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

Purpose

Patients may present with concurrent symptomatic hip and spine problems, with surgical treatment indicated for both. Controversy exists over which procedure, total hip arthroplasty (THA) or lumbar spine procedure, should be performed first, and does the surgeon's area of expertise influence the choice.

Objective. Guidelines published by the British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) and Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) recommend urgent MRI imaging and intervention in individuals suspected of having CES. The need for an evidence based protocol is driven by a lack of 24/7 MRI services and centralisation of neurosurgery to tertiary centres, compounded by CES's significant medico-legal implications. We conducted an audit to evaluate the pathway for suspected CES in BCUHB West between 2018 and 2021. Methods. A retrospective audit of patients managed for suspected CES between 01/11/2018 and 01/05/2021 was performed, using the SBNS/BASS guidelines as the standard. Results. A total of 252 patients received an emergency MRI for suspected CES between 2018 and 2021. 99% of patients were scanned in compliance with SBNS/BASS standards. Radiological evidence of CES was found in 18% of patients. 33% of emergency scans were performed by out-of-hours services. 4% of patients had repeated scans within the same 6-month period. The majority of referrals originated from Orthopaedics surgeons (78%), or staff in the Emergency Department (8%). 92% of ambulatory patients were not admitted to hospital. During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, referrals increased from 2.5 to 3.5 per week. Conclusion. SBNS/BASS standards were largely met, avoiding life changing disability and medico-legal consequences. The department should continue to follow SBNS/BASS guidance on the management of individuals with suspected CES. Challenges regarding the use of repeated scans should be addressed to avoid unnecessary costs. Introduction of new early recognition guidelines and Same Day Emergency Care (SDEC) has likely driven an increase in suspected CES referrals, and subsequent MRI demand. This audit should be utilised as an ongoing tool to ensure best practice continues, and to implement simple measures which may improve compliance with the pathway

Background and Purpose. The UK's NIHR and Australia's NHMRC have funded two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to determine if lumbar fusion surgery (LFS) is more effective than best conservative care (BCC) for adults with persistent, severe low back pain (LBP) attributable to lumbar spine degeneration. We aimed to describe clinicians’ decision-making regarding suitability of patient cases for LFS or BCC and level of equipoise to randomise participants in the RCTs. Methods. Two online cross-sectional surveys distributed via UK and Australian professional networks to clinicians involved in LBP care, collected data on clinical discipline, practice setting and preferred care of five patient cases (ranging in age, pain duration, BMI, imaging findings, neurological signs/symptoms). Clinicians were also asked about willingness to randomise each patient case. Results. Of 174 responses (73 UK, 101 Australia), 70 were orthopaedic surgeons, 34 neurosurgeons, 65 allied health professionals (AHPs), 5 others. Most worked in public health services only (92% UK, 45% Australia), or a mix of public/private (36% Australia). Most respondents chose BCC as their first-choice management option for all five cases (81–93% UK, 83–91% Australia). For LFS, UK surgeons preferred TLIF (36.4%), whereas Australian surgeons preferred ALIF (54%). Willingness to randomise cases ranged from 37–60% (UK mean 50.7%), and 47–55% (Australian mean 51.9%); orthopaedic and neuro-surgeons were more willing than AHPs. Conclusion. Whilst BCC was preferred for all five patient cases, just over half of survey respondents in both the UK and Australia were willing to randomise cases to either LFS or BCC, indicating clinical equipoise (collective uncertainty) needed for RCT recruitment. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. No specific funding obtained for the surveys. DB, SA, AG and NEF have funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) UK (FORENSIC-UK NIHR134859); NEF, DB and SA have funding from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC FORENSIC-Australia GA268233). AG has funding from Orthopaedic Research UK (combined with British Association of Spine Surgeons and British Scoliosis Society) and Innovate UK. NEF is funded through an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator Grant (ID: 2018182)

