Treatment Outcomes of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms due to Fragility Sacral Fractures: A Review of Eight Patients and Literature.

BACKGROUND: Sacral fractures can cause lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to damage to the cauda equina. While several studies have reported on sacral fractures due to high-energy trauma, those due to fragility fractures have only been reported in case reports and their clinical differences are not well known. This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of LUTS caused by fragility sacral fractures and propose a novel treatment strategy. METHODS: This study is retrospective, uncontrolled, clinical case series. The inclusion criteria were sole sacral fractures due to low-energy trauma and appearance of LUTS after injury. Patients with additional spinal fractures or combined abdominal or pelvic organ injuries that could cause LUTS were excluded. Improvement in LUTS, period from onset to improvement, and imaging findings were recorded. RESULTS: Eight patients met the inclusion criteria (4 surgical and 4 conservative treatment cases). Six patients showed improvement in LUTS. In surgical cases, the mean period from onset of LUTS to surgery and from onset of LUTS to improvement was 14.5 and 21.5 days, respectively. Intraoperative rupture or laceration of the dural sac was not observed. In 2 conservatively improved cases, the period from onset to improvement of LUTS was 14 and 17 days. CONCLUSIONS: LUTS can improve even with conservative treatment and should be utilized as the primary choice. LUTS caused by severe sacral canal deformity and stenosis can be reversible, and the decision to perform surgical treatment is still timely if LUTS do not improve with conservative treatment for several weeks.

Coexisting Lower Back Pain in Patients With Cervical Myelopathy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study is to investigate the coexisting lower back pain (LBP) in patients with cervical myelopathy and to evaluate changes in LBP after cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Only a few studies with a small number of participants have evaluated the association between cervical myelopathy surgery and postoperative improvement in LBP. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary cervical decompression surgery with or without fusion for myelopathy and completed preoperative and 1-year postoperative questionnaires were reviewed using a prospectively collected database involving 9 tertiary referral hospitals. The questionnaires included the patient-reported Japanese Orthopaedic Association (PRO-JOA) score and Numerical Rating Scales (NRS). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for NRS-LBP was defined as >30% improvement from baseline. Patient demographics, characteristics, and PRO-JOA score were compared between patients with and without concurrent LBP, and the contributor to achieving the MCID for LBP was analyzed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 786 consecutive patients with cervical myelopathy were included, of which 525 (67%) presented with concurrent LBP. LBP was associated with a higher body mass index ( P <0.001) and worse preoperative PRO-JOA score ( P <0.001). Among the 525 patients with concurrent LBP, the mean postoperative NRS-LBP significantly improved from 4.5±2.4 to 3.4±2.7 ( P <0.01) postoperatively, with 248 (47%) patients reaching the MCID cutoff. Patients with a PRO-JOA recovery rate >50% were more likely to achieve MCID compared with those with a recovery rate <0% (adjusted odd ratio 4.02, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% of patients with myelopathy reported improvement in LBP after cervical spine surgery, and 47% achieved the MCID for LBP, which was positively correlated with a better PRO-JOA recovery rate. Treating cervical myelopathy in patients with concomitant LBP may be sufficient to mitigate concomitant LBP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Comparative Analysis of Microendoscopic and Open Laminectomy for Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis at L1-L2 or L2-L3.

