Search

OBJECTIVE: To develop a guideline to help guide healthcare professionals participate effectively in the design, construction, and occupancy of a new or renovated intensive care unit. PARTICIPANTS: A group of multidisciplinary professionals, designers, and architects with expertise in critical care, under the direction of the American College of Critical Care Medicine, met over several years, reviewed the available literature, and collated their expert opinions on recommendations for the optimal design of an intensive care unit. SCOPE: The design of a new or renovated intensive care unit is frequently a once- or twice-in-a-lifetime occurrence for most critical care professionals. Healthcare architects have experience in this process that most healthcare professionals do not. While there are regulatory documents, such as the Guidelines for the Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities, these represent minimal guidelines. The intent was to develop recommendations for a more optimal approach for a healing environment. DATA SOURCES AND SYNTHESIS: Relevant literature was accessed and reviewed, and expert opinion was sought from the committee members and outside experts. Evidence-based architecture is just in its beginning, which made the grading of literature difficult, and so it was not attempted. The previous designs of the winners of the American Institute of Architects, American Association of Critical Care Nurses, and Society of Critical Care Medicine Intensive Care Unit Design Award were used as a reference. Collaboratively and meeting repeatedly, both in person and by teleconference, the task force met to construct these recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for the design of intensive care units, expanding on regulatory guidelines and providing the best possible healing environment, and an efficient and cost-effective workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected, multicenter database. OBJECTIVE: To assess rates of new neurologic deficit (NND) associated with spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: NND is a potential complication of spine surgery, but previously reported rates are often limited by small sample size and single-surgeon experiences. METHODS: The Scoliosis Research Society morbidity and mortality database was queried for spinal surgery cases complicated by NND from 2004 to 2007, including nerve root deficit (NRD), cauda equina deficit (CED), and spinal cord deficit (SCD). Use of neuromonitoring was assessed. Recovery was stratified as complete, partial, or none. Rates of NND were stratified based on diagnosis, age (pediatric < 21; adult >= 21), and surgical parameters. RESULTS: Of the 108,419 cases reported, NND was documented for 1064 (1.0%), including 662 NRDs, 74 CEDs, and 293 SCDs (deficit not specified for 35 cases). Rates of NND were calculated on the basis of diagnosis. Revision cases had a 41% higher rate of NND (1.25%) compared with primary cases (0.89%; P < 0.001). Pediatric cases had a 59% higher rate of NND (1.32%) compared with adult cases (0.83%; P < 0.001). The rate of NND for cases with implants was more than twice that for cases without implants (1.15% vs. 0.52%, P < 0.001). Neuromonitoring was used for 65% of cases, and for cases with new NRD, CED, and SCD, changes in neuromonitoring were reported in 11%, 8%, and 40%, respectively. The respective percentages of no recovery, partial, and complete recovery for NRD were 4.7%, 46.8%, and 47.1%, respectively; for CED were 9.6%, 45.2%, and 45.2%, respectively; and for SCD were 10.6%, 43%, and 45.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that, even among skilled spinal deformity surgeons, new neurologic deficits are inherent potential complications of spine surgery. These data provide general benchmark rates for NND with spine surgery as a basis for patient counseling and for ongoing efforts to improve safety of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Our understanding of the relationship between sagittal alignment and mechanical complications is evolving. In normal spines, the L1-pelvic angle (L1PA) accounts for the magnitude and distribution of lordosis and is strongly associated with pelvic incidence (PI), and the T4-pelvic angle (T4PA) is within 4° of the L1PA. We aimed to examine the clinical implications of realignment to a normal L1PA and T4-L1PA mismatch., Methods: A prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity registry was queried for patients who underwent fixation from the T1-T5 region to the sacrum and had 2-year radiographic follow-up. Normal sagittal alignment was defined as previously described for normal spines: L1PA = PI × 0.5 - 21°, and T4-L1PA mismatch = 0°. Mechanical failure was defined as severe proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), displaced rod fracture, or reoperation for junctional failure, pseudarthrosis, or rod fracture within 2 years. Multivariable nonlinear logistic regression was used to define target ranges for L1PA and T4-L1PA mismatch that minimized the risk of mechanical failure. The relationship between changes in T4PA and changes in global sagittal alignment according to the C2-pelvic angle (C2PA) was determined using linear regression. Lastly, multivariable regression was used to assess associations between initial postoperative C2PA and patient-reported outcomes at 1 year, adjusting for preoperative scores and age., Results: The median age of the 247 included patients was 64 years (interquartile range, 57 to 69 years), and 202 (82%) were female. Deviation from a normal L1PA or T4-L1PA mismatch in either direction was associated with a significantly higher risk of mechanical failure, independent of age. Risk was minimized with an L1PA of PI × 0.5 - (19° ± 2°) and T4-L1PA mismatch between -3° and +1°. Changes in T4PA and in C2PA at the time of final follow-up were strongly associated (r2 = 0.96). Higher postoperative C2PA was independently associated with more disability, more pain, and worse self-image at 1 year., Conclusions: We defined sagittal alignment targets using L1PA (relative to PI) and the T4-L1PA mismatch, which are both directly modifiable during surgery. In patients undergoing long fusion to the sacrum, realignment based on these targets may lead to fewer mechanical failures., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The International Spine Study Group (ISSG) is funded through research grants from NuVasive, SI-Bone, DePuy Synthes Spine, K2M, Stryker, Biomet, AlloSource, and Orthofix, and individual donations. The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/I191)., (Copyright © 2024 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.)

Objective: Correction of mild flexible cervical deformity (CD) via the posterior approach has been described with and without the use of posterior osteotomies (POs), despite a lack of clarity regarding their necessity or risks. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the use of POs when correcting mild flexible CD leads to improved clinical or radiographic outcomes, as well as defining the relative risks in utilizing them., Methods: A prospective multicenter registry of operative CD patients was analyzed. Inclusion criteria were cervical kyphosis > 10°, cervical scoliosis > 10°, cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) > 4 cm, or chin-brow vertical angle > 25°. Mild deformity was defined by a cSVA of 3-5 cm and/or kyphosis < 15°. Flexibility was defined by a C2-7 angular change > 5° on preoperative flexion/extension radiographs. Patients who received a posterior column osteotomy (PCO) (Ames grades 1 and 2) were compared with patients who did not undergo a PCO (noPCO) as well as those who underwent a three-column osteotomy (3CO) (Ames grades 3-6)., Results: Ninety-five patients (33 PCO, 49 noPCO, 13 3CO) met the inclusion criteria. Both the number of levels fused (9.2 vs 7.7, p = 0.001) and the estimated blood loss (EBL) (1027 vs 486 mL, p = 0.012) were higher in the PCO cohort. Patients in the noPCO group were more likely to have a cervical apex of kyphosis (71.1%, p = 0.046), while those undergoing 3COs were more likely to have a thoracic apex (58.3%, p = 0.005). Preoperative cSVA (PCO vs noPCO: 45.4 vs 37.9 cm, p = 0.084), T1 slope (32.5° vs 29.6°, p = 0.376), C2-7 lordosis (-8.9° vs -9.2°, p = 0.942), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score (13.4 vs 13.5, p = 0.854) were similar; however, both Neck Disability Index (NDI) (55.6 vs 42, p = 0.002) and numeric rating scale (NRS) neck (7.2 vs 5.8, p = 0.028) scores were higher in the PCO group before surgery. When adjusting for the use of an anterior approach, there was no significant difference in 1-year postoperative cSVA (35.7 and 35.6 cm, respectively; p = 0.969), C2-7 lordosis (13.7° and 10.1°, respectively; p = 0.393), and patient-reported outcome measures (NRS, NDI, and mJOA) between the PCO and noPCO groups. Two-year radiographic outcomes were largely similar, except for C2 slope, which was higher in the PCO group (29.1° vs 18°, p = 0.026). The overall complication rates progressively increased with more complex osteotomy use (noPCO 68.8% vs PCO 71.9% vs 3CO 75%) but did not reach significance (p = 0.063)., Conclusions: The use of POs for mild flexible adult CD may not be necessary to achieve desirable radiographic correction. They are associated with greater EBL and fusion burden. Further studies are needed to fully delineate the risks of adverse events for various types of osteotomies.