Introduction. The British Spinal Registry (BSR) is a web-based database commissioned by the British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) in the UK. It allows auditing of spinal surgery outcomes, patient's safety and overall experience. The clinical data include patient's demographics which is entered into the Registry by medical staff, as well as patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) that is submitted to the Registry by the patient themselves at different time periods post-operatively. It has the ability to register Device and Implants as well as co-ordinate multicentre research. This study is to identify both the staff and patient compliance regarding to data submissions to the BSR at St. George's Hospital NHS Trust. Methods and Materials. Retrospective analysis of the BSR data for all spinal surgeries that was performed at SGH by the three Complex Spinal Surgery Consultants between 1st January 2017 to 31st December 2018. This study period allowed up to 12 months PROM data analysis. Staff and Patient compliance were analysed separately depend on the data they submitted. Results. 404 (n) spinal surgeries were performed over this two-year period. Surgical demographics: 39.4% (159/404) males and 56.2% (227/404) females, 4.5% (18/404) declined to be added. Age ranging from 6 to 92, mean age was 47.9. Staff compliance was 89.4% for the registration of patient data. Trauma and tumour patients were excluded as they are not required to complete any pre-operative PROMs. For the remaining patients, 35.8% (116/324) completed their baseline pre-operative PROMs. A steady decrease in patient compliance for post-operative PROMS was observed: 29.8% (2 weeks), 24.9% (6 weeks), 21.2% (6 months), 17.1% (12 months), and 16.6% (24 months). Conclusions. We identified a poor patient compliance in both pre-operative and post-operative PROMS. Patient questionnaire fatigue can occur over time which results in falling compliance to PROMS in 12 months and 24 months. Moreover, patients who do not provide an email address are less likely to fill in their PROMS. Satisfactory compliance for staff regarding to BSR utilisation are shown. Staff should aim to achieve a higher level of compliance as this will help to keep a record of all spinal surgeries that are performed and any complications that are encountered in a particular centre. Over the past three years, the BSR had introduced various schemes to drive up utilisation including a Best Practice Tariff in 2019. Part of the tariff will be withheld when staff failure to enter patients onto the Registry. Further research is needed to determine why there is such fall off especially with patient compliance and to elucidate potential measures to improve their compliance

The effective capture of outcome measures in the healthcare setting can be traced back to Florence Nightingale’s investigation of the in-patient mortality of soldiers wounded in the Crimean war in the 1850s. Only relatively recently has the formalised collection of outcomes data into Registries been recognised as valuable in itself. With the advent of surgeon league tables and a move towards value based health care, individuals are being driven to collect, store and interpret data. Following the success of the National Joint Registry, the British Association of Spine Surgeons instituted the British Spine Registry. Since its launch in 2012, over 650 users representing the whole surgical team have registered and during this time, more than 27 000 patients have been entered onto the database. There has been significant publicity regarding the collection of outcome measures after surgery, including patient-reported scores. Over 12 000 forms have been directly entered by patients themselves, with many more entered by the surgical teams. Questions abound: who should have access to the data produced by the Registry and how should they use it? How should the results be reported and in what forum?. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:871–4

The diagnostic sub-categorization of cauda equina syndrome (CES) is used to aid communication between doctors and other healthcare professionals. It is also used to determine the need for, and urgency of, MRI and surgery in these patients. A recent paper by Hoeritzauer et al (2023) in this journal examined the interobserver reliability of the widely accepted subcategories in 100 patients with cauda equina syndrome. They found that there is no useful interobserver agreement for the subcategories, even for experienced spinal surgeons. This observation is supported by the largest prospective study of the treatment of cauda equina syndrome in the UK by Woodfield et al (2023). If the accepted subcategories are unreliable, they cannot be used in the way that they are currently, and they should be revised or abandoned. This paper presents a reassessment of the diagnostic and prognostic subcategories of cauda equina syndrome in the light of this evidence, with a suggested cure based on a more inclusive synthesis of symptoms, signs, bladder ultrasound scan results, and pre-intervention urinary catheterization.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3):227–231.

