Frailty has been shown to be a risk predictor for peri-operative adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing various type of spine surgery. However, its relationship with Patient Related Outcome Measures (PROMS) remains unknown. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of frailty on PROMS in patients undergoing surgery for thoraco-lumbar degenerative conditions. The secondary objective was to determine the association between frailty and baseline PROMS. This is a retrospective study of a prospective cohort of patients >55 years old who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2018. Patient data and PROMS (EQ-5D, SF-12, ODI, back and leg pain NRS) were extracted from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry for a single academic centre. Frailty was retrospectively calculated using the modified frailty index (mFI) and patient were classified as frail, pre-frail and non-frail. Patient characteristics and outcomes were analyzed using ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables and Chi square or Fisher's exact test for proportions. A generalized estimating equations (GEEs) regression model was used to assess the association between patients' baseline frailty status and PROMs measures at three and 12 months. 293 patients were included with a mean age of 67 ± 7 years. Twenty-two percent of the patients (n= 65) were frail, 59 % (n=172) were pre-frail and 19% (n=56) were non-frail. At baseline, the three groups had similar PROMS, except for the PCS which was worse in the frail group (mean difference [95% CI], −4.9 [−8.6;-1.1], p= 0.0083). The improvement in the EQ-5D, PCS, MCS, ODI, back and leg pain NRS scores was not significantly different between the three groups (p> 0.05). The was no difference in the evolution of the PROMS at three and 12 months between the three groups (p> 0.05). Although frailty is a known predictor of AEs, it does not predict worse PROMS after spine surgery in that population. At baseline, non-frail, pre-frail and frail patients have similar PROMS

Objectives. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction is a degenerative condition that can result in low back pain and is likely underdiagnosed. Diagnosis is made clinically with the patient experiencing pain in the sacroiliac joint region. Initial management is non-operative with pain management, physiotherapy, injections, and rhizolysis. If these fail then surgical management, by sacroiliac joint fusion, can be considered. The aim of this study was to review the outcomes of all patients who underwent sacroiliac joint fusion by a single surgeon in a large district general hospital between April 2018 and April 2023. Design and Methods. A retrospective review of all patients who underwent sacroiliac joint fusion between April 2018 and April 2023 was conducted. Data was collected from clinical letters, operative notes, and the British Spinal Registry. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain were recorded as well as any post-operative complications. Results. In total 19 patients underwent sacroiliac joint fusion. Mean age was 47 years (range 27 – 69 years). Nine were right sided procedures and ten were left. The mean BMI was 32.3. ODI improved from a mean of 55 pre-operative to 26 at one year and 15 at two years post-operative. VAS for back pain improved from a mean of six pre-operative to three at one year and one at two years post-operative. VAS for leg pain improved from a mean of five pre-operative to four at one year and zero at two years post-operative. There were no surgical site complications. One patient developed trochanteric bursitis post-operatively. Two patients have since undergone sacroiliac joint fusion on the contralateral side with a further patient awaiting contralateral surgery. Conclusion. In patients with sacroiliac joint pain where non-operative measures have failed to control symptoms sacroiliac joint fusion is a reliable and effective surgical option

