Mohammed Ali Alvi

Full-endoscopic versus micro-endoscopic and open discectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes and complications

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to systematically compare the effectiveness and safety of full-endoscopic discectomy (FED) and micro-endoscopic discectomy (MED) with open discectomy (OD) for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation. METHODS Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to February 2016, identifying all relevant randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies comparing either FED or MED with OD. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints. RESULTS Twenty three studies were selected for analysis, including 421 FED, 6914 MED, and 21,152 OD cases. No significant difference was found between FED and OD in regards to postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) leg pain scores (WMD 0.03, P=0.93). Similar results were obtained for MED vs OD (WMD 0.09, P=0.18). In terms of postoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI), both FED and MED were similar to OD (WMD -2.60, P=0.32 and WMD -1.00, P=0.21, respectively). FED had a significantly shorter operative duration compared to OD (54.6 vs 102.6min, P=0.0001). MED alone and endoscopic approaches overall (including MED and FED) demonstrated significantly lower estimated blood loss (44.3 vs 194.4mL, P=0.03 and 38.2 vs 203.5mL, respectively, both p<0.05). FED alone demonstrated a trend towards lower estimated blood loss in comparison to OD (3.3 vs 244.9mL, P=0.07). No difference was found in overall complications, recurrence or reoperation rates, dural tears, root injury, wound infections, and spondylodiscitis between FED vs OD, or MED vs OD. CONCLUSIONS Based on this meta-analysis, FED and MED appear to be safe and efficacious alternatives to traditional approaches, but these results require further investigation and validation by prospective randomized studies.

Allegations of Failure to Obtain Informed Consent in Spinal Surgery Medical Malpractice Claims

Importance Predictive factors associated with increased risk of medical malpractice litigation have been identified, including severity of injury, physician sex, and error in diagnosis. However, there is a paucity of literature investigating informed consent in spinal surgery malpractice. Objective To investigate the failure to obtain informed consent as an allegation in medical malpractice claims for patients undergoing a spinal procedure. Design, Setting, and Participants In this retrospective cohort study, a national medicolegal database was searched for malpractice claim cases related to spinal surgery for all years available (ie, January 1, 1980, through December 31, 2015). Main Outcomes and Measures Failure to obtain informed consent and associated medical malpractice case verdict. Results A total of 233 patients (117 [50.4%] male and 116 [49.8%] female; 80 with no informed consent allegation and 153 who cited lack of informed consent) who underwent spinal surgery and filed a malpractice claim were studied (mean [SD] age, 47.1 [13.1] years in the total group, 45.8 [12.9] years in the control group, and 47.9 [13.3] years in the informed consent group). Median interval between year of surgery and year of verdict was 5.4 years (interquartile range, 4-7 years). The most common informed consent allegations were failure to explain risks and adverse effects of surgery (52 [30.4%]) and failure to explain alternative treatment options (17 [9.9%]). In bivariate analysis, patients in the control group were more likely to require additional surgery (45 [56.3%] vs 53 [34.6%], P = .002) and have more permanent injuries compared with the informed consent group (46 [57.5%] vs 63 [42.0%], P = .03). On multivariable regression analysis, permanent injuries were more often associated with indemnity payment after a plaintiff verdict (odds ratio [OR], 3.12; 95% CI, 1.46-6.65; P = .003) or a settlement (OR, 6.26; 95% CI, 1.06-36.70; P = .04). Informed consent allegations were significantly associated with less severe (temporary or emotional) injury (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28-0.97; P = .04). In addition, allegations of informed consent were found to be predictive of a defense verdict vs a plaintiff ruling (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17-0.98; P = .046) or settlement (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.001-0.15; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Lack of informed consent is an important cause of medical malpractice litigation. Although associated with a lower rate of indemnity payments, malpractice lawsuits, including informed consent allegations, still present a time, money, and reputation toll for physicians. The findings of this study can therefore help to improve preoperative discussions to protect spinal surgeons from malpractice claims and ensure that patients are better informed.