BACKGROUND: Several reports have highlighted comparable surgical outcomes between microendoscopic laminectomy (MEL) and open laminectomy (open) for lumbar spinal stenosis. However, the unilateral approach in MEL may present challenges for the upper lumbar levels, where facet joints are located deeper inside. Our objective was to compare surgical outcomes and radiographic evaluations for single-level decompression cases at L1-L2 or L2-L3 between MEL and open laminectomy. METHODS: We analyzed patients who underwent single-level decompression for upper lumbar spinal stenosis at 12 distinguished spine centers from April 2017 to September 2021. Baseline demographics, preoperative, and 1-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes, along with imaging parameters, were compared between the MEL and open groups. To account for potential confounding, patients' backgrounds were adjusted using the inverse probability weighting method based on propensity scores. RESULTS: Among the 2487 patients undergoing decompression surgery, 118 patients (4.7%) underwent single-level decompression at L1-L2 or L2-L3. Finally, 80 patients (51 in the MEL group, 29 in the open group) with postoperative data were deemed eligible for analysis. The MEL group exhibited significantly improved postoperative EuroQol 5-Dimension values compared to the open group. Additionally, the MEL group showed a lower facet preservation rate according to computed tomography examination, whereas the open group had a higher incidence of retrolisthesis. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall surgical outcomes were similar, the MEL group demonstrated potential advantages in enhancing EuroQol 5-Dimension scores. The MEL group's lower facet preservation rate did not translate into a higher postoperative instability rate.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical volume and outcomes in spine surgery: a multicentre retrospective study in Tokyo.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical volume and outcomes in spine surgery. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 9935 patients who underwent spine surgery between January 2019 and December 2021 at eight high-volume spine centres in the Greater Tokyo metropolitan area were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were the number of surgical cases, perioperative complications and patient-reported outcomes, including numerical rating scales for each body part, Euro quality of life 5-dimension (EQ5D), Neck Disability Index and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). RESULTS: The total number of surgeries in 2020 and 2021 remained lower than that of 2019, with respective percentages of 93.1% and 95.7% compared with the prepandemic period, with a marked reduction observed in May 2020 compared with the same period in 2019 (56.1% decrease). There were no significant differences between the prepandemic and postpandemic groups in the incidence of perioperative complications, although the frequency of reoperation tended to be higher in the postpandemic group (3.04% vs 3.76%, p=0.05). Subgroup analysis focusing on cervical spine surgery revealed significantly worse preoperative EQ5D scores in the postpandemic group (0.57 vs 0.54, p=0.004). Similarly, in lumbar spine surgery, the postpandemic group showed higher levels of leg pain (5.7 vs 6.1 to 0.002) and worse ODI scores (46.2 vs 47.7 to 0.02). However, postoperative outcomes were not different between pre and post-pandemic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted spinal surgeries in Japan, leading to a decrease in surgical volumes and changes in patient characteristics and surgical procedures. However, surgical outcomes remained comparable between the pre and postpandemic periods, indicating the resilience and adaptability of healthcare systems.

Does surgical site infection affect patient-reported outcomes after spinal surgery? A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections are common in spinal surgeries. It is uncertain whether outcomes in spine surgery patients with vs. without surgical site infection are equivalent. Therefore, we assessed the effects of surgical site infection on postoperative patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent elective spine surgery at 12 hospitals between April 2017 and February 2020. We collected data regarding the patients' backgrounds, operative factors, and incidence of surgical site infection. Data for patient-reported outcomes, namely numerical rating scale, Neck Disability Index/Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol Five-Dimensional questionnaire, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores, were obtained preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. We divided the patients into with and without surgical site infection groups. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the risk factors for surgical site infection. Using propensity score matching, we obtained matched surgical site infection-negative and -positive groups. Student's t-test was used for comparisons of continuous variables, and Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables between the two matched groups and two unmatched groups. RESULTS: We enrolled 8861 patients in this study; 74 (0.8 %) developed surgical site infections. Cervical spine surgery and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification ≥3 were identified as risk factors; microendoscopy was identified as a protective factor. Using propensity score matching, we compared surgical site infection-positive and -negative groups (74 in each group). No significant difference was found in postoperative pain or dysesthesia of the lower back, buttock, leg, and plantar area between the groups. When comparing preoperative with postoperative pain and dysesthesia, statistically significant improvement was observed for both variables in both groups (p < 0.01 for all variables). No significant differences were observed in postoperative outcomes between the matched surgical site infection-positive and -negative groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with surgical site infections had comparable postoperative outcomes to those without surgical site infections.

