The effect of chronic liver disease on acute outcomes following cervical spine trauma.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The adverse impact of chronic liver diseases, including chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis, on outcomes following orthopedic surgery has been increasingly recognized in recent years. The impact of these conditions on acute outcomes following spinal trauma remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cohort control study that uses patient records in the Massachusetts Statewide Inpatient Dataset (2003-2010). PURPOSE: The study aimed to evaluate whether chronic liver disease increased the odds of mortality, complications, failure to rescue (FTR), reoperation, and hospital length of stay (LOS) following cervical spine trauma. PATIENT SAMPLE: The sample is composed of 10,841 patients with cervical spine trauma. OUTCOME MEASURES: Posttreatment morbidity, mortality, reoperation, and LOS were the outcome measures. METHODS: Differences between patients with and without chronic liver disease were evaluated using chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Logistic and negative binomial regression techniques were used to adjust for confounders, including whether a surgical intervention was performed. Receiver operator characteristic curves were used to assess final model discrimination. RESULTS: There were 117 patients with chronic liver disease identified in the cohort. The rate of surgical intervention for cervical trauma was not significantly different between patients with and without chronic liver disease (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.29). Mortality (OR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.23-3.66), FTR (OR: 2.86, 95% CI: 1.34-6.11), complications (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.12-2.45), and LOS (regression coefficients: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14-0.48) were all significantly increased for patients with chronic liver disease in final adjusted models that controlled for differences in case-mix and whether a surgical procedure was performed. Final models explained approximately 72% of the variation in mortality and FTR. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel findings indicate that patients with chronic liver disease may be at elevated risk of posttreatment morbidity and mortality following cervical spine trauma. Medical comanagement in the acute period following injury and optimization before surgery may diminish the potential for adverse events.

A multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a stand-alone anterior carbon I/F Cage for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Two-year prospective multicenter clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of the anterior I/F Cage in the primary treatment of single-level degenerative disc disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A carbon fiber-reinforced polymer cage was designed to replace the traditional allograft/autograft structural graft used in an anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Although the outcomes of various types of ALIF cages have previously been reported, the safety and efficacy of the I/F cage are unknown. METHODS: Between June 2000 and June 2004, 112 patients were prospectively enrolled at 12 study sites for the current study. Efficacy was evaluated clinically and radiographically. "Patient success" was declared only when the following 4 criteria were present at final follow-up: (1) "clinical success": improvement of 15 points on Oswestry Disability Index, (2) absence of a new neurologic abnormality, (3) successful radiographic fusion, and (4) no subsequent secondary surgical intervention at 24-month follow-up. Safety was inferred by way of an objective summary of complications and adverse events, as reported at regular intervals throughout the course of the study. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (mean age: 41.7 years) underwent a single-level ALIF procedure (L5-S1: 95 patients, L4-L5: 17 patients). The mean surgical time was 126 minutes, the mean estimated blood loss was 134 mL, and the mean duration of hospitalization was 3.3 days. There were 80 patients available for 24-month follow-up. Overall patient success was 25% (20/80). Clinical success was present in 46.3% (37/80), fusion success was 57.5% (46/80), and 87.5% of patients (70/80) avoided a subsequent secondary surgical intervention. Disc space height had significantly increased after surgery, and this increase was maintained at 2 years follow-up period. Complications and adverse events included the following: 8 infections (7.1%) (7 superficial, 1 deep), 2 vascular injuries (1.8%) (left common iliac vein), and 12 secondary surgical interventions (15%). CONCLUSION: This safety and efficacy study suggests that the anterior I/F Cage is a safe surgical option in the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease. As a stand-alone construct, the I/F Cage yields suboptimal radiographic and clinical outcomes. Additional benefit may be gained from adjunctive posterior stabilization.

Surgical treatment of unstable type II odontoid fractures in skeletally mature individuals.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of literature. OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal indications and methods of surgical treatment for unstable type II odontoid fractures in skeletally mature individuals. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Odontoid fractures are a frequently encountered injury pattern in the cervical spine. The surgical treatment of type II odontoid fractures varies among spinal surgeons. The optimal surgical indications and treatment for type II odontoid fractures remains unclear. METHODS: Five primary research questions, based on safety and efficacy, were determined by consensus of a panel of spine trauma surgeons consisting of fellowship trained orthopedic and neurologic surgeons. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using MeSH search terms in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. The quality of literature was rated as high, moderate, low, or very low. Using the GRADE evidence-based review system, the primary questions were answered using the literature review and expert opinion. These treatment recommendations were then rated as either strong or weak based on the quality of evidence and clinical expertise. RESULTS: The initial search resulted in over 1300 results. After initial application of all inclusion and exclusion criteria, 458 abstracts were reviewed from which 22 manuscripts were found to meet all criteria. These were obtained, reviewed, and used to create an evidentiary table. All articles were of either low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: There is no moderate or high quality literature on the surgical management of acute type II odontoid fractures. Optimal indications for either anterior or posterior treatment of fractures are described but with no comparative data. A single anterior odontoid screw is the recommended technique for anterior treatment. Posterior internal fixation (C1-C2 transarticular screw, C1-C2 segmental fixation) is the recommended technique for posterior treatment. In equivocally indicated instances, anterior or posterior treatment can be safely used with good outcome. In this scenario, surgical management decision should be influenced by surgeon and patient preference as well as cost considerations.