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become increasingly important in the evaluation of spine surgery patients, interpretability may be limited by a patient's ability to recall pre-intervention impairment. The accuracy of patient recall of preoperative back pain, leg pain, and disability after spine surgery remains unknown. We sought to characterise the accuracy of patient recall of preoperative symptoms in a cohort of lumbar spine surgery patients. We analysed consecutive patients undergoing lumbar decompression or decompression and fusion for lumbar radiculopathy by a single surgeon over a four-year period. Using standardised questionnaires, we recorded back and leg numeric pain scores (NPS) and Oswestry Disability Indices (ODI) preoperatively and asked patients to recall their preoperative status at a minimum of one-year following surgery. We then statistically compared and characterised patient recall of their pre-operative status and their actual pre-operative status. Patients with incomplete follow up or diagnoses other than degenerative lumbar stenosis were excluded. Sixty-seven patients with a mean age of 66.1 years (55% female) were included in the final analysis. All cases were either posterior or combined anterior/ posterior procedures. Mean levels of surgery was 1.7 and 93.8% of all cases were instrumented. Mean duration of preoperative symptoms was 44.5 months (3.7 years). Preoperative vs postoperative PROs improved with regards to NPS back (5.2 vs 2.2, p= to 2 point difference), exceeding the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for NPS. This pattern was maintained across age, gender, and duration of preoperative symptoms. We also observed cases of symptom minimisation recall bias, and cases in which back and leg pain predominance were switched in severity during recall bias. Significant recall bias of preoperative symptoms exists in patients undergoing spine surgery, potentially limiting accurate assessment and interpretation of PROs. An understanding of PROs and their limitations is essential to assess treatment efficacy of spinal procedures

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

Introduction. The majority of spine patients present with discogenic low back pain, originating from either degenerative disc disease (DDD) or internal disc disruption (IDD). Successful treatment of this patient population relies on obtaining precision diagnosis and careful patient selection, as well as matching the pathology with reliable technology. Total disc replacement (TDR), as an alternative to spinal fusion in the treatment of DDD or IDD, has been studied and reported for several decades in long-term follow-up studies and in several randomized control trials. This prospective study presents a single surgeon experience with two-level CHARITÉ® TDR in 84 consecutive patients, with minimum follow-up of 5 years. The aims of the study were to assess the clinical outcomes of two-level TDR in patients with DDD/IDD. Based on the literature review conducted, this study is considered the largest single surgeon series experience with the two-level CHARITÉ® TDR in the treatment of lumbar DDD, with a minimum follow-up of 5 years reported to date. Materials and Methods. Between January 1997 and March 2006, n=84 consecutive patients underwent two-level TDR for the treatment of two-level DDD or IDD discogenic axial low back pain with or without radicular pain. All patients completed self-assessment outcome questionnaires pre and postoperatively (3, 6, 12 months, and yearly thereafter), including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Visual Analogue Score (VAS) for back and leg pain. Results. For the n=84 patients, the mean follow-up was 94.34±2.19 months (range = 62–150). The mean age was 49.6±0.94. The mean surgical time was 91±3.16 minutes and the mean blood loss was 207.5±30.62 mls. The main diagnosis was two-level DDD in 63 (76.8%) patients, followed by one-level disc herniation and one-level DDD. Seventy-three (89%) patients underwent L4-5 L5-S1 TDR and 9 (11%) patients underwent L3-4 L4-5 TDR. At all follow-up points, patients demonstrated significant improvement in ODI, RMDQ, and VAS back and leg pain scores compared to pre-operative scores (p < 0.001). The mean improvement between pre-op and last follow-up was 33.3 (66.8%) and 13.23 (74%) for ODI and RMDQ, respectively. Similarly, that was 54.8 (69 %%) and 34.8 (65%) for VAS back and VAS leg pain, respectively. At least 87.8% of the patients rated their satisfaction as good/excellent at any follow-up point. At 5 years follow-up, 54 patients (65.9%) rated their satisfaction as excellent, 19 (23.2%) as good, 7 (8.5%) as satisfactory and 2 (2.4%) as poor. Two patients (2 out of 84, 2.38%) required early revision of one of the prostheses due to failure of indication and/or failure of technique. There has been no device failure. One patient required surgery for adjacent segment disease (1.19%). Conclusion. This study has shown that statistically significant reductions in pain and functional outcomes can be obtained in patients at a minimum follow-up of 5-years following 2-level TDR for the treatment of multilevel DDD or IDD. The clinical benefits of this procedure is supported by the data, with the outcomes reflecting a precision diagnosis, stringent patient selection criteria, and a standardised surgical technique