Impact of body mass index on outcomes after lumbar spine surgery.

The impact of body mass index (BMI) on outcomes after lumbar spine surgery is currently unknown. Previous studies have reported conflicting evidence for patients with high BMI, while little research has been conducted on outcomes for underweight patients. This study aims to examine the impact of BMI on outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. This prospective cohort study enrolled 5622 patients; of which, 194, 5027, and 401 were in the low (< 18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5-30), and high (≥ 30) BMI groups, respectively. Pain was assessed via the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) for the lower back, buttock, leg, and plantar area. Quality of life was assessed via the EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Inverse probability weighting with propensity scores was used to adjust patient demographics and clinical characteristics between the groups. After adjustment, the 1-year postoperative scores differed significantly between groups in terms of leg pain. The proportion of patients who achieved a 50% decrease in postoperative NPRS score for leg pain was also significantly different. Obese patients reported less improvement in leg pain after lumbar spine surgery. The outcomes of patients with low BMI were not inferior to those of patients with normal BMI.

Predictors for hemostatic thrombin-gelatin matrix usage in spine surgery: a multicenter observational study.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Thrombin-gelatin matrix (TGM) is a rapid and potent hemostatic agent, but it has some limitations, including the cost and its preparation time. The purpose of this study was to investigate the current trend in the use of TGM and to identify the predictors for TGM usage in order to ensure its proper use and optimized resource allocation. METHODS: A total of 5520 patients who underwent spine surgery in a multicenter study group within a year were included in the study. The demographic factors and the surgical factors including spinal levels operated, emergency surgery, reoperation, approach, durotomy, instrumented fixation, interbody fusion, osteotomy, and microendoscopy-assistance were investigated. TGM usage and whether it was routine or unplanned use for uncontrolled bleeding were also checked. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors for unplanned use of TGM. RESULTS: Intraoperative TGM was used in 1934 cases (35.0%), among which 714 were unplanned (12.9%). Predictors of unplanned TGM use were female gender (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.43, p = 0.03), ASA grade ≥ 2 (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.04-1.72, p = 0.02), cervical spine (OR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.24-1.94, p < 0.001), tumor (OR: 2.02, 95% CI: 1.34-3.03, p < 0.001), posterior approach (OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.26-2.18, p < 0.001), durotomy (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.24-2.20, p < 0.001), instrumentation (OR: 1.30, 1.03-1.63, p = 0.02), osteotomy (OR: 5.00, 2.76-9.05, p < 0.001), and microendoscopy (OR: 2.24, 1.84-2.73, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Many of the predictors for unplanned TGM use have been previously reported as risk factors for intraoperative massive hemorrhaging and blood transfusion. However, other newly revealed factors can be predictors of bleeding that is technically challenging to control. While routine usage of TGM in these cases will require further justification, these novel findings are valuable for implementing preoperative precautions and optimizing resource allocation.

A Propensity Score-matched Analysis of Clinical Outcomes Between Single-level and Multilevel Intervertebral Decompression for Cervical Radiculopathy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter study with propensity score matching. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes of single-level and multilevel intervertebral decompression for cervical degenerative radiculopathy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In patients with cervical radiculopathy, physical examination findings are sometimes inconsistent with imaging data. Multilevel decompression may be necessary for multiple foraminal stenosis. Additional decompression is more invasive yet expected to comprehensively decompress all suspected nerve root compression areas. However, the surgical outcomes of this approach compared with that of single-level decompression remain unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of patients with spinal surgery for pure cervical radiculopathy were collected. Patients were categorized into the single-level (SLDG) or multilevel (MLDG) intervertebral decompression group at C3/C4/C5/C6/C7/T1. Demographic data and patient-reported outcome scores, including the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores for pain and numbness in the neck, upper back, and arms, were collected. The NDI improvement rates and changes in NRS scores were analyzed one year postoperatively at patient-reported outcome evaluation. Propensity score matching was performed to compare both groups after adjusting for baseline characteristics, including the preoperative NDI and NRS scores. RESULTS: Among the 357 patients in this study, SLDG and MLDG comprised 231 and 126 patients, respectively. Two groups (n=112, each) were created by propensity score matching. Compared with the MLDG, the SLDG had a higher postoperative NDI improvement rate ( P =0.029) and lower postoperative arm numbness NRS score ( P =0.037). Other outcomes tended to be more favorable in the SLDG than in the MLDG, yet no statistical significance was detected. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cervical radiculopathy, the surgical outcomes of the SLDG showed better improvement in clinical outcomes than those of the MLDG. Numbness remained on the distal (arms) rather than the central (neck and upper back) areas in patients receiving multilevel decompression.

