Search

OBJECTIVE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated the use of telehealth visits (THVs). The effects on neurosurgical practice have not been well characterized, especially concerning new-patient THVs. Therefore, the authors of this study reviewed their institution’s experience with outpatient clinic visits and THVs from before the COVID-19 pandemic to the present to focus on clinical metrics, rates of surgery, and the effects of implementing THVs in order to better understand their implications for clinical practice as more data emerge over time. METHODS The authors reviewed 15,677 consecutive new outpatient in-person visits (IPVs), THVs, and neurosurgical procedures/cases proceeding from their institution between 2018 and 2022 for trends and associations related to THVs. RESULTS Among spine patients, there was no difference in the proportion of encounters that led to surgery (surgical conversion rate) between THVs and IPVs (p = 0.49). Among cranial patients, THVs were negatively associated with conversion (OR 0.73, p = 0.03). On average, patients using THVs lived further from the hospital (p < 0.001); however, the patient catchment area appeared unchanged. The median distance to the hospital among THV patients was counterbalanced by a decreased distance for spine patients pursing IPVs (p < 0.001), with no significant change to case volume. There was no change in distance to the hospital among cranial patients. For both cranial and spine patients, surgical conversion was more likely among those who lived a great distance from the hospital if their initial encounter was an IPV (p = 0.007 and < 0.001, respectively). However, there was no relationship between distance from the hospital and surgical conversion among THV patients (p = 0.565). The availability of THVs did not significantly affect follow-up time (p = 0.837). For new patients at IPVs, there was no difference in time to the operating room between cranial and spine cases; for new patients at THVs, however, time to the operating room was significantly faster for cranial cases than for spine cases (p = 0.0018). CONCLUSIONS Compared to IPVs, THVs lead to decreased surgical conversion for cranial patients but not spine patients. THVs do not appear to increase the catchment area. For patients who live far from the hospital, an IPV is associated with surgical conversion. Surgical conversion is faster following cranial THVs than after spine THVs. THVs did not increase the duration of follow-up.

Most posterior spinal fusion (PSF) patients do not require admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), and those who do may represent an underinvestigated, high-risk subpopulation.To identify the microbial profile of and risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI) in PSF patients admitted to the ICU postoperatively.We examined 3965 consecutive PSF patients treated at our institution between 2000 and 2015 and collected demographic, clinical, and procedural data. Comorbid disease burden was quantified using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We performed multivariable logistic regression to identify risk factors for SSI, readmission, and reoperation.Anemia, more levels fused, cervical surgery, and cerebrospinal fluid leak were positively associated with ICU admission, and minimally invasive surgery was negatively associated. The median time to infection was equivalent for ICU patients and non-ICU patients, and microbial culture results were similar between groups. Higher CCI and undergoing a staged procedure were associated with readmission, reoperation, and SSI. When stratified by CCI into quintiles, SSI rates show a strong linear correlation with CCI ( P = .0171, R = 0.941), with a 3-fold higher odds of SSI in the highest risk group than the lowest (odds ratio = 3.15 [1.19, 8.07], P = .032).Procedural characteristics drive the decision to admit to the ICU postoperatively. Patients admitted to the ICU have higher rates of SSI but no difference in the timing of or microorganisms that lead to those infections. Comorbid disease burden drives SSI in this population, with a 3-fold greater odds of SSI for high-risk patients than low-risk patients.

Spinal ependymomas represent the most common primary intramedullary tumors for which optimal management remains undefined. When possible, gross total resection (GTR) is often the mainstay of treatment, with consideration of radiotherapy (RT) in cases of residual or recurrent tumor. The impact of extent of resection and radiotherapy remain understudied.Report on a large institutional cohort with lengthy follow-up to provide information on long-term outcomes and to contribute to limited data assessing the value of extent of resection and RT.Patients with pathologically proven primary spinal ependymoma between 1990 and 2018 were identified. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to calculate progression-free survival (PFS); local-control (LC) and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression was used to analyze variables' association with receipt of RT.We identified 69 patients with ependymoma of which 4 had leptomeningeal dissemination at diagnosis and were excluded. Of the remaining cohort (n = 65), 42 patients (65%) had Grade II spinal ependymoma, 20 (31%) had Grade I myxopapillary ependymoma and 3 (5%) had Grade III anaplastic ependymoma; 54% underwent GTR and 39% underwent RT. With a median follow-up of 5.7 years, GTR was associated with improved PFS. For grade II lesions, STR+RT yielded better outcomes than STR alone (10y PFS 77.1% vs 68.2%, LC 85.7% vs 50%). Degree of resection was the only significant predictor of adjuvant radiotherapy (p0.0001).Our findings confirm the importance of GTR in spinal ependymomas. Adjuvant RT should be utilized in the setting of a subtotal resection with expectation of improved disease-related outcomes.

Spinopelvic balance is based on the theory that adjacent segments of the spine are related and influenced by one another. By understanding the correlation between the thoracolumbar spine and the pelvis, a concept of spinopelvic balance can be applied to adult deformity. The purpose of this study was to develop a mathematical relationship between the pelvis and spine and apply it to a population of adults who had undergone spinal deformity surgery to determine whether patients in spinopelvic balance have improved health measures.Using values published in the literature, a mathematical relationship between the spine and pelvis was derived where pelvic incidence (PI) was divided by the sum of the lumbosacral lordosis (LL; T12-S1) plus the main thoracic kyphosis (TK; T4-12). The result was termed the spinopelvic constant (r): r = PI/(LL + TK). This was performed in patients in 2 age groups previously defined in the literature as "adult" (18-60 years of age) and "geriatric" (60 years). The equation was then constructed to relate an individual's measured PI to his or her predicted thoracolumbar curvature (LL + TK)(p) based on the age-specific spinopelvic constant: (LL + TK)(p) = r/PI. A retrospective review was then performed using cases involving patients who had undergone spine deformity surgery and were enrolled in our spinal deformity database. Sagittal balance, PI, and the sum of the main thoracic and lumbar curves were measured. The difference between the predicted sum of the regional curves (LL + TK)(p), based on the individual's measured PI and the age-specific spinopelvic constant, and the measured sum of the regional curves (LL + TK)(m) was then calculated to determine the degree of spinopelvic imbalance. Health status measures were then compared.Using the formula r = PI/(TK = LL) and normative values in the literature, the adult spinopelvic constant was calculated to be -2.57, and the geriatric constant -5.45. For the second portion of the study, 41 patients met inclusion criteria (13 classified as nongeriatric adults and 28 as geriatric patients). Application of these constants found a statistically significant decline in almost all outcome categories when the spinopelvic balance showed at least 10° of kyphosis more than predicted. While not statistically significant, the trend was that better outcomes were associated with a spinopelvic balance within 0 to +10° of the predicted value. The final analysis compared and separated outcomes from sagittal balance and spinopelvic balance. For patients to be considered in sagittal balance, they must be within 50 mm (± 50 mm) of neutral. For patients to be considered in spinopelvic balance, they must be within ± 10° of predicted spinopelvic balance. Patients in both sagittal and spinopelvic balance have statistically significant better outcomes than those in neither sagittal nor spinopelvic balance. Except for the mean SF-12 PCS (12-Item Short-Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary), there were no significant differences between those that were either in sagittal or spinopelvic balance, but not the other.Restoring a normative relationship between the spine and the pelvis during adult deformity correction may play an important role in determining surgical outcomes in these patients independent of sagittal balance.