Abstract. Background. Elderly patients with degenerative lumbar disease are increasingly undergoing posterior lumbar decompression without instrumented stabilisation. There is a paucity of studies examining clinical outcomes, morbidity & mortality associated with this procedure in this population. Methods. A retrospective analysis of aged 80–100 years who underwent posterior lumbar decompression without instrumented stabilisation at University Hospitals of Derby &Burton between 2016–2020. Results. Total 167 eligible patients, 163 octogenarians & 4 nonagenarians. Mean age was 82.78 ± 3.07 years. Mean length of hospital stay 4.79 ± 10.92 days. 76% were pain free at 3months following decompression. The average Charleston co-morbidity index (CCI) was 4.87. No association found with CCI in predicting mortality (ODD ratio 0.916, CI95%). 17patients suffered complications; dural tear (0.017%), post-op paralysis (0.017%), SSI(0.01%), and 0.001% of hospital acquired pneumonia, delirium, TIA, urinary retention, ileus, anaemia. High BMI (35+) was associated with increased incidence of complication (CI 95%, p<0.002). There was significant social drift following discharge as 147 patients went home and 4 patients to rehabilitation facility (p<0.001FE test). The mean operative time was 91.408±41.17 mins and mean anaesthetic time was 36.8±16.06 mins. Prolonged operative time was not associated with increased mortality.2year revision decompression rate was 0.011%. Conclusion. Posterior lumbar decompression without instrumented stablisation in elderly is safe & associated with low mortality with 99.5%survival at 1 year. It significantly improves PROMs & has extremely low revision rate. Incidence of post-op complication is <0.05% and 54% of patients get discharged within 72hours of surgery. Careful selection & optimising patients with high BMI would reduced perioperative morbidity and mortality

Background. Surgical site infection following spine surgery is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and increased cost for the health care system. The reported pooled incidence is 3%. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is a key factor in lowering the risk of acquiring an infection. Previous studies have assessed perioperative cefuroxime concentrations in the anterior column of the cervical spine with an anterior surgical approach. However, the majority of surgeries are performed in the posterior column and often involve the lumbar spine. Accordingly, the objective was to compare the perioperative tissue concentrations of cefuroxime in the anterior and posterior column of the same lumbar vertebra using microdialysis in an experimental porcine model. Method. The lumbar vertebral column was exposed in 8 female pigs. Microdialysis catheters were placed for sampling in the anterior column (vertebral body) and posterior column (posterior arch) within the same vertebra (L5). Cefuroxime (1.5 g) was administered intravenously over 10 min. Microdialysates and plasma samples were continuously obtained over 8 hours. Cefuroxime concentrations were quantified by Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Microdialysis is a catheter-based pharmacokinetic tool, that allows dynamic sampling of unbound and pharmacologic active fraction of drugs e.g., cefuroxime. The primary endpoint was the time with cefuroxime above the clinical breakpoint minimal inhibitory concentration (T>MIC) for Staphylococcus aureus of 4 µg/mL as this has been suggested as the best predictor of efficacy for cefuroxime. The secondary endpoint was tissue penetration (AUC. tissue. /AUC. plasma. ). Results. Mean T>MIC 4 µg/mL (95% confidence interval) was 123 min (105–141) in plasma, 97 min (79–115) in the anterior column and 93 min (75–111) in the posterior column. Tissue penetration (95% confidence interval) was incomplete for both the anterior column 0.48 (0.40–0.56) and posterior column 0.40 (0.33–0.48). Conclusions. Open lumbar spine surgery often involves extensive soft tissue dissection, stripping and retraction of the paraspinal muscles which may impair the local blood flow exposing the lumbar vertebra to postoperative infections. A single intravenous administration of 1.5 g cefuroxime resulted in comparable T>MIC between the anterior and posterior column of the lumbar spine. Mean cefuroxime concentrations decreased below the clinical breakpoint MIC for S. aureus of 4 µg/mL after 123 min (plasma), 97 min (anterior column) and 93 min (posterior column). This is shorter than the duration of most lumbar spine surgeries, and therefore alternative dosing regimens should be considered in posterior open lumbar spine surgeries lasting more than 1.5 hours

