Post cervical spine surgery hyperpyrexia (108?F) in a patient with COVID-19: a case report

Perioperative hyperpyrexia raises many questions and can cause permanent brain damage if left untreated. Malignant hyperthermia (MH), although uncommon, but sporadic cases continue to happen and it is potentially life-threatening. It is characterized by sudden rise of body temperatures to above 106 degrees F or even more, and hypercapnia. It is usually associated with anesthetic exposure. However, not every hyperpyrexia is MH;a clinical examination, risk stratification, scoring, and logical approach are required to exclude MH in the postoperative patient. We present a case of rare postoperative hyperpyrexia caused by COVID-19. The patient underwent uneventful spine surgery under general anesthesia and developed hyperpyrexia on the first postoperative day. The case highlights the importance of a logical and systematic approach for excluding the causes of postoperative hyperpyrexia and aggressive management.

The Development And Applications Of Augmented And Virtual Reality Technology In Spine Surgery Training: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the growing global interest in the role of augmented and virtual reality in surgical training. While this technology grows at a rapid rate, its efficacy remains unclear. To that end, we offer a systematic review of the literature summarizing the role of virtual and augmented reality on spine surgery training. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted on May 13th, 2022. PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, and Embase were reviewed for relevant studies. Studies from both orthopedic and neurosurgical spine programs were considered. There were no restrictions placed on the type of study, virtual/augmented reality modality, nor type of procedure. Qualitative data analysis was performed, and all studies were assigned a Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) score. RESULTS: The initial review identified 6752 studies, of which 16 were deemed relevant and included in the final review, examining a total of nine unique augmented/virtual reality systems. These studies had a moderate methodological quality with a MERSQI score of 12.1 + 1.8; most studies were conducted at single-center institutions, and unclear response rates. Statistical pooling of the data was limited by the heterogeneity of the study designs. CONCLUSION: This review examined the applications of augmented and virtual reality systems for training residents in various spine procedures. As this technology continues to advance, higher-quality, multi-center, and long-term studies are required to further the adaptation of VR/AR technologies in spine surgery training programs.

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Spine Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Series

Background: Hospitals are one of the primary resources for disease transmission, so many guidelines were published, and neuro-surgeons were advised to postpone elective spine surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective(s): To avoid pulmonary complications and reduce the risk of spreading the virus and contracting the disease during the COVID-19 era, we operated a group of our patients under spinal anesthesia rather than general anesthesia. Method(s): We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent discectomy surgery for lumbar spinal disc herniation under SA between September 2020 and 2021. Result(s): Sixty-four patients diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation underwent lumbar discectomy with SA. All patients except three were male. The mean age was 44.52 +/- 7.95 years (28 to 64 years). The mean procedure time for SA was 10 minutes. The duration of the surgery was 40 to 90 minutes per each level of disc herniation. The mean blood loss was 350 cc (200 to 600 cc). The most common involved level was L4/L5 intervertebral disc (n = 40 patients;63.5%). The mean recovery time was 20 minutes. Only three patients requested more analgesics for relief of their pain postoperatively. All patients with discectomy were discharged a day after surgery, and in the case of fusion, two days after surgery. All the patients were followed up for six months, showing no recurrence symptoms, good pain relief, satisfaction with the surgery, and no bad memory of the surgery. Conclusion(s): Spinal anesthesia is a good alternative or even the main anesthesia route for patients with lumbar disc herniation. More studies are needed to elucidate the best candidate for SA in patients with lumbar pathology.Copyright © 2023, Author(s).

The Effect of COVID-19 on Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort analysis. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the impact of COVID-19 on utilization of the ten most common spine procedures and percentages of outpatient procedures. METHODS: The PearlDiver national database was queried from January 2010 to April 2021 for short (<6 segments) and long segment posterior instrumented fusion (≥6 segments), posterior cervical fusion, anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF), cervical laminectomy, laminoplasty, and disc arthroplasty, lumbar laminectomy, microdiscectomy, and interbody fusion. Annual procedure utilization between January 2010 through April 2021 was recorded and compared. Monthly trends were compared to January 2020. Outpatient trends were compared between 2010-2019 and 2019-2021 using segmented linear regression. RESULTS: Overall, all ten procedures decreased 4.3% in 2020 compared to 2019 and increased 6.3% in 2021 compared to 2019. March and April of 2020 had the largest decreases, with March 2020 decreasing 18.2% and April 2020 decreasing 51.6% compared to January 2020. Despite increasing COVID cases in January 2021, overall procedure utilization decreased only 1.8% compared to January 2020, and increased later in 2021 with April 2021 case volumes increasing by 138% compared to January 2020. Outpatient utilization of short segment posterior lumbar fusion and lumbar interbody fusion significantly increased during this time (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The greatest impact on spine surgery volume from the COVID-19 pandemic occurred in March and April 2020. Spine procedure utilization was otherwise similar or increased compared to January 2020. Additionally, the volume of outpatient short segment posterior fusion and lumbar interbody fusions increased during this time period.