Surgical outcomes between posterior decompression alone and posterior decompression with fusion surgery among patients with Meyerding grade 2 degenerative spondylolisthesis: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Whether lumbar decompression with fusion surgery is effective against Meyerding grade 2 degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is unknown. Therefore, the current study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes between posterior decompression alone and posterior decompression with fusion surgery among patients with grade 2 DS with central canal stenosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included prospectively registered patients (n = 3863) who underwent surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal canal stenosis at nine high-volume spine centers from April 2017 to July 2019. Patients with grade 2 DS and central canal stenosis were included in the analysis. Patients with radiculopathy, including foraminal stenosis, degenerative scoliosis, and concomitant anterior spinal fusion, and those with a previous history of lumbar surgery were excluded. The participants were divided into the decompression alone group (group D) and decompression with fusion surgery group (group F). Data about patient-reported outcomes, including Numeric Rating Scale (low back pain, leg pain, leg numbness, and foot numbness), Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol Five-Dimensional questionnaire, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores, were obtained preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: In total, 2354 (61%) patients, including 42 (1.8%) with grade 2 DS (n = 18 in group D and n = 24 in group F), completed the 2-year follow-up. Group D had a higher proportion of female patients than group F. However, the two groups did not significantly differ in terms of other baseline demographic characteristics. Group D had a significantly shorter surgical time and lower volume of intraoperative blood loss than group F. Postoperative patient-reported outcomes did not significantly differ between the two groups, although the preoperative degree of low back pain was higher in group F than in group D. The slip degree of group D did not worsen during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: The surgical outcomes were similar regardless of the addition of fusion surgery among patients with grade 2 DS. Decompression alone was superior to decompression with fusion surgery as it was associated with a lower volume of intraoperative blood loss and shorter surgical time.

Effect of diabetes on patient-reported outcome measures at one year after laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Although patients with diabetes reportedly have more peripheral neuropathy, the impacts of diabetes on postoperative recovery in pain and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is not well characterized. The authors aimed to elucidate the effects of diabetes on neck/arm/hand/leg/foot pain and PROMs after laminoplasty CSM. The authors retrospectively reviewed 339 patients (82 with diabetes and 257 without) who underwent laminoplasty between C3 and C7 in 11 hospitals during April 2017 -October 2019. Preoperative Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores in all five areas, the Short Form-12 Mental Component Summary, Euro quality of life 5-dimension, Neck Disability Index, and the Core Outcome Measures Index-Neck) were comparable between the groups. The between-group differences were also not significant in NRS scores and PROMs one year after surgery. The change score of NRS hand pain was larger in the diabetic group than the nondiabetic group. The diabetic group showed worse preoperative score but greater improvement in the Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary than the nondiabetic group, following comparable score one year after surgery. These data indicated that the preoperative presence of diabetes, at least, did not adversely affect pain or PROMs one year after laminoplasty for CSM.

