Introduction/Aims. An increased mortality associated with hip fractures has been recognized, but the impact of vertebral osteoporotic compression fractures (VCF) is still underestimated. The aim of this study was to report on the difference in survival for VCF patients following non-operative and operative [Balloon Kyphoplasty (BKP) or Vertebroplasty (VP)] treatments. Methods. Operated and non-operated VCF patients were identified from the US Medicare database in 2006 and 2007 and followed for a minimum of 24 months. Patients diagnosed with pathological and traumatic VCFs in the prior year were excluded. Overall survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the differences in mortality rates (operated vs non-operated; balloon kyphoplasty vs vertebroplasty) were assessed by Cox regression, with adjustments for patient demographics, general and specific co-morbidities, that have been previously identified as possible causes of death associated with osteoporotic VCFs. Results. A total of 81,662 operated (vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty) patients had a survival rate of 74.8% at 24 months following VCF diagnosis compared to 67.4% for the 329,303 non-operated patients. In operated (Vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty) patients there was 44% less mortality than in non-operated VCF patients (p<0.0001). The survival rates for VCF patients following vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty were 72.3% and 76.2% at 24 months, respectively. In kyphoplasty patients there was 12.5% more survival than in vertebroplasty patients (p<0.0001) after 2 years. Conclusions. This retrospective analysis, in 410,965 patients diagnosed with a VCF confirmed the statistical significant decrease (43%, p<0.0001) in mortality between patients receiving minimally invasive surgery compared to non-operated patients. Additionally the present study confirmed a statistical significant decrease (12.5%, p<0.0001) in mortality in BKP patients compared to VP patients

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for adverse events following the surgical correction of cervical spinal deformities in adults.

Aims

The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the clinical relevance of increased facet joint distraction as a result of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for trauma.

The demand for spinal surgery and its costs have both risen over the past decade. In 2008 the aggregate hospital bill for surgical care of all spinal procedures was reported to be $33.9 billion. One key driver of rising costs is spinal implants. In 2011 our institution implemented a cost containment programme for spinal implants which was designed to reduce the prices of individual spinal implants and to reduce the inter-surgeon variation in implant costs. Between February 2012 and January 2013, our spinal surgeons performed 1493 spinal procedures using implants from eight different vendors. By applying market analysis and implant cost data from the previous year, we established references prices for each individual type of spinal implant, regardless of vendor, who were required to meet these unit prices. We found that despite the complexity of spinal surgery and the initial reluctance of vendors to reduce prices, significant savings were made to the medical centre.

Cite this article: 2015; 97-B:1102–5.

Whether to combine spinal decompression with fusion in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis remains controversial. We performed a cohort study to determine the effect of the addition of fusion in terms of patient satisfaction after decompressive spinal surgery in patients with and without a degenerative spondylolisthesis.

The National Swedish Register for Spine Surgery (Swespine) was used for the study. Data were obtained for all patients in the register who underwent surgery for stenosis on one or two adjacent lumbar levels. A total of 5390 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed a two-year follow-up. Using multivariable models the results of 4259 patients who underwent decompression alone were compared with those of 1131 who underwent decompression and fusion. The consequence of having an associated spondylolisthesis in the operated segments pre-operatively was also considered.

At two years there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the two treatment groups for any of the outcome measures, regardless of the presence of a pre-operative spondylolisthesis. Moreover, the proportion of patients who required subsequent further lumbar surgery was also similar in the two groups.

In this large cohort the addition of fusion to decompression was not associated with an improved outcome.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:960–5.

Using the United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified national trends in revision spinal fusion along with a comprehensive comparison of comorbidities, inpatient complications and surgical factors of revision spinal fusion compared to primary spinal fusion.

In 2009, there were 410 158 primary spinal fusion discharges and 22 128 revision spinal fusion discharges. Between 2002 and 2009, primary fusion increased at a higher rate compared with revision fusion (56.4% vs 51.0%; p < 0.001). In 2009, the mean length of stay and hospital charges were higher for revision fusion discharges than for primary fusion discharges (4.2 days vs 3.8 days, p < 0.001; USD $91 909 vs. $87 161, p < 0.001). In 2009, recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) was used more in revision fusion than in primary fusion (39.6% vs 27.6%, p < 0.001), whereas interbody devices were used less in revision fusion (41.8% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001).

In the multivariable logistic regression model for all spinal fusions, depression (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, p < 0.001), psychotic disorders (OR 1.49, p < 0.001), deficiency anaemias (OR 1.35, p < 0.001) and smoking (OR 1.10, p = 0.006) had a greater chance of occurrence in revision spinal fusion discharges than in primary fusion discharges, adjusting for other variables. In terms of complications, after adjusting for all significant comorbidities, this study found that dural tears (OR 1.41; p < 0.001) and surgical site infections (OR 3.40; p < 0.001) had a greater chance of occurrence in revision spinal fusion discharges than in primary fusion discharges (p < 0.001). A p-value < 0.01 was considered significant in all final analyses.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:807–16.