Lumbar fusion surgery is an established procedure for the treatment of several spinal pathologies. Despite numerous techniques and existing devices, common surgical trends in lumbar fusion surgery are scarcely investigated. The purpose of this Canada-based study was to provide a descriptive portrait of current surgeons’ practice and implant preferences in lumbar fusion surgery while comparing findings to similar investigations performed in the United Kingdom. Canadian Spine Society (CSS) members were sampled using an online questionnaire which was based on previous investigations performed in the United Kingdom. Fifteen questions addressed the various aspects of surgeons’ practice: fusion techniques, implant preferences, and bone grafting procedures. Responses were analyzed by means of descriptive statistics. Of 139 eligible CSS members, 41 spinal surgeons completed the survey (29.5%). The most common fusion approach was via transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) with 87.8% performing at least one procedure in the previous year. In keeping with this, 24 surgeons (58.5%) had performed 11 to 50 cases in that time frame. Eighty-six percent had performed no lumbar artificial disc replacements over their last year of practice. There was clear consistency on the relevance of a patient specific management (73.2%) on the preferred fusion approach. The most preferred method was pedicle screw fixation (78%). The use of stand-alone cages was not supported by any respondents. With regards to the cage material, titanium cages were the most used (41.5%). Published clinical outcome data was the most important variable in dictating implant choice (87.8%). Cage thickness was considered the most important aspect of cage geometry and hyperlordotic cages were preferred at the lower lumbar levels. Autograft bone graft was most commonly preferred (61.0%). Amongst the synthetic options, DBX/DBM graft (64.1%) in injectable paste form (47.5%) was preferred. In conclusion, findings from this study are in partial agreement with previous work from the United Kingdom, but highlight the variance of practice within Canada and the need for large-scale clinical studies aimed to set specific guidelines for certain pathologies or patient categories

Hip instability is one of the most common causes for total hip arthroplasty (THA) revision surgery. Studies have indicated that lumbar fusion (LF) surgery is a risk factor for hip dislocation. Instrumented spine fusion surgery decreases pelvic tilt, which might lead to an increase in hip motion to accommodate this postural change. To the best of our knowledge, spine-pelvis-hip kinematics during a dynamic activity in patients that previously had both a THA and LF have not been investigated. Furthermore, patients with a combined THA and LF tend to have greater disability. The purpose was to examine spine-pelvis-hip kinematics during a sit to stand task in patients that have had both THA and LF surgeries and compare it to a group of patients that had a THA with no history of spine surgery. The secondary purpose was to compare pain, physical function, and disability between these patients. This cross-sectional study recruited participants that had a combined THA and LF (n=10; 6 females, mean age 73 y) or had a THA only (n=11; 6 females, mean age 72 y). Spine, pelvis, and hip angles were measured using a TrakSTAR motion capture system sampled at 200 Hz. Sensors were mounted over the lateral thighs, base of the sacrum, and the spinous process of the third lumbar,12th thoracic, and ninth thoracic vertebrae. Participants completed 10 trials of a standardized sit-to-stand-to-sit task. Hip, pelvis, lower lumbar, upper lumbar, and lower thoracic sagittal joint angle range of motion (ROM) were calculated over the entire task. In addition, pain, physical function, and disability were measured with clinical outcomes: Hip Disability Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (pain and physical function), Oswestry Low Back Disability Questionnaire (disability), and Harris Hip Score (pain, physical function, motion). Physical function performance was measured using 6-Minute Walk Test, Stair Climb Test, and 30s Chair Test. Angle ROMs during the sit-to-stand-to-sit task and clinical outcomes were compared between THA+LF and THA groups using independent t-tests and effect sizes (d). The difference in hip ROM was approaching statistical significance (p=0.07). Specifically, the THA+LF group had less hip ROM during the sit-to-stand-to-sit task than the THA only group (mean difference=11.17, 95% confidence interval=-1.13 to 23.47), which represented a large effect size (d=0.83). There were no differences in ROM for pelvis (p=0.54, d=0.28) or spinal (p=0.14 to 0.97; d=0.02 to 0.65) angles between groups. The THA+LF group had worse clinical outcomes for all measures of pain, physical function, and disability (p=0.01 to 0.06), representing large effect sizes (d=0.89 to 2.70). Hip ROM was not greater in the THA+LF group, and thus this is unlikely a risk factor for hip dislocation during this specific sit-to-stand-to-sit task. Other functional tasks that demand greater excursions in the joints should be investigated. Furthermore, the lack of differences in spinal and pelvis ROM were likely due to the task and the THA+LF group had spinal fusions at different levels. Combined THA+LF results in worse clinical outcomes and additional rehabilitation is required for these patients

Low back pain is the single most common cause for disability in individuals aged 45 years or younger, it carries tremendous weight in socioeconomic considerations. Degenerative aging of the structural components of the spine can be associated with genetic aspects, lifetime of tissue exposure to mechanical stress & loads and environmental factors. Mechanical consequences of the disc degenerative include loss of disc height, segment instability and increase the load on facets joints. All these can lead to degenerative changes and osteophytes that can narrow the spinal canal. Surgery is indicated in patients with spinal stenosis who have intractable pain, altered quality of life, substantially diminished functional capacity, failed non-surgical treatment and are not candidates for non-surgical treatment. The aim was to determine the reasons for refusal of surgery in patients with established degenerative lumber spine pathology eligible for surgery. All patients meeting the study criteria, patients older than 18 years, patients with both clinical and radiological established symptomatic degenerative lumbar spine pathology and patients eligible for surgery but refusing it were recruited. Questionnaire used to investigate reasons why they are refusing surgery. Results 59 were recruited, fifty-one (86.4 %) females and eight (13.6 %) males. Twenty (33.8 %) were between the age of 51 and 60 years, followed by nineteen (32.2 %) between 61 and 70 years, and fourteen (23.7 %) between 71 and 80 years. 43 (72 %) patients had lumber spondylosis complicated by lumber spine stenosis, followed by nine (15.2 %) with lumbar spine spondylolisthesis and four (6.7 %) had adjacent level disease. 28 (47.4 %) were scared of surgery, fifteen (25.4 %) claimed that they are too old for surgery and nine (15.2 %) were not ready. Findings from this study outlined that patients lack information about the spinal surgery. Patients education about spine surgery is needed