Postoperative outcomes after degenerative lumbar spine surgery in rheumatoid arthritis patients -a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have evolved significantly since the introduction of biologic agents, degenerative lumbar disease in RA patients remains a major challenge. Well-controlled comparisons between RA patients and their non-RA counterparts have not yet been reported. The objective of the present study was to compare postoperative outcomes of lumbar spine surgery between RA and non-RA patients by a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary posterior spine surgery for degenerative lumbar disease in our prospective multicenter study group between 2017 and 2020 were enrolled. Demographic data including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, diabetes mellitus, smoking, steroid usage, number of spinal levels involved, and preoperative patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores (numerical rating scale [NRS] for back pain and leg pain, Short Form-12 physical component summary [PCS], EuroQOL 5-dimension [EQ-5D], and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) were used to calculate a propensity score for RA diagnosis. One-to-one matching was performed and 1-year postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: Among the 4567 patients included, 90 had RA (2.0%). RA patients in our cohort were more likely to be female, with lower BMI, higher ASA grade and lower current smoking rate than non-RA patients. Preoperative NRS scores for leg pain, PCS, EQ-5D, and ODI were worse in RA patients. Propensity score matching generated 61 pairs of RA and non-RA patients who underwent posterior lumbar surgery. After background adjustment, RA patients reported worse postoperative PCS (28.4 vs. 37.2, p = 0.008) and EQ-5D (0.640 vs. 0.738, p = 0.03), although these differences were not significant between RA and non-RA patients not on steroids. CONCLUSIONS: RA patients showed worse postoperative quality of life outcomes after posterior surgery for degenerative lumbar disease, while steroid-independent RA cases showed equivalent outcomes to non-RA patients.

Minimal clinically important difference in patients who underwent decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) represents the smallest change in an outcome measure recognized as clinically meaningful to a patient after receiving a clinical intervention. Most studies that discussed the MCIDs for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) included mixed pathologies or procedures despite that the MCID value should be different depending on the intervention. Moreover, despite the efficacy of adopting percentage-change improvement for the MCID threshold, there are limited reports and discussions in the field of lumbar surgery. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to elucidate the MCIDs for the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQOL 5-dimension 3-level (EQ-5D-3L), physical component summary (PCS) of the Short Form of the Medical Outcomes Study, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) in patients with degenerative LSS treated with decompression surgery without fusion. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 422 patients who underwent decompression surgery for LSS and answered a complete set of questionnaires were included in the study. Patients who underwent endoscopic or revision surgery were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative and 1-year postoperative scores of each health-related quality of life questionnaires (HRQOLs) and patient satisfaction questionnaire response METHODS: The patient satisfaction question was used as an anchor, and the cutoff values were estimated based on absolute point improvement from baseline using a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the "mean change" method for MCIDs. The MCID values for percentage-change in HRQOLs were also calculated using ROC curve analysis. The three cutoff values for each HRQOL were validated using the Youden index for determining the most robust MCIDs. RESULTS: Of the patients, 356 (84.4%) were at least "somewhat satisfied" with the treatment results. The two cutoff values of absolute point-change in each HRQOL, which were estimated by two different anchor-based methods, were similar. The area under the curve of the ROC curve for percentage-change tended to be higher than that for absolute point-change. Moreover, the Youden index of the percentage-change in each HRQOL was higher than that of the absolute point-change calculated by either the "mean change" method or the ROC curve analysis. Based on these results, it was proposed that MCID was 42.4% for percentage-change in ODI, 22.0% for EQ-5D-3L, 13.7% for PCS, 25.0% for NRS (low back pain), 55.6% for NRS (leg pain), 22.2% for NRS (leg numbness). CONCLUSIONS: The MCIDs of HRQOLs were calculated in patients with LSS treated with decompression surgery without concomitant fusion procedure. The MCID cutoffs based on percentage-change from baseline were more effective than those of absolute point-change.

