Search

Background: Existing adult spinal deformity (ASD) classification systems are based on radiological parameters but management of ASD patients requires a holistic approach. A comprehensive clinically oriented patient profile and classification of ASD that can guide decision-making and correlate with patient outcomes is lacking., Objective: To perform a systematic review to determine the purpose, characteristic, and methodological quality of classification systems currently used in ASD., Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for literature published between January 2000 and October 2018. From the included studies, list of classification systems, their methodological measurement properties, and correlation with treatment outcomes were analyzed., Results: Out of 4470 screened references, 163 were included, and 54 different classification systems for ASD were identified. The most commonly used was the Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab classification system. A total of 35 classifications were based on radiological parameters, and no correlation was found between any classification system levels with patient-related outcomes. Limited evidence of limited quality was available on methodological quality of the classification systems. For studies that reported the data, intraobserver and interobserver reliability were good (kappa = 0.8)., Conclusion: This systematic literature search revealed that current classification systems in clinical use neither include a comprehensive set of dimensions relevant to decision-making nor did they correlate with outcomes. A classification system comprising a core set of patient-related, radiological, and etiological characteristics relevant to the management of ASD is needed., (© Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2021.)

In vitro tests on the biomechanical properties of human spines are often performed using fresh frozen specimens. However, this carries the risk of pathogen transfer from specimen to the worker and the specimens can only be used for a limited amount of time. Human spinal specimens embalmed with formaldehyde carry an almost absent risk of transfer of pathogens and can be stored and used for a long time, but the tissue properties are strongly affected making this method inapplicable for biomechanical testing. In this study, a new embalming technique called Fix for Life (F4L), which claims to preserve the tissue properties, was tested. The range of motion (ROM) and stiffness of six fresh human spinal specimens was measured using a spinal motion simulator before and after F4L embalming. After F4L embalming, spinal stiffness increased in flexion-extension by 230%, in lateral bending by 284% and in axial rotation by 271%. ROM decreased by 46% in flexion-extension, 56% in lateral bending and 54% in axial rotation. In conclusion, based on this study, F4L does not maintain physiological spinal biomechanical properties, and we propose that this method should not be used for biomechanical studies. Nevertheless, the method may be an alternative to formaldehyde fixation in situations such as training and education because the effect on spinal biomechanics is less detrimental than formaldehyde and tissue color is maintained., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Conflicts of interest arising from ties between pharmaceutical industry and physicians are common and may bias research. The extent to which these ties exist among editorial board members of medical journals is not known. This study aims to determine the prevalence and financial magnitude of potential conflicts of interest among editorial board members of five leading spine journals. The editorial boards of: The Spine Journal; Spine; European Spine Journal; Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine; and Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques were extracted on January 2013 from the journals' websites. Disclosure statements were retrieved from the 2013 disclosure index of the North American Spine Society; the program of the 20th International Meeting on Advanced Spine Techniques; the program of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Scoliosis Research Society; the program of the AOSpine global spine congress; the presentations of the 2013 Annual Eurospine meeting; and the disclosure index of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Names of the editorial board members were compared with the individuals who completed a disclosure for one of these indexes. Disclosures were extracted when full names matched. Two hundred and ten (29%) of the 716 identified editorial board members reported a potential conflict of interest and 154 (22%) reported nothing to disclose. The remaining 352 (49%) editorial board members had no disclosure statement listed for one of the indexes. Eighty-nine (42%) of the 210 editorial board members with a potential conflict of interest reported a financial relationship of more than $10,000 during the prior year. This finding confirms that potential conflicts of interest exist in editorial boards which might influence the peer review process and can result in bias. Academia and medical journals in particular should be aware of this and strive to improve transparency of the review process. We emphasize recommendations that contribute to achieving this goal.

Purpose: Lumbar laminectomy affects spinal stability in shear loading. However, the effects of laminectomy on torsion biomechanics are unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of laminectomy on torsion stiffness and torsion strength of lumbar spinal segments following laminectomy and whether these biomechanical parameters are affected by disc degeneration and bone mineral density (BMD)., Methods: Ten human cadaveric lumbar spines were obtained (age 75.5, range 59-88). Disc degeneration (MRI) and BMD (DXA) were assessed. Disc degeneration was classified according to Pfirrmann and dichotomized in mild or severe. BMD was defined as high BMD (≥median BMD) or low BMD (

Both the humans as well as the quadrupedal spine have been shown to exhibit a pattern of pre-existent rotation that is similar in direction to what is found in the most common types of idiopathic scoliosis. It has been postulated that human bipedalism introduces forces to the spine that increase a tendency of the vertebrae to rotate. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of body position on vertebral rotation in vivo. Thirty asymptomatic volunteers underwent magnetic resonance imaging scanning of the spine (T2-L5) in three different body positions; upright, quadrupedal-like (on hands-and-knees) and supine. Vertebral rotation in the local transverse plane was measured according to a pre-established method and compared at different spinal levels between the three body positions. It was shown that in all three positions the mid- and lower thoracic vertebrae were predominantly rotated to the right. However, vertebral rotation was significantly less in the quadrupedal position than in both the standing upright and supine positions.