Purpose: To evaluate the variability in intraoperative fluid management during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery, and analyze the association with complications, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, and length of hospital stay (LOS)., Methods: Multicenter comparative cohort study. Patients ≥ 18 years old and with ASD were included. Intraoperative intravenous (IV) fluid data were collected including: crystalloids, colloids, crystalloid/colloid ratio (C/C), total IV fluid (tIVF, ml), normalized total IV fluid (nIVF, ml/kg/h), input/output ratio (IOR), input-output difference (IOD), and normalized input-output difference (nIOD, ml/kg/h). Data from different centers were compared for variability analysis, and fluid parameters were analyzed for possible associations with the outcomes., Results: Seven hundred ninety-eight patients with a median age of 65.2 were included. Among different surgical centers, tIVF, nIVF, and C/C showed significant variation (p < 0.001 for each) with differences of 4.8-fold, 3.7-fold, and 4.9-fold, respectively. Two hundred ninety-two (36.6%) patients experienced at least one in-hospital complication, and ninety-two (11.5%) were IV fluid related. Univariate analysis showed significant relations for: LOS and tIVF (ρ = 0.221, p < 0.001), IOD (ρ = 0.115, p = 0.001) and IOR (ρ = -0.138, p < 0.001); IV fluid-related complications and tIVF (p = 0.049); ICU stay and tIVF, nIVF, IOD and nIOD (p < 0.001 each); extended ICU stay and tIVF (p < 0.001), nIVF (p = 0.010) and IOD (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis controlling for confounders showed significant relations for: LOS and tIVF (p < 0.001) and nIVF (p = 0.003); ICU stay and IOR (p = 0.002), extended ICU stay and tIVF (p = 0.004)., Conclusion: Significant variability and lack of standardization in intraoperative IV fluid management exists between different surgical centers. Excessive fluid administration was found to be correlated with negative outcomes., Level of Evidence: III., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Background: Severe sagittal plane deformity with loss of L4-S1 lordosis is disabling and can be improved through various surgical techniques. However, data are limited on the differing ability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to achieve alignment goals in severely malaligned patients., Methods: Severe adult spinal deformity patients with preoperative PI-LL >20°, L4-S1 lordosis <30°, and full body radiographs and PROMs at baseline and 6-week postoperative visit were included. Patients were grouped into ALIF (1-2 level ALIF at L4-S1), PSO (L4/L5 PSO), and TLIF (1-2 level TLIF at L4-S1). Comparative analyses were performed on demographics, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs., Results: Among the 96 included patients, 40 underwent ALIF, 27 underwent PSO, and 29 underwent TLIF. At baseline, cohorts had comparable age, sex, race, Edmonton frailty scores, and radiographic spinopelvic parameters (P > 0.05). However, PSO was performed more often in revision cases (P < 0.001). Following surgery, L4-S1 lordosis correction (P = 0.001) was comparable among ALIF and PSO patients and caudal lordotic apex migration (P = 0.044) was highest among ALIF patients. PSO patients had higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (P < 0.001) and motor deficits (P = 0.049), and in-hospital ICU admission (P = 0.022) and blood products given (P = 0.004), but were otherwise comparable in terms of length of stay, blood transfusion given, and postoperative admission to rehab. Likewise, 90-day postoperative complication profiles and 6-week PROMs were comparable as well., Conclusions: ALIF can restore L4-S1 sagittal alignment as powerfully as PSO, with fewer intraoperative and in-hospital complications. When feasible, ALIF is a suitable alternative to PSO and likely superior to TLIF for correcting L4-S1 lordosis among patients with severe sagittal malalignment., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data., Objective: Evaluate the impact of correcting normative segmental lordosis values on postoperative outcomes., Background: Restoring lumbar lordosis magnitude is crucial in adult spinal deformity surgery, but the optimal location and segmental distribution remain unclear., Patients and Methods: Patients were grouped based on offset to normative segmental lordosis values, extracted from recent publications. Matched patients were within 10% of the cohort's mean offset, less than or over 10% were undercorrected and overcorrected. Surgical technique, patient-reported outcome measures, and surgical complications were compared across groups at baseline and two years., Results: In total, 510 patients with a mean age of 64.6, a mean Charlson comorbidity index 2.08, and a mean follow-up of 25 months. L4-5 was least likely to be matched (19.1%), while L4-S1 was the most likely (24.3%). More patients were overcorrected at proximal levels (T10-L2; undercorrected, U: 32.2% vs. matched, M: 21.7% vs. overcorrected, O: 46.1%) and undercorrected at distal levels (L4-S1: U: 39.0% vs. M: 24.3% vs. O: 36.8%). Postoperative Oswestry disability index was comparable across correction groups at all spinal levels except at L4-S1 and T10-L2/L4-S1, where overcorrected patients and matched were better than undercorrected (U: 32.1 vs. M: 25.4 vs. O: 26.5, P =0.005; U: 36.2 vs. M: 24.2 vs. O: 26.8, P =0.001; respectively). Patients overcorrected at T10-L2 experienced higher rates of proximal junctional failure (U: 16.0% vs. M: 15.6% vs. O: 32.8%, P <0.001) and had greater posterior inclination of the upper instrumented vertebrae (U: -9.2±9.4° vs. M: -9.6±9.1° vs. O: -12.2±10.0°, P <0.001), whereas undercorrection at these levels led to higher rates of revision for implant failure (U: 14.2% vs. M: 7.3% vs. O: 6.4%, P =0.025)., Conclusions: Patients undergoing fusion for adult spinal deformity suffer higher rates of proximal junctional failure with overcorrection and increased rates of implant failure with undercorrection based on normative segmental lordosis., Level of Evidence: Level IV., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Multicenter, prospective cohort., Objectives: Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved., Methods: ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs., Results: The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning ( P < .001), lower baseline GCA ( P = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO ( P = .037)., Conclusions: Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: reports consultancy fees from ZimVie, NuVasive, Cerapedics, and Carlsmed; receives royalties from Zimmer Biomet and Nuvasive; holds stock in Alphatec and NuVasive; receives research funding to his institution from DePuy Synthes, International Spine Study Group Foundation (ISSGF), and AOSpine; receives fellowship grant funding to his institution from AOSpine; serves on the Executive Committee of the ISSGF; and serves on the editorial boards of Journal of Neurosurgery Spine, Neurosurgery, Operative Neurosurgery, and Spine Deformity. is a consultant for ISSGF. is a consultant for Globus Medical and Alphatec; receives royalties from NuVasive; receives research support from ISSG; receives honoraria from DePuy Synthes, Stryker, and Implanet; and has leadership roles in ISSG and the Scoliosis Research Society. is a consultant for DePuy Synthes, Stryker, and Medtronic, SI Bone, and Agnovos; receives honoraria and a fellowship grant paid to an institution from AO Spine; and has leadership roles with AOSpine. Dr. Kim receives royalties from Zimmer Biomet, Acuity Surgical, and K2M-Stryker; is a consultant for NuVasive; receives research support from the ISSGF; is on advisory boards for Vivex Biology and Aspen Medical; and has other financial or non-financial interests with AOSpine. is a consultant for Medtronic, SpineWave, Terumo, and Royal Biologics; receives honoraria from Cervical Spine Research Society, Globus Medical, and Zimmer; serves on the editorial or governing board for Spine journal; and receives research support from Allosource. receives research support from Stryker, Biom’Up, Pfizer, the Alan L. & Jacqueline B. Stuart Spine Center, National Health Foundation, Cerapedics, Empirical Spine, Inc., TSRH, and Scoliosis Research Society; receives royalties from Acuity, Medtronic, and NuVasive; is a consultant for Acuity, DePuy, Medtronic, NuVasive, FYR Medical, and Stryker; receives honoraria from Baxter, Broadwater, NASS, and Pacira Pharmaceuticals; holds patents with Medtronic; participates on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with Medtronic; has a leadership role in the National Spine Health Foundation; owns stock/stock options in Cingulate Therapeutics and FYR Medical; is an employee of Norton Healthcare, Inc.; and serves as a journal reviewer for Global Spine Journal, Spine Deformity, and The Spine Journal. and receives research/fellowship support from NuVasive, Medtronic, SeaSpine, SI Bone, and AONA; receives royalties from SI Bone, Nuvasive, Seaspine, Aesculap, and Globus Medical; is a consultant for Aesculap, NuVasive, SI Bone, SeaSpine, Spinal Elements, Biedermann-Motech, Silony, Neo Medical, Depuy, Medtronic, Carevature, and ControlRad; has received payment/honoraria from Radius; has patents with Globus, Spine Innovation, and SI Bone; has leadership role with San Diego Spine Foundation; and has stock/stock options with Alphatec, Nuvasive, Seaspine, and SI Bone. receives grants/research support from Medtronic and Orthofix; receives royalties from Spineart and Stryker; is a consultant for Stryker Spine, Spineart, and Medtronic; and has received payment for expert testimony from multiple law firms. is a consultant for NuVasive, Viseon, Carlsmed, SI Bone, and SeaSpine; holds patents with Stryker, NuVasive, and SeaSpine; has leadership roles with Global Spine Outreach and San Diego Spine Foundation; has stock or stock options with Alphatec, SeaSpine, and NuVasive; and receives royalties from NuVasive and K2M/Stryker. is a consultant for Globus, NuVasive, and Medtronic; receives royalties from Altus; receives grants from Medtronic; and has stock or stock options from One Point Surgical. Dr. receives travel expenses to teach at the ISSG-Medtronic Spine Course for fellows and residents; and has a leadership role with the Canadian Spine Society. receives grants/research support from Prosydiuan and NuVasive. receives honoraria from Wolters Kluwer; received support for travel from AO Spine; has leadership roles with Scoliosis Research Society and AO Spine; and receives research support from the Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation and San Diego Spine Foundation. is a consultant for Stryker Spine; receives grant/research support from Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, and AOSpine; receives honoraria from Medtronic, Stryker Spine, DePuy Synthes, Scoliosis Research Society, and AOSpine; receives support for travel from AO Spine and Scoliosis Research Society; and is on an advisory board/panel for AOSpine Research Commission and Scoliosis Research Society Research Task Force; and is Chair of the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Deformity. owns stock in J&J; is a consultant for DePuy, Medtronic, Globus; receives royalties from Innomed, DePuy, and Globus; receives honoraria from AO Spine, Wright State, and LSU; serves on the board of directors of the Scoliosis Research Society; receives travel reimbursements from DePuy, Globus, Scoliosis Research Society; and has a voluntary relationship with the National Spine Health Foundation. is a consultant for MSD, Zimmer Biomet, and Mainstay Medical; receives royalties from Zimmer Biomet, Medtronic, and Stryker; owns stock in VFT Solutions and SeaSpine; is an executive committee member of ISSG. receives royalties from DePuy Spine, Globus, and Blue Ocean Spine; is a consultant for DePuy Spine, Globus, and Blue Ocean Spine; has a leadership role in the Scoliosis Research Society and International Spine Study Group Foundation; has stock or stock options in Progenerative Medical; and has received research support from DePuy Spine and ISSGF. receives royalties from Stryker, Biomet Zimmer Spine, DePuy Synthes, NuVasive, Next Orthosurgical, K2M, and Medicrea; is a consultant for DePuy Synthes, Medtronic, Medicrea, K2M, Agada Medical, and Carlsmed; receives research support from Titan Spine, DePuy Synthes, and ISSG; serves on the editorial board of Operative Neurosurgery; receives grant funding from SRS; serves on the executive committee of ISSG; is the director of Global Spinal Analytics; and is the safety and value committee chair of SRS. is a consultant for Medtronic, ABRYX, and Acuity Surgical; receives research/grant support from AOSpine, Scoliosis Research Society, and Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation; receives royalties from Medtronic and Acuity Surgical; and receives other financial support from Broadwater, AOSpine, and Scoliosis Research Society. is a consultant for NuVasive, SI Bone, and Proprio; owns stock in NuVasive; holds patents with NuVasive; receives fellowship funding from Globus, Medtronic, and NuVasive; and receives royalties from NuVasive, Medtronic, and SI Bone; has leadership roles with SRS and CSRS; and receives study-related clinical or research support from DePuy Synthes and ISSGF. is a consultant for Zimmer Biomet, NuVasive, Cerapedics, Carlsmed, SeaSpine, and DePuy Synthes; owns stock in Alphatec and NuVasive; receives study-related clinical or research support from DePuy Synthes and ISSGF; receives non–study-related clinical or research support from DePuy Synthes, ISSGF, and AO Spine; receives royalties from Zimmer Biomet and NuVasive; and receives fellowship support from AO Spine. is a consultant for Alphatec, Stryker, and MiRus; receives honoraria from Stryker; holds patents with Stryker; receives study-related clinical or research support from Medtronic, Globus, NuVasive, Stryker, Carlsmed, and SI Bone; receives non–study-related clinical or research support from DePuy Synthes; and receives royalties from Stryker and NuVasive. report no conflicts of interest.

