Subu N. Magge

Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

BACKGROUND The comparative effectiveness of performing instrumented (rigid pedicle screws affixed to titanium alloy rods) lumbar spinal fusion in addition to decompressive laminectomy in patients with symptomatic lumbar grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is unknown. METHODS In this randomized, controlled trial, we assigned patients, 50 to 80 years of age, who had stable degenerative spondylolisthesis (degree of spondylolisthesis, 3 to 14 mm) and symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis to undergo either decompressive laminectomy alone (decompression-alone group) or laminectomy with posterolateral instrumented fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome measure was the change in the physical-component summary score of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36; range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) 2 years after surgery. The secondary outcome measure was the score on the Oswestry Disability Index (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more disability related to back pain). Patients were followed for 4 years. RESULTS A total of 66 patients (mean age, 67 years; 80% women) underwent randomization. The rate of follow-up was 89% at 1 year, 86% at 2 years, and 68% at 4 years. The fusion group had a greater increase in SF-36 physical-component summary scores at 2 years after surgery than did the decompression-alone group (15.2 vs. 9.5, for a difference of 5.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 11.3; P=0.046). The increases in the SF-36 physical-component summary scores in the fusion group remained greater than those in the decompression-alone group at 3 years and at 4 years (P=0.02 for both years). With respect to reductions in disability related to back pain, the changes in the Oswestry Disability Index scores at 2 years after surgery did not differ significantly between the study groups (-17.9 in the decompression-alone group and -26.3 in the fusion group, P=0.06). More blood loss and longer hospital stays occurred in the fusion group than in the decompression-alone group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The cumulative rate of reoperation was 14% in the fusion group and 34% in the decompression-alone group (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with degenerative grade I spondylolisthesis, the addition of lumbar spinal fusion to laminectomy was associated with slightly greater but clinically meaningful improvement in overall physical health-related quality of life than laminectomy alone. (Funded by the Jean and David Wallace Foundation and others; SLIP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00109213.).

Comparative Effectiveness of Ventral vs Dorsal Surgery for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

BACKGROUND:Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is the most common cause of spinal cord dysfunction. OBJECTIVE:To determine the feasibility of a randomized clinical trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and costs of ventral vs dorsal decompression with fusion surgery for treating CSM. METHODS:A nonrandomized, prospective, clinical pilot trial was conducted. Patients ages 40 to 85 years with degenerative CSM were enrolled at 7 sites over 2 years (2007-2009). Outcome assessments were obtained preoperatively and at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. A hospital-based economic analysis used costs derived from hospital charges and Medicare cost-to-charge ratios. RESULTS:The pilot study enrolled 50 patients. Twenty-eight were treated with ventral fusion surgery and 22 with dorsal fusion surgery. The average age was 61.6 years. Baseline demographics and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) scores were comparable between groups; however, dorsal surgery patients had significantly more severe myelopathy (P < .01). Comprehensive 1-year follow-up was obtained in 46 of 50 patients (92%). Greater HR-QOL improvement (Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary) was observed after ventral surgery (P = .05). The complication rate (16.6% overall) was comparable between groups. Significant improvement in the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scale score was observed in both groups (P < .01). Dorsal fusion surgery had significantly greater mean hospital costs (

Radiographic predictors of delayed instability following decompression without fusion for degenerative Grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis

29 465 vs

Postoperative cervical sagittal imbalance negatively affects outcomes after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

19 245; P < .01) and longer average length of hospital stay (4.0 vs 2.6 days; P < .01) compared with ventral fusion surgery. CONCLUSION:Surgery for treating CSM was followed by significant improvement in disease-specific symptoms and in HR-QOL. Greater improvement in HR-QOL was observed after ventral surgery. Dorsal fusion surgery was associated with longer length of hospital stay and higher hospital costs. The pilot study demonstrated feasibility for a larger randomized clinical trial.

Heuristic map of myotomal innervation in humans using direct intraoperative nerve root stimulation.