The primary objective is to compare revision rates for lumbar disc replacement (LDR) and fusion at the same or adjacent levels in Ontario, Canada. The secondary objectives include acute complications during hospitalization and in 30 days, and length of hospital stay. A population-based cohort study was conducted using health administrative databases including patients undergoing LDR or single level fusion between October 2005 to March 2018. Patients receiving LDR or fusion were identified using physician claims recorded in the Ontario Health Insurance Program database. Additional details of surgical procedure were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information hospital discharge abstract. Primary outcome measured was presence of revision surgery in the lumbar spine defined as operation greater than 30 days from index procedure. Secondary outcomes were immediate/ acute complications within the first 30 days of index operation. A total of 42,024 patients were included. Mean follow up in the LDR and fusion groups were 2943 and 2301 days, respectively. The rates of revision surgery at the same or adjacent levels were 4.7% in the LDR group and 11.1% in the fusion group (P=.003). Multivariate analysis identified risk factors for revision surgery as being female, hypertension, and lower surgeon volume. More patients in the fusion group had dural tears (p<.001), while the LDR group had more “other” complications (p=.037). The LDR group had a longer mean hospital stay (p=.018). In this study population, the LDR group had lower rates of revision compared to the fusion group. Caution is needed in concluding its significance due to lack of clinical variables and possible differences in indications between LDR and posterior decompression and fusion

Abstract. Purpose. No clinical CT based classification system is currently in use for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis. MRI scanners are not easily available, are expensive and may be contraindicated in an increasing number of patients. This study aims to propose and evaluate the reproducibility of a novel CT based classification for lumbar foraminal stenosis. Materials and Methods. The grading was developed as 4 grades. Normal foramen – Grade 0, Anteroposterior(AP)/Superoinferior (SI)(single plane) fat compression – Grade 1, Both AP/SI compression (two planes) – Grade 2 (both AP and SI) without distortion of nerve root, Grade 2 with distortion of nerve root – Grade 3. 800 lumbar foramen of a cohort of 100 random patients over the age of 60 who had undergone both CT and MRI scans were reviewed by two radiologists independently to assess agreement of the novel CT classification against the MRI based grading system of Lee et al. Interobserver(n=400) and intraobserver agreement(n=160) was also evaluated. Agreement analysis was performed using the Weighted Kappa statistic. Results. 100 patients (M:F = 45:55) with a mean age of 68.5 years (range 60 – 83 years were included in the study. The duration between CT and MRI scans was 98 days(range 0 – 540, SD – 108). There was good correlation between CT and MRI with Kappa scores (k=0.81) and intraobserver Kappa of 0.89 and 0.98 for the two readers. Conclusion. The novel CT based classification correlates well with the MRI grading system and can safely and accurately replace it where required

Introduction. Lumbar spine fusion in patients undergoing THA (total hip arthroplasty) is a known risk factor for hip dislocation with some studies showing a 400% increased incidence compared to the overall THA population. Reduced spine flexibility can effectively narrow the cup anteversion safe zone while alterations in pelvic tilt can alter the center of the anteversion safe zone. The use of precision cup alignment technology combined with patient-specific cup alignment goals based on preoperative assessment has been suggested as a method of addressing this problem. The current study assess the dislocation rate of THA patients with stiff or fused lumbar spines treated using surgical navigation with patient-specific cup orientation goals. Methods. Seventy-five THA were performed in 54 patients with a diagnosis of lumbar fusion, lumbar disc replacement, and scoliosis with Cobb angles greater than 40 degrees were treated by the senior author (SM) as part of a prospective, non-randomized study of surgical navigation in total hip arthroplasty. All patients were treated using a smart mechanical navigation tool for cup alignment (HipXpert System, Surgical Planning Associates, Inc., Boston, MA). Cup orientation goals were set on a patient-specific basis using supine pelvic tilt as measured using CT. Patients with increased pelvic tilt had a goal for increased cup anteversion and patients with decreased pelvic tilt had a goal for decreased cup anteversion (relative to the anterior pelvic plane coordinate system). Each patient's more recent outpatient records were assessed for history of dislocation, instability, mechanical symptoms, decreased range of motion or progressive pain. Additionally, last clinic radiographs were reviewed to confirm lumbar pathology in the form of spinal surgical hardware. Results. Seventy-five total hip arthroplasties with stiff lumbar spine were reviewed with and average follow up of 6.04 years. The average number of levels of lumbar fusion was 2.3 levels. Since the most recent follow up on all patients in this cohort no hip dislocations had occurred. Discussion and Conclusion. Fusion or stiffness of the lumbar spine is a known risk factor for instability following elective THA. The current study demonstrates that patient-specific planning of cup placement taking abnormal pelvic tilt into consideration combined with the use of accurate intra-operative cup alignment technology can be used to address this problem