Classification and surgical decision making in acute subaxial cervical spine trauma.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series, literature review. OBJECTIVE: To describe and apply an optimal classification system for the management of subaxial cervical trauma. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Traumatic injury to the subaxial cervical trauma is common yet diagnosis and treatment choices remain controversial. The lack of a widely accepted classification system contributes to the variation in care. METHODS: Two clinically relevant questions pertaining to the subaxial spine were developed by consensus from a panel of fellowship-trained spine trauma surgeons. A literature review identified published treatment algorithms for subaxial cervical trauma. Consecutive cases presenting to 2 tertiary trauma centers representing a spectrum of commonly observed, clinically relevant injury patterns were analyzed and the subaxial cervical injury classification system (SLIC) applied. Three representative clinical scenarios of subaxial trauma are presented to demonstrate utilization of the treatment algorithm. RESULTS: Literature review identified only 1 classification and treatment algorithm that met all inclusion criteria. Sixty-five consecutive subaxial cervical trauma cases were identified from which 10 representative injury patterns were selected and described according to the SLIC classification system. This was applied to clinical scenarios and treatment algorithms derived. CONCLUSION: The SLIC system can be used to reliably and effectively classify subaxial cervical trauma. The treatment algorithm described by Dvorak et al, Spine 2007;32:2620-9, can be used to guide surgical decision-making including surgical approach and the sequence of procedures based on injury type.

Patient perception of outcomes following failed spinal instrumentation with polyetheretherketone rods and titanium rods.

STUDY DESIGN: A structured questionnaire. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether material rod composition and its imaging characteristics can determine patient perceptions of pain, outcome, and need for revision surgery in the context of the failure of spinal instrumentation following lumbar arthrodesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient perceptions of radiographic images in the context of failed spinal instrumentation may influence clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Due to radiolucency, failed polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods may be perceived differently by patients than more traditional materials. METHODS: Patients presenting primarily with chief complaints of back pain completed a 2-page, 22-question questionnaire containing 3 alternative radiographic images of failed rod instrumentation following posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis. The images represented failed rods composed of either PEEK, PEEK with a longitudinal radio-opaque marker, or traditional titanium. Statistical analysis with the Cochran Q test was performed to determine whether there were statistical differences in the responses. RESULTS: The responses suggested a preference for the images representing PEEK instrumentation as being associated with superior clinical outcomes, the least pain, the most comfort, and the least likelihood of required revision surgery. CONCLUSION: PEEK rods possess radiolucent properties that can alter patient perceptions of clinical outcomes when compared with images of other equally unfavorable scenarios. The significance of these patient perceptions must still be demonstrated. However, they may play an important role in clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Thromboprophylaxis in spinal trauma surgery: consensus among spine trauma surgeons.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Although there are several studies evaluating the necessity and efficacy of thromboprophylaxis after spinal trauma with or without spinal cord injury (SCI), to date there is no established standard of practice pertaining to this specific patient population with regards to venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. PURPOSE: To reach a consensus opinion in the administration of thromboprophylaxis in both preoperative and postoperative care in the settings of spinal trauma and SCI. STUDY DESIGN: A live survey on thromboprophylaxis after spinal surgery in the setting of trauma was conducted at a meeting among spine trauma surgeons. METHODS: Twenty-five spine surgeons (Neurosurgeons and Orthopedic surgeons), all members of the Spine Trauma Study Group, participated in a live survey in which they attempted to reach consensus pertaining to the management of deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis in patients with spine fractures (with and without a concomitant SCI). The consensus survey consisted of a 10-item questionnaire. Chi-square test was used for group comparisons in questionnaire responses. RESULTS: Complete agreement was reached for the need of postoperative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in cervical spine injuries with SCI and anterior thoracolumbar procedures with or without SCI. Postoperative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after cervical spine injuries without SCI was agreed not to be needed. In cases of delayed surgery for patients with SCI, pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis was recommended to be started as soon as possible in the presurgical period. The optimal duration of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis was determined to be 3 months. Only 53% agreement was noted for the withholding of preoperative chemical prophylaxis in cervical or thoracolumbar spinal injuries with SCI (and 68% without SCI). Only 80% of the surgeons agreed that postoperative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is needed after posterior thoracolumbar procedures in patients with or without SCI. The use of vena cava filter after SCI was not universally recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis was opined to be unnecessary in patients with cervical spine injuries without SCI, however, it is recommended for cervical spine trauma with SCI or anterior thoracolumbar procedures irrespective of SCI. Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis was recommended to start preoperatively as soon as possible in SCI cases or in cases with surgical delay. Pharmacologic prophylaxis was recommended to be administered for at least 3 months postinjury. Although these recommendations met complete consensus by this group, individual patient factors should also be considered in determining optimal thromboprophylaxis in this patient population. Future research recommendations on thromboprophylaxis in spinal trauma are proposed.