Background and Objectives: Nearly 30% of older adults presenting with isolated spine fractures will die within 1 year. Attempts to ameliorate this alarming statistic are hindered by our inability to identify relevant risk factors. The primary objective of this study was to develop a prediction model that identifies feasible targets to limit 1-year mortality., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 703 older adults (65 years or older) admitted to a level I trauma center with isolated spine fractures, without neural deficit, from January 2013 to January 2018. Multivariable analysis was used to select for independently significant patient demographics, frailty variables, injury metrics, and management decisions to incorporate into distinct logistic regression models predicting 1-year mortality. Variables were considered significant, if P < .05., Results: Of the 703 older adults, 199 (28.3%) died after hospital discharge, but within 1 year of index trauma. Risk Analysis Index (RAI; odds ratio [OR]: 1.116; 95% CI: 1.087-1.149; P < .001) and ambulation requiring a cane (OR: 2.601; 95% CI: 1.151-5.799; P = .02) or walker (OR: 4.942; 95% CI: 2.698-9.196; P < .001), ie, frailty variables, were associated with increased odds of 1-year mortality. Spine trauma scales were not associated with 1-year mortality. Longer hospital stays (OR: 1.112; 95% CI: 1.034-1.196; P = .004) and nursing home discharge (OR: 3.881; 95% CI: 2.070-7.378; P < .001) were associated with increased odds, while discharge to rehab (OR: 0.361; 95% CI: 0.155-0.799; P = .014) decreased 1-year mortality odds. A "preinjury" regression model incorporating Risk Analysis Index and ambulation status resulted in an area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC) of 0.914 (95% CI: 0.863-0.965). A "postinjury" model incorporating Glasgow Coma Scale, hospital stay duration, and discharge disposition resulted in AUROCC of 0.746 (95% CI: 0.642-0.849). Combining elements of the preinjury and postinjury models into an "integrated model" produced an AUROCC of 0.908 (95% CI: 0.852-0.965)., Conclusion: Preinjury frailty measures are most strongly associated with 1-year mortality outcomes in older adults with isolated spine fractures. Incorporating injury metrics or management decisions did not enhance predictive accuracy. Further work is needed to understand how targeting frailty may reduce mortality., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.)

Background: Spinal cord hypoperfusion undermines clinical recovery in acute traumatic spinal cord injuries. New guidelines suggest cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage is an important strategy for preventing spinal cord hypoperfusion in the acute post-injury phase., Methods: This study included participants presenting to a single level 1 trauma center between 2018 and 2022 with cervical or thoracic traumatic spinal cord injury severity grade A-C, as evaluated by the American spinal injury association impairment scale (AIS). The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of two CSF drainage protocols in preventing spinal cord hypoperfusion; 1) draining CSF only when spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP) drops below 65 mmHg (i.e. reactive) versus 2) empiric CSF drainage of 5-10 mL every hour. Intrathecal pressure, spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and vasopressor utilization were compared using univariate T-test statistical analysis., Results: While there was no difference in the incidence of sub-optimal SCPP (<65 mmHg; p = 0.1658), reactively drained participants were more likely to exhibit critical hypoperfusion (<50 mmHg; p = 0.0030) despite also having lower average intrathecal pressures (p < 0.001). There were no differences in average SCPP, mean arterial pressure (MAP), or vasopressor utilization between the two groups (p > 0.05)., Conclusions: Empiric (vs reactive) CSF drainage resulted in fewer incidences of critical spinal cord hypoperfusion for patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injuries., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Dr. Nitin Agarwal receives royalties from Thieme Medical Publishers and Springer International Publishing. The rest of the authors have no interests conflicting with the material presented herein., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Proper documentation is essential for patient care. The popularity of artificial intelligence (AI) offers the potential for improvements in neurosurgical note-writing. The study aimed to assess how AI can optimize documentation in neurosurgical procedures., Methods: Thirty-six notes were included. All identifiable data were removed. Essential information, such as perioperative data and diagnosis, was sourced from these notes. ChatGPT 4.0 was trained to draft notes from surgical vignettes using each surgeon's note template. One hundred forty-four surveys, with a surgeon or AI note, were shared with three surgeons to evaluate accuracy, content, and organization using a five-point scale. Accuracy was the factual correctness. Content was the comprehensiveness. Organization was the arrangement of the note. Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) scores quantified each note's readability., Results: The mean AI accuracy (4.44) was not different from the mean surgeon accuracy (4.33, p = 0.512). The mean AI content (3.73) was lower than the mean surgeon content (4.42, p < 0.001). The mean AI organization (4.54) was greater than the mean surgeon organization (4.24, p = 0.064). The mean AI note's FKGL (13.13) was greater than the mean surgeon FKGL (9.99, p <0.001). The mean AI FRE (21.42) was lower than the mean surgeon FRE (41.70, p <0.001)., Conclusion: AI notes were on par with surgeon notes in accuracy and organization, but lacked in content. Additionally, AI notes utilized language at an advanced reading level. These findings underscore the potential for ChatGPT to enhance the efficiency of neurosurgery documentation., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with sagittal plane deformity (N) or structural lumbar/thoraco-lumbar (TL) curves can be treated with fusions stopping at the TL junction or extending to the upper thoracic (UT) spine. This study evaluates the impact on cost/cumulative quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in patients treated with TL vs UT fusion., Methods: ASD patients with > 4-level fusion and 2-year follow-up were included. Index and total episode-of-care costs were estimated using average itemized direct costs obtained from hospital records. Cumulative QALY gained were calculated from preoperative to 2-year postoperative change in Short Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D) scores. The TL and UT groups comprised patients with upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) at T9-T12 and T2-T5, respectively., Results: Of 566 patients with type N or L curves, mean age was 63.2 ± 12.1 years, 72% were female and 93% Caucasians. Patients in the TL group had better sagittal vertical axis (7.3 ± 6.9 vs. 9.2 ± 8.1 cm, p = 0.01), lower surgical invasiveness (- 30; p < 0.001), and shorter OR time (- 35 min; p = 0.01). Index and total costs were 20% lower in the TL than in the UT group (p < 0.001). Cost/QALY was 65% lower (492,174.6 vs. 963,391.4), and 2-year QALY gain was 40% higher, in the TL than UT group (0.15 vs. 0.10; p = 0.02). Multivariate model showed TL fusions had lower total cost (p = 0.001) and higher QALY gain (p = 0.03) than UT fusions., Conclusion: In Schwab type N or L curves, TL fusions showed lower 2-year cost and improved QALY gain without increased reoperation rates or length of stay than UT fusions., Level of Evidence: III., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Background and Objectives: The "July Effect" hypothesizes increased morbidity and mortality after the addition of inexperienced physicians at the beginning of an academic year. However, the impact of newer members on neurosurgical teams managing patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) has yet to be examined. This study conducted a nationwide analysis to evaluate the existence of the "July Effect" in the setting of patients with TBI., Methods: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Central Distributor's National Inpatient Sample data set was queried for patients with TBI using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes. Discharges were included for diagnoses of traumatic epidural, subdural, or subarachnoid hemorrhages. Only patients treated at teaching hospitals were included to ensure resident involvement in care. Patients were grouped into July admission and non-July admission cohorts. A subgroup of patients with neurotrauma undergoing any form of cranial surgery was created. Perioperative variables were recorded. Rates of different complications were assayed. Groups were compared using χ2 tests (qualitative variables) and t-tests or Mann-Whitney U-tests (quantitative variables). Logistic regression was used for binary variables. Gamma log-linked regression was used for continuous variables., Results: The National Inpatient Sample database yielded a weighted average of 3 160 452 patients, of which 312 863 (9.9%) underwent surgical management. Patients admitted to the hospital in July had a 5% decreased likelihood of death (P = .027), and a 5.83% decreased likelihood of developing a complication (P < .001) compared with other months of the year. July admittance to a hospital showed no significant impact on mean length of stay (P = .392) or routine discharge (P = .147). Among patients with TBI who received surgical intervention, July admittance did not significantly affect the likelihood of death (P = .053), developing a complication (P = .477), routine discharge (P = .986), or mean length of stay (P = .385)., Conclusion: The findings suggested that there is no "July Effect" on patients with TBI treated at teaching hospitals in the United States., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is common in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Limited data exist on the prevalence of hip OA in patients with ASD, or on its impact on baseline and postoperative alignment and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Therefore, this paper will assess the prevalence and impact of hip OA on alignment and PROMs., Methods: Patients with ASD who underwent L1-pelvis or longer fusions were included. Two independent reviewers graded hip OA with the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification and stratified it by severity into non-severe (KL grade 1 or 2) and severe (KL grade 3 or 4). Radiographic parameters and PROMs were compared among 3 patient groups: Hip-Spine (hip KL grade 3 or 4 bilaterally), Unilateral (UL)-Hip (hip KL grade 3 or 4 unilaterally), or Spine (hip KL grade 1 or 2 bilaterally)., Results: Of 520 patients with ASD who met inclusion criteria for an OA prevalence analysis, 34% (177 of 520) had severe bilateral hip OA and unilateral or bilateral hip arthroplasty had been performed in 8.7% (45 of 520). A subset of 165 patients had all data components and were examined: 68 Hip-Spine, 32 UL-Hip, and 65 Spine. Hip-Spine patients were older (67.9 ± 9.5 years, versus 59.6 ± 10.1 years for Spine and 65.8 ± 7.5 years for UL-Hip; p < 0.001) and had a higher frailty index (4.3 ± 2.6, versus 2.7 ± 2.0 for UL-Hip and 2.9 ± 2.0 for Spine; p < 0.001). At 1 year, the groups had similar lumbar lordosis, yet the Hip-Spine patients had a worse sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) measurement (45.9 ± 45.5 mm, versus 25.1 ± 37.1 mm for UL-Hip and 19.0 ± 39.3 mm for Spine; p = 0.001). Hip-Spine patients also had worse Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Summary scores at baseline (25.7 ± 9.3, versus 28.7 ± 9.8 for UL-Hip and 31.3 ± 10.5 for Spine; p = 0.005) and 1 year postoperatively (34.5 ± 11.4, versus 40.3 ± 10.4 for UL-Hip and 40.1 ± 10.9 for Spine; p = 0.006)., Conclusions: This study of operatively treated ASD revealed that 1 in 3 patients had severe hip OA bilaterally. Such patients with severe bilateral hip OA had worse baseline SVA and PROMs that persisted 1 year following ASD surgery, despite correction of lordosis., Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence., Competing Interests: Disclosure: Funding for this study was received from DePuy Synthes Spine, NuVasive, and K2/Stryker. In addition, the International Spine Study Group reports grants to the foundation from Medtronic, Globus, Stryker, SI Bone, and Carlsmed. The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/H962)., (Copyright © 2024 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.)

