS and satisfaction were compared using chi-square test for categorical variables and independent samples t-tests for continuous variables. A total of 206 patients were included in this study (105 patients not crossing the CTJ and 101 crossing the CTJ). Patients who underwent a construct extending through the CTJ were more likely to be female and had worse baseline EQ5D and NDI scores (p> 0.05). When adjusted for baseline difference, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups for the PROs and mJOA at 3 and 12 months. Surgical duration was longer (p 0.05). Satisfaction with the surgery was high in both groups but significantly different at 12 months (80% versus 72%, p= 0.042 for the group not crossing the CTJ and the group crossing the CTJ, respectively). The percentage of patients reaching MCID for the NDI score was 55% in the non-crossing group versus 69% in the group extending through the CTJ (p= 0.06). Up to 12 months after the surgery, there was no statistically significant differences in PROs between posterior construct extended to or not extended to the upper thoracic spine. The adverse event profile did not differ significantly, but longer surgical time and blood loss were associated with construct extending across the CTJ

Cervical total disc replacement has been in practice for years now as a viable alternative to cervical fusion in suitable cases, aspiring to preserve spinal motion and prevent adjacent segment disease. Reports are rife that neck pain emerges as an annoying feature in the early postoperative period. The facet joint appears to be the most likely source of pain. 50 patients were prospectively followed up through 5 years after having received disc replacement surgery, indicated for symptomatic soft disc herniation of the cervical spine presenting with radiculopathy. • All were skeletally mature and aged between 22 to 50. • All had failed a minimum of 6 months conservative therapy. • Up to 2 disc levels were addressed. C3 till C7 levels. • Single surgeon (first author). • NDI > 30% (15/50). • Deteriorating radicular neurology. We excluded those with degenerative trophic changes of the cervical spine, focal instability, trauma, osteoporosis, previous cervical spine surgery, previous infection, ossifying axial skeletal disease and inflammatory spondyloarthritides. The device used was an unconstrained implant with stabilizing teeth. Over the 5 years, we studied their postoperative comfort level via the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Visual Analogue Score (VAS). Pre-operative and post-operative analysis of the sagittal axis and of involved facet joints were done. 22 patients suffered postoperative neck pain as reflected by the NDI and VAS scores. Of these, 10 reported of neck pain even 24 months after surgery. However, none were neurologically worse and all patients returned to their pre-morbid functions and were relieved of pain by 28 months. All 22 patients reported of rapid dissolution of neckache after peri-facetal injections of steroids were done under image guidance. We draw attention to the facet joint as the pain generator, triggered by inappropriate implant height, eccentric stresses via hybrid constructs, eccentric loading due to unconstrained devices and unaddressed Luschka joint degeneration. Such factors require careful selection of patients for surgery, necessitate proper pre-operative templating and call for appropriate technical solutions during surgery

Objectives. To demonstrate that instrumented fusion of the paediatric cervical spine is possible and can be performed safely. Study Design. A retrospective review of paediatric patients who had instrumented fusion of the cervical spine. Materials and method. Sixteen paediatric patients (10 male, 6 female) with a mean age of 8 years who underwent instrumented cervical fusion were retrospectively reviewed. Surgery was performed for trauma (5 cases), spinal tuberculosis (3 cases), congenital anomalies (6 cases) and malignancies (2 cases). Fixation methods included occipito-cervical fusion, pedicle and lateral mass screws and anterior cervical plating. Ten posterior approaches, four anterior approaches and four combined anterior and posterior approaches were performed. We looked at fusion rates, blood loss, levels fused, theatre time, technique and complications. Results. All patients achieved radiological and clinical fusion. The average number of levels fused was 2.5, blood loss 418ml and theatre time 222 minutes for all patients. Anterior procedures had an average of 1 levels fused, blood loss 117ml and theatre time 98 minutes. Posterior procedures had an average number of 1.9 levels fused, blood loss of 306ml and theatre time of 131 minutes. For the combined anterior and posterior procedures the average levels fused were 5.5, blood loss 975ml and theatre time 248 minutes. Five surgery related complications were encountered. These consisted of dural leaks and wound sepsis which were all treated effectively. Conclusion. The use of modern segmental spinal instrumentation in the paediatric cervical spine is a viable option in this young population. Although our study sample was small we are able to demonstrate that no major surgical complications were encountered due to the use of cervical spinal instrumentation. NO DISCLOSURES

Fresh-frozen allograft bone is frequently used in orthopaedic surgery. We investigated the incidence of allograft-related infection and analysed the outcomes of recipients of bacterial culture-positive allografts from our single-institute bone bank during bone transplantation. The fresh-frozen allografts were harvested in a strict sterile environment during total joint arthroplasty surgery and immediately stored in a freezer at -78º to -68º C after packing. Between January 2007 and December 2012, 2024 patients received 2083 allografts with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. The overall allograft-associated infection rate was 1.2% (24/2024). Swab cultures of 2083 allografts taken before implantation revealed 21 (1.0%) positive findings. The 21 recipients were given various antibiotics at the individual orthopaedic surgeon’s discretion. At the latest follow-up, none of these 21 recipients displayed clinical signs of infection following treatment. Based on these findings, we conclude that an incidental positive culture finding for allografts does not correlate with subsequent surgical site infection. Additional prolonged post-operative antibiotic therapy may not be necessary for recipients of fresh-frozen bone allograft with positive culture findings.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:427–31.