Risk factors for dural tears: a study of elective spine surgery*

Abstract Objective: This study moves beyond previous cohort studies and benchmark data by studying a population of elective spine surgery from a multicenter registry in an effort to validate, disprove, and/or identify novel risk factors for dural tears. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis queried a multicenter registry for patients with degenerative spinal diagnoses undergoing elective spinal surgery from 2010–2014. Multivariable logistic regression analysis interrogated for independent risk factors of dural tears. Results: Of 104,930 patients, a dural tear requiring repair occurred in 0.6% of cases. On adjusted analysis, the following factors were independently associated with increased likelihood of a dural tear: ankylosing spondylitis vs. intervertebral disc disorders, greater than two levels, combined surgical approach and posterior approach vs. anterior approach, decompression only vs. fusion and decompression, age groups 85+, 75–84 and 65–74 vs. <65, obesity (BMI ≥30), corticosteroid use and preoperative platelet count <150,000. Conclusions: This multicenter study identifies novel risk factors for dural tears in the elective spine surgery population, including corticosteroids, thrombocytopenia, and ankylosing spondylitis. The results of this analysis provide further information for surgeons to use both in operative planning and in preoperative counseling when discussing the risk of dural tears.

Micro vs. macrodiscectomy: Does use of the microscope reduce complication rates?

OBJECTIVE A single level discectomy is one of the most common procedures performed by spine surgeons. While some practitioners utilize the microscope, others do not. We postulate improved visualization with an intraoperative microscope decreases complications and inferior outcomes. METHODS A multicenter surgical registry was utilized for this retrospective cohort analysis. Patients with degenerative spinal diagnoses undergoing elective single level discectomies from 2010 to 2014 were included. Univariate analysis was performed comparing demographics, patient characteristics, operative data, and outcomes for discectomies performed with and without a microscope. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was then applied to compare outcomes of micro- and macrodiscectomies. RESULTS Query of the registry yielded 23,583 patients meeting inclusion criteria. On univariate analysis the microscope was used in a greater proportion of the oldest age group as well as Hispanic white patients. Patients with any functional dependency, history of congestive heart failure, chronic corticosteroid use, or anemia (hematocrit<35%) also had greater proportions of microdiscectomies. Thoracic region discectomies more frequently involved use of the microscope than cervical or lumbar discectomies (25.0% vs. 16.4% and 13.0%, respectively, p<0.001). Median operative time (IQR) was increased in microscope cases [80min (60, 108) vs. 74min (54, 102), p<0.001]. Of the patients that required reoperation within 30days, 2.5% of them had undergone a microdiscectomy compared to 1.9% who had undergone a macrodiscectomy, p=0.044. On multivariable analysis, microdiscectomies were more likely to have an operative time in the top quartile of discectomy operative times, ≥103min (OR 1.256, 95% CI 1.151-1.371, p<0.001). In regards to other multivariable outcome models for any complication, surgical site infection, dural tears, reoperation, and readmission, no significant association with microdiscectomy was found. CONCLUSIONS The use of the microscope was found to significantly increase the odds of longer operative time, but not influence rates of postoperative complications. Thus, without evidence from this study that the microscope decreases complications, the use of the microscope should be at the surgeons discretion, validating the use of both macro and micro approaches to discectomy as acceptable standards of care.

Comparison of Outcomes for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with and Without Anterior Plate Fixation

Study Design. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objective. To compare postoperative surgical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with and without plate fixation. Summary of Background Data. ACDF has evolved significantly over the years, including the placement of an anterior plate construct. Although promoting bony osseo-integration at the fusion site, there are a number of plate-related complications that can arise. The non-plating approach is less invasive, however, greater rates of cage subsidence have been associated with this model. Methods. We performed an electronic literature search for human studies that directly compared ACDF with and without anterior plate fixation. Outcomes of interest comprised of postoperative dysphagia, fusion success, and cage subsidence as well as patient reported outcomes, including the Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for both neck and arm pain. Results. A total of 15 studies (12 observational and 3 randomized controlled trials) and 893 patients (57% males) were included. Overall, ACDF with plate fixation was associated with significantly higher vertebral fusion rates (odds ratio [OR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–3.37), lower subsidence rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% CI 0.18–0.52), and more favorable VAS-neck pain scores at last follow-up (mean difference [MD] 0.59, 95% CI −0.78 to −0.41). Conversely, ACDF procedures without plate fixation had marginally better long-term VAS-arm pain scores (mean difference [MD] 0.2, 95% CI 0.04–0.36). No difference was found with regards to dysphagia (OR 1.21, 95% CI, 0.57–2.56) and NDI (MD 0.06, 95% C.I −0.54 to 0.42). Conclusion. Available evidence, although limited, suggests superior surgical outcomes in ACDF procedures with anterior plate fixation (increased fusion, decreased subsidence) and slightly better VAS-neck pain scores at last follow-up. Future longitudinal, multicenter randomized controlled trials should be completed to validate any associations found in this study. Level of Evidence: 3