Purpose: Operative treatment of adult spinal deformity (ASD) has been shown to improve patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Selection of the uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) in either the upper thoracic (UT) or lower thoracic (LT) spine is a pivotal decision with effects on operative and postoperative outcomes. This review overviews the multifaceted decision-making process for UIV selection in ASD correction., Methods: PubMed was queried for articles using the keywords "uppermost instrumented vertebra", "upper thoracic", "lower thoracic", and "adult spinal deformity"., Results: Optimization of UIV selection may lead to superior deformity correction, better patient-reported outcomes, and lower risk of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF). Patient alignment characteristics, including preoperative thoracic kyphosis, coronal deformity, and the magnitude of sagittal correction influence surgical decision-making when selecting a UIV, while comorbidities such as poor body mass index, osteoporosis, and neuromuscular pathology should also be taken in to account. Additionally, surgeon experience and resources available to the hospital may also play a role in this decision. Currently, it is incompletely understood whether postoperative HRQOLs, functional and radiographic outcomes, and complications after surgery differ between selection of the UIV in either the UT or LT spine., Conclusion: The correct selection of the UIV in surgical planning is a challenging task, which requires attention to preoperative alignment, patient comorbidities, clinical characteristics, available resources, and surgeon-specific factors such as experience., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Study Design: A retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected multicenter adult spinal deformity (ASD) database., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare staged procedures to same-day interventions and identify the optimal time interval between staged surgeries for the treatment of ASD., Background: Surgical intervention for ASD is an invasive and complex procedure that surgeons often elect to perform on different days (staging). Yet, there remains a paucity of literature on the timing and effects of the interval between stages., Materials and Methods: ASD patients with 2-year data undergoing an anterior/posterior (A/P) fusion to the ilium were included. Propensity score matching was performed for the number of levels fused, number of interbody devices, surgical approaches, number of osteotomies/three-column osteotomy, frailty, Oswestry Disability Index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, revisions, sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis, and upper instrumented vertebrae to create balanced cohorts of same-day and staged surgical patients. Staged patients were stratified by intervening time-period between surgeries, using quartiles., Results: A total of 176 propensity score-matched patients were included. The median interval between A/P staged procedures was 3 days. Staged patients had greater operative time and lower intensive care unit stays postoperatively ( P <0.05). At 2 years, staged compared with same-day showed a greater improvement in T1 slope-cervical lordosis, C2 sacral slope, and SRS-Schwab sagittal vertical axis ( P <0.05). Staged patients had higher rates of minimal clinically important difference for 1-year SRS-Appearance and 2-year Physical Component Summary scores. Assessing different intervals of staging, patients at the 75th percentile interval showed greater improvement in 1-year SRS-Pain and SRS-Total postoperative as well as SRS-Activity, Pain, Satisfaction, and Total scores ( P <0.05) compared with patients in lower quartiles. Compared with the 25th percentile, patients reaching the 50th percentile interval were associated with increased odds of improvement in Global Alignment and Proportion score proportionality [9.3 (1.6-53.2), P =0.01]., Conclusions: This investigation is among the first to compare multicenter staged and same-day surgery A/P ASD patients fused to ilium using propensity matching. Staged procedures resulted in significant improvement radiographically, reduced intensive care unit admissions, and superior patient-reported outcomes compared with same-day procedures. An interval of at least 3 days between staged procedures is associated with superior outcomes in terms of Global Alignment and Proportion score proportionality., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Importance: In adults, primary spinal cord tumors account for 5% of all primary tumors of the central nervous system, with schwannomas making up about 74% of all nerve sheath tumors. Thoracic schwannomas can pose a threat to neurovasculature, presenting a significant challenge to safe and complete surgical resection. For patients presenting with complex pathologies including tumors, a dual surgeon approach may be used to optimize patient care and improve outcomes., Clinical Presentation: A 73-year-old female previously diagnosed with a nerve sheath tumor of the fourth thoracic vertebra presented with significant thoracic pain and a history of falls. Imaging showed that the tumor had doubled in size ranging from T3 to T5. Augmented reality volumetric rendering was used to clarify anatomic relationships of the mass for perioperative evaluation and decision-making. A dual surgeon approach was used for complete resection. First, a ventrolateral left video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery was performed with robotic assistance followed by a posterior tumor resection and thoracic restabilization. The patient did well postoperatively., Conclusion: Although surgical treatment of large thoracic dumbbell tumors presents a myriad of risks, perioperative evaluation with augmented reality, new robotic surgical techniques, and a dual surgeon approach can be implemented to mitigate these risks., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.)