Commencing Novel Therapies for Adult Sma Patients: Experience from a Hybrid Clinic

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a progressive neuromuscular disorder that affect both adults and children. Two novel therapies were approved for patients in England by NICE (Nusinersen via Management Access Agreement (MAA) and Risdiplam via Early Access to Medicine scheme (EAMS)). Setting up baseline assessments, designing new pathways, acquiring personnel and resources have been challenging. We present a pathway analysis of the new clinic set-up, process of patient choice, risk minimisation in intro- ducing the two novel therapies, and the impact therapies have had on adult cohort of SMA patients. Total of 58 patients included (31 had type 2 SMA and 27 had type 3[only 11/27 were ambulant]. The average age of patients with type 2 and 3 SMA was 25 and 33 respectively. 19 patients chose risdiplam (oral) and 22 are on nusinersen (intra thecal). We analysed factors that govern patients' treatment decisions. We report factors that helped early success in our hybrid clinic set-up. Set criteria on each scheme;but potential side effects, information availability, route of administration (mainly previous spinal surgery), speed at treatment initiation but not COVID directed many patients' treatment decisions. A battery of outcome measures were analysed to establish treatment impact at 12 months.

Remote patient monitoring following full endoscopic spine surgery: feasibility and patient satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE: The utilization of telemedicine in healthcare has increased dramatically during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility to perform remote patient monitoring after full endoscopic spine surgery via a smartphone application that also allows communication with patients. METHODS: A smartphone application (SPINEhealthie) was designed at the University of Washington and used to collect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and to provide chat communication between patients and their care team. A total of 71 patients were included in the study and prospectively followed for 3 months postoperatively. Patient demographic characteristics, compliance with surveys, and frequency of chat utilization were recorded. The ease of use, the participants' experiences with the app interface design, and the usefulness of the app were assessed by using the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire (MAUQ). RESULTS: Of all eligible patients, 71/78 (91.0%) agreed to participate. Of these, 60 (85%) patients provided at least 1 postoperative PROM. There was good coverage of the immediate postoperative period with 45 (63.4%) patients providing ≥ 5 PROMs within the 1st week after surgery. The authors observed a 33.2% increase in patient compliance in postoperative PROMs and a 45.7% increase in chat function utilization between the first and last of the three enrollment periods of the study, during which continuous updates were made to improve the app's functionality. Sixty-two (87.3%) patients responded to the user satisfaction survey after using the app for at least 40 days. The MAUQ results revealed excellent rates of satisfaction for ease of use (78.6% of the maximum score), app interface design (71.4%), and usefulness (71.4%), resulting in a total mean MAUQ score of 110 (74.8%). Communication with the doctor (38 votes) was found to be the top feature of the app. Additionally, physical therapy instructions (33 votes) and imaging review (29 votes) were the top two features that patients would like to see in future app versions. Lastly, the authors have presented a case example of a 68-year-old man who used the app for postoperative monitoring and communication after undergoing a two-level lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative remote patient monitoring and communication after full endoscopic surgery is feasible using the SPINEhealthie app. Importantly, patients were willing to share their medical information using a mobile device, and they were eager to use it postoperatively as a supplementary tool.

