Search

Cone-beam CT images obtained during cerebral angiography provided high-spatial-resolution characterization of the entire retrobulbar vasculature not currently feasible with other in vivo imaging techniques.

IMPORTANCE: Geriatric (aged ≥80 years) patients are historically underrepresented in cancer clinical trials. Little is known about the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in geriatric patients. These agents are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be particularly associated with morbidity in this population. OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into the clinical outcomes and safety of ICIs among geriatric patients (aged ≥80 years) with cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A Multicenter, international retrospective study of 928 geriatric patients with different tumors treated with single-agent ICIs between 2010 to 2019 from 18 academic centers in the US and Europe. Analyses were conducted from January 2021 to April 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Clinical outcomes and irAE patterns in geriatric patients treated with single-agent ICIs. RESULTS: Median (range) age of the 928 patients at ICI initiation was 83.0 (75.8-97.0) years. Most patients (806 [86.9%]) were treated with anti–programmed cell death 1 therapy. Among the full cohort, the 3 most common tumors were non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, 345 [37.2%]), melanoma (329 [35.5%]), and genitourinary (GU) tumors (153 [16.5%]). Objective response rates for patients with NSCLC, melanoma, and GU tumors were 32.2%, 39.3%, and 26.2%, respectively. Median PFS and OS, respectively, were 6.7 and 10.9 months (NSCLC), 11.1 and 30.0 months (melanoma), and 6.0 and 15.0 months (GU). Within histologically specific subgroups (NSCLC, melanoma, and GU), clinical outcomes were similar across age subgroups (aged <85 vs ≥85 years). Among all 928 patients, 383 (41.3%) experienced ≥1 irAE(s), including 113 (12.2%) that were reported to be grade (G) 3 to 4 based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 5.0). The median time to irAE onset was 9.8 weeks; 219 (57%) occurred within the first 3 months after ICI initiation. Discontinuation of treatment with ICIs owing to irAEs occurred in 137 (16.1%) patients. There was no significant difference in the rate of irAEs among patients aged younger than 85, 85 to 89, and 90 years or older. Despite the similar rate of G3 or higher irAEs, ICIs were discontinued due to irAEs more than twice as often among patients aged 90 years or older compared with patients younger than 90 years (30.9% vs 15.1%, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this international cohort study suggest that treatment with ICIs may be effective and generally well tolerated among older patients with cancer, though ICI discontinuation owing to irAEs was more frequent with increasing age.

Objective: To determine the frequency of autoimmune antibody testing in an inpatient neurology setting and its influence on immunotherapy use on an inpatient neurology service.Methods: A retrospective descriptive cohort study of patients admitted to the neurology inpatient service at a large tertiary academic medical center who had autoimmune and/or paraneoplastic antibody testing performed between 10/1/2017 and 10/1/2018. Characteristics of patients’ initial clinical presentation, antibody testing results, test timing in relation to initiating immunotherapy, and final diagnosis using consensus criteria were extracted and analyzed. Case reports of patients with positive antibody panels are presented.Results: Of 1,604 patients, 50 patients (3.1%) had an antibody panel sent. Tests resulted after an average of 17 days (range 7-27). The most common clinical presenting symptom in those with a panel sent was encephalopathy. There were 5 (10%) positive serum panels and no positive CSF panels. Only one of these 5 patients had autoimmune encephalitis and was treated with immunotherapy. Of those with negative serum and CSF panels, 15 were treated acutely with empiric immunotherapy and the remainder with supportive care. Of those treated with immunotherapy, 14/15 (93%) were treated before the panel tests resulted. Four patients who had negative panels but were empirically treated met consensus criteria for an autoimmune-mediated neurologic process.Conclusion: Our study suggests that the results of antibody testing did not influence inpatient neurologists’ decision to treat with immunotherapy as most treatments began prior to final results being available.