Background: Research has focused on the increased correction from a three-column osteotomy (3CO) during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. However, an in-depth analysis on the performance of a 3CO in a cohort of complex spinal deformity cases has not been described., Study Design/setting: This is a retrospective study on a prospectively enrolled, complex ASD database., Purpose: This study aimed to determine if three-column osteotomies demonstrate superior benefit in correction of complex sagittal deformity at the cost of increased perioperative complications., Methods: Surgical complex adult spinal deformity patients were included and grouped into thoracolumbar 3COs compared to those who did not have a 3CO (No 3CO) (remaining cohort). Rigid deformity was defined as ΔLL less than 33% from standing to supine. Severe deformity was defined as global (SVA > 70 mm) or C7-PL > 70 mm, or lumbopelvic (PI-LL > 30°). Means comparison tests assessed correction by 3CO grade/location. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity evaluated outcomes up to six weeks compared to No 3CO., Results: 648 patients were included (Mean age 61 ± 14.6 years, BMI 27.55 ± 5.8 kg/m 2 , levels fused: 12.6 ± 3.8). 126 underwent 3CO, a 20% higher usage than historical cohorts. 3COs were older, frail, and more likely to undergo revision (OR 5.2, 95% CI [2.6-10.6]; p < .001). 3COs were more likely to present with both severe global/lumbopelvic deformity (OR 4), 62.4% being rigid. 3COs had greater use of secondary rods (OR 4st) and incurred 4 times greater risk for: massive blood loss (> 3500 mL), longer LOS, SICU admission, perioperative wound and spine-related complications, and neurologic complications when performed below L3. 3COs had similar HRQL benefit, but higher perioperative opioid use. Mean segmental correction increased by grade (G3-21; G4-24; G5-27) and was 4 × greater than low-grade osteotomies, especially below L3 (OR 12). 3COs achieved 2 × greater spinopelvic correction. Higher grades properly distributed lordosis 50% of the time except L5. Pelvic compensation and non-response were relieved more often with increasing grade, with greater correction in all lower extremity parameters (p < .01). Due to the increased rate of complications, 3COs trended toward higher perioperative cost ($42,806 vs. $40,046, p = .086)., Conclusion: Three-column osteotomy usage in contemporary complex spinal deformities is generally limited to more disabled individuals undergoing the most severe sagittal and coronal realignment procedures. While there is an increased perioperative cost and prolongation of length of stay with usage, these techniques represent the most powerful realignment techniques available with a dramatic impact on normalization at operative levels and reciprocal changes., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Background Context: Among adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients, heterogeneity in patient pathology, surgical expectations, baseline impairments, and frailty complicates comparisons in clinical outcomes and research. This study aims to qualitatively segment ASD patients using machine learning-based clustering on a large, multicenter, prospectively gathered ASD cohort., Purpose: To qualitatively segment adult spinal deformity patients using machine learning-based clustering on a large, multicenter, prospectively gathered cohort., Study Design/setting: Machine learning algorithm using patients from a prospective multicenter study and a validation cohort from a retrospective single center, single surgeon cohort with complete 2-year follow up., Patient Sample: About 805 ASD patients; 563 patients from a prospective multicenter study and 242 from a single center to be used as a validation cohort., Outcome Measures: To validate and extend the Ames-ISSG/ESSG classification using machine learning-based clustering analysis on a large, complex, multicenter, prospectively gathered ASD cohort., Methods: We analyzed a training cohort of 563 ASD patients from a prospective multicenter study and a validation cohort of 242 ASD patients from a retrospective single center/surgeon cohort with complete two-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinical/radiographic follow-up. Using k-means clustering, a machine learning algorithm, we clustered patients based on baseline PROs, Edmonton frailty, age, surgical history, and overall health. Baseline differences in clusters identified using the training cohort were assessed using Chi-Squared and ANOVA with pairwise comparisons. To evaluate the classification system's ability to discern postoperative trajectories, a second machine learning algorithm assigned the single-center/surgeon patients to the same 4 clusters, and we compared the clusters' two-year PROs and clinical outcomes., Results: K-means clustering revealed four distinct phenotypes from the multicenter training cohort based on age, frailty, and mental health: Old/Frail/Content (OFC, 27.7%), Old/Frail/Distressed (OFD, 33.2%), Old/Resilient/Content (ORC, 27.2%), and Young/Resilient/Content (YRC, 11.9%). OFC and OFD clusters had the highest frailty scores (OFC: 3.76, OFD: 4.72) and a higher proportion of patients with prior thoracolumbar fusion (OFC: 47.4%, OFD: 49.2%). ORC and YRC clusters exhibited lower frailty scores and fewest patients with prior thoracolumbar procedures (ORC: 2.10, 36.6%; YRC: 0.84, 19.4%). OFC had 69.9% of patients with global sagittal deformity and the highest T1PA (29.0), while YRC had 70.2% exhibiting coronal deformity, the highest mean coronal Cobb Angle (54.0), and the lowest T1PA (11.9). OFD and ORC had similar alignment phenotypes with intermediate values for Coronal Cobb Angle (OFD: 33.7; ORC: 40.0) and T1PA (OFD: 24.9; ORC: 24.6) between OFC (worst sagittal alignment) and YRC (worst coronal alignment). In the single surgeon validation cohort, the OFC cluster experienced the greatest increase in SRS Function scores (1.34 points, 95%CI 1.01-1.67) compared to OFD (0.5 points, 95%CI 0.245-0.755), ORC (0.7 points, 95%CI 0.415-0.985), and YRC (0.24 points, 95%CI -0.024-0.504) clusters. OFD cluster patients improved the least over 2 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated that the OFD cohort had significantly worse reoperation outcomes compared to other clusters (HR: 3.303, 95%CI: 1.085-8.390)., Conclusion: Machine-learning clustering found four different ASD patient qualitative phenotypes, defined by their age, frailty, physical functioning, and mental health upon presentation, which primarily determines their ability to improve their PROs following surgery. This reaffirms that these qualitative measures must be assessed in addition to the radiographic variables when counseling ASD patients regarding their expected surgical outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest One or more of the authors declare financial or professional relationships on ICMJE-TSJ disclosure forms., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data., Objective: To investigate the effect of lower extremity osteoarthritis on sagittal alignment and compensatory mechanisms in adult spinal deformity (ASD)., Background: Spine, hip, and knee pathologies often overlap in ASD patients. Limited data exists on how lower extremity osteoarthritis impacts sagittal alignment and compensatory mechanisms in ASD., Patients and Methods: In total, 527 preoperative ASD patients with full body radiographs were included. Patients were grouped by Kellgren-Lawrence grade of bilateral hips and knees and stratified by quartile of T1-Pelvic Angle (T1PA) severity into low-, mid-, high-, and severe-T1PA. Full-body alignment and compensation were compared across quartiles. Regression analysis examined the incremental impact of hip and knee osteoarthritis severity on compensation., Results: The mean T1PA for low-, mid-, high-, and severe-T1PA groups was 7.3°, 19.5°, 27.8°, and 41.6°, respectively. Mid-T1PA patients with severe hip osteoarthritis had an increased sagittal vertical axis and global sagittal alignment ( P <0.001). Increasing hip osteoarthritis severity resulted in decreased pelvic tilt ( P =0.001) and sacrofemoral angle ( P <0.001), but increased knee flexion ( P =0.012). Regression analysis revealed that with increasing T1PA, pelvic tilt correlated inversely with hip osteoarthritis and positively with knee osteoarthritis ( r2 =0.812). Hip osteoarthritis decreased compensation through sacrofemoral angle (β-coefficient=-0.206). Knee and hip osteoarthritis contributed to greater knee flexion (β-coefficients=0.215, 0.101; respectively). For pelvic shift, only hip osteoarthritis significantly contributed to the model (β-coefficient=0.100)., Conclusions: For the same magnitude of spinal deformity, increased hip osteoarthritis severity was associated with worse truncal and full body alignment with posterior translation of the pelvis. Patients with severe hip and knee osteoarthritis exhibited decreased hip extension and pelvic tilt but increased knee flexion. This examines sagittal alignment and compensation in ASD patients with hip and knee arthritis and may help delineate whether hip and knee flexion is due to spinal deformity compensation or lower extremity osteoarthritis., Competing Interests: The International Spine Study Group reports the following: grants to the foundation from Medtronic, Globus, Stryker, SI Bone, Carlsmed. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives  Expandable transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) devices have been developed to introduce more segmental lordosis through a narrow operative corridor, but there are concerns about the degree of achievable correction with a small graft footprint. In this report, we describe the technical nuances associated with placing bilateral expandable cages for correction of iatrogenic deformity. Materials and Methods  A 60-year-old female with symptomatic global sagittal malalignment and a severe lumbar kyphotic deformity after five prior lumbar surgeries presented to our institution. We performed multilevel posterior column osteotomies, a L3-4 intradiscal osteotomy, and placed bilateral lordotic expandable TLIF cages at the level of maximum segmental kyphosis. Results  We achieve a 21-degree correction of the patient's focal kyphotic deformity and restoration of the patient global sagittal alignment. Conclusion  This case demonstrates both the feasibility and utility of placing bilateral expandable TLIF cages at a single disc space in the setting of severe focal sagittal malalignment. This technique expands the implant footprint and, when coupled with an intradiscal osteotomy, allows for a significant restoration of segmental lordosis., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None declared., (Asian Congress of Neurological Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).)

Background and Objectives: For patients with surgical adult spinal deformity (ASD), our understanding of alignment has evolved, especially in the last 20 years. Determination of optimal restoration of alignment and spinal shape has been increasingly studied, yet the assessment of how these alignment schematics have incrementally added benefit to outcomes remains to be evaluated., Methods: Patients with ASD with baseline and 2-year were included, classified by 4 alignment measures: Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab, Age-Adjusted, Roussouly, and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP). The incremental benefits of alignment schemas were assessed in chronological order as our understanding of optimal alignment progressed. Alignment was considered improved from baseline based on SRS-Schwab 0 or decrease in severity, Age-Adjusted ideal match, Roussouly current (based on sacral slope) matching theoretical (pelvic incidence-based), and decrease in proportion. Patients separated into 4 first improving in SRS-Schwab at 2-year, second Schwab improvement and matching Age-Adjusted, third two prior with Roussouly, and fourth improvement in all four. Comparison was accomplished with means comparison tests and χ2 analyses., Results: Sevenhundredthirty-two. patients met inclusion. SRS-Schwab BL: pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (++:32.9%), sagittal vertical axis (++: 23%), pelvic tilt (++:24.6%). 640 (87.4%) met criteria for first, 517 (70.6%) second, 176 (24%) third, and 55 (7.5%) fourth. The addition of Roussouly (third) resulted in lower rates of mechanical complications and proximal junctional kyphosis (48.3%) and higher rates of meeting minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for physical component summary and SRS-Mental (P < .05) compared with the second. Fourth compared with the third had higher rates of MCID for ODI (44.2% vs third: 28.3%, P = .011) and SRS-Appearance (70.6% vs 44.8%, P < .001). Mechanical complications and proximal junctional kyphosis were lower with the addition of Roussouly (P = .024), while the addition of GAP had higher rates of meeting MCID for SRS-22 Appearance (P = .002) and Oswestry Disability Index (P = .085)., Conclusion: Our evaluation of the incremental benefit that alignment schemas have provided in ASD corrective surgery suggests that the addition of Roussouly provided the greatest reduction in mechanical complications, while the incorporation of GAP provided the most significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.)

Spinal serotonin enables neuro-motor recovery (i.e., plasticity) in patients with debilitating paralysis. While there exists time of day fluctuations in serotonin-dependent spinal plasticity, it is unknown, in humans, whether this is due to dynamic changes in spinal serotonin levels or downstream signaling processes. The primary objective of this study was to determine if time of day variations in spinal serotonin levels exists in humans. To assess this, intrathecal drains were placed in seven adults with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) collected at diurnal (05:00 to 07:00) and nocturnal (17:00 to 19:00) intervals. High performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry was used to quantify CSF serotonin levels with comparisons being made using univariate analysis. From the 7 adult patients, 21 distinct CSF samples were collected: 9 during the diurnal interval and 12 during nocturnal. Diurnal CSF samples demonstrated an average serotonin level of 216.6 ± $ \pm $ 67.7 nM. Nocturnal CSF samples demonstrated an average serotonin level of 206.7 ± $ \pm $ 75.8 nM. There was no significant difference between diurnal and nocturnal CSF serotonin levels (p = .762). Within this small cohort of spine healthy adults, there were no differences in diurnal versus nocturnal spinal serotonin levels. These observations exclude spinal serotonin levels as the etiology for time of day fluctuations in serotonin-dependent spinal plasticity expression., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Abstract: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality and morbidity. Effective nurse training for PPH management can reduce negative health impacts on childbearing women. This article discusses a framework for the development of an innovative immersive virtual reality simulator for PPH management training. The simulator should consist of: 1) a virtual world, including virtual physical and social environments, and simulated patients, and 2) a smart platform, providing automatic instructions, adaptive scenarios, and intelligent performance debriefing and evaluations. This simulator will provide a realistic virtual environment for nurses to practice PPH management and promote women's health., Competing Interests: The authors have declared no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 National League for Nursing.)