Cerebral Air Embolism During a Flight

Introduction: We report a case of a 67 year old lady with an acute drop in conscious level whilst on a transatlantic flight. She had a background history of TII DM and recent mild COVID. Past surgical history of a gastric bypass, at which time a CXR had incidentally shown a bulla, with no underlying respiratory symptoms, or history of COPD. Method(s): On arrival in the emergency department, her GCS was 7/15, and she required immediate intubation. Non-contrast CT head showed multiple tiny gas locules in keeping with air emboli. CT Chest, Abdo, Pelvis showed an 88mm bulla within the left lung lingula with a bronchus and many large pulmonary vessels running on its edge. Result(s): It was thought the change in air pressure during the flight caused a communication to open between the bulla and the pulmonary circulation resulting in the release of air emboli. Conclusion(s): She required ITU admission for 8 days. After initial stabilisation she was stepped down to HASU. Neurologically she was dysphagic, dysarthric, quadriplegic and GCS 14 due to confusion. MRI whole spine ruled out spinal cord pathology. Repeat CT head showed air initially present had completely resorbed leaving multifocal, small areas of cortical and subcortical ischaemia in both cerebral hemispheres. MRI head confirmed innumerable small early subacute embolic ischaemic infarcts across multiple vascular distributions.

COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND CHANGING PRACTICES IN SPINAL SURGERY

The novel Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), which was identified in December 2019, has quickly evolved into a pandemic, thereby forcing spine surgeons to modify their daily practice. Several articles and guidelines have been published on how to manage daily routines during the pandemic. Neurologic deficits, spinal instability and spinal infections are generally considered as emergencies and treated immediately. Every patient who is scheduled to undergo surgery must first be screened for signs and symptoms of the disease, and diagnostic tests must be conducted on suspected and high-risk patients. In addition, precautions must be taken in the operating room to minimise the risk of disease transmission. In regions where the disease has started to decline, a gradual return to the normal routine activities is being considered. Surgeons must be aware of the local circumstances and elective surgeries can only be resumed when the safety of patients and healthcare personnel are no longer at risk. In this review article, we aimed to combine the data with our experience and help spine surgeons in adapting to the current situation. © 2020 Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery. All rights reserved.

Minimally invasive endoscopy in spine surgery: where are we now?

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) is a minimally invasive surgical technique that offers comparable efficacy and safety with less collateral damage compared to conventional surgery. To achieve clinical success, it is imperative to stay abreast of technological advancements, modern surgical instruments and technique, and updated evidence. PURPOSES: To provide a comprehensive review and updates of ESS including the nomenclature, technical evolution, bibliometric analysis of evidence, recent changes in the spine communities, the prevailing of biportal endoscopy, and the future of endoscopic spine surgery. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature on ESS for the mentioned topics from January 1989 to November 2022. Three major electronic databases were searched, including MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase. Covidence Systematic Review was used to organize the eligible records. Two independent reviewers screened the articles for relevance. RESULTS: In total, 312 articles were finally included for review. We found various use of nomenclatures in the field of ESS publication. To address this issue, we proposed the use of distinct terms to describe the biportal and uniportal techniques, as well as their specific approaches. In the realm of technical advancement, ESS has rapidly evolved from addressing disc herniation and spinal stenosis to encompassing endoscopic fusion, along with technological innovations such as navigation, robotics, and augmented reality. According to bibliometric analysis, China, South Korea, and the USA have accounted for almost three-quarters of total publications. The studies of the biportal endoscopy are becoming increasingly popular in South Korea where the top ten most-cited articles have been published. The biportal endoscopy technique is relatively simple to adopt, as it relies on a more familiar approach, requires less expensive instruments, has a shorter learning curve, and is also well-suited for interbody fusion. The uniportal approach provided the smallest area of soft tissue dissection. While robotics and augmented reality in ESS are not widely embraced, the use of navigation in ESS is expected to become more streamlined, particularly with the emergence of recent electromagnetic-based navigation technologies. CONCLUSIONS: In this paper, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of ESS, as well as an updated summary of current trends in the field, including the biportal and uniportal approaches. Additionally, we summarize the nomenclature used in ESS, present a bibliometric analysis of the field, and discuss future directions for the advancement of the field.

