The Role of Calcium Pyrophosphate Dihydrate Deposition in the Postoperative Outcome of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study.PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the association of surgical intervention with clinical and quality of life (QoL) outcomes in patients who underwent posterior spinal surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with spinal calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate deposition (SCPPD) versus that in those who underwent the surgery for LSS without SCPPD.OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Calcium pyrophosphate (CPP)-associated arthritis is one of the most common types of arthritis. The clinical outcomes are well studied in CPP-associated arthritis of the appendicular joints. However, few studies have investigated SCPPD.METHODS: A single-institution database was reviewed. LSS patients were categorized as those who did and did not have SCPPD, based on histologic identification. Clinical presentations and postoperative results were analyzed. Disability and QoL were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey.RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enrolled, with 18 patients being allocated to the SCPPD group and 16 being allocated to the non- SCPPD group. Preoperative and postoperative pain scores were not significantly different between the groups (p=0.33 and p=0.48, respectively). The average preoperative ODI score in the SCPPD group was slightly higher than that in the non-SCPPD group (57 vs. 51, p=0.33); however, the postoperative ODI score was significantly lower (15 vs. 43, p=0.01). The postoperative physical function, vitality, and mental health of the SCPPD patients were also significantly improved (p=0.03, p=0.022, and p=0.022, respectively).CONCLUSIONS: Surgical intervention resulted in good clinical outcomes in SCPPD patients. As per our findings, total removal of CPPinvolved tissue is unnecessary. As such, surgery should be performed as indicated according to clinical presentation without considering the presence of CPPD.

Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of the Posterior and Combined Approaches for Repair of Cervical Fractures in Ankylosing Spondylitis

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: To evaluate surgical outcomes and complications of cervical spine fractures in ankylosing spondylitis (CAS) patients who were treated using either the posterior (P) or combined approach (C). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Ankylosing spondylitis typically causes progressive spinal stiffness that makes patients susceptible to spinal fractures. CAS is a highly unstable condition. There is contradictory evidence regarding which treatment option, the posterior or the combined approach, yields superior clinical results. METHODS: A single institution database was reviewed for data in the period 1999 to 2015. All CAS patients who underwent posterior or combined instrumented fusion were enrolled. We analyzed demographic data, radiographic results, perioperative complications, and postoperative results. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were enrolled (23 in the P group, 10 in the C group). All patients presented with neck pain after a fall. In the P group, mean operative time was 161.1 minutes (100–327 minutes), and mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 306.4 mL (50–750 mL). In the C group, 90% of patients underwent a staged procedure, typically with posterior surgery first. Mean EBL was 124 mL (25–337 mL). For posterior surgery, mean EBL was 458.3 mL (400–550 mL). EBL of posterior surgery in the C group was higher but this difference was not significant (p=0.16). Postoperative complication rate was higher in the C group but this difference was not significant (50% vs. 17.4%, p=0.09). In the follow-up period, no late reoperations were performed. Patients who underwent C surgery had a higher rate of neurological improvement but this difference was not significant (p=0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Both P and C provided good clinical results. P surgery had lower EBL, lower postoperative complication rate, and shorter length of stay than C surgery; none of these differences were statistically significant.