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate if imbalance influences complication rates, radiological outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Methods: ASD patients with baseline and 2-year radiographic and PROMs were included. Patients were grouped according to whether they answered yes or no to a recent history of pre-operative loss of balance. The groups were propensity-matched by age, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and surgical invasiveness score. Results: In total, 212 patients were examined (106 in each group). Patients with gait imbalance had worse baseline PROM measures, including Oswestry disability index (45.2 vs. 36.6), SF-36 mental component score (44 vs. 51.8), and SF-36 physical component score ( p < 0.001 for all). After 2 years, patients with gait imbalance had less pelvic tilt correction (-1.2 vs. -3.6°, p = 0.039) for a comparable PI-LL correction (-11.9 vs. -15.1°, p = 0.144). Gait imbalance patients had higher rates of radiographic proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) (26.4% vs. 14.2%) and implant-related complications (47.2% vs. 34.0%). After controlling for age, baseline sagittal parameters, PI-LL correction, and comorbidities, patients with imbalance had 2.2-times-increased odds of PJK after 2 years. Conclusions: Patients with a self-reported loss of balance/unsteady gait have significantly worse PROMs and higher risk of PJK.

Background: Pip is a novel digital health platform (DHP) that combines human health coaches (HCs) and technology with patient-facing content. This combination has not been studied in perioperative surgical optimization., Objective: This study's aim was to test the feasibility of the Pip platform for deploying perioperative, digital, patient-facing optimization guidelines to elective surgical patients, assisted by an HC, at predefined intervals in the perioperative journey., Methods: We conducted an institutional review board-approved, descriptive, prospective feasibility study of patients scheduled for elective surgery and invited to enroll in Pip from 2.5 to 4 weeks preoperatively through 4 weeks postoperatively at an academic medical center between November 22, 2022, and March 27, 2023. Descriptive primary end points were patient-reported outcomes, including patient satisfaction and engagement, and Pip HC evaluations. Secondary end points included mean or median length of stay (LOS), readmission at 7 and 30 days, and emergency department use within 30 days. Secondary end points were compared between patients who received Pip versus patients who did not receive Pip using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting., Results: A total of 283 patients were invited, of whom 172 (60.8%) enrolled in Pip. Of these, 80.2% (138/172) patients had ≥1 HC session and proceeded to surgery, and 70.3% (97/138) of the enrolled patients engaged with Pip postoperatively. The mean engagement began 27 days before surgery. Pip demonstrated an 82% weekly engagement rate with HCs. Patients attended an average of 6.7 HC sessions. Of those patients that completed surveys (95/138, 68.8%), high satisfaction scores were recorded (mean 4.8/5; n=95). Patients strongly agreed that HCs helped them throughout the perioperative process (mean 4.97/5; n=33). The average net promoter score was 9.7 out of 10. A total of 268 patients in the non-Pip group and 128 patients in the Pip group had appropriate overlapping distributions of stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting for the analytic sample. The Pip cohort was associated with LOS reduction when compared to the non-Pip cohort (mean 2.4 vs 3.1 days; median 1.9, IQR 1.0-3.1 vs median 3.0, IQR 1.1-3.9 days; mean ratio 0.76; 95% CI 0.62-0.93; P=.009). The Pip cohort experienced a 49% lower risk of 7-day readmission (relative risk [RR] 0.51, 95% CI 0.11-2.31; P=.38) and a 17% lower risk of 30-day readmission (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.30-2.31; P=.73), though these did not reach statistical significance. Both cohorts had similar 30-day emergency department returns (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.56-2.01, P=.85)., Conclusions: Pip is a novel mobile DHP combining human HCs and perioperative optimization content that is feasible to engage patients in their perioperative journey and is associated with reduced hospital LOS. Further studies assessing the impact on clinical and patient-reported outcomes from the use of Pip or similar DHPs HC combinations during the perioperative journey are required., (©Stephen Andrew Esper, Jennifer Holder-Murray, Katie Ann Meister, Hsing-Hua Sylvia Lin, David Kojo Hamilton, Yram Jan Groff, Brian Scott Zuckerbraun, Aman Mahajan. Originally published in JMIR Perioperative Medicine (http://periop.jmir.org), 04.04.2024.)