Influence of Perioperative Antithrombic Agent Discontinuation in Elective Posterior Spinal Surgery: A Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of perioperative antithrombotic agent (antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants) discontinuation in elective posterior spinal surgery in terms of bleeding complications, such as epidural hematoma and postoperative thromboembolism. METHODS: We enrolled patients undergoing elective posterior spinal surgery at 9 hospitals between April 2017 and August 2020. We collected data regarding patient baseline characteristics, surgical details, intraoperative estimated blood loss, and postoperative complication rates, including epidural hematoma and thromboembolism. We divided the patients into a discontinuation group, in which antithrombic agents were discontinued perioperatively, and a control group without antithrombic agents. Propensity scores for taking any antithrombic agents were calculated, with 1-to-1 matching based on the estimated propensity scores to adjust for patient baseline characteristics and surgical details. Intraoperative estimated blood loss and 30-day postoperative complication rates were compared between the groups. RESULTS: We enrolled 9853 patients, including 1123 patients (11.4%) who discontinued antithrombic agents perioperatively. One-to-one propensity score matching yielded 1111 pairs with and without antithrombic agents. Intraoperative estimated blood loss per 10 minutes (8.2 mL vs. 8.9 mL) and the incidence of epidural hematoma requiring revision (0.97% vs. 0.72%) were similar between the groups. Although postoperative cardiac events and stroke were observed only in the discontinuation group (0.27% and 0.09%, respectively), these incidences were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative antithrombic agent discontinuation in elective posterior spinal surgery normalized the intraoperative bleeding tendency and the incidence of postoperative epidural hematoma and did not influence in a significative way the incidence of postoperative thromboembolism.

Comparison between microendoscopic laminectomy and open posterior decompression surgery for single-level lumbar spinal stenosis: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Microendoscopic laminectomy (MEL), in which a 16-mm tubular retractor with an internal scope is used, has shown excellent surgical results for patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. However, no reports have directly compared MEL with open laminectomy. This study aimed to elucidate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and perioperative complications in patients undergoing MEL versus open laminectomy. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study of prospectively registered patients who underwent lumbar spinal surgery at one of the six high-volume spine centers between April 2017 and September 2018. A total of 258 patients who underwent single posterior lumbar decompression at L4/L5 were enrolled in the study. With regard to demographic data, we prospectively used chart sheets to evaluate the diagnosis, operative procedure, operation time, estimated blood loss, and complications. The follow-up period was 1-year. PROs included a numerical rating scale (NRS) for lower back pain and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), and patient satisfaction with the treatment. RESULTS: Of the 258 patients enrolled, 252 (97%) completed the 1-year follow-up. Of the 252, 130 underwent MEL (MEL group) and 122 underwent open decompression (open group). The MEL group required a significantly shorter operating time and sustained lesser intraoperative blood loss compared with the open group. The MEL group showed shorter length of postoperative hospitalization than the open group. The overall complication rate was similar (8.2% in the MEL group versus 7.7% in the open group), and the revision rate did not significantly differ. As for PROs, both preoperative and postoperative values did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, the satisfaction rate was higher in the MEL group (74%) than in the open group (53%) (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: MEL required a significantly shorter operating time and resulted in lesser intraoperative blood loss compared with laminectomy. Postoperative PROs and complication rates were not significantly different between the procedures, although MEL demonstrated a better satisfaction rate.

Risk factors for worsening sexual function after lumbar spine surgery and characteristics of non-responders to the questionnaire of sex life.

PURPOSE: To precisely assess the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) and its total score (Oswestry Disability Index: ODI) and reveal characteristics of non-responders of the 8th item of ODQ (ODI-8) relating to sexual function. Furthermore, we evaluated risk factors for aggravation of postoperative sexual function. METHODS: We enrolled patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery at eight hospitals between April 2017 and November 2018. Patients' background data and operative factors were collected. We also assessed pain or dysesthesia (lower back, buttock, leg, and plantar area) on a numerical rating scale, EuroQol 5 Dimension, core outcome measures index back, and ODI before and 1 year after surgery. Factor analysis was conducted for the ODQ. Non-responders of the ODI-8 were compared with full-responders using propensity score matching. Risk factors for worsening ODI-8 were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 2,610 patients enrolled, 601 (23.0%) answered all but the ODI-8 item; these patients were likely to show better preoperative clinical symptoms than full-responders, even after adjusting for age and gender using propensity scores. Age, spinal deformity, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) 3/4 were significant risk factors for postoperative aggravation of the ODI-8. Factor analysis revealed that the ODQ was composed of dynamic and static activities; the ODI-8 was considered a dynamic activity. CONCLUSION: Almost a fourth of the patients skipped the ODI-8. Age, the presence of spinal deformity, and worse ASA-PS were found to be risk factors for postoperative aggravation of sexual function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with the consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

Diabetes is associated with greater leg pain and worse patient-reported outcomes at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery.