Comparison of coagulation profile and thromboembolic events among patients undergoing spinal surgery before and after COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Impairment of coagulation parameters and increased rate of thromboembolism are known complications of COVID-19 infection. In this study the coagulation profile and rate of thromboembolic events between two groups of patients who underwent spinal surgery before and after the COVID-19 pandemic was compared. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Clinically and laboratory negative for COVID-19 elective patients before (n: 211) and during COVID- 19 pandemic (n: 294) with spinal surgeries were included in this retrospective study. Surgical characteristics, Physiologic parameters, coagulation parameters and thromboembolic events were compared between the two study groups. RESULTS: Preoperative coagulation parameters, including PT, PTT, and INR were significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (P < 0.001. P = 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively), while the platelet count was significantly reduced (P = 0.04). The same differences were observed between the two study groups after the spinal surgery. In addition, respiratory rate and postoperative bleeding of the first postoperative 24 h was significantly more in patients who were operated on during COVID-19 outbreak (P = 0.03 and P = 0.002, respectively). The rate of thromboembolic events was 3.1% during the COVID-19 pandemic (seven PE, one DVT, and one MI) and 0% before that. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0.043). CONCLUSION: The rate of thromboembolic events seems to be increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings urge more stringent monitoring of the patients' coagulation parameters during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemia on spine surgery in 2nd level hospital. / Impacto de la pandemia COVID-19 en la cirugía de columna en un centro de segundo nivel.

INTRODUCTION: The consequences of COVID-19 pandemic, like in any other field of medicine, had such a massive effect in the activity of spine surgeons. OBJECTIVES: The main purpose of the study is quantifying the number of interventions done between 2016 and 2021 and analyze the time between the indication and the intervention as an indirect measurement of the waiting list. As secondary objectives we focused on variations of the length of stay and duration of the surgeries during this specific period. METHODS: We performed a descriptive retrospective study including all the interventions and diagnosis made during a period including pre-pandemic data (starting on 2016) until 2021, when we considered the normalization of surgical activity was achieved. A total of 1039 registers were compiled. The data collected included age, gender, days in waiting list before the intervention, diagnosis, time of hospitalization and surgery duration. RESULTS: We found that the total number of interventions during the pandemic has significantly decreased compared to 2019 (32.15% less in 2020 and 23.5% less in 2021). After data analysis, we found an increase of data dispersion, average waiting list time and for diagnosis after 2020. No differences were found regarding hospitalization time or surgical time. CONCLUSION: The number of surgeries decreased during pandemic due to the redistribution of human and material resources to face the raising of critical COVID-19 patients. The increase of data dispersion and median of waiting time, is the consequence of a growing waiting list for non-urgent surgeries during the pandemic as the urgent interventions also raised, those with a shorter waiting time.

[Translated article] Impact of COVID-19 pandemia on spine surgery in 2nd level hospital.

INTRODUCTION: The consequences of COVID-19 pandemic, like in any other field of medicine, had such a massive effect in the activity of spine surgeons. OBJECTIVES: The main purpose of the study is quantifying the number of interventions done between 2016 and 2021 and analyze the time between the indication and the intervention as an indirect measurement of the waiting list. As secondary objectives we focused on variations of the length of stay and duration of the surgeries during this specific period. METHODS: We performed a descriptive retrospective study including all the interventions and diagnosis made during a period including pre-pandemic data (starting on 2016) until 2021, when we considered the normalization of surgical activity was achieved. A total of 1039 registers were compiled. The data collected included age, gender, days in waiting list before the intervention, diagnosis, time of hospitalization and surgery duration. RESULTS: We found that the total number of interventions during the pandemic has significantly decreased compared to 2019 (32.15% less in 2020 and 23.5% less in 2021). After data analysis, we found an increase of data dispersion, average waiting list time and for diagnosis after 2020. No differences were found regarding hospitalization time or surgical time. CONCLUSION: The number of surgeries decreased during pandemic due to the redistribution of human and material resources to face the raising of critical COVID-19 patients. The increase of data dispersion and median of waiting time, is the consequence of a growing waiting list for non-urgent surgeries during the pandemic as the urgent interventions also raised, those with a shorter waiting time.

Impact of COVID-19 on Spinal Diagnosis and Procedural Volume in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a national database. OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 resulted in the widespread shifting of hospital resources to handle surging COVID-19 cases resulting in the postponement of surgeries, including numerous spine procedures. This study aimed to quantify the impact that COVID-19 had on the number of treated spinal conditions and diagnoses during the pandemic. METHODS: Using CPT and ICD-10 codes, TriNetX, a national database, was utilized to quantify spine procedures and diagnoses in patients >18 years of age. The period of March 2020-May 2021 was compared to a reference pre-pandemic period of March 2018-May 2019. Each time period was then stratified into four seasons of the year, and the mean average number of procedures per healthcare organization was compared. RESULTS: In total, 524,394 patient encounters from 53 healthcare organizations were included in the analysis. There were significant decreases in spine procedures and diagnoses during March-May 2020 compared to pre-pandemic levels. Measurable differences were noted for spine procedures during the winter of 2020-2021, including a decrease in lumbar laminectomy and anterior cervical arthrodesis. Comparing the pandemic period to the pre-pandemic period showed significant reductions in most spine procedures and treated diagnoses; however, there was an increase in open repair of thoracic fractures during this period. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 resulted in a widespread decrease in spinal diagnosis and treated conditions. An inverse relationship was observed between new COVID-19 cases and spine procedural volume. Recent increases in procedural volume from pre-pandemic levels are promising signs that the spine surgery community has narrowed the gap in unmet care produced by the pandemic.