Aims

The early diagnosis of cauda equina syndrome (CES) is crucial for a favourable outcome. Several studies have reported the use of an ultrasound scan of the bladder as an adjunct to assess the minimum post-void residual volume of urine (mPVR). However, variable mPVR values have been proposed as a threshold without consensus on a value for predicting CES among patients with relevant symptoms and signs. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis and systematic review of the published evidence to identify a threshold mPVR value which would provide the highest diagnostic accuracy in patients in whom the diagnosis of CES is suspected.

Purpose. To determine, for the first time, how back pain is portrayed in the United Kingdom press. Methods and Results. LexisNexisTM Professional search engine was utilised to retrieve articles from all national newspapers over a six months containing the terms “back pain/backpain/back ache/backache” from May to October 2009. 284 relevant articles were retrieved. Of these tabloids accounted for 62% and broadsheets for 38%. Back pain was the sole topic in 7%, a main topic in 18% and mentioned in passing in 75%. 15% were essentially case reports and the tone was neutral in 95%, positive in 2.5% and negative in 2.5%. The cause of back pain was mentioned in 11% of articles- trauma accounted for 50% and disc disease and spinal deformity for 20% each. Only 0.3% of articles discussed litigation. Articles mentioned new physiotherapy regimes in 7%, new forms of alternative therapy in 7%, new surgical techniques/technologies in 2% and new medications in 1%. They were significantly more likely to mention new non-surgical techniques- Fishers' Exact Test p=0.01. Articles were alternative therapy related in 3%, physiotherapist related in 2%, surgeon related in 1% and pain specialist related in 1%. 10% of papers included a quote from an “expert” of which 23% were Spine Surgeons, 16% GP's, 13% Sports Physicians, 13% alternative therapists, 10% pain specialists and 7% physiotherapists. Overall, 98% of articles were of a neutral tone and 1% were of a positive tone or negative tone. Articles concerning physiotherapists or new surgical techniques/technologies were significantly more likely to be of a positive overall tone than the other articles- Fishers' Exact Test p=0.04. Conclusions. Back pain receives a considerable amount of attention in the United Kingdom press. Much of this currently concentrates on isolated case reports, the aetiology of back pain is poorly represented, quoted “experts” are frequently non-medical and new surgical treatments receive significantly less attention than new non-surgical treatments. The press play an important role in educating and informing the general public. The stories they cover ad how they cover them have a powerful influence on public perceptions. We need to do more to engage with the press and positively influence their reportage

Study Design: A radiographic study using disarticulated cadaver thoracic vertebrae. Objective: To determine the accuracy of orthogonal X-rays in detecting thoracic pedicle screw position by different groups of observers. Summary of Background Data: Pedicle screws are increasingly being used for internal fixation of the thoracic spine. Surgeons and radiologists are often required to make decisions on the pedicle screw position by plain antero-posterior (AP) and lateral radiographs. Materials and Methods: 23 disarticulated fresh adult thoracic vertebrae were used in this study. Pedicle screws were inserted completely within the pedicle; or deliberately violating the lateral or medial cortex of the pedicle. AP and lateral radiographs of each vertebrae were assessed by 2 spine surgeons, 2 spine trainees, and 2 musculoskeletal radiologists in a sequence of AP alone, and AP + lateral views. They were supposed to cataogorize the pedicular screw as ‘out laterally’/‘inside the pedicle’/‘out medially’ or ‘unsure’. Their assessments were compared to the actual position of the screws determined by the axial views. Results: For each screw position, trend was found towards slightly better accuracy with availability of AP & lateral views in combination. From either AP alone or AP + lateral views, significantly higher accuracy was found in detecting screws “out laterally” than “inside pedicle” (p< 0.01), or “out medially”(p< 0.05), respectively. Nearly 30% of screws that were deliberately placed through the medial pedicle wall were not correctly identified. In addition, surgeons have highest accuracy from either AP alone, or AP + lateral views, followed by the spine trainees and radiologists. Radiologists provided more “unsure” answers than surgeons or trainees. Conclusions: Screws that perforated the lateral cortex were the easiest, and those that were wholly within the pedicle were the most difficult to identify correctly. The use of plain radiographs to detect thoracic pedicle screws placed through the critical medial cortex is unreliable. The positions of thoracic pedicle screws appear to be more accurately detected by AP + lateral, however, the major contribution was from AP views. Surgeon experience continues to be vitally important in the safe placement of thoracic pedicle screws. Key points:. Screws that perforated the lateral cortex were the easiest, and those that were wholly within the pedicle were the most difficult to identify correctly. The use of plain radiographs to detect thoracic pedicle screws placed through the critical medial cortex is unreliable. AP + lateral views provides higher accuracy in determining the screw position, while, the major contribution comes from AP views. Surgeon experience, in the use of tactile skills and anatomical knowledge continue to be vitally important in the safe placement of thoracic pedicle screws