Background: Preoperative symptom severity in cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) can be variable. Radiomic signatures could provide an imaging biomarker for symptom severity in CSM. This study utilizes radiomic signatures of T1-weighted and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging images to correlate with preoperative symptom severity based on modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores for patients with CSM., Methods: Sixty-two patients with CSM were identified. Preoperative T1-weighted and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging images for each patient were segmented from C2-C7. A total of 205 texture features were extracted from each volume of interest. After feature normalization, each second-order feature was further subdivided to yield a total of 400 features from each volume of interest for analysis. Supervised machine learning was used to build radiomic models., Results: The patient cohort had a median mJOA preoperative score of 13; of which, 30 patients had a score of >13 (low severity) and 32 patients had a score of ≤13 (high severity). Radiomic analysis of T2-weighted imaging resulted in 4 radiomic signatures that correlated with preoperative mJOA with a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 78%, 89%, and 83%, respectively (P < 0.004). The area under the curve value for the ROC curves were 0.69, 0.70, and 0.77 for models generated by independent T1 texture features, T1 and T2 texture features in combination, and independent T2 texture features, respectively., Conclusions: Radiomic models correlate with preoperative mJOA scores using T2 texture features in patients with CSM. This may serve as a surrogate, objective imaging biomarker to measure the preoperative functional status of patients., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To elucidate the current academic, demographic, and professional factors influencing the career trajectories of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) William P. Van Wagenen (VW) fellows while also identifying trends that may influence future fellow selection., Methods: Fifty-five VW fellows were identified from 1968 to 2022 from the AANS website, along with corresponding institutions, countries, and continents of study. Additional variables such as age at selection, accruing additional degrees, neurosurgical subspecialty, the number of publications at the time of selection, funding, and h-index were collected from various publicly available sources., Results: Eighty-five percent of VW fellows were male and had a mean age of 34 ± 2.4 years. Ninety-one percent of fellows chose to study in Europe, and 40% had earned additional degrees. Univariate linear regression demonstrated a positive relationship between the year of selection and both age at selection ( p  = 0.0094) and the number of publications at hire ( p  < 0.001), while logistic regression revealed that more recently selected fellows were less likely to study in Europe ( p  = 0.037) and be of the white race ( p  = 0.0047). Logistic regression also exhibited a positive trend between the year of selection and both the likelihood that the VW fellow was currently enrolled in another fellowship ( p  = 0.019) and possessed additional degrees ( p  = 0.0019). Females were shown to have fewer publications at hire compared to males ( p  = 0.04)., Conclusions: Most Van Wagenen fellows are academically productive members of the neurosurgical community. Increased attention is likely to be placed on both academic, research, and individualized factors when selecting future fellows., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Study Design: Retrospective cohort., Objective: To evaluate factors associated with the long-term durability of cost-effectiveness (CE) in ASD patients., Background: A substantial increase in costs associated with the surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD) has given precedence to scrutinize the value and utility it provides., Methods: We included 327 operative ASD patients with 5-year (5 Y) follow-up. Published methods were used to determine costs based on CMS.gov definitions and were based on the average DRG reimbursement rates. Utility was calculated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) utilizing the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) converted to Short-Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D), with a 3% discount applied for its decline with life expectancy. The CE threshold of $150,000 was used for primary analysis., Results: Major and minor complication rates were 11% and 47% respectively, with 26% undergoing reoperation by 5 Y. The mean cost associated with surgery was $91,095±$47,003, with a utility gain of 0.091±0.086 at 1Y, QALY gained at 2 Y of 0.171±0.183, and at 5 Y of 0.42±0.43. The cost per QALY at 2 Y was $414,885, which decreased to $142,058 at 5 Y.With the threshold of $150,000 for CE, 19% met CE at 2 Y and 56% at 5 Y. In those in which revision was avoided, 87% met cumulative CE till life expectancy. Controlling analysis depicted higher baseline CCI and pelvic tilt (PT) to be the strongest predictors for not maintaining durable CE to 5 Y (CCI OR: 1.821 [1.159-2.862], P=0.009) (PT OR: 1.079 [1.007-1.155], P=0.030)., Conclusions: Most patients achieved cost-effectiveness after four years postoperatively, with 56% meeting at five years postoperatively. When revision was avoided, 87% of patients met cumulative cost-effectiveness till life expectancy. Mechanical complications were predictive of failure to achieve cost-effectiveness at 2 Y, while comorbidity burden and medical complications were at 5 Y., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: Peter Gust Passias, MD: Cerapedics: Other financial or material support. Cervical Scoliosis Research Society: Research support. Globus Medical: Paid presenter or speaker. Medtronic: Paid consultant. Royal Biologics: Paid consultant. Spine: Editorial or governing board. Spinevision: Other financial or material support. SpineWave: Paid consultant. JNS Spine: Editorial Board. JCM: Editorial Board. Justin S Smith, MD: Alphatec Spine: Stock or stock Options. Carlsmed: Paid consultant. Cerapedics: Paid consultant. DePuy: Research support. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant. Journal of Neurosurgery Spine: Editorial or governing board. Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board. Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support. Operative Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. Spine Deformity: Editorial or governing board. Stryker: Paid consultant. Thieme: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Zimmer: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Renaud Lafage, MS: Nemaris: Stock or stock Options. Jeffrey Gum, MD: Acuity: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Alan L. & Jacqueline B. Stuart Spine Research: Research support. Cerapedics: Research support. Cingulate Therapeutics: Stock or stock Options. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker. Global Spine Journal - Reviewer: Editorial or governing board. Intellirod Spine Inc.: Research support. K2M /Stryker: Board or committee member. MAZOR Surgical Technologies: Paid consultant. Medtronic: Board or committee member; Paid consultant; Research support. Norton Healthcare: Research support. Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Pfizer: Research support. Scoliosis Research Society: Research support. Spine Deformity - Reviewer: Editorial or governing board. Stryker: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. Texas Scottish Rite Hospital: Research support. The Spine Journal - Reviewer: Editorial or governing board. Breton G Line, BS: ISSGF: Paid consultant. Alan H Daniels, MD: EOS: Paid consultant. Medicrea: Paid consultant. Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Paid consultant. Novabone: Paid consultant. Orthofix, Inc.: Paid consultant; Research support. Southern Spine: IP royalties. Spineart: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Springer: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Stryker: Paid consultant. D. Kojo Hamilton: European Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board. Nuvasive: Research support. Robert Kenneth Eastlack, MD: Aesculap/B.Braun: Paid consultant. Alphatec Spine: Stock or stock Options. Baxter: Paid consultant. Biedermann-Motech: Paid consultant. Carevature: Paid consultant; Stock or stock Options. Globus Medical: IP royalties. Invuity: Stock or stock Options. Medtronic: Paid consultant. Nocimed: Stock or stock Options. Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support; Stock or stock Options. Radius: Paid presenter or speaker. San Diego Spine Foundation: Board or committee member. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. Seaspine: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Stock or stock Options. SI Bone: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Society of Lateral Access Surgery: Board or committee member. Spine Innovations: Stock or stock Options. Stryker: Paid consultant. Gregory Michael Mundis Jr, MD: Carlsmed: Paid consultant. ISSGF: Research support. K2M: IP royalties. Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. SeaSpine: Paid consultant. Stryker: Paid consultant. Viseon: Paid consultant. Andrew J Schoenfeld, MD: AAOS: Board or committee member. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American: Editorial or governing board. North American Spine Society: Board or committee member. Spine: Editorial or governing board. Springer: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Wolters Kluwer Health - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Eric O Klineberg, MD: AO Spine: Paid presenter or speaker; Research support. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant. Medicrea: Paid consultant. Medtronic: Paid consultant. Stryker: Paid consultant. Khaled M Kebaish, MD: DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support. Orthofix, Inc.: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Orthofix, Inc., K2 medical Inc: Paid presenter or speaker. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. Stryker: IP royalties. Munish C Gupta, MD: AO Spine Faculty, travel: Board or committee member. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. European Spine Journal-Advisory Board: Editorial or governing board. Global Spine Journal-Reviewer: Editorial or governing board. Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant. honorarium for faculty: Board or committee member. Innomed: IP royalties. Johnson & Johnson: Stock or stock Options. Medtronic: Paid consultant. Procter & Gamble: Stock or stock Options. Spine Deformity, Associate Editor: Editorial or governing board. SRS-IMAST & Education committee: Board or committee member. travel: Board or committee member. Wolters Kluwer Health - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Han Jo Kim, MD: AAOS: Board or committee member. Alphatec Spine: Paid consultant. AO SPINE: Board or committee member. Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member. HSS Journal, Asian Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board. ISSGF: Research support. K2M: IP royalties. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. Zimmer: IP royalties. Robert A Hart, MD, FAAOS: American Orthopaedic Association: Board or committee member. Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. International Spine Study Group: Board or committee member. ISSLS Textbook of the Lumbar Spine: Editorial or governing board. Medtronic: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. North American Spine Society: Board or committee member. Orthofix, Inc.: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. SeaSpine: IP royalties. Spine Connect: Stock or stock Options. Western Ortho Assn: Board or committee member. Christopher Ames, MD: Biomet Spine: IP royalties. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support. Global Spine Analytics - Director: Other financial or material support. International Spine Study Group (ISSG): Research support. International Spine Study Group (ISSG) - Executive Committee: Other financial or material support. K2M: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Medicrea: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Medtronic: Paid consultant. Next Orthosurgical: IP royalties. Nuvasive: IP royalties. Operative Neurosurgery - Editorial Board: Other financial or material support. Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) - Grant Funding: Other financial or material support. Stryker: IP royalties. Titan Spine: Research support. Christopher I Shaffrey, MD: AANS: Board or committee member. Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker; Research support. Globus Medical: Research support. Medtronic: Other financial or material support; Paid consultant. Medtronic Sofamor Danek: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support. Neurosurgery RRC: Board or committee member. Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; Stock or stock Options. Proprio: Paid consultant. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. SI Bone: IP royalties. Spinal Deformity: Editorial or governing board. Spine: Editorial or governing board. Frank J Schwab, MD: DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Research support. Globus Medical: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. K2M: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. Medicrea: Paid consultant. Medtronic: Paid consultant. Medtronic Sofamor Danek: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker. Nuvasive: Research support. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. spine deformity: Editorial or governing board. Stryker: Research support. VP of International Spine Society Group (ISSG): Board or committee member. Zimmer: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. Virginie Lafage, PhD: DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker. European Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board. Globus Medical: Paid consultant. International Spine Study Group: Board or committee member. Nuvasive: IP royalties. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. The Permanente Medical Group: Paid presenter or speaker. Richard A Hostin, MD: DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant. Robert Shay Bess, MD: allosource: Paid consultant; Research support. Biomet: Research support. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant; Research support. EOS: Research support. Globus Medical: Research support. k2 medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support. Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Research support. North American Spine Society: Board or committee member. Nuvasive: IP royalties; Research support. Orthofix, Inc.: Research support. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. Stryker: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker. Douglas C Burton, MD, FAAOS: Bioventus: Research support. DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support. Pfizer: Research support. Progenerative Medical: Stock or stock Options. Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member. Spine Deformity: Editorial or governing board. Other Authors: None., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Sagittal alignment measured on standing radiography remains a fundamental component of surgical planning for adult spinal deformity (ASD). However, the relationship between classic sagittal alignment parameters and objective metrics, such as walking time (WT) and grip strength (GS), remains unknown. The objective of this work was to determine if ASD patients with worse baseline sagittal malalignment have worse objective physical metrics and if those metrics have a stronger relationship to patient-reported outcome metrics (PROMs) than standing alignment., Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective review of a multicenter ASD cohort. ASD patients underwent baseline testing with the timed up-and-go 6-m walk test (seconds) and for GS (pounds). Baseline PROMs were surveyed, including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22r, and Veterans RAND 12 (VR-12) scores. Standard spinopelvic measurements were obtained (sagittal vertical axis [SVA], pelvic tilt [PT], and mismatch between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis [PI-LL], and SRS-Schwab ASD classification). Univariate and multivariable linear regression modeling was performed to interrogate associations between objective physical metrics, sagittal parameters, and PROMs., Results: In total, 494 patients were included, with mean ± SD age 61 ± 14 years, and 68% were female. Average WT was 11.2 ± 6.1 seconds and average GS was 56.6 ± 24.9 lbs. With increasing PT, PI-LL, and SVA quartiles, WT significantly increased (p < 0.05). SRS-Schwab type N patients demonstrated a significantly longer average WT (12.5 ± 6.2 seconds), and type T patients had a significantly shorter WT time (7.9 ± 2.7 seconds, p = 0.03). With increasing PT quartiles, GS significantly decreased (p < 0.05). SRS-Schwab type T patients had a significantly higher average GS (68.8 ± 27.8 lbs), and type L patients had a significantly lower average GS (51.6 ± 20.4 lbs, p = 0.03). In the frailty-adjusted multivariable linear regression analyses, WT was more strongly associated with PROMs than sagittal parameters. GS was more strongly associated with ODI and PROMIS Physical Function scores., Conclusions: The authors observed that increasing baseline sagittal malalignment is associated with slower WT, and possibly weaker GS, in ASD patients. WT has a stronger relationship to PROMs than standing alignment parameters. Objective physical metrics likely offer added value to standard spinopelvic measurements in ASD evaluation and surgical planning.

Objective: Complex spinal deformity surgeries may involve significant blood loss. The use of antifibrinolytic agents such as tranexamic acid (TXA) has been proven to reduce perioperative blood loss. However, for patients with a history of thromboembolic events, there is concern of increased risk when TXA is used during these surgeries. This study aimed to assess whether TXA use in patients undergoing complex spinal deformity correction surgeries increases the risk of thromboembolic complications based on preexisting thromboembolic risk factors., Methods: Data were analyzed for adult patients who received TXA during surgical correction for spinal deformity at 21 North American centers between August 2018 and October 2022. Patients with preexisting thromboembolic events and other risk factors (history of deep venous thrombosis [DVT], pulmonary embolism [PE], myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, peripheral vascular disease, or cancer) were identified. Thromboembolic complication rates were assessed during the postoperative 90 days. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess thromboembolic outcomes in high-risk and low-risk patients who received intravenous TXA., Results: Among 411 consecutive patients who underwent complex spinal deformity surgery and received TXA intraoperatively, 130 (31.6%) were considered high-risk patients. There was no significant difference in thromboembolic complications between patients with and those without preexisting thromboembolic risk factors in univariate analysis (high-risk group vs low-risk group: 8.5% vs 2.8%, p = 0.45). Specifically, there were no significant differences between groups regarding the 90-day postoperative rates of DVT (high-risk group vs low-risk group: 1.5% vs 1.4%, p = 0.98), PE (2.3% vs 1.8%, p = 0.71), acute MI (1.5% vs 0%, p = 0.19), or stroke (0.8% vs 1.1%, p > 0.99). On multivariate analysis, high-risk status was not a significant independent predictor for any of the thromboembolic complications., Conclusions: Administration of intravenous TXA during the correction procedure did not change rates of thromboembolic events, acute MI, or stroke in this cohort of adult spinal deformity surgery patients.