Study design. Prospective randomized study. Objective. Primary aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiological results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with posterolateral (interlaminar) instrumented lumbar fusion (PLF) in adult low grade (Meyerding 1 & 2) spondylolisthesis patients. Background data. Theoretically, TLIF has better radiological result than PLF in spondylolisthesis in most of the studies. Method. 24 patients of low grade adult spondylolisthesis were randomly allocated to one of the two groups: group 1- PLF and group 2-TLIF. Study period was between August 2010 to March 2013. All patients were operated by a single surgeon (CN). Posterior decompression was performed in all patients. Average follow up period was 18.4 months. Quality of life was accessed with Visual analogue scale and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index. Fusion was assessed radiologically by CT scan and X-ray. Result. Though fusion was significantly better in TLIF group, clinical outcome including relief of back pain and neurogenic claudication were better in PLF group. Rate of complication was also lower in PLF group. Conclusion. Considering the low complication rate and similar or better clinical results, posterolateral instrumented lumbar fusion is the better option in low grade adult spondylolisthesis

Instrumented fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) has been challenged recently with high impact trials demonstrating similar changes in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and less morbidity/cost with laminectomy alone. Randomized trials often fail, however, to evaluate a heterogeneous population of patients. A standardized clinical assessment and management plan (SCAMP) was created as a decision aid for surgeons based on the radiographic stability and clinical presentation of patients. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of those patients who followed the decision aid with respect to fusion/no fusion to those who did not. Patients were prospectively enrolled from eleven different Canadian institutions and followed from 2015–2019. A degenerative spondylolisthesis instability classification system (DSIC) was created using best available evidence stratifying patients into three different subtypes (1. stable degenerative spondylolisthesis, 2. potentially unstable spondylolisthesis and 3. unstable spondylolisthesis). The decision aid recommends laminectomy alone for group 1 patients, posterolateral fusion with pedicle screws in type 2 patients and pedicle screw and interbody fusion for type 3 patients. One year changes in HRQOL, length of hospital stay (LOS), medication use and surgical time were compared between each group and in context of whether the treatment fell within the decision aid recommendation. Statistics were performed with STATA software. There were 394 patients initially enrolled and 334 (84.8%) with full one year data available for comparison. There were 95 type 1 (stable), 224 type 2 (potentially unstable) and 75 type 3 (unstable) patients initially classified. Baseline Ostwestry disability index (ODI), EQ-5D, and SF-12 MCS scores were significantly worse for type 3 patients versus type 1 patients. One hundred and eight patients were treated within the recommendations of the DSIC system (108/334, 32.3%). Surgeons performed interbody fusions in 141 patients (42%) rather than follow DSIC recommending a less invasive approach. There were no significant differences EQ-5D, SF-12 PCS/MCS, PHQ-9 or ODI at one year between patient groups. There was a trend towards shorter operating times for those patients following the DSIC system (195 minutes non-followers versus 180 followers, p=0.078) and reduced hospital stay (4.46 days non-followers versus 3.98 followers, p=0.065). There were no significant clinical differences in outcome at 1 year whether patients underwent decompression alone, decompression/posterolateral fusion or interbody fusion regardless of the stability classification. Surgeons were more likely to perform potentially unnecessary interbody fusions even in those patients with stable or potentially unstable spondylolisthesis. Although not statistically significant, there is some suggestion that following the DSIC system based on best evidence recommendations leads to more judicious/responsible use of hospital resources. Further study is required to determine why surgeons are more likely to choose more invasive, higher rigidity constructs in patients with LDS

