Background

For the surgical treatment of single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), patients can be treated with either an anterior or posterior interbody fusion. Prior studies have shown that patients with symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis treated surgically maintain substantially greater pain relief and improvement in function when compared to those treated non-operatively, but no consensus has emerged between which approach results in the best outcomes.

Methods

The PearlDiver MARINER database was queried for patients with single-level DS who underwent either an anterior or posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Both populations were compared on multiple outcomes, including reoperation, post-operative complications, and readmission rates at 90 days, as well as rates of reoperation and cauda equina syndrome two-years postoperatively.

Results

At 90 days patients who underwent anterior interbody were found to have higher rates of DVT (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.74 - 3.70, p<0.001), ileus (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.25 - 1.64, p<0.001), and readmission (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.38, p<0.001). Patients who underwent posterior interbody fusion were found to have higher rates of revision procedures (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.59 - 0.66, p<0.001), transfusion (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58 - 0.78, p<0.001), acute kidney injury (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 - 0.95, p=0.0046), and cauda equina syndrome (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.40 - 0.69, p<0.001). At 2 years, patients who underwent posterior fusion required revision procedures (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.67 - 0.74, p<0.001) and developed cauda equina syndrome (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 - 0.77, p<0.001) at a higher rate than those who underwent anterior fusion.

Conclusions

Patients who underwent anterior interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis were found to have increased rates of DVT, ileus, and were more likely to be readmitted to the hospital within 90 days, while patients who underwent posterior interbody fusion were found to have higher rates of reoperation, transfusion, AKI, and cauda equina syndrome. Increased rates of reoperation and development of cauda equina in the posterior fusion group persisted at 2 years post-operatively.

[This corrects the article on p. 1001 in vol. 12, PMID: 35036342.].

Background: It is not known if the adult literature on midshaft clavicle fracture treatment with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) has influenced injury management in adolescents. Purpose: We sought to longitudinally evaluate the rates of operative management of adolescent midshaft clavicle fractures in the state of Florida. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of data from the following Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project databases: the State Inpatient Database, the State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database, and the State Emergency Department Database. Patients in Florida ages 10 to 18 years with midshaft clavicle fractures between 2005 and 2014 were identified along with data on age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance type, treatment, and income percentile. We reviewed the data to identify trends in the rates of operative management of midshaft clavicle fractures. We then compared the rates of operative management between the first 3 years and the most recent 3 years (2005-2007 vs 2012-2014). Various demographic and socioeconomic factors were compared between patients treated with and without surgery. Descriptive statistics as well as univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: There were 4297 midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescents identified between 2005 and 2014, and 338 (7.8%) of these fractures underwent operative management. There was a significant increase in the rate of operative management; it increased from 4.3% (n = 59) of the 1373 clavicle fractures that occurred between 2005 and 2007 to 11.2% (n = 130) of the 1164 clavicle fractures that occurred between 2012 and 2014. Patients with commercial insurance and patients who were older were more likely to undergo ORIF. Patients with Medicaid were more likely to undergo ORIF between 2012 and 2014 compared with patients with Medicaid between 2005 and 2007. Conclusions: Operative management rates of adolescent midshaft clavicle fractures have significantly increased in Florida over a decade; additional research is needed to understand these findings.

Background

The national rates of readmission and reoperation after open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescents is unknown.

Aim

To determine rates of and risk factors for readmission and reoperation after ORIF of midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescents.

Methods

This retrospective study utilized data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database for California and Florida and included 11728 patients 10-18 years of age that underwent ORIF of midshaft clavicle fracture between 2005 and 2012. Readmissions within ninety days, reoperations within two years, and differences in patient demographic factors were determined through descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses.

Results

In total, 3.29% (n = 11) of patients were readmitted within 90 d to a hospital at an average of 18.91 ± 18 d after discharge, while 15.87% (n = 53) of patients underwent a reoperation within two years at an average of 209.53 ± 151 d since the index surgery. The most common reason for readmission was a postoperative infection (n < 10). Reasons for reoperation included implant removal (n = 49) at an average time of 202.39 ± 138 d after surgery, and revision ORIF (n < 10) with an average time of 297 ± 289 d after index surgery. The odds of reoperation were higher for females (P < 0.01) and outpatients (P < 0.01), while the odds of reoperation were lower for patients who underwent surgery in California (P = 0.02).

