Aims. Historically, patients undergoing surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) have been nursed postoperatively in a critical care (CC) setting because of the challenges posed by prone positioning, extensive exposures, prolonged operating times, significant blood loss, major intraoperative fluid shifts, cardiopulmonary complications, and difficulty in postoperative pain management. The primary aim of this paper was to determine whether a scoring system, which uses Cobb angle, forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and number of levels to be fused, is a valid method of predicting the need for postoperative critical care in AIS patients who are to undergo scoliosis correction with posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all AIS patients who had undergone PSF between January 2018 and January 2020 in a specialist tertiary spinal referral centre. All patients were assessed preoperatively in an anaesthetic clinic. Postoperative care was defined as ward-based (WB) or critical care (CC), based on the preoperative FEV1, FVC, major curve Cobb angle, and the planned number of instrumented levels. Results. Overall, 105 patients were enrolled. Their mean age was 15.5 years (11 to 25) with a mean weight of 55 kg (35 to 103). The mean Cobb angle was 68° (38° to 122°). Of these, 38 patients were preoperatively scored to receive postoperative CC. However, only 19% of the cohort (20/105) actually needed CC-level support. Based on these figures, and an average paediatric intensive care unit stay of one day before stepdown to ward-based care, the potential cost-saving on the first postoperative night for this cohort was over £20,000. There was no statistically significant difference between the Total Pathway Score (TPS), the numerical representation of the four factors being assessed, and the actual level of care received (p = 0.052) or the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (p = 0.187). Binary logistic regression analysis of the TPS variables showed that the preoperative Cobb angle was the only variable which significantly predicted the need for critical care. Conclusion. Most patients undergoing posterior fusion surgery for AIS do not need critical care. Of the readily available preoperative measures, the Cobb angle is the only predictor of the need for higher levels of care, and has a threshold value of 74.5°. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):713–719

Despite the increasing prevalence of sleep apnoea, little information is available regarding its impact on the peri-operative outcome of patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion. Using a national database, patients who underwent lumbar fusion between 2006 and 2010 were identified, sub-grouped by diagnosis of sleep apnoea and compared. The impact of sleep apnoea on various outcome measures was assessed by regression analysis. The records of 84 655 patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion were identified and 7.28% (n = 6163) also had a diagnostic code for sleep apnoea. Compared with patients without sleep apnoea, these patients were older, more frequently female, had a higher comorbidity burden and higher rates of peri-operative complications, post-operative mechanical ventilation, blood product transfusion and intensive care. Patients with sleep apnoea also had longer and more costly periods of hospitalisation. . In the regression analysis, sleep apnoea emerged as an independent risk factor for the development of peri-operative complications (odds ratio (OR) 1.50, confidence interval (CI) 1.38;1.62), blood product transfusions (OR 1.12, CI 1.03;1.23), mechanical ventilation (OR 6.97, CI 5.90;8.23), critical care services (OR 1.86, CI 1.71;2.03), prolonged hospitalisation and increased cost (OR 1.28, CI 1.19;1.37; OR 1.10, CI 1.03;1.18). . Patients with sleep apnoea who undergo posterior lumbar fusion pose significant challenges to clinicians. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:242–8

Aims

The timing of surgical fixation in spinal fractures is a contentious topic. Existing literature suggests that early stabilization leads to reduced morbidity, improved neurological outcomes, and shorter hospital stay. However, the quality of evidence is low and equivocal with regard to the safety of early fixation in the severely injured patient. This paper compares complication profiles between spinal fractures treated with early fixation and those treated with late fixation.