Management and Scheduling of Spine Surgery in a Level 1 Trauma Center in the Setting of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Feasibility and Considerations for Reimplementation of Elective Spine Surgery.

Introduction: Determination of what constitutes necessary surgery in the setting of acute hospital resource strain during the COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented challenge for healthcare systems. Over the past two years during the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been many changes in reviews of medically necessary spine surgery. There continues to be no clear guidelines on recommendations and further discussion is necessary to continue to provide appropriate and high-level care during future pandemics. Significance: This review critically appraises and evaluates current barriers to medically necessary spine surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and evaluates future decision making to maintain spine surgery during future pandemics or limitations in medical care. Results: Multiple studies included in this review have shown that while various orthopaedic surgeries may be considered elective, medically necessary spine surgery will need to continue during settings of limited medical care. This review discussed multiple methods and recommendations to limit transmission of virus from patients to providers and providers to patients. Conclusion: Continued medically necessary spine surgery in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics should continue while limiting risk of transmission to continue providing high-level medical care and allowing hospitals to maintain financial responsibility.

Impact Of COVID-19 On Patients Requiring Spine Surgery: A Tertiary Level Government Trauma Hospital Experience.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak caused by the SARS Corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), that appeared in Wuhan, China in December 2019 evolved into a pandemic and caused a devastating effect in all aspect of life. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of Covid-19 on the management of spine patients requiring surgery and to observe the functioning of a trauma center in a pandemic situation. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed at National Trauma Center, Kathmandu, Nepal from January 1 2019 to February 28 2020(Pre-Covid period) and March 1 2020 to April 30 2021(Covid Period) . All patients undergoing spine surgery were included and details regarding demographics, diagnosis, surgical procedures were obtained and compared between pre- covid and covid period and also between complete lockdown period and partial lockdown period of the covid duration. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients undergoing surgery in the Pre covid period was (40.4 ± 14.51) years and covid period was (38.9 ± 14.00) years. The number of spine surgeries performed during the pre covid period was 295 whereas the number decreased to 197 in the covid period. The total number of non traumatic spine surgery in the pre covid period was 22.03% of the total spine surgery cases where as it decreased to 11.68% in the covid period. Similarly out of the total cases instrumented surgery was 91.86% in the pre covid period whereas it was 97.97% in the covid period. While analyzing the spine surgery done in the COVID period we found that most of the cases of surgery done in the complete restriction period was of traumatic spine only (97.77%) where as in the limited restriction period non traumatic spine surgery was also increased with traumatic spine surgery accounting for 85.52% of the total spine surgery cases. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID pandemic has had a direct impact on traumatic and non-traumatic spine surgeries performed in this center.

Durability of Symptom Relief with Restorative Neurostimulation for Mechanical Chronic Low Back Pain: Three-Year Follow-up Results of the Pivotal Trial: Track 3: Neurostimulation for Back and Leg Pain