Aims

The aim of this paper is to describe the impact of COVID-19 on spine surgery services in a district general hospital in England in order to understand the spinal service provisions that may be required during a pandemic.

Purpose of the study:. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the possible causes or risk factors for the occurrence of venous thrombotic events (VTE) after shoulder arthroscopy. Methods:. Two cases that occurred in the practice were evaluated for the study. Evaluation of their medical history, procedures and post-operative care was made. The information was evaluated for possible risk factors that could have led to the VTE. Literature reports were also evaluated. All the relevant data (personal and literature) was used to determine risk factors that could help identify high risk patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Results:. Results revealed no intra operative risk factors for the VTE to occur. An underlying genetic predisposition in the one case and a previous history of VTE in the other were indentified as the major risk factors/causes. Literature review revealed that underlying mechanical causes should also be considered as possible risk factors. The rate of VTE occurring after a shoulder arthroscopy (0.6/1000 procedures) is much lower than when compared to knee, hip or spinal surgery. It should be noted however that upper limb VTE's have the highest risk of a pulmonary embolus developing as compared to a lower limb VTE. Conclusion:. Surgeons performing arthroscopic shoulder surgery also run the risk of their patients developing a VTE (upper or lower limb). The attending surgeon should assess and examine their patients preoperatively with as much scrutiny as they would their patients with upcoming knee, hip or spine surgery. Surgeons should have protocols in place to identify high risk patients. These should assess extrinsic as well as intrinsic risk factors. A high index of suspicion should also be maintained in the post-operative period

Aims

The exact risk to patients undergoing surgery who develop COVID-19 is not yet fully known. This study aims to provide the current data to allow adequate consent regarding the risks of post-surgery COVID-19 infection and subsequent COVID-19-related mortality.

Aims

Early cases of cauda equina syndrome (CES) often present with nonspecific symptoms and signs, and it is recommended that patients undergo emergency MRI regardless of the time since presentation. This creates substantial pressure on resources, with many scans performed to rule out cauda equina rather than confirm it. We propose that compression of the cauda equina should be apparent with a limited sequence (LS) scan that takes significantly less time to perform.

Aims

Computer-based applications are increasingly being used by orthopaedic surgeons in their clinical practice. With the integration of technology in surgery, augmented reality (AR) may become an important tool for surgeons in the future. By superimposing a digital image on a user’s view of the physical world, this technology shows great promise in orthopaedics. The aim of this review is to investigate the current and potential uses of AR in orthopaedics.

We have treated 15 patients with massive lumbar disc herniations non-operatively. Repeat MR scanning after a mean 24 months (5 to 56) showed a dramatic resolution of the herniation in 14 patients. No patient developed a cauda equina syndrome.

We suggest that this condition may be more benign than previously thought.