Resident involvement in the operating room is a vital component of their medical education. Conflicting and limited research exists regarding the effects of surgical resident participation on spine surgery patient outcomes. Our objective was to determine the effect of resident involvement on surgery duration, length of hospital stay and 30-day post-operative complication rates. This study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of the prospectively collected American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. All anterior cervical or posterior lumbar fusion surgery patients were identified. Patients who had missing trainee involvement information, surgery for cancer, preoperative infection or dirty wound classification, spine fractures, traumatic spinal cord injury, intradural surgery, thoracic surgery and emergency surgery were excluded. Propensity score for risk of any complication was calculated to account for baseline characteristic differences between the attending alone and trainee present group. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the impact of resident involvement on surgery duration, length of hospital stay and 30 day post-operative complication rates. 1441 patients met the inclusion criteria: 1142 patients had surgeries with an attending physician alone and 299 patients had surgeries with trainee involvement. After adjusting using the calculated propensity score, the multivariate analysis demonstrated that there was no significant difference in any complication rates between surgeries involving trainees compared to surgeries with attending surgeons alone. Surgery times were found to be significantly longer for surgeries involving trainees. To further explore this relationship, separate analyses were performed for tertile of predicted surgery duration, cervical or lumbar surgery, instrumentation, inpatient or outpatient surgery. The effect of trainee involvement on increasing surgery time remained significant for medium predicted surgery duration, longer predicted surgery duration, cervical surgery, lumbar surgery, lumbar fusion surgery and inpatient surgery. There were no significant differences reported for any other factors. After adjusting for confounding, we demonstrated in a national database that resident involvement in surgeries did not increase complication rates, length of hospital stay or surgical duration of more routine surgical cases. We found that resident involvement in surgical cases that were generally more complexed resulted in increased surgery time. Further study is required to determine the relationship between surgery complexity and the effect of resident involvement on surgery duration

Abstract. Objective. Flexible stabilisation has been utilised to maintain spinal mobility in patients with early-stage lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Previous literature has not yet established any non-fusion solution as a viable treatment option for patients with severe posterior degeneration of the lumbar spine. This feasibility study evaluates the mean five-year outcomes of patients treated with the TOPS (Total Posterior Spine System) facet replacement system in the surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods. Ten patients (2 males, 8 females, mean age 59.6) were enrolled into a non-randomised prospective clinical study. Patients were evaluated with standing AP, lateral, flexion and extension radiographs and MRI scans, back and leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) and the SF-36 questionnaires, preoperatively, 6 months, one year, two years and latest follow-up at a mean of five years postoperatively (range 55–74 months). Flexion and extension standing lumbar spine radiographs were obtained at 2 years to assess range of motion (ROM) at the stabilised segment. Results. The clinical outcome scores for the cohort improved significantly across all scoring systems. Radiographs at 2 years did not reveal any loss of position or loosening of metal work. There were two incidental durotomies and no failures at 5 years with no patient requiring revision surgery. Conclusions. The TOPS implant maintains clinical improvement and motion in the surgical management of LSS and spondylolisthesis, indicating it can be considered an option for these indications

Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis is a common entity and increasing in prevalence. Limited evidence is available regarding patient reported outcomes comparing primary vs revision surgery for those undergoing lumbar decompression, with or without fusion. Evidence available suggest a lower rate of improvement in the revision group. The aim of this study was to assess patient reported outcomes in patients undergoing revision decompression, with or without fusion, when compared to primary surgery. Patient data was collected from the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) database. Patients undergoing lumbar decompression without or without fusion were included. Patients under 18, undergoing discectomy, greater than two level decompressions, concomitant cervical or thoracic spine surgery were excluded. Demographic data, smoking status, narcotic use, number of comorbidities as well as individual comorbidities were included in our propensity scores. Patients undergoing primary vs revision decompression were matched in a four:one ratio according to their scores, whilst a separate matched cohort was created for those undergoing primary vs revision decompression and fusion. Continuous data was compared using a two-tailed t-test, whilst categorical variables were assessed using chi-square test. A total of 555 patients were included, with 444 primary patients matched to 111 revision surgery patients, of which 373 (67%) did not have fusion. Patients undergoing primary decompression with fusion compared to revision patients were more likely to answer yes to “feel better after surgery” (87.8% vs 73.8%, p=0.023), “undergo surgery again” (90.1% vs 76.2%, P=0.021) and “improvement in mental health” (47.7% vs 28.6%, p=0.03) at six months. There was no difference in either of these outcomes at 12 or 24 months. There was no difference between the groups ODI, EQ-5D, SF 12 scores at any time point. Patients undergoing primary vs revision decompression alone showed no difference in PROMs at any time point. In a matched cohort, there appears to be no difference in improvement in PROMS between patients undergoing primary vs revision decompression, with or without fusion, at two year follow-up. This would suggest similar outcomes can be obtained in revision cases