Introduction: Mechanical chronic low back pain (CLBP) can be caused by impaired neuromuscular control and degeneration of the multifidus muscles, the most important stabilizers of the lumbar spine. An implantable Restorative Neurostimulation system bilaterally stimulates the medial branches of the L2 dorsal rami to override underlying multifidus inhibition to facilitate motor control restoration. A randomized sham-controlled pivotal trial provided evidence of safety, effectiveness and durability of this therapy (clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02577354).[1,2] Here we will report the three-year durability results. Materials / Methods: Eligible patients had activity limiting mechanical CLBP (VAS >=6cm;Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) >=21 points) despite medical management, which included at least pain medications and physical therapy. They had evidence of impaired multifidus motor control (positive prone instability test) and no indication for spine surgery. All patients were implanted with a Restorative Neurostimulation system (ReActiv8, Mainstay Medical, Dublin, Ireland). During the long-term follow-up phase, all participants delivered stimulation for up to 30 minutes twice daily eliciting repetitive, tonic multifidus contractions. Result(s): At baseline (N=204), participants were 47+/-9 years of age, had history of backpain for 14+/-11 years, had an average low back pain VAS of 7.3+/-0.7 cm, ODI of 39+/-10, EQ-5D of 0.585+/-0.174 points and had pain on 97+/-8% of days in the year prior to enrollment. Three-year data are available for 124 participants*. Average VAS improved by 5.0+/-2.4 cm, ODI by 23+/-15 points and EQ-5D by 0.223+/-0.199 (All P<0.0001);78% of participants had a >=50% VAS improvement;69% reported LBP-Resolution (VAS<=2.5 cm);65% had a >=20-point ODI improvement and 86% of participants were "definitely satisfied" with the treatment. Pain intensity and disability are interdependent symptoms and treatment success is determined by composite improvements in ODI and VAS: 84% had a substantial improvement of >=50% in VAS and/or >=20points in ODI, and 59% had these improvements in both VAS and ODI. Of participants using opioids at baseline, 72% had voluntarily discontinued or decreased consumption. Overall safety compares favorably to other neurostimulation systems, and no lead migrations were observed. During the third year of follow-up, 6 participants requested device removal citing resolution of pain. Discussion(s): See conclusions. Conclusion(s): Restorative-Neurostimulation is an effective, durable, and safe treatment for patients with refractory, activity-limiting CLBP secondary to impaired multifidus neuromuscular control. Consistent with the restorative mechanism, improvements accrue progressively over time. *Twenty-five follow-ups pending (Covid-19 restrictions) Learning Objectives: 1. Understand the long term pain outcomes (three year outcomes) of restorative neurostimulation for refractory chronic low back pain. 2. Understand the long term function outcomes (three year outcomes) of restorative neurostimulation for refractory chronic low back pain. 3. Understand the long term safety outcomes (three year outcomes) of restorative neurostimulation for refractory chronic low back pain. Keywords: nociceptive low back pain, multifidus, motor control, Restorative neurostimulation, chronic low back pain Copyright © 2022

Global research hotspots and trends in the field of spine surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A bibliometric and visual analysis.

Background: The Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) significantly affected the healthcare and research systems, including spine surgery, throughout the world. A bibliometric analysis allows graphical visualization of the development of an academic field and its frontiers. Since research concerning spine surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is being constantly upgraded, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of this literature to investigate the current status, research hotspots, and trends in this field. Methods: We searched the Web of Science database for literature published (from December 1, 2019, to March 24, 2022) using the terms "COVID-19" OR "2019-nCoV" OR "SARS-CoV-2" AND "spine surgery" OR "spinal surgery" OR "discectomy" OR "decompression" OR "laminectomy" OR "interbody fusion" OR "pedicle screws." Detailed bibliometric and visual analysis of the number of publications, geographical distribution, institutions, journals, authors, and keywords was done using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R-Bibliometrix. Results: Of the initially screened 173 articles, we included 84 relevant articles-62 original articles, 10 editorial materials, 8 reviews, and 4 others. The United States, China, Egypt, and Argentina were most actively publishing in the field of spine surgery and COVID-19. The AOSpine International community contributed 7 articles (24 citations). The Hospital for Special Surgery (13.1%) and Johns Hopkins University (13.1%) were institutions with the most publications. Using the Law of Bradford, we found that World Neurosurgery, Global Spine Journal, and European Spine Journal are the core journals in this field, with P. K. Louie being the most influential author. "Elective surgery," "intensive care," "telehealth," "patient satisfaction," and "follow-up" had the strongest citation bursts. Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, spine surgeons were more concerned with surgical timing, care, treatment, and patient's quality of life. Accordingly, research hotspots in spine surgery during the pandemic shifted from "early healthcare" to "virus management" and "experience and education."