Although patients with diabetes reportedly have more back pain and worse patient-reported outcomes than those without diabetes after lumbar spine surgery, the impact of diabetes on postoperative recovery in pain or numbness in other regions is not well characterized. In this study, the authors aimed to elucidate the impact of diabetes on postoperative recovery in pain/numbness in four areas (back, buttock, leg, and sole) after lumbar spine surgery. The authors retrospectively reviewed 993 patients (152 with diabetes and 841 without) who underwent decompression and/or fixation within three levels of the lumbar spine at eight hospitals during April 2017-June 2018. Preoperative Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores in all four areas, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Euro quality of life 5-dimension (EQ-5D) were comparable between the groups. The diabetic group showed worse ODI/EQ-5D and greater NRS scores for leg pain 1 year after surgery than the non-diabetic group. Although other postoperative NRS scores tended to be higher in the diabetic group, the between-group differences were not significant. Diabetic neuropathy caused by microvascular changes may induce irreversible nerve damage especially in leg area. Providers can use this information when counseling patients with diabetes about the expected outcomes of spine surgery.

Minimum clinically important change for outcome scores among patients aged 75 or over undergoing lumbar spine surgery.

PURPOSE: To elucidate the minimum clinically important change (MCIC) of the physical component summary (PCS) of the Short Form-12, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQOL-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) in patients aged ≥ 75 years undergoing lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients aged ≥ 75 years with degenerative lumbar spine disease who underwent lumbar spine decompression or fusion surgery within three levels between April 2017 and June 2018. We also evaluated patients aged < 75 years in the same period as reference. We evaluated the baseline and postoperative PCS, ODI, EQ-5D, and COMI scores. Patients were asked to answer an anchor question regarding health transition for MCICs using the anchor-based method. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients aged ≥ 75 years and 398 patients aged < 75 years were included for analysis. Of patients aged ≥ 75 years, 83.4% showed at least "somewhat improved" outcomes, while 91.0% of patients aged < 75 years reported this outcome. PCS change score was not adequately correlated to health transition in patients aged ≥ 75 years. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses revealed MCICs of 17.8 for ODI, 0.18 for EQ-5D, and 1.6 for COMI in patients aged ≥ 75 years, and 12.7 for ODI, 0.19 for EQ-5D, and 2.3 for COMI in patients aged < 75 years. CONCLUSION: In patients aged ≥ 75 years, PCS may not be feasible for evaluation of health transition. The MCIC value for ODI score was higher and that for EQ-5D/COMI score was lower in patients aged ≥ 75 years, compared with those in patients aged < 75 years.

Microendoscope-Assisted Versus Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background and objectives: Minimally invasive surgery has become popular for posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Microendoscope-assisted PLIF (ME-PLIF) utilizes a microendoscope within a tubular retractor for PLIF procedures; however, there are no published reports that compare Microendoscope-assisted to open PLIF. Here we compare the surgical and clinical outcomes of ME-PLIF with those of open PLIF. Materials and Methods: A total of 155 consecutive patients who underwent single-level PLIF were registered prospectively. Of the 149 patients with a complete set of preoperative data, 72 patients underwent ME-PLIF (ME-group), and 77 underwent open PLIF (open-group). Clinical and radiographic findings collected one year after surgery were compared. Results: Of the 149 patients, 57 patients in ME-group and 58 patients in the open-group were available. The ME-PLIF procedure required a significantly shorter operating time and involved less intraoperative blood loss. Three patients in both groups reported dural tears as intraoperative complications. Three patients in ME-group experienced postoperative complications, compared to two patients in the open-group. The fusion rate in ME-group at one year was lower than that in the open group (p = 0.06). The proportion of patients who were satisfied was significantly higher in the ME-group (p = 0.02). Conclusions: ME-PLIF was associated with equivalent post-surgical outcomes and significantly higher rates of patient satisfaction than the traditional open PLIF procedure. However, the fusion rate after ME-PLIF tended to be lower than that after the traditional open method.

