Search

PurposeThe focus of SPINE20 is to develop evidence-based policy recommendations for the G20 countries to work with governments to reduce the burden of spine disease, and disability.MethodsOn September 17-18, 2021, SPINE20 held its annual meeting in Rome, Italy. Prior to the meeting, the SPINE20 created six proposed recommendations. These recommendations were uploaded to the SPINE20 website 10 days before the meeting and opened to the public for comments. The recommendations were discussed at the meeting allowing the participants to object and provide comments.ResultsIn total, 27 societies endorsed the following recommendations. SPINE20 calls upon the G20 countries: (1) to expand telehealth for the access to spine care, especially in light of the current situation with COVID-19. (2) To adopt value-based interprofessional spine care as an approach to improve patient outcomes and reduce disability. (3) To facilitate access and invest in the development of a competent rehabilitation workforce to reduce the burden of disability related to spine disorders. (4) To adopt a strategy to promote daily physical activity and exercises among the elderly population to maintain an active and independent life with a healthy spine, particularly after COVID-19 pandemic. (5) To engage in capacity building with emerging countries and underserved communities for the benefit of spine patients. (6) To promote strategies to transfer evidence-based advances into patient benefit through effective implementation processes.ConclusionsSPINE20's initiatives will make governments and decision makers aware of efforts to reduce needless suffering from disabling spine pain through education that can be instituted across the globe.

BackgroundPreoperative anxiety is a common phenomenon in plastic surgery that has been associated with numerous negative patient outcomes. Little is known about the preferences of plastic surgeons regarding management of patient preoperative anxiety OBJECTIVE: To determine the preferences of plastic surgeons regarding the assessment and reduction of adult preoperative patient anxiety in their primary practice setting.MethodsThe membership of the American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons (ACAPS) was surveyed using an anonymous, online questionnaire from April to June of 2020.ResultsA total of 100 participants from a membership of 532 responded (19%). The majority of respondents (63%) did not formally assess patient anxiety but supported the use of standardized scales to measure anxiety (57%). Most plastic surgeons preferred patient education (81%), family member presence (69%), and visit from the anesthesiologist (54%) to reduce patient anxiety. Plastic surgeons also allocated the most responsibility to anesthesiologists (63%) and plastic surgeons (62%) to reduce preoperative anxiety.DiscussionMost plastic surgeon members of ACAPS did not assess their patients' anxieties preoperatively but appeared willing to use anxiety scales. Plastic surgeons also supported several measures to reduce anxiety, especially patient education, family member preferences, and anesthesiologist visits. Although plastic surgeons appeared to hold multiple parties responsible to manage preoperative anxiety, they held themselves and anesthesiologists most responsible. Future studies are needed to determine whether these views cohere with those of other healthcare providers and whether these preferences change for pediatric patients.Level of evidence vThis journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

COVID-19 is a severe infectious disease that has claimed >150,000 lives and infected millions in the United States thus far, especially the elderly population. Emerging evidence has shown the virus to cause hemorrhagic and immunologic responses, which impact all organs, including lungs, kidneys, and the brain, as well as extremities. SARS-CoV-2 also affects patients', families', and society's mental health at large. There is growing evidence of re-infection in some patients. The goal of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of SARS-CoV-2-induced disease, its mechanism of infection, diagnostics, therapeutics, and treatment strategies, while also focusing on less attended aspects by previous studies, including nutritional support, psychological, and rehabilitation of the pandemic and its management. We performed a systematic review of >1,000 articles and included 425 references from online databases, including, PubMed, Google Scholar, and California Baptist University's library. COVID-19 patients go through acute respiratory distress syndrome, cytokine storm, acute hypercoagulable state, and autonomic dysfunction, which must be managed by a multidisciplinary team including nursing, nutrition, and rehabilitation. The elderly population and those who are suffering from Alzheimer's disease and dementia related illnesses seem to be at the higher risk. There are 28 vaccines under development, and new treatment strategies/protocols are being investigated. The future management for COVID-19 should include B-cell and T-cell immunotherapy in combination with emerging prophylaxis. The mental health and illness aspect of COVID-19 are among the most important side effects of this pandemic which requires a national plan for prevention, diagnosis and treatment.