The Effect of Epidural Steroid Injections on Bone Mineral Density and Vertebral Fracture Risk: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Current Literature

Objective The aim of this paper is to review the available literature investigating the effect of epidural steroid injections (ESIs) on bone mineral density (BMD) and vertebral fracture risk. Study design Systematic review of current literature. Methods The sources of the data were PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus. Papers included in the review were original research articles in peer-reviewed journals. Results A total of 7,233 patients (eight studies) with a mean age ranging between 49 and 74 years and an average follow-up between six and 60 months were studied. Steroids that were used included triamcinolone, dexamethasone, and methylprednisolone (MP), with a mean number of injections ranging from one to 14.7 and an average cumulative dose in MP equivalents between 80 and 8,130 mg. Epidural steroids were associated with significantly decreased BMD in four out of six included studies, and with increased risk of vertebral fracture in one out of two included studies. Significant reductions in BMD were associated with a cumulative MP dose of 200 mg over a one-year period and 400 mg over three years, but not in doses of less than 200 mg of MP equivalents for postmenopausal women and at least 3 g for healthy men. The risk of osteopenia and osteoporosis was lower in patients who were receiving anti-osteoporotic medication during the treatment course. Conclusions ESIs should be recommended with caution, especially in patients at risk for osteoporotic fractures, such as women of postmenopausal age. Anti-osteoporotic medication might be considered prior to ESI.

The impact of spine disease, relative to cranial disease, on perception of health and care experience: an analysis of 1484 patients in a tertiary center

OBJECTIVEPatient-reported outcomes have been increasingly mandated by regulators and payers to evaluate hospital and physician performance. The purpose of this study is to delineate the differences in patient-reported experience of hospital care for cranial and spinal operations.METHODSThe authors selected all patients who underwent inpatient, elective cranial or spinal procedures and completed the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey at a single, high-volume, tertiary care institution between October 2012 and September 2015. The association of the surgical procedure and diagnosis with various HCAHPS composite measures, calculated across 9 domains using standard top-box methodology, was investigated. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted for outcomes that were significant with procedure type and diagnosis group on univariate analysis, adjusting for age, sex, case complexity, overall health rating, and education level.RESULTSA total of 1484 patients met criteria and returned an HCAHPS survey. Overall, patients undergoing a cranial procedure gave top-box (most favorable) scores more often in pain management measure (66.3% vs 59.6%, p = 0.01) compared with those undergoing spine surgery. Furthermore, despite better discharge scores (93.1% vs 87.1%, p < 0.001), spinal patients were less likely to report excellent health (7.4% vs 12.7%). Lastly, patients with a primary diagnosis of brain or spinal tumor compared with those with degenerative spinal disease and those with other neurosurgical diagnoses provided top-box scores more often regarding communication with doctors (82.7% vs 76.4% vs 75.2%, p = 0.04), pain management (71.8% vs 60.9% vs 59.1%, p = 0.002), and global rating (90.4% vs 84.0% vs 87.3%, p = 0.02). On multivariable analysis, spinal patients had significantly lower odds of reporting top-box scores in pain management (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.85; p = 0.001), staff responsiveness (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87; p = 0.002), and global rating (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.82; p = 0.002), and significantly higher odds of top-box scoring in discharge information (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.45-3.18; p < 0.001) than cranial patients. Similarly, brain tumor cases were associated with significantly higher odds of top-box scoring in communication with doctors (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.01-2.12; p = 0.04), pain management (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.29-2.55; p < 0.001), staff responsiveness (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.33-2.66; p < 0.001), and global rating (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.26-3.17; p = 0.003) compared with degenerative spine cases.CONCLUSIONSSignificant differences in patient-reported experience with hospital care exist across different cranial and spine surgery patient populations. Overall, spinal patients, particularly those with degenerative spine disease, rated their health and their hospital experience lower relative to cranial patients. Identifying weaker areas of hospital performance in target populations can stimulate quality initiatives that aim to increase the overall hospital score.