OBJECT It is not known whether adding fusion to lumbar decompression is necessary for all patients undergoing surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with symptomatic stenosis. Determining specific radiographic traits that might predict delayed instability following decompression surgery might guide clinical decision making regarding the utility of up-front fusion in patients with degenerative Grade I spondylolisthesis. METHODS Patients with Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (3-14 mm) with symptomatic stenosis were prospectively enrolled from a single site between May 2002 and September 2009 and treated with decompressive laminectomy without fusion. Patients with mechanical back pain or with gross motion (> 3 mm) on flexion-extension lumbar radiographs were excluded. The baseline radiographic variables measured included amount of slippage, disc height, facet angle, motion at spondylolisthesis (flexion-extension), and sagittal rotation angle. Data were analyzed using multivariate forward selection stepwise logistic regression, chi-square tests, Student t-test, and ANOVA. RESULTS Forty patients were enrolled and treated with laminectomy without fusion, and all patients had complete radiographic data sets that were available for analysis. Reoperation was performed in 15 (37.5%) of 40 patients, with a mean follow-up duration of 3.6 years. Reoperation was performed for pain caused by instability at the index level in all 15 cases. Using multivariate stepwise logistic regression with a threshold p value of 0.35, motion at spondylolisthesis, disc height, and facet angle were predictors of reoperation following surgery. Facet angle > 50° was associated with a 39% rate of reoperation, disc height > 6.5 mm was associated with a 45% rate of reoperation, and motion at spondylolisthesis > 1.25 mm was associated with a 54% rate of reoperation. Patients with all 3 risk factors for instability had a 75% rate of reoperation, whereas patients with no risk factors for instability had a 0% rate of reoperation (p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS Patients with motion at spondylolisthesis > 1.25 mm, disc height > 6.5 mm, and facet angle > 50° are more likely to experience instability following decompression surgery for Grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis. Identification of key risk factors for instability might improve patient selection for decompression without fusion surgery.

The efficacy of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: results from the NeuroPoint-SD registry: clinical article.

Study Design. Prospective observational cohort study. Objective. To determine if postoperative cervical sagittal balance is an independent predictor of health-related quality of life outcome after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Summary of Background Data. Both ventral and dorsal fusion procedures for CSM are effective at reducing the symptoms of myelopathy. The importance of cervical sagittal balance in predicting overall health-related quality of life outcome after ventral versus dorsal surgery for CSM has not been previously explored. Methods. A prospective, nonrandomized cohort of 49 patients undergoing dorsal and ventral fusion surgery for CSM was examined. Preoperative and postoperative C2–C7 sagittal vertical axis was measured on standing lateral cervical spine radiographs. Outcome was assessed with 2 disease-specific measures—the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scale and the Oswestry Neck Disability Index and 2 generalized outcome measures—the Short-Form 36 physical component summary (SF-36 PCS) and Euro-QOL-5D. Assessments were performed preoperatively, and at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.3 (SAS Institute). Results. Most patients experienced improvement in all outcome measures regardless of approach. Both preoperative and postoperative C2–C7 sagittal vertical axis measurements were independent predictors of clinically significant improvement in SF-36 PCS scores (P = 0.03 and P = 0.02). The majority of patients with C2–C7 sagittal vertical axis values greater than 40 mm did not improve from an overall health-related quality of life perspective (SF-36 PCS) despite improvement in myelopathy. The postoperative sagittal balance value was inversely correlated with a clinically significant improvement of SF-36 PCS scores in patients undergoing dorsal surgery but not ventral surgery (P = 0.03 vs. P = 0.93). Conclusion. Preoperative and postoperative sagittal balance measurements independently predict clinical outcomes after surgery for CSM. Level of Evidence: 2

Predictive value of 3-month lumbar discectomy outcomes in the NeuroPoint-SD Registry

OBJECTIVE Considerable overlap exists in nerve root innervation of various muscles. Knowledge of myotomal innervation is essential for the interpretation of neurological examination findings and neurosurgical decision-making. Previous studies relied on cadaveric dissections, animal studies, and cases with anomalous anatomy. This study investigates the myotomal innervation patterns of cervical and lumbar nerve roots through in vivo stimulation during surgeries for spinal decompression. METHODS Patients undergoing cervical and lumbar surgeries in which nerve roots were exposed in the normal course of surgery were included in the study. Electromyography electrodes were placed in the muscle groups that are generally accepted to be innervated by the roots under study. These locations included levels above and below the spinal levels undergoing decompression. After decompression, a unipolar neural stimulator probe was placed directly on the nerve root sleeve and constant current stimulation in increments of 0.1 mA was performed. Current was raised until at least a 100 μV amplitude-triggered electromyographic response was noted in 1 or more muscles. All muscles that responded were recorded. RESULTS A total of 2295 nerve root locations in 129 patients (mean age 57 ± 15 years, 47 female [36%]) were stimulated, and 1589 stimulations met quality criteria and were analyzed. Four hundred ninety-five stimulations were performed on roots contributing to the cervical and brachial plexus from C-3 to T-1 (31.2%), and 1094 (68.8%) were roots in the lumbosacral plexus between L-1 and S-2. The authors were able to construct a statistical map of the contributions of each cervical and lumbosacral nerve root for the set of muscle groups monitored in the protocol. In many cases the range of muscles innervated by a specific root was broader than previously described in textbooks. CONCLUSIONS This is the largest data set of direct intraoperative nerve root stimulations during decompressive surgery, demonstrating the relative contribution of root-level motor input to various muscle groups. Compared with classic neuroanatomy, a significant number of roots innervate a broader range of muscles than expected, which may account for the variability of presentation between patients with identical number and location of compressed roots.

Increased Patient Enrollment to a Randomized Surgical Trial Through Equipoise Polling of an Expert Surgeon Panel.