Conclusion

There is a low rate of readmission and a high rate of reoperation after ORIF for midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescents. There are significant differences for reoperation based on patient sex, location, and hospital type.

Study design

Retrospective cohort.

Objective

Reoperation to lumbar spinal fusion creates significant burden on patient quality of life and healthcare costs. We assessed rates, etiologies, and risk factors for reoperation following elective 1 to 2 level lumbar fusion.

Methods

Patients undergoing elective 1 to 2 level lumbar fusion were identified using the Health Care Utilization Project (HCUP) state inpatient databases from Florida and California. Patients were tracked for 5 years for any subsequent lumbar fusion. Cox proportional hazard analyses for reoperation were assessed using the following covariates: fusion approach type, age, race, Charlson comormidity index, gender, and length of stay. Distribution of etiologies for reoperation was then assessed.

Results

71, 456 patients receiving elective 1 to 2 level lumbar fusion were included. A 5-year reoperation rate of 13.53% and mortality rate of 2.22% was seen. Combined anterior-posterior approaches (HR = 0.904, p < 0.05) and TLIF (HR = 0.867, p < 0.001) were associated with reduced risk of reoperation compared to stand-alone anterior approaches and non-TLIF posterior approaches. Age, gender, and number of comorbidities were not associated with risk of reoperation. From 1 to 5 years, degenerative disease rose from 43.50% to 50.31% of reoperations; mechanical failure decreased from 37.65% to 29.77%.

Conclusions

TLIF and combined anterior-posterior approaches for 1 to 2 level lumbar fusion are associated with the lowest rate of reoperation. Number of comorbidities and age are not predictive of reoperation. Primary etiologies leading to reoperation were degenerative disease and mechanical failure. Mortality rate is not increased from baseline following 1 to 2 level lumbar fusion.

A prospective observational cohort of 20 primary total hip arthroplasty (n = 12) and total knee arthroplasty (n = 8) patients (mean age: 63 ± 6 years) was passively monitored with a consumer-level wearable activity sensor before and 6 weeks after surgery. Patients were clustered by minimal change or decreased activity using sensor data. Decreased postoperative activity was associated with greater pain reduction (-5.5 vs -2.0, P = .03). All patients surpassed minimal clinical benefit thresholds of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Score Junior 30.5 vs 20.8, P = .23; Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior 23.3 vs 18.2, P = .77) within 6 weeks. Patients who objectively "take it easy" after TJA may experience less pain with no difference in early subjective outcome. Remote, passive analysis of outpatient wearable sensor data may permit real-time detection of early problems after TJA.

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT:  In patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) of main thoracic and lumbar spine regions, combined anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) is a novel non-fusion treatment option for growth modulation and conservation of motion. METHODS:  Fourteen patients with AIS who underwent ATVBT/PLST with at least 2-year follow-up were included. Primary outcomes included quality of life as assessed by SRS-22 instruments, radiographic analysis, and revision operations. We secondarily reported perioperative metrics and post-operative opiate morphine equivalents (OME). Clinical success was defined as patients who achieved skeletal maturity with ≤ 30° curve magnitude of both their main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curves and who did not undergo posterior spine instrumentation and fusion (PSIF). RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 11.6 years (range 10-14 years), majority were girls (92%), and mean follow-up was 3.0 years (range 2-4.8 years). All patients were skeletally immature with a Risser ≤ 2. Included curves were Lenke 1C, 3C, or 6C. Mean preoperative curve magnitudes were 53° ± 8° (range 45°-65°) main thoracic and 49° ± 9° (range 40°-62°) thoracolumbar/lumbar curves. At most recent follow-up, patients had a mean main thoracic curve of 29° ± 8° (range 15°-40°) and a mean thoracolumbar/lumbar curve of 20° ± 15° (range 4°-35°). 50% required a revision operation. Cable breakage occurred in 43%, which did not always require revision. One patient progressed to thoracic fusion, but no patient underwent lumbar fusion. Patients had a mean SRS-22 outcome score of 4.2 ± 0.4. CONCLUSIONS: ATVBT/PLST is a potential alternative to spine fusion for select immature patients with AIS at a minimum 2-year follow-up. ATVBT/PLST potentially offers motion conservation at the cost of a higher revision rate. Further study and reporting of results are necessary to refine indications and techniques, which in turn will improve outcomes of this procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-Case series without comparative group.