Telemedicine in practice: Patient selection and strategies adopted in spinal care during the COVID-19 era and beyond.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a substantial effect on health-care systems around the world. To deal with this challenge, we developed a prospectus design and test a teleconsultation procedure suitable for both diagnostic and therapeutic needs of outpatients in our Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery Units. Methods: (1) The first 15 patients received in-person and telemedicine visits: Our pilot began with screening protocol that involved 15 patients who received an in-person assessment and a telemedicine consult. The 15 patients who were selected were already known to our unit after having had at least one previous in-person visit. Further, they had to be neurologically intact or have a stable neurological examination. The secondary teleconsultation took place as a synchronous face-to-face communication between the doctor and the patient through a video interface (Lifesize Video Conferencing, Austin, Texas). If the patient demonstrated worsening of symptoms or of their condition, they were rescheduled for an immediate/timely in-person revisit with a spinal physician. (2) Fifty patients were offered telemedicine visits alone: 35 accepted: Next, from 2020 to 2021, we provided a questionnaire to 50 patients, we deemed eligible for teleconsultations: 35 agreed to the teleconsultations, while 15 refused (i.e., selecting direct in-person assessments). Results: We found a comparable quality for the clinical consultations/assessments provided in-person versus through telemedicine. Further, the additional 35 patients who were positively impressed with the quality of the medical care provided utilizing the telemedicine/remote visits alone. Conclusion: When pandemic conditions worsen, telemedicine appears to be a viable and important tool/ alternative for spinal surgeons to screen potential patients for treatment/surgery. This preliminary study suggests that a remote examination may be effective, particularly in patients who have previously undergone prior in-person evaluations.

The effect of COVID-19 lockdown restrictions on oswestry disability index scores: a comparative cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: Lockdown measures to combat the COVID-19 pandemic restricted social interactions and travel. This retrospective, observational study was conducted to evaluate the effect of lockdown restrictions on Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores in patients with spinal conditions. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from the British Spine Registry were retrospectively analysed in two groups. The study group included patients' baseline pre-operative ODI scores collected during the first national lockdown in the UK between March and May 2020. The reference group included ODI scores recorded during the same period in 2019, before the pandemic. Scores were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test. We also calculated modified scores that omitted responses to questions related to travel and social life. These were compared using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: The median ODI scores for the reference and lockdown groups were 49 and 45, respectively, with no significant differences in the mean ranks (p = 0.068). Comparisons of original and modified ODI scores showed different outcomes for each study group. No significant differences were observed in the lockdown group (p = 0.06). However, for the pre-COVID-19 reference group, there was a significant difference (p < 0.01). Bland-Altman analyses showed reasonable agreement between the methods for calculating ODI in both groups. CONCLUSION: We found no clinically important differences in ODI scores between the two groups. The findings suggest that the ODI is reliable during lockdown situations and can be used with confidence in the future research using both retrospective and prospective data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

Creation of a Proof-of-Concept 3D-Printed Spinal Lateral Access Simulator.

Background Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) offers advantages over traditional approaches, providing indirect decompression of neural elements and deformity correction while avoiding many challenges and risks of anterior and posterior approaches. Mastering this technique requires a specialized team, advanced equipment, and sufficient case exposure. Current training is limited to the classic educational model, and alternative training methods such as cadaver labs can be inconvenient, inaccessible, expensive, and incompatible with intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) systems. Objective The aim of this study was to create a proof-of-concept, low-cost, fully synthetic lateral lumbar surgical simulator and to increase awareness of the lack of current training alternatives. Methods Standard engineering design and expert interviews of attending neurosurgeons, nurses, engineers, and medical device representatives (n=20) were utilized to determine key elements for the simulator, physical characteristics of the components, and translational strategy. Physical and radiographic testing was performed on multiple thermoplastics to determine appropriateness for inclusion in the simulator. For evaluation of the concept, a descriptive slide deck and questionnaire were sent to 15 U.S. and 15 international surgeons who perform LLIF. Results The lateral access training model (LATM) features the following three components: torso casing, spine module, and IONM feature. This model utilizes operable ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) 3D-printed lumbar vertebrae, verified for anatomical accuracy and compatibility with fluoroscopy. Additionally, a novel neuromonitoring simulation algorithm was developed to train junior residents on neurological complications. To further highlight the need for lateral training models, 30/30 polled surgeons felt that this simulator has value for the field, 29/30 noted that they would have used the LATM if they had access during training, and 30/30 responded that they would encourage trainees to practice on the LATM. Conclusion The LATM is a first step to provide reliable and inexpensive basic lateral lumbar spine training. While this model is lacking some anatomical features, our simulator offers novel training elements for lateral lumbar transpsoas approaches, which lay the foundation for future models to be built. The need for this training exists, and current gaps in the approach to learning these complex techniques need to be filled due to the inconvenience, cost, and impracticability of standard cadaveric models.