OBJECT There is significant practice variation and considerable uncertainty among payers and other major stakeholders as to whether many surgical treatments are effective in actual US spine practice. The aim of this study was to establish a multicenter cooperative research group and demonstrate the feasibility of developing a registry to assess the efficacy of common lumbar spinal procedures using prospectively collected patient-reported outcome measures. METHODS An observational prospective cohort study was conducted at 13 US academic and community sites. Unselected patients undergoing lumbar discectomy or single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis were included. Patients completed the 36-item Short-Form Survey Instrument (SF-36), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaires preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Power analysis estimated a sample size of 160 patients: 125 patients with lumbar disc herniation, and 35 with lumbar spondylolisthesis. All patient data were entered into a secure Internet-based data management platform. RESULTS Of 249 patients screened, there were 198 enrolled over 1 year. The median age of the patients was 45.0 years (49% female) for lumbar discectomy (n = 148), and 58.0 years (58% female) for lumbar spondylolisthesis (n = 50). At 30 days, 12 complications (6.1% of study population) were identified. Ten patients (6.8%) with disc herniation and 1 (2%) with spondylolisthesis required reoperation. The overall follow-up rate for the collection of patient-reported outcome data over 1 year was 88.3%. At 30 days, both lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion procedures were associated with significant improvements in ODI, VAS, and SF-36 scores (p ≤ 0.0002), which persisted over the 1-year follow-up period (p < 0.0001). By the 1-year follow-up evaluation, more than 80% of patients in each cohort who were working preoperatively had returned to work. CONCLUSIONS It is feasible to build a national spine registry for the collection of high-quality prospective data to demonstrate the effectiveness of spinal procedures in actual practice. Clinical trial registration no.: 01220921 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pigmented villonodular synovitis of the thoracic spine

OBJECT The authors have established a multicenter registry to assess the efficacy and costs of common lumbar spinal procedures using prospectively collected outcomes. Collection of these data requires an extensive commitment of resources from each site. The aim of this study was to determine whether outcomes data from shorter-interval follow-up could be used to accurately estimate long-term outcome following lumbar discectomy. METHODS An observational prospective cohort study was completed at 13 academic and community sites. Patients undergoing single-level lumbar discectomy for treatment of disc herniation were included. SF-36 and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) data were obtained preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) data were calculated using SF-6D utility scores. Correlations among outcomes at each follow-up time point were tested using the Spearman rank correlation test. RESULTS One hundred forty-eight patients were enrolled over 1 year. Their mean age was 46 years (49% female). Eleven patients (7.4%) required a reoperation by 1 year postoperatively. The overall 1-year follow-up rate was 80.4%. Lumbar discectomy was associated with significant improvements in ODI and SF-36 scores (p < 0.0001) and with a gain of 0.246 QALYs over the 1-year study period. The greatest gain occurred between baseline and 3-month follow-up and was significantly greater than improvements obtained between 3 and 6 months or 6 months and 1 year(p < 0.001). Correlations between 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year outcomes were similar, suggesting that 3-month data may be used to accurately estimate 1-year outcomes for patients who do not require a reoperation. Patients who underwent reoperation had worse outcomes scores and nonsignificant correlations at all time points. CONCLUSIONS This national spine registry demonstrated successful collection of high-quality outcomes data for spinal procedures in actual practice. Three-month outcome data may be used to accurately estimate outcome at future time points and may lower costs associated with registry data collection. This registry effort provides a practical foundation for the acquisition of outcome data following lumbar discectomy.

Laparoscopic approach for lumbar spinal fusion.

Objective: To determine whether patients who learned the views of an expert surgeons’ panels assessment of equipoise between 2 alternative operative treatments had increased likelihood of consenting to randomization. Background: Difficulty obtaining patient consent to randomization is an important barrier to conducting surgical randomized clinical trials, the gold standard for generating clinical evidence. Methods: Observational study of the rate of patient acceptance of randomization within a 5-center randomized clinical trial comparing lumbar spinal decompression versus lumbar spinal decompression plus instrumented fusion for patients with symptomatic grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. Eligible patients were enrolled in the trial and then asked to accept randomization. A panel of 10 expert spine surgeons was formed to review clinical information and images for individual patients to provide an assessment of suitability for randomization. The expert panel vote was disclosed to the patient by the patients surgeon before the patient decided whether to accept randomization or not. Results: Randomization acceptance among eligible patients without expert panel review was 40% (19/48) compared with 81% (47/58) among patients undergoing expert panel review (P < 0.001). Among expert-reviewed patients, randomization acceptance was 95% when all experts or all except 1 voted for randomization, 75% when 2 experts voted against randomization, and 20% with 3 or 4 votes against (P < 0.001 for trend). Conclusions: Patients provided with an expert panels assessment of their own suitability for randomization were twice as likely to agree to randomization compared with patients receiving only their own surgeons recommendation.