The Diagnostic Value of Fluorine-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for the Detection of Surgical Site Infection after Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic yield of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (F-18 FDG PET/CT) for surgical site infection (SSI) after spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Diagnosis of SSI in the spine based on F-18 FDG PET/CT requires experienced nuclear medical physicians for a detailed analysis of F-18 FDG distribution pattern. It has also been reported that increases in the maximal standardized uptake values of F-18 FDG (SUVmax) closely correlated with SSI, suggesting potential of more objective and quantitative diagnosis. METHODS: We assessed the diagnostic yield of F-18 FDG PET/CT (pattern-based diagnosis by nuclear medical physicians and SUVmax-based diagnosis) for SSI in 52 subjects who underwent spine surgery. The 52 subjects included 11 nonimplant and 41 implant cases. F-18 FDG PET/CT was performed in 33 and 19 cases in early (≤12 weeks after the surgery) and late (>12 weeks) phases, respectively. The final diagnosis of SSI was based on the results of pathogen identification, plain radiography, and CT and/or magnetic resonance imaging or response to antibiotics and/or reoperation. RESULTS: SUVmax-based diagnosis was performed with a cut off value of 5.0 as determined by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Both pattern-based and SUVmax-based diagnoses demonstrated excellent diagnostic yields with high sensitivity (97% and 90%), specificity (100% and 100%), and accuracy (98% and 94%). High diagnostic yields (accuracy of ≥90%) were consistently observed irrespective of presence or absence of implantation or interval between surgery and F-18 FDG PET/CT. CONCLUSION: F-18 FDG PET/CT can be the procedure of choice for investigation of SSI in the spine when other imaging fails to provide a definitive diagnosis.Level of Evidence: 4.

A Multicenter Observational Study on the Postoperative Outcomes of C3 Laminectomy in Cervical Double-door Laminoplasty.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective observational study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the differences between C3 laminectomy (LN) and C3 laminoplasty (LP) in cervical LP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Interlaminar bony fusion after cervical LP is reported to be related to a decrease in postoperative range of motion (ROM) or neurological disorder. However, it remains uncertain whether C3 LN affects patient-reported outcomes, especially after double-door LPs. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of C3 LN compared with C3 LP in cervical double-door LP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using our prospective database, consecutive patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy undergoing cervical double-door LP in 7 hospitals between April 2017 and May 2018 were enrolled. Before and 1 year after the surgeries, we collected the details of patient background data, operative factors, radiologic findings such as C2-C7 ROM angle and C2-C3 interlaminar bony fusion, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, postoperative satisfaction, neck pain, and patient-reported outcomes such as Short Form-12 (SF-12), EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the neck. RESULTS: In all, 152 patients were enrolled, including 97 undergoing C3 LP and 55 undergoing C3 LN. There were no significant differences in patient background data, complications, and operative factors. C2-C3 interlaminar bony fusion occurred more often in the C3 LP group (22.6% vs. 5.7%). There were also no differences in the C2-C7 angle, C2-C7 ROM angle, the JOA score, patient satisfaction, neck pain, SF-12, EQ-5D, NDI, and COMI between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: C2-C3 bony fusion after cervical double-door LP occurred more often in the C3 LP group than in the C3 LN group. C3 LN resulted in similar outcomes in complication rate, radiographic outcomes, and clinical outcomes compared with those of C3 LP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.