Study designA retrospective case-control study.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the nationwide trends and complication rates associated with outpatient posterior lumbar fusion (PLF).Summary of background dataOutpatient lumbar spine fusion is now possible secondary to minimally invasive techniques that allow for reduced hospital stays and analgesic requirements. Limited data are currently available regarding the clinical outcome of outpatient lumbar fusion.MethodsThe Humana administrative claims database was queried for patients who underwent one to two-level PLF (CPT-22612 or CPT-22633 AND ICD-9-816.2) as either outpatients or inpatients from Q1 2007 to Q2 2015. The incidence of perioperative medical and surgical complications was determined by querying for relevant International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Multivariate logistic regression adjusting for age, gender, and Charlson Comorbidity Index was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) of complications among outpatients relative to inpatients undergoing PLF.ResultsCohorts of 770 patients who underwent outpatient PLF and 26,826 patients who underwent inpatient PLF were identified. The median age was in the 65 to 69 years age group for both cohorts. The annual relative incidence of outpatient PLF remained stable across the study period (R = 0.03, P = 0.646). Adjusting for age, gender, and comorbidities, patients undergoing outpatient PLF had higher likelihood of revision/extension of posterior fusion [(OR 2.33, confidence interval (CI) 2.06-2.63, P

Study designA literature review.ObjectivesAn evaluation of the contaminants prevalent on implants used for surgery and the aseptic methods being employed against them.MethodsPubMed was searched for articles published between 2000 and 2017 for studies evaluating the contaminants present on spine implants, and associated pre- and intraoperative implant processing and handling methodology suggested to avoid them. Systematic reviews, observational studies, bench-top studies, and expert opinions were included.ResultsEleven studies were identified whose major focus was the asepsis of implants to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection incidences during surgery. These studies measured the colony forming units of bacteria on sterilized implants and/or gloves from the surgeon, scrub nurse, and assistants, as well as reductions of surgical site infection rates in spine surgery due to changes in implant handling techniques. Additionally, the search included assessments of endotoxins and carbohydrates present on reprocessed implants. The suggested changes to surgical practice based on these studies included handling implants with only fresh gloves, keeping implants covered until the immediate time of use, reducing operating room traffic, avoiding reprocessing of implants (ie, providing terminally sterilized implants), and avoiding touching the implants altogether.ConclusionsBoth reprocessing (preoperative) and handling (intraoperative) of implants seem to lead to contamination of sterilized implants. Using a terminally sterilized device may mitigate reprocessing (preoperative implant prophylaxis), whereas the use of fresh gloves for handling each implant and/or a permanent shielding technique (intraoperative implant prophylaxis) could potentially avoid recontamination at the theatre.