Introduction: Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) is a heterogeneous condition with lack of diagnostic clarity. Therapeutic interventions show small effects. To improve outcomes by targeting interventions it is recommended to develop a triage system to surgical and non-surgical treatments based on treatment outcomes. The objective of the current study was to develop and internally validate prognostic models based on pre-treatment patient-reported profiles that identify patients who either respond or do not respond to two frequently performed treatments (lumbar spine surgery and multidisciplinary pain management program). Methods: A consecutive cohort study in a secondary referral spine center was performed. The study followed the recommendations of the PROGRESS framework and was registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR5946). Data of forty-seven potential pre-consultation (baseline) indicators predicting ‘response’ or ‘non-response’ at one-year follow-up for the two treatments were obtained to develop and validate four multivariable logistic regression models. The source population consisted of 3,410 referred CLBP-patients. Two treatment cohorts were defined: elective ‘spine surgery’ (n = 217 [6.4%]) and multidisciplinary bio-psychosocial ‘pain management program’ (n = 171 [5.0%]). Main inclusion criteria were age ≥18, CLBP (≥6 months), and not responding to primary care treatment. The primary outcome was functional ability: ‘response’ (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] ≤22) and ‘non-response’ (ODI ≥41). Results: Baseline indicators predictive of treatment outcome were: degree of disability (all models), ≥2 previous spine surgeries, psychosocial complaints, age (onset <20 or >50), and patient expectations of treatment outcomes. The explained variances were low for the models predicting response and non-response to pain management program (R2 respectively 23% and 26%) and modest for surgery (R2 30% and 39%). The overall performance was acceptable (c-index; 0.72–0.83), the model predicting non-response to surgery performed best (R2 = 39%; c-index = 0.83). Conclusion: This study was the first to identify different patient-reported profiles that predict response to different treatments for CLBP. The model predicting ‘non-response’ to elective lumbar spine surgery performed remarkably well, suggesting that referrals of these patients to a spine surgeon could be avoided. After external validation, the patient-reported profiles could potentially enhance timely patient triage to the right secondary care specialist and improve decision-making between clinican and patient. This could lead to improved treatment outcomes, which results in a more efficient use of healthcare resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Context: Patients with adult spinal deformity suffer from disease related disability as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for which surgery can result in significant improvements.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to show the change in overall and individual components of the ODI in patients aged 60 years or older following multi-level spinal deformity surgery.Study Design: Prospective, multicenter, multi-continental, observational longitudinal cohort study PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients ≥60 years undergoing primary spinal fusion surgery of ≥5 levels for coronal, sagittal or combined deformity.Outcome Measures: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) METHODS: : Patients completed the ODI pre-operatively for baseline, then at 10 weeks, 12 months and 24 months post-operatively. ODI scores were grouped into deciles, and change was calculated with numerical score and improvement or worsening was further categorized from baseline as substantial (≥20%), marginal (≥10-<20%) or no change (within 10%).Results: Two-hundred nineteen patients met inclusion criteria for the study. The median number of spinal levels fused was 9 [Q1=5.0, Q3=12.0]. Two-year mean (95% CI) ODI improvement was 19.3% (16.7%; 21.9%; p<.001) for all age groups, with mean scores improved from a baseline of 46.3% (44.1%; 48.4%) to 41.1% (38.5%; 43.6%) at 10 weeks (p<.001), 28.1% (25.6%; 30.6%) at 12 months (p<.001), and 27.0% (24.4%; 29.5%) at 24 months (p<.001). At 2 years, 45.5% of patients showed 20% or greater improvement in ODI, 23.7% improved between 10% and 20%, 26.3% reported no change (defined as±10% from baseline), 4.5% of patients reported a worsening between 10% to 20%, and none reported worsening greater than 20%. 59.0% of patients were severely disabled (ODI >40%) pre-operatively, which decreased to 20.2% at 2 years. Significant improvement was observed across all 10 ODI items at 12 and 24 months. The largest improvements were seen in pain, walking, standing, sex life, social life and traveling.Conclusions: In this prospective, multicenter, multi-continental study of patients 60 years or older undergoing multi-level spinal deformity surgery, almost 70% of patients reported significant improvements in ODI without taking into account surgical indications, techniques or complications. Clear data is presented demonstrating the particular change from baseline for each decile of pre-operative ODI score, for each sub-score, and for each age group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]