Surgical site infections (SSIs) after spinal fusion surgery increase healthcare costs, morbidity and mortality. Routine measures of obesity fail to consider site specific fat distribution. We aimed to assess the association between the spine adipose index and deep surgical site infection and determine a threshold value for spine adipose index that can assist in preoperative risk stratification in patients undergoing posterior instrumented lumbar fusion (PILF). A multicentre retrospective case-control study was completed. We reviewed patients who underwent PILF from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018. All patients developing a deep primary incisional or organ-space SSI within 90 days of surgery as per US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention criteria were identified. We gathered potential pre-operative and intra-operative deep infection risk factors for each patient. Spine adipose index was measured on pre-operative mid-sagittal cuts of T2 weighted MRI scans. Each measurement was repeated twice by three authors in a blinded fashion, with each series of measurement separated by a period of at least six weeks. Forty-two patients were included in final analysis, with twenty-one cases and twenty-one matched controls. The spine adipose index was significantly greater in patients developing deep SSI (p =0.029), and this relationship was maintained after adjusting for confounders (p=0.046). Risk of developing deep SSI following PILF surgery was increased 2.0-fold when the spine adipose index was ≥0.51. The spine adipose index had excellent (ICC >0.9; p <0.001) inter- and intra-observer reliabilities. The spine adipose index is a novel radiographic measure and an independent risk factor for developing deep SSI, with 0.51 being the ideal threshold value for pre-operative risk stratification in patients undergoing PILF surgery

Introduction. This study was performed to investigate the efficacy of steroid and local anaesthesia (LA) in reducing post-operative pain in lumbar discectomy. Materials and methods. The study was ethically approved. Patients undergoing primary single level lumbar discectomy were randomised by a closed envelope system into 4 groups, which were (Group 1) 10mg of adcortyl in 1ml and 1ml of 0.5% marcaine, (Group 2) 10mg of adcortyl and 1ml of normal saline, (Group 3) 1ml of 0.5% marcaine and 1ml of normal saline and (Group 4) 2mls of normal saline as control. Combinations of the above were applied topically over the nerve root prior to closure. Pre-operative, day 1 and eight weeks post-operative pain scores were recorded. 24 hours post-operative opiate analgesia requirements and duration of inpatient stay were recorded. Data were analysed using student t-test for statistical significance. Results. 100 patients were recruited into the study. There were no significant differences seen in the mean age, gender and the mean pre-operative pain score between all groups. Mean day one pain score in groups 1,2,3 and 4 was 0.9,2.5, 2.1 and 3.3 respectively. Mean 24 hours post-operative opiate requirement was 32.4mg, 54mg, 48.8mg and 56.4mg respectively. Mean inpatient stay was 2.2 days, 3.9 days, 4.62 days and 3.63 days respectively. A significant different (p<0.05) was noted in day one post-operative mean pain score, mean 24 opiate requirement and mean inpatient stay in the corticosteroid and LA group. At 8 weeks post-operatively, no significant differences were seen in the pain score in all groups. Conclusions. Significant early post-operative pain reduction was achieved in the steroid and local anaesthesia group compared with other groups (p<0.05). A significant reduction in the 24-post operative analgesia requirement (p<0.05) and in inpatient stay (p<0.05) was also observed

There is a paucity of published Canadian literature comparing lumbar total disc arthroplasty (LDA) to fusion on patient outcomes in degenerative spondylosis. The purpose of this study is to quantify and compare the long-term patient reported outcomes following LDA and matched-fusion procedures. We conducted a matched-cohort study comparing consecutive patients enrolled by CSORN who underwent standalone primary LDA or hybrid techniques for degenerative disk disease between 2015–2019. Fusion patients were included by a primary diagnosis of degenerative disk disease, chief complaint of back pain, who received a primary fusion irrespective of technique. Fusion patients were matched by number of involved levels of surgery to LDA counterparts. Outcome scores and patient satisfaction were assessed preoperatively and 2-years postoperatively. 97 patients (39-female, 58-male) underwent LDA or hybrid construct up to 4 levels. 94 patients (52-female, 42-male) underwent a lumbar fusion were selected based on inclusion criteria. 36 LDA and 57 Fusion patients underwent a 1-level surgery. 39 LDA and 25 Fusion patients underwent 2-level surgery. 18 LDA and 7 Fusion patients underwent 3-level surgery. 4 LDA and 5 Fusion patients underwent a 4-level procedure. Slight differences in average cohort age were found (LDA-43.4yrs, Fusion-49.8yrs, p<0.01). Cohort preoperative-BMI (LDA-27.0kg/m. 2. , Fusion-27.9kg/m. 2. , p=0.29) and total comorbidities (LDA-2.6, Fusion-2.1, p=0.05) demonstrated no clinically significant differences. At 2 year follow-up, no differences were found in ODI improvement (LDA-20.32pts, Fusion-17.02pts, p=0.36), numerical back-pain improvement (LDA-3.5pts, Fusion-3.06pts, p=0.40), numerical leg-pain improvement (LDA-1.67pts, Fusion-1.87pts, p=0.76), and Health Scale improvement (LDA-17.12, Fusion-10.73, p=0.20) between cohorts. Similar positive findings were found in subgroups stratified by number of surgical levels. Satisfaction rate at 2 years was 86.7% and 82.4% for LDA and Fusion patients respectively. There didn't appear to be significant differences in outcomes or satisfaction through 2 years comparing patients who underwent LDA (whether used in isolation or as part of a hybrid construct) for debilitating degenerative disk disease and isolated spinal fusion for back dominant pain