319 Determining the Role of Informed Consent Allegations in Spinal Surgery Medical Malpractice

INTRODUCTION: Subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) following aneurysmal rupture is an extremely fatal condition with mortality as high as 45%. Apart from the intra-cranial causes, there are cardiovascular events which add to the morbidity and mortality. Eg: myocardial ischemia, arrhythmia’s and heart blocks. These can manifest with deranged cardiac biomarkers. However, quantitative assessment of these biochemical markers and its co-relation with prognosis in patients of aneurysmal SAH has not been adequately studied. METHODS: After obtaining ethical clearance, we conducted a prospective observational study in our department. The study included all patients of aneurysmal SAH with ictus less than 48 hours at the time of admission.Excluded were patients with past history of coronary artery disease or cardiac surgery. The patient’s heart rate, blood pressure, pupillary response, GCS Score, any neurodeficits, cranial nerve palsies, Hunt and Hess/WFNS grade of SAH were noted on admission. Serum cardiac enzymes (Troponin T, Total creatine phosphokinase, cardiac specific creatine phosphokinase), serum brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and C reactive protein levels were done for 6 consecutive days from the day of admission. Patient also underwent a 12 lead ECG and 2D Echocardiography on days 0, 1 and 5. RESULTS: Serum levels of troponin T, total creatine phosphokinase and BNP were statistically associated with outcome. Abnormal levels of these markers were associated with a poor outcome. ECG abnormalities were observed in 76% of the cases. Prolonged QTc interval was the most common abnormal ECG finding among the patients who died. One patient developed 3rd degree heart block following aneurysmal SAH and another patient developed left ventricular dysfunction with an ejection fraction of 40%. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular complications are common in patients of aneurysmal SAH. Serum quantitative levels of Troponin T, total creatine phosphokinase and BNP show statistical significant association with outcome and can be incorporated in the battery of tests in SAH patients for predicting outcome.

Conditions of Care and Episode Groups

Bundled payment or episode-based payment models are part of an effort to curb healthcare costs in the USA by combining all care-related costs into a single payment to be distributed among the hospital or facility, the treating physician or provider, post-acute care, and subsequent care including readmissions or complications. Episode groups aggregate all of the items and services involved in care for a particular patient cohort so that the total cost of the care can be assessed. Episodes are made of three consecutive steps defining an episode using a combination of logic rules and medical billing codes specific to each episode. These steps are (a) opening, (b) grouping, and (c) closing. After obtaining observed cost to expected cost ratios for the episode, risk adjustment is employed to determine the final cost for a single episode. While bundled payment models have demonstrated cost savings in several other surgical fields such as cardiac surgery, total joint arthroplasty, and colectomy, current evidence in spine surgery is insufficient to speak for its favorable effects. It is imperative that hospitals and physicians comply with the efforts to curb healthcare costs in spine surgery.

Magnetic Resonance guided Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy (MRgLITT) vs Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) for Medically Intractable Temporal Lobe Epilepsy (TLE) : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Seizure Outcomes and Complications

INTRODUCTION Magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are 2 emerging minimally invasive procedures being increasingly used for surgical intervention in cases of medically intractable temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). To date, no comparative analyses of these 2 procedures have been made. In the current study, we synthesized pooled data from existing studies in an attempt to present a systematic review and meta-analysis of seizure and clinical outcomes of the 2 procedures in patients with TLE. METHODS The Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) approach and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to perform an indirect meta-analysis of seizure and clinical outcomes between MRgLITT and SRS. Only studies reporting outcomes for patients with TLE were included in the current review. RESULTS A total of 19 studies were included in the final analysis, giving a total of 415 TLE patients. Of those studies, 9 were on MRgLITT, with a total of 250 patients (60%), and 10 were on SRS, with a total of 165 patients (40%). We found that the overall seizure freedom rate was comparable between the 2 procedures (MRgLITT 50%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 44% to 56%, vs. SRS 42%, 95% CI 27% to 59%, P = 0.39). Similarly, among patients with lesional pathologic conditions only, the seizure freedom rate was comparable between the 2 procedures (MRgLITT 62%, 95% CI 48% to 74%, vs. SRS 50%, 95% CI 37% to 64%, P = 0.23). Compared with SRS, MRgLITT was associated with lower complication rates (MRgLITT 20%, 95% CI 14% to 26% vs. SRS 32%, 95% CI 20% to 46%, P = 0.06) but similar reoperation rates (15%, 95% CI 9% to 22% vs. 27%, 95% CI 12% to 46%, P = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS As minimally invasive procedures continue to gain popularity for use in surgery for epilepsy, it is imperative to evaluate their efficacy and safety outcomes. In this study we pooled the data from existing studies to compare the seizure and clinical outcomes in patients with TLE undergoing MRgLITT and SRS. We found similar outcomes and complications between the 2 procedures.