Study design: Retrospective comparative study.Objective: Whereas smoking has been shown to affect the fusion rates for patients undergoing an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), the relationship between smoking and health-related quality of life outcome measurements after an ACDF is less clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether smoking negatively affects patient outcomes after an ACDF for cervical degenerative pathology.Methods: Patients with tumor, trauma, infection, and previous cervical spine surgery and those with less than a year of follow-up were excluded. Smoking status was assessed by self-reported smoking history. Patient outcomes, including Neck Disability Index, Short Form 12 Mental Component Score, Short Form 12 Physical Component Score (PCS-12), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) arm pain, VAS neck pain, and pseudarthrosis rates were evaluated. Outcomes were compared between smoking groups using multiple linear and logistic regression, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI), among other factors. A Pvalue <.05 was considered significant.Results: A total of 264 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of 19.8 months, age of 53.1 years, and BMI of 29.6 kg/m2. There were 43 current, 69 former, and 152 nonsmokers in the cohort. At baseline, nonsmokers had higher PCS-12 scores than current smokers (P= .010), lower VAS neck pain than current (P= .035) and former (P= .014) smokers, as well as lower VAS arm pain than former smokers (P= .006). Postoperatively, nonsmokers had higher PCS-12 scores than both current (P= .030) and former smokers (P= .035). Smoking status was not a significant predictor of change in patient outcome in multivariate analysis.Conclusions: Whereas nonsmokers had higher function and lower pain than former or current smokers preoperatively, smoking status overall was not found to be an independent predictor of outcome scores after ACDF. This supports the notion that smoking status alone should not deter patients from undergoing ACDF for cervical degenerative pathology.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.The authors conducted a multicenter retrospective study on the outcome of programmed death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score≥50% advanced non–small cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab according to the presence/absence of brain metastases. A total of 282 patients were included, of whom 56 had brain metastases that were treated with upfront local radiation therapy in 80.3% of cases. The overall response rate was 39.2% and 44.4% in patients with and without brain metastases (P=0.48), respectively, while intracranial response rate and intracranial disease control rate were 67.5% and 85.0%, respectively. The median time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were 4.2 and 9.9 months versus 10.8 and 26.5 months for patients with and without brain metastases (P=0.06 and 0.05, respectively). Drug discontinuation rate due to treatment-related adverse events was 10.7% and 10.2% in patients with and without brain metastases, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that baseline steroids was an independent predictor for a worse OS (P<0.001), while performance status (PS)≥2 was an independent predictor for a poorer TTF (P<0.001) and OS (P<0.001). In patients with brain metastases, only PS ≥2 was predicted for a worse TTF (P=0.02) and OS (P=0.03). Pembrolizumab has activity against brain metastases from non–small cell lung cancers with programmed death-ligand 1≥50%. Presence of brain metastases per se does not appear to be prognostic, and PS ≥2 seems to be the only factor associated with a worse outcome in patients with brain metastases.

The management of acute spinal cord injury requires a multidisciplinary approach to maximize patient outcomes and potential. Treatment of this injury involves both surgical and medical intervention. Medical intervention in acute spinal cord injury is aimed at decreasing the neurotoxic environment that occurs as part of the secondary injury. New neuroregenerative therapies are being developed.

Injuries to the spine comprise a high percentage of workplace injuries. Spine surgeons’ evaluation of injured workers requires attention to facts specific to worker’s compensation claims including whether the injury occurred in the scope of employment, whether a work incident was causally related to the injury, and whether the injury contributed to a significant degree to the patient’s overall medical condition. An injured worker’s compensation is subject to state-specific guidelines and is largely dependent on the degree of disability and whether the disability is temporary or permanent. Here, we review the background, organization, and key terms used in the worker’s compensation system.

Although patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide valuable insight into the effectiveness of spine surgery, there still remain limitations on measuring outcomes in this manner. Among other deficiencies, PROMs do not always correlate with more objective measures of surgery success. Wearable technology, such as pedometers, tri-axis accelerometer, or wearable cameras, may allow physicians to track patient progress following spine surgery more objectively. Recently, there has been an emphasis on using wearable devices to measure physical activity and limb and spine function. Wearable devices could play an important role as a supplement to PROMs, although they might have to be substantiated through adequate controlled studies to identify normative data for patients presenting with common spine disorders. This review will detail the current state of wearable technology applications in spine surgery and its direction as its utilization expands.

In July of 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 7 focused on wound care, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.

In July 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 15 focused on the use of imaging, tissue sampling, and biomarkers in spine surgery, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.

In July of 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 11 focused on risk factors and prevention questions in spine surgery, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.

In July of 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA was held to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 8 questions focused on general principles in spine surgery, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.

In July of 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA was held to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 9 focused on implants questions in spine surgery, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.

There are vast numbers of evidenced-based clinical trials produced each year, making it increasingly difficult to stay up to date with new treatments and protocols designed to provide the most optimal patient care. A physician’s ability to combine existing knowledge with new data is limited by a basic understanding of the background statistics used in these studies. Our goal is to not only define the basic statistics commonly used in clinical trials but to also ensure that practitioners are able to have a working understanding of these statistical measurements to effectively make the most informed and efficacious decisions regarding patient management. On the basis of the recent growth of empirical spine literature, it is becoming more important for spine surgeons to have the basic statistical background necessary to efficiently interpret new data, which may affect clinical decision making regarding patient care.

Because of the rising health care costs in the United States, there has been a focus on value-based care and improving the cost-effectiveness of surgical procedures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can not only give physicians and health care providers immediate feedback on the well-being of the patients but also be used to assess health and determine outcomes for surgical research purposes. Recently, PROMs have become a prominent tool to assess the cost-effectiveness of spine surgery by calculating the improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of a procedure per QALY gained is an essential metric to determine cost-effectiveness in universal health care systems. Common patient-reported outcome questionnaires to calculate QALY include the EuroQol-5 dimensions, the SF-36, and the SF-12. On the basis of the health-related quality of life outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of various spine surgeries can be determined, such as cervical fusions, lumbar fusions, microdiscectomies. As the United States attempts to reduce costs and emphasize value-based care, PROMs may serve a critical role in spine surgery moving forward. In addition, PROM-driven QALYs may be used to analyze novel spine surgical techniques for value-based improvements.

In July of 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA was held to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 17 focused on the use of antibiotics in spine surgery, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.