Prolonged length of stay (LOS) is a significant contributor to the variation in surgical health care costs and resource utilization after elective spine surgery. The primary goal of this study was to identify patient, surgical and institutional variables that influence LOS. The secondary objective is to examine variability in institutional practices among participating centers. This is a retrospective study of a prospectively multicentric followed cohort of patients enrolled in the CSORN between January 2015 and October 2020. A logistic regression model and bootstrapping method was used. A survey was sent to participating centers to assessed institutional level interventions in place to decrease LOS. Centers with LOS shorter than the median were compared to centers with LOS longer than the median. A total of 3734 patients were included (979 discectomies, 1102 laminectomies, 1653 fusions). The median LOS for discectomy, laminectomy and fusion were respectively 0.0 day (IQR 1.0), 1.0 day (IQR 2.0) and 4.0 days (IQR 2.0). Laminectomy group had the largest variability (SD=4.4, Range 0-133 days). For discectomy, predictors of LOS longer than 0 days were having less leg pain, higher ODI, symptoms duration over 2 years, open procedure, and AE (p< 0.05). Predictors of longer LOS than median of 1 day for laminectomy were increasing age, living alone, higher ODI, open procedures, longer operative time, and AEs (p< 0.05). For posterior instrumented fusion, predictors of longer LOS than median of 4 days were older age, living alone, more comorbidities, less back pain, higher ODI, using narcotics, longer operative time, open procedures, and AEs (p< 0.05). Ten centers (53%) had either ERAS or a standardized protocol aimed at reducing LOS. In this study stratifying individual patient and institutional level factors across Canada, several independent predictors were identified to enhance the understanding of LOS variability in common elective lumbar spine surgery. The current study provides an updated detailed analysis of the ongoing Canadian efforts in the implementation of multimodal ERAS care pathways. Future studies should explore multivariate analysis in institutional factors and the influence of preoperative patient education on LOS

INTRODUCTION. Standing spinal alignment has been the center of focus recently, particularly in the setting of adult spinal deformity. Humans spend approximately half of their waking life in a seated position. While lumbopelvic sagittal alignment has been shown to adapt from standing to sitting posture, segmental vertebral alignment of the entire spine is not yet fully understood, nor are the effects of DEGEN or DEFORMITY. Segmental spinal alignment between sitting and standing, and the effects of degeneration and deformity were analyzed. METHODS. Segmental spinal alignment and lumbopelvic alignment (pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI-LL, sacral slope) were analyzed. Lumbar spines were classified as NORMAL, DEGEN (at least one level of disc height loss >50%, facet arthropathy, or spondylolisthesis), or DEFORMITY (PI-LL mismatch>10°). Exclusion criteria included lumbar fusion/ankylosis, hip arthroplasty, and transitional lumbosacral anatomy. Independent samples t-tests analyzed lumbopelvic and segmental alignment between sitting and standing within groups. ANOVA assessed these differences between spine pathology groups. RESULTS. There were 183 NORMAL, 216 DEGEN and 92 DEFORMITY patients with significant differences in age, gender, and hip OA grades. After propensity matching for these factors, there were 56 patients in each group (age 63±14, 58% female) [Fig. 1]. Significant differences were noted between spinal pathology groups with regard to changes from standing to sitting alignment with regard to NORMAL vs DEGEN vs DEFORMITY groups in PT (13.93° vs −11.98° vs − 7.95°; p=0.024), LL (21.91° vs 17.45° vs 13.23°; p=0.002), PI-LL (−22.32° vs −17.28° vs −13.18°; p<0.001), SVA (−48.99° vs −29.98° vs −32.12°; p=0.002), and TPA(−16.35° vs −12.69° vs −9.64; p=0.001). TK (−2.08° vs −2.78° vs −2.00°, p=0.943) and CL (−3.84° vs −4.14° vs −3.57°, p=0.621) were not significantly different across spinal pathology groups [Fig. 2]. NORMAL patients had overall greater mobility in the lower lumbar spine from standing to sitting compared to DEGEN and DEFORMITY patients. L4-L5 (7.50° vs 5.23° vs 4.74°, p=0.012) and L5-S1 (6.96° vs 5.28° and 3.69°, p=0.027). There were no significant differences in change in alignment from standing to sitting at the upper lumbar levels or lower thoracic levels between the three groups [Fig. 3]. CONCLUSION. The lower lumbar spine provides the greatest sitting to standing change in lumbopelvic alignment in normal patients. Degeneration and deformity of the spine significantly reduces the mobility of the lower lumbar spine and PT. With lumbar spine degeneration and flatback deformity, relatively more alignment change occurs at the upper lumbar spine and thoracolumbar junction