PURPOSE: While posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) for severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the gold standard, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is becoming an alternative for select cases. Several studies have compared technical outcomes for these two procedures, but no studies have compared post-operative pain and recovery. METHODS: In this prospective cohort, we evaluated patients who underwent AVBT or PSIF for AIS for a period of 6 weeks after operation. Pre-operative curve data were obtained from the medical record. Post-operative pain and recovery were evaluated with pain scores, pain confidence scores, PROMIS scores for pain behavior, interference, and mobility, and functional milestones of opiate use, independence in activities of daily living (ADLs), and sleeping. RESULTS: The cohort included 9 patients who underwent AVBT and 22 who underwent PSIF, with a mean age of 13.7 years, 90% girls, and 77.4% white. The AVBT patients were younger (p = 0.03) and had fewer instrumented levels (p = 0.03). Results were significant for decreased pain scores at 2 and 6 weeks after operation (p = 0.004, and 0.030), decreased PROMIS pain behavior at all time points (p = 0.024, 0.049, and 0.001), decreased pain interference at 2 and 6 weeks post-operative (p = 0.012 and 0.009), increased PROMIS mobility scores at all time points (p = 0.036, 0.038, and 0.018), and faster time to functional milestones of weaning opiates, independence in ADLs, and sleep (p = 0.024, 0.049, and 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this prospective cohort study, the early recovery period following AVBT for AIS is characterized by less pain, increased mobility, and faster recovery of functional milestones, compared with PSIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of patients to return to work following anteromedialization (AMZ) tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO) due to isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis or pain. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing AMZ TTO were reviewed retrospectively at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. Patients completed a subjective work questionnaire, a visual analog scale for pain, as well as a Kujala questionnaire and satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients (61 knees; average age: 32.7 ± 9.6 years) were contacted at an average follow-up of 4.86 ± 2.84 years postoperatively. The preoperative Kujala score improved from 55.7 ± 17.8 to 84.6 ± 15.8 at final follow-up (P < 0.001). Thirty-seven patients (64.9%) were employed within 3 years prior to surgery and 34 patients (91.9%) were able to return to work by 2.8 ± 2.6 months postoperatively. However, only 27 patients (73.0%) of patients were able to return to the same level of occupational intensity. Patients who held sedentary, light-, medium-, or high-intensity occupations were able to return to work at a rate of 100.0%, 93.8%, 77.8%, and 100.0% by 2.2 months, 3.0 months, 3.1 months, and 4.0 months, postoperatively. No patients underwent revision TTO or conversion to arthroplasty by the time of final follow-up. CONCLUSION: In patients with focal patellofemoral osteoarthritis or pain, AMZ TTO provides a high rate of return to work (91.9%) by 2.8 ± 2.6 months postoperatively. Patients with higher intensity occupations may take longer to return to work than those with less physically demanding occupations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine perspectives of surgeons regarding simultaneous surgery in patients undergoing posterior spine instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Methods

A survey was administered to orthopaedic trainees and faculty regarding simultaneous surgery for primary PSIF for AIS. A five-point Likert scale (1: 'Strongly Disagree' to 5: 'Strongly Agree') was used to assess agreement with statements about simultaneous surgery. We divided simultaneous surgery into concurrent, when critical portions of operations occur at the same time, and overlapping, when noncritical portions occur at the same time.

Results

The 72 respondents (78.3% of 92 surveyed) disagreed with concurrent surgery for 'one of my patients' (response mean 1.76 (sd 1.03)) but were more accepting of overlapping surgery (mean 3.94 (sd 0.99); p < 0.0001). The rating difference between concurrent and overlapping surgery was smaller for paediatric and spine surgeons (-1.25) than for residents or those who did not identify a subspecialty (-2.17; p = 0.0246) or other subspecialty surgeons (-2.57; p = 0.0026). Respondents were more likely to agree with explicit informed consent for concurrent surgery compared with overlapping (mean 4.32 (sd 0.91) versus 3.44 (sd 1.14); p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Orthopaedic surgeons disagreed with concurrent but were more accepting of overlapping surgery and anaesthesia for PSIF for AIS. Respondents were in greater agreement that patients should be explicitly informed of concurrence than of overlap. The surgical community's evidence and position regarding simultaneous surgery, in particular overlapping, must be more effectively presented to the public in order to bridge the gap in perspectives.

Level of evidence

IV.