Introduction. This study investigates the effect of somatisation on results of lumbar surgery. Methods. Pre- and post-operative data of all primary discectomies and posterior lumbar decompressions were prospectively collected. Pain using the Visual Analogue Score (VAS) and disability using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were measured. Psychological assessment used the Distress Risk Assessment Method (DRAM). Follow-up was at 1 year. Results. There were a total of 320 patients (average age 49.7 years). Pre-operatively there were 61 Somatising and 75 psychologically Normal patients. 47 of the pre-operative Somatisers were available for follow-up. All pre-operative parameters were significantly higher compared with the Normal group (back pain VAS 6.3 and 3.8; leg pain VAS 7 and 4.7; ODI 61 and 34.4 respectively). At 1 year follow-up, 23% of the somatising patients became psychologically Normal; 36% became At Risk; 11% became Distressed Depressed; and 30% remained Distressed Somatisers. The post-operative VAS for back and leg pain of the 11 patients who had become psychologically Normal was 3.4 (pre-op 6.8) and 3.2 (pre-op 6.6) respectively. In the 14 patients who remained Distressed Somatisers the corresponding figures were 5.6 (pre-op 7.8) and 6.7 (pre-op 7.0). The post-operative ODI of the 11 patients who had become psychologically Normal was 26.4 (pre-op 55.5). In the 14 patients who remained Distressed Somatisers the corresponding figures were 56.7 (pre-op 61.7). These differences are statistically significant. Discussion. Patients with features of somatisation are severely functionally impaired pre-operatively. One year following lumbar spine surgery, 60% (28) had improved psychologically, 23% (11) were defined as psychologically normal. This was associated with a significant improvement in function and back and leg pain. The 14 (30%) patients who did not improve psychologically and remained somatisers had a poor functional outcome. Our results demonstrate that psychological distress is not an absolute contraindication to lumbar spinal decompressive surgery

Background. Foraminal stenosis is often encountered in patients undergoing decompression for spinal stenosis. Given the increased resection of facets and the presence of the more sensitive dorsal root ganglion, it is hypothesized that patients with foraminal stenosis have poorer postoperative outcomes. Methods. Thirty-one patients undergoing decompression without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis were evaluated. The degree of foraminal stenosis was determined by 2 independent reviewers for absence of fat around the nerve roots. ImageJ digital imaging software was also used to evaluate the foraminal area. Patients with foraminal stenosis were compared with those without using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and a numerical pain scale for back and leg pain at a minimum of 1 year follow-up. Results. Twenty patients in the foraminal stenosis group were compared with 11 without foraminal stenosis. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding age, sex, comorbidities, number of levels operated on, preoperative ODI, back pain or leg pain scores. The foraminal area was significantly smaller in the foraminal stenosis group. Patients without foraminal stenosis reported significant improvements in ODI (mean 26.0), back pain (mean 3.1) and leg pain scores (mean 5.5). Patients with foraminal stenosis reported significant improvements in ODI (mean 18.8) and leg pain (mean 2.5) but not in back pain (mean 0.3). Comparing the 2 groups, the patients with foraminal stenosis had significantly less improvement in back pain (p = 0.02) and leg pain (p = 0.02). Conclusion. The results of this study suggest that presence of foraminal stenosis is a negative predictor for successful outcome following decompression surgery. This may be related to the increased instability that occurs when a foraminotomy is required. Spinal fusion may reduce this effect, and further study is required. NO DISCLOSURES