Obesity is an increasing public health concern associated with increased perioperative complications and expense in lumbar spine fusions. While open and mini-open fusions such as transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF) are more challenging in obese patients, new MIS procedures like oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLLIF) may improve perioperative outcomes in obese patients relative to TLIF and MIS-TLIF. The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of obesity on perioperative outcomes in OLLIF, MIS-TLIF, and TLIF. This is a retrospective cohort study. We included patients who underwent OLLIF, MIS-TLIF, or TLIF on three or fewer spinal levels at a single Minnesota hospital after conservative therapy had failed. Indications included in this study were degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis, spondylosis, herniation, stenosis, and scoliosis. We measured demographic information, body mass index (BMI), surgery time, blood loss, and hospital stay. We performed summary statistics to compare perioperative outcomes in MIS-TLIF, OLLIF, and TLIF. We performed multivariate regression to determine the effects of BMI on perioperative outcomes controlling for demographics and number of levels on which surgeries were operated. OLLIF significantly reduces surgery time, blood loss, and hospital stay compared to MIS-TLIF, and TLIF for all levels. MIS-TLIF and TLIF do not differ significantly except for a slight reduction in hospital stay for two-level procedures. On multivariate analysis, a one-point increase in BMI increased surgery time by 0.56 ± 0.47 minutes (p = 0.24) in the OLLIF group, by 2.8 ± 1.43 minutes (p = 0.06) in the MIS-TLIF group, and by 1.7 ± 0.43 minutes (p < 0.001) in the TLIF group. BMI has positive effects on blood loss for TLIF (p < 0.001) but not for OLLIF (p = 0.68) or MIS-TLIF (p = 0.67). BMI does not have significant effects on length of hospital stay for any procedure. Obesity is associated with increased surgery time and blood loss in TLIF and with increased surgery time in MIS-TLIF. Increased surgery time may be associated with increased perioperative complications and cost. In OLLIF, BMI does not affect perioperative outcomes. Therefore, OLLIF may reduce the disparity in outcomes and cost between obese and non-obese patients

INTRODUCTION. Lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) is an alternative treatment to avoid fusion related adverse events, specifically adjacent segment disease. New generation of elastomeric non-articulating devices have been developed to more effectively replicate the shock absorption and flexural stiffness of native disc. This study reports 5 years clinical and radiographic outcomes, range of motion and position of the center of rotation after a viscoelastic TDR. Material and methods. This prospective observational cohort study included 61 consecutive patients with monosegmental TDR. We selected patients with intermediate functional activity according to Baecke score. Hybrid constructs had been excluded. Only cases with complete clinical and radiological follow-up at 3, 6, 12, 24 and 60 months were included. Mean age at the time of surgery was 42.8 +7.7 years-old (27–60) and mean BMI was 24.2 kg/m² +3.4 (18–33). TDR level was L5-S1 in 39 cases and L4-L5 in 22 cases. The clinical evaluation was based on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, Short Form-36 (SF36) including physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) and General Health Questionnaire GHQ28. The radiological outcomes were range of motion and position of the center of rotation at the index and the adjacent levels and the adjacent disc height changes. Results. There was a significant improvement in VAS (3.3±2.5 versus 6.6±1.7, p<0.001), in ODI (20±17.9 versus 51.2±14.6, p<0.001), GHQ28 (52.6±15.5 versus 64.2±15.6, p<0.001), SF 36 PCS (58.8±4.8 versus 32.4±3.4, p<0.001) and SF 36 MCS(60.7±6 versus 42.3±3.4, p<0.001). Additional surgeries were performed in 5 cases. 3 additional procedures were initially planified in the surgical program: one adjacent L3-L5 ligamentoplasty above a L5S1 TDR and two L5S1 TDR cases had additional laminectomies. Fusion at the index level was secondary performed in 2 L4L5 TDR cases but the secondary posterior fusion did not bring improvement. In the 56 remaining patients none experienced facet joint pain. One patient with sacroiliac pain needed local injections. Radiological outcomes were studied on 56 cases (exclusion of 5 cases with additional surgeries). The mean location centers of the index level and adjacent discs were comparable to those previously published in asymptomatic patients. According to the definition of Ziegler, all of our cases remained grade 0 for disc height (within 25% of normal). Discussion. The silent block design of LP-ESP provides an interesting specificity. It could be the key factor that makes the difference regarding facets problems and instability reported with other implants experimentally or clinically. Unfortunately no other comparative TDR series are available yet in the literature. Conclusion. This series reports significant improvement in mid-term follow up after TDR which is consistent with previously published studies but with a lower rate of revision surgery and no adjacent level disease pathologies. The radiographic assessment of the patients demonstrated the quality of functional reconstruction of the lumbar spine after LP ESP viscoelastic disc replacement