Objective: The present study aimed to analyze the academic attributes of the presidents of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) over the past four decades to elucidate the trajectories of these societies' leaderships., Methods: Forty-three AANS and 43 CNS presidents of the past four decades were identified. Demographic and research productivity data were collected from publicly available sources., Results: Compared to AANS presidents, CNS presidents were younger (median = 48 years vs. 59.5 years; p  < 0.001), had fewer years of practice prior to their election (15 years vs. 28 years; p  < 0.001), had higher NIH funding rate (37.2% vs. 11.6%; p  = 0.01), and higher rate of practicing at academic institutions (93% vs. 74.4%; p  = 0.04). The CNS presidents had a comparable median number of publications at election (AANS: 72 vs. CNS: 94 publications, p  = 0.78) but a higher median h-index scores (AANS: 28 vs. CNS: 59; p  = 0.04). In the multiple linear regression analysis, vascular subspecialty ( β  = 0.21 [95% CI: 0.09-0.34]; p  = 0.002) and practicing in a non-academic institution ( β  = 0.23 [95% CI: 0.08-0.39]; p  = 0.007) were predictors for later election for AANS presidency., Conclusions: We characterized the attributes of AANS and CNS presidents to serve as useful references for career trajectories for junior neurosurgeons and trainees. Research and academic presence seem to be associated with early election to both societies., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. None., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Study Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data., Objective: To analyze the impact of operative room (OR) time in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery on patient outcomes., Background: It is currently unknown if OR time in ASD patients matched for deformity severity and surgical invasiveness is associated with patient outcomes., Materials and Methods: ASD patients with baseline and two-year postoperative radiographic and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) data, undergoing a posterior-only approach for long fusion (>L1-Ilium) were included. Patients were grouped into short OR time (<40th percentile: <359 min) and long OR time (>60th percentile: >421 min). Groups were matched by age, baseline deformity severity, and surgical invasiveness. Demographics, radiographic, PROM data, fusion rate, and complications were compared between groups at baseline and two years follow-up., Results: In total, 270 patients were included for analysis: the mean OR time was 286 minutes in the short OR group versus 510 minutes in the long OR group ( P <0.001). Age, gender, percent of revision cases, surgical invasiveness, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis, sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic tilt were comparable between groups ( P >0.05). Short OR had a slightly lower body mass index than the short OR group ( P <0.001) and decompression was more prevalent in the long OR time ( P =0.042). Patients in the long group had greater hospital length of stay ( P =0.02); blood loss ( P <0.001); proportion requiring intensive care unit ( P =0.003); higher minor complication rate ( P =0.001); with no significant differences for major complications or revision procedures ( P >0.5). Both groups had comparable radiographic fusion rates ( P =0.152) and achieved improvement in sagittal alignment measures, Oswestry disability index, and Short Form-36 ( P <0.001)., Conclusion: Shorter OR time for ASD correction is associated with a lower minor complication rate, a lower estimated blood loss, fewer intensive care unit admissions, and a shorter hospital length of stay without sacrificing alignment correction or PROMs. Maximizing operative efficiency by minimizing OR time in ASD surgery has the potential to benefit patients, surgeons, and hospital systems., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The present study utilized recently developed in-construct measurements in simulations of cervical deformity surgery in order to assess undercorrection and predict distal junctional kyphosis (DJK)., Methods: A retrospective review of a database of operative cervical deformity patients was analyzed for severe DJK and mild DJK. C2-lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) sagittal angle (SA) was measured postoperatively, and the correction was simulated in the preoperative radiograph in order to match the C2-LIV by using the planning software. Linear regression analysis that used C2 pelvic angle (CPA) and pelvic tilt (PT) determined the simulated PT that matched the virtual CPA. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the C2-T1 SA, C2-T4 SA, and C2-T10 SA that corresponded to DJK of 20° and cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) of 40 mm., Results: Sixty-nine cervical deformity patients were included. Severe and mild DJK occurred in 11 (16%) and 22 (32%) patients, respectively; 3 (4%) required DJK revision. Simulated corrections demonstrated that severe and mild DJK patients had worse alignment compared to non-DJK patients in terms of cSVA (42.5 mm vs 33.0 mm vs 23.4 mm, p < 0.001) and C2-LIV SVA (68.9 mm vs 57.3 mm vs 36.8 mm, p < 0.001). Linear regression revealed the relationships between in-construct measures (C2-T1 SA, C2-T4 SA, and C2-T10 SA), cSVA, and change in DJK (all R > 0.57, p < 0.001). A cSVA of 40 mm corresponded to C2-T4 SA of 10.4° and C2-T10 SA of 28.0°. A DJK angle change of 10° corresponded to C2-T4 SA of 5.8° and C2-T10 SA of 20.1°., Conclusions: Simulated cervical deformity corrections demonstrated that severe DJK patients have insufficient corrections compared to patients without DJK. In-construct measures assess sagittal alignment within the fusion separate from DJK and subjacent compensation. They can be useful as intraoperative tools to gauge the adequacy of cervical deformity correction.

Background and Objectives: The Internet has become a primary source of health information, leading patients to seek answers online before consulting health care providers. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) in neurosurgery by assessing the accuracy and helpfulness of artificial intelligence (AI)-generated responses to common postsurgical questions., Methods: A list of 60 commonly asked questions regarding neurosurgical procedures was developed. ChatGPT-3.0, ChatGPT-3.5, and ChatGPT-4.0 responses to these questions were recorded and graded by numerous practitioners for accuracy and helpfulness. The understandability and actionability of the answers were assessed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. Readability analysis was conducted using established scales., Results: A total of 1080 responses were evaluated, equally divided among ChatGPT-3.0, 3.5, and 4.0, each contributing 360 responses. The mean helpfulness score across the 3 subsections was 3.511 ± 0.647 while the accuracy score was 4.165 ± 0.567. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool analysis revealed that the AI-generated responses had higher actionability scores than understandability. This indicates that the answers provided practical guidance and recommendations that patients could apply effectively. On the other hand, the mean Flesch Reading Ease score was 33.5, suggesting that the readability level of the responses was relatively complex. The Raygor Readability Estimate scores ranged within the graduate level, with an average score of the 15th grade., Conclusion: The artificial intelligence chatbot's responses, although factually accurate, were not rated highly beneficial, with only marginal differences in perceived helpfulness and accuracy between ChatGPT-3.0 and ChatGPT-3.5 versions. Despite this, the responses from ChatGPT-4.0 showed a notable improvement in understandability, indicating enhanced readability over earlier versions., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The objective was to evaluate the efficacy, outcomes, and complications of surgical intervention performed within 24 hours (≤ 24 hours) versus after 24 hours (> 24 hours) in managing acute traumatic central cord syndrome (ATCCS)., Methods: Articles pertinent to the study were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment procedures and outcomes according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRIMSA) guidelines., Results: Seven articles comprising 488 patients were included, with 188 (38.5%) patients in the ≤ 24-hour group and 300 (61.5%) in the > 24-hour group. Significant differences were not found between groups in terms of demographic characteristics, injury mechanism, spinal cord compression level, neuroimaging features, and the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) motor score at admission. Both groups had a similar approach to surgery and steroid administration. The surgical complication rate was significantly higher in the > 24-hour group (4.5%) compared to the ≤ 24-hour group (1.2%) (p = 0.05). Clinical follow-up duration was similar at 12 months (interquartile range 3-36) for both groups (p > 0.99). The ≤ 24-hour group demonstrated a not statistically significant greater improvement in ASIA motor score, with a mean difference of 12 (95% CI -20.7 to 44.6) compared to the > 24-hour group., Conclusions: The present study indicates potential advantages of early (≤ 24 hours) surgery in ATCCS patients, specifically in terms of lower complication rates. However, further research is needed to confirm these findings and their clinical implications.

Background and Objectives: Achieving spinopelvic realignment during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery does not always produce ideal outcomes. Little is known whether compensation in lower extremities (LEs) plays a role in this disassociation. The objective is to analyze lower extremity compensation after complex ASD surgery, its effect on outcomes, and whether correction can alleviate these mechanisms., Methods: We included patients with complex ASD with 6-week data. LE parameters were as follows: sacrofemoral angle, knee flexion angle, and ankle flexion angle. Each parameter was ranked, and upper tertile was deemed compensation. Patients compensating and not compensating postoperatively were propensity score matched for body mass index, frailty, and T1 pelvic angle. Linear regression assessed correlation between LE parameters and baseline deformity, demographics, and surgical details. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity and history of total knee/hip arthroplasty evaluated outcomes., Results: Two hundred and ten patients (age: 61.3 ± 14.1 years, body mass index: 27.4 ± 5.8 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.1 ± 1.6, 72% female, 22% previous total joint arthroplasty, 24% osteoporosis, levels fused: 13.1 ± 3.8) were included. At baseline, 59% were compensating in LE: 32% at hips, 39% knees, and 36% ankles. After correction, 61% were compensating at least one joint. Patients undercorrected postoperatively were less likely to relieve LE compensation (odds ratio: 0.2, P = .037). Patients compensating in LE were more often undercorrected in age-adjusted pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, and T1 pelvic angle and disproportioned in Global Alignment and Proportion (P < .05). Patients matched in sagittal age-adjusted score at 6 weeks but compensating in LE were more likely to develop proximal junctional kyphosis (odds ratio: 4.1, P = .009) and proximal junctional failure (8% vs 0%, P = .035) than those sagittal age-adjusted score-matched and not compensating in LE., Conclusion: Perioperative lower extremity compensation was a product of undercorrecting complex ASD. Even in age-adjusted realignment, compensation was associated with global undercorrection and junctional failure. Consideration of lower extremities during planning is vital to avoid adverse outcomes in perioperative course after complex ASD surgery., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2023. All rights reserved.)

Tranexamic acid (TXA) has long been utilized in spine surgery and can be administered through intravenous (IV) and topical routes. Although, topical and IV administration of TXA are both effective in decreasing blood loss during spine surgery, complications like deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism have been reported with the use of intravenous TXA (ivTXA). These potential complications may be mitigated through the use of topical TXA (tTXA). To assess optimal dosing protocols and efficacy of topical TXA in spine surgery, Embase, Ovid-MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov were queried for original research on the use of tTXA in adult patients undergoing spine surgery. Data parameters analyzed included blood loss, transfusion rate, thromboembolic, and other complications. Data was synthesized and confidence evaluated according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Nineteen studies were included in the final analysis with 2197 patients. Of the 18 published studies, 9 (50%) displayed high levels of evidence. Topical TXA showed a trend towards a lower risk of transfusion and complications. Protocols that used 1g tTXA showed a significantly reduced risk for transfusion when compared to controls (risk ratio -1.05, 95% CI (-1.62, -0.48); P = 0.94, I 2 = 0%). Complications associated with tTXA included DVTs and wound infections. Topical TXA was non-inferior to intravenous TXA with similar efficacy and complication profiles for bleeding control in spine surgery; however, more studies are needed to discern benefits and risks., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)