Introduction:. Circumferential arthrodesis of the spine may be achieved by posterior-only or anterior and posterior surgery. Posterior-based interbody fusions have significant limitations including unreliable improvement of segmental lordosis and variable rates of post-operative radiculopathy. Combined anterior and posterior surgery introduces significant cost and peri-operative morbidity. The purpose of this paper is to report the radiographic and clinical outcomes of posterior-based circumferential arthrodesis using a novel expandable interbody cage. Methods:. A prospective pilot clinical trial with one year follow-up of the only expandable cage approved by the FDA for interbody application. Clinical outcomes measured include ODI and VAS for back and leg. Radiographic outcomes include arthrodesis rates based upon CT scan. Statistical significance for change in health status was calculated using Student's t-test. Results:. 10 consecutive patients (11 levels) with lumbar degenerative pathology underwent circumferential arthrodesis with a transforaminal interbody approach. 10 of 11 levels were fused based upon CT scan. ODI scores improved a median of 37 to 20 at 6 months and 17 at one year (p = 0.0003). The VAS for back and leg pain likewise from 6 to 2 at 12 months (p = −.003). No patient reported an increase in leg pain from pre-op to post-op. One patient with a 2-level fusion had a non-union at 1 level requiring revision surgery. Conclusion:. Circumferential arthrodesis with a TLIF approach is an important technique for the management of lumbar degenerative pathology. The experience with a novel expandable TLIF cage demonstrates excellent results based upon clinical outcome and fusion rates. The expandable interbody cage allows in-situ height increase which is useful for optimizing clinical and radiographic outcomes in TLIF surgery

Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis may entail both decompression and fusion. The knee-chest position facilitates the decompression, but fixation in this position risks fusion in kyphosis. This can be avoided by intra-operative re-positioning to the prone position. The aim of this study was to quantify the restoration of lordosis achieved by intra-operative repositioning and to assess the clinical and radiological outcome. A total of forty consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and stenosis were treated by posterior decompression and interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation. The screw insertion, decompression and interbody grafting were performed with the patient in the knee-chest position. The patient was then re-positioned to the fully prone position for fusion. Sagittal plane angles were measured pre-, intra- and post-operatively. Clinical assessment was performed using SF-36 scores and visual analogue scores for back and leg pain. The sagittal plane angle increased from median 16.0 degrees pre-operatively to 23.1 degrees post-operatively (p<0.01) and this was maintained at the last follow-up (mean 21 months). The SF-36 scores improved for 7 out of 8 domains and the physical score improved from 29% to 40% (p<0.05). The mean pain scores improved significantly from 7.5 to 3.8 for back pain and from 7.6 to 3.7 for leg pain (p<0.001). Lumbar spondylolisthesis was found to be associated with a reduction of normal lumbar lordosis and the knee-chest position exacerbates this loss of lordosis. Intra-operative repositioning restored lordosis to greater than the pre-operative angle and was associated with a good clinical outcome

Background. The relationship between obesity and cauda equina syndrome (CES) has not been previously evaluated or defined. Aim. Purpose of this study was to examine the presentation, timing of surgery, peri-operative complications and outcome of Cauda Equina Syndrome in relation to Body Mass Index. Methods. A single centre retrospective analysis was performed on 40 patients admitted with cauda equina syndrome. Data was collected regarding patient demographics, body mass index (BMI), co-morbidities, onset & mode of presentation and speed of functional recovery following surgery. Results. There were 18 males and 22 females with an overall average age of 38.9 years. The average height was 168.7 cm, and the average weight was 89.3 kg, giving an average BMI of 30.6 Kg/m2. 80% of patients were considered overweight (BMI 25–29.5) or obese (BMI >30). The average duration of back or leg pain prior to presentation was 4.2 years for the obese group and 1.3 years for the non-obese group. Bilateral sciatica, urinary incontinence and dense peri-anal numbness were the predominant presenting features in the obese group. Onset of symptoms was slow and gradually evolving in the obese group compared to the fast onset in the obese group. In the non-obese group, 71% underwent surgery within 24 hrs as opposed to 31% in the obese group. Average follow-up was 6months (6 weeks to 14 months). We observed that higher the BMI more slower the recovery with residual neurology and sphincter dysfunction. Patients in ideal group had prompt early symptomatic recovery with no residual neurology and full bladder recovery. There was correlation between increasing BMI and increased rate of surgical complications. Conclusion. This is the first study exploring the impact of body mass index on CES presentation and outcome. Specific care in establishing an early diagnosis in obese individuals is imperative for timely intervention