Background: As the elderly population grows, the increasing prevalence of osteoporosis presents a unique challenge for surgeons. Decreased bone strength and quality are associated with hardware failure and impaired bone healing, which may increase the rate of revision surgery and the development of complications. The purpose of this review is to determine the impact of osteoporosis on postoperative outcomes for patients with cervical degenerative disease or deformity. Methods: A systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Medical Subject Headings terms involving spine surgery for cervical degenerative disease and osteoporosis were performed. This review focused on radiographic outcomes, as well as surgical and medical complications. Results: There were 16 studies included in the degenerative group and 9 in the deformity group. Across degenerative studies, lower bone mineral density was associated with increased rates of cage subsidence in osteoporotic patients undergoing operative treatment for cervical degenerative disease. Most studies reported varied results on the relationship between osteoporosis and other outcomes such as revision and readmission rates, costs, and perioperative complications. Our meta-analysis suggests that osteoporotic patients carry a greater risk of reduced fusion rates at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. With respect to cervical deformity correction, although individual complication rates were unchanged with osteoporosis, the collective risk of incurring any complication may be increased in patients with poor bone stock. Conclusions: Overall, the literature suggests that outcomes for osteoporotic patients after cervical spine surgery are multifactorial. Osteoporosis seems to be a significant risk factor for developing cage subsidence and pseudarthrosis postoperatively, whereas reports on medical and hospital-related metrics were inconclusive. Our findings highlight the challenges of caring for osteoporotic patients and underline the need for adequately powered studies to understand how osteoporosis changes the risk index of patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. Clinical Relevance: In patients undergoing cervical spine surgery for degenerative disease, osteoporosis is a significant risk factor for long-term postoperative complications--notably cage subsidence and pseudarthrosis. Given the elective nature of these procedures, interdisciplinary collaboration between providers should be routinely implemented to enable medical optimization of patients prior to cervical spine surgery. Level of Evidence: 1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This review outlines clinical data and characteristics of current Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved implants in cervical disc replacement/cervical disc arthroplasty (CDR/CDA) to provide a centralized resource for spine surgeons. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CDR/CDA were identified using a search of the PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. The initial search identified 69 studies. Duplicates were removed, and the following inclusion criteria were applied when determining eligibility of RCTs for the current review: (1) discussing CDR/CDA prosthesis and (2) published within between 2010 and 2020. Studies without clinical data or that were not RCTs were excluded. All articles were reviewed independently by 2 authors, with the involvement of an arbitrator to facilitate consensus on any discrepancies. Results: A total of 34 studies were included in the final review. Findings were synthesized into a comprehensive table describing key features and clinical results for each FDA-approved CDR/CDA implant and are overall suggestive of expanding indications and increasing utilization. Conclusions: RCTs have provided substantial evidence to support CDR/CDA for treating single- and 2-level cervical degenerative disc disease in place of conventional anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Clinical Relevance: This review provides a resource that consolidates relevant clinical data for current FDA-approved implants to help spine surgeons make an informed decision during preoperative planning. Level of Evidence: 5 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background contextWith the changing landscape of health care, outpatient spine surgery is being more commonly performed to reduce cost and to improve efficiency. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most common spine surgeries performed and demand is expected to increase with an aging population.PurposeThe objective of this study was to determine the nationwide trends and relative complication rates associated with outpatient ACDF.Study design/settingThis is a large-scale retrospective case control study.Patient sampleThe patient sample included Humana-insured patients who underwent one- to two-level ACDF as either outpatients or inpatients from 2011 to 2016 OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures included incidence and the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of postoperative medical and surgical complications within 1 year of the index surgery.Materials and methodsA retrospective review was performed of the PearlDiver Humana insurance records database to identify patients undergoing one- to two-level ACDF (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT]-22551 and International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-9-816.2) as either outpatients or inpatients from 2011 to 2016. The incidence of perioperative medical and surgical complications was determined by querying for relevant ICD and CPT codes. Multivariate logistic regression adjusting for age, gender, and Charlson Comorbidity Index was used to calculate ORs of complications among outpatients relative to inpatients undergoing ACDF.ResultsCohorts of 1,215 patients who underwent outpatient ACDF and 10,964 patients who underwent inpatient ACDF were identified. The median age was in the 65-69 age group for both cohorts. The annual relative incidence of outpatient ACDF increased from 0.11 in 2011 to 0.22 in 2016 (R2=0.82, p=.04). Adjusting for age, gender, and comorbidities, patients undergoing outpatient ACDF were more likely to undergo revision surgery for posterior fusion at both 6 months (OR 1.58, confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.96, p

The purpose of this study was to determine the relative incidence of postoperative complications in 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25D)-deficient and -sufficient patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients who were either serum 25D deficient (25D

Study designGuideline development.ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to develop guidelines that outline how to best manage (1) patients with mild, moderate, and severe myelopathy and (2) nonmyelopathic patients with evidence of cord compression with or without clinical symptoms of radiculopathy.MethodsFive systematic reviews of the literature were conducted to synthesize evidence on disease natural history; risk factors of disease progression; the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of nonoperative and surgical management; the impact of preoperative duration of symptoms and myelopathy severity on treatment outcomes; and the frequency, timing, and predictors of symptom development. A multidisciplinary guideline development group used this information, and their clinical expertise, to develop recommendations for the management of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).ResultsOur recommendations were as follows: (1) "We recommend surgical intervention for patients with moderate and severe DCM." (2) "We suggest offering surgical intervention or a supervised trial of structured rehabilitation for patients with mild DCM. If initial nonoperative management is pursued, we recommend operative intervention if there is neurological deterioration and suggest operative intervention if the patient fails to improve." (3) "We suggest not offering prophylactic surgery for non-myelopathic patients with evidence of cervical cord compression without signs or symptoms of radiculopathy. We suggest that these patients be counseled as to potential risks of progression, educated about relevant signs and symptoms of myelopathy, and be followed clinically." (4) "Non-myelopathic patients with cord compression and clinical evidence of radiculopathy with or without electrophysiological confirmation are at a higher risk of developing myelopathy and should be counselled about this risk. We suggest offering either surgical intervention or nonoperative treatment consisting of close serial follow-up or a supervised trial of structured rehabilitation. In the event of myelopathic development, the patient should be managed according to the recommendations above."ConclusionsThese guidelines will promote standardization of care for patients with DCM, decrease the heterogeneity of management strategies and encourage clinicians to make evidence-informed decisions.