Twenty-Year Radiographic Outcomes Following Single-Level Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: Results From a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: Compare range of motion (ROM) and adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) following cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at 20-year follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is the standard of treatment for single-level cervical disc degeneration causing radiculopathy. CDA is claimed to reduce shear strain, and adjacent-level ROM changes are hypothesized to hasten ASD with ACDF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study collected data on 47 patients randomized to ACDF or CDA. Lateral cervical spine radiographs were evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively, and at 20 years for alignment, ROM, ASD, and heterotopic ossification. RESULTS: Eighty-two percent (18/22) of CDA patients and 84% (21/25) of ACDF patients followed up at 20 years. At 20 years, total cervical (C2-C7) ROM was statistically different between the CDA and fusion groups (47.8° vs . 33.4°, P =0.005). Total cervical ROM was not significantly different between preoperative and 20-year periods following CDA (45.6° vs . 47.4°, P =0.772) or ACDF (40.6° vs . 33.0°, P =0.192). Differences in postoperative and 20-year index-level ROM following CDA were not significant (10.1° vs . 10.2°, P =0.952). Final ASD grading was statistically lower following CDA versus ACDF at both adjacent levels ( P <0.005). Twenty-year adjacent-level ossification development was increased following ACDF versus CDA ( P <0.001). Polyethylene mean thickness decreased from 9.4 mm immediately postoperatively to 9.1 mm at 20-year follow up ( P =0.013). Differences in adjacent-level ROM from preoperative to 20-year follow-up in both the ACDF and CDA groups did not meet statistical significance ( P >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical disc arthroplasty maintains index-level and total cervical ROM with very long-term follow-up. Total cervical ROM was higher at 20 years in CDA relative to ACDF. CDA results in lower rates of ASD and adjacent-level ossification development than ACDF.

20-year Clinical Outcomes of Cervical Disk Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) at 20 years. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Concern for adjacent-level disease after ACDF prompted the development of CDA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy were randomized to either BRYAN CDA or ACDF for a Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial. At 20 years, patient-reported outcomes, including visual analog scales (VAS) for neck and arm pain, neck disability index (NDI), and reoperation rates, were analyzed. RESULTS: Follow-up rate was 91.3%. Both groups showed significantly better NDI, VAS arm pain, and VAS neck pain scores at 20 years versus preoperative scores. Comparing CDA versus ACDF, there was no difference at 20 years in mean scores for NDI [11.1 (SD 14.1) vs. 19.9 (SD 17.2), P =0.087], mean VAS arm pain [0.9 (SD 2.4) vs. 2.3 (SD 2.8), P =0.095], or mean VAS neck pain [1.2 (SD 2.5) vs. 2.9 (3.3), P =0.073]. There was a significant difference between CDA versus ACDF groups in the change in VAS neck pain score between 10 and 20 years [respectively, -0.4 (SD 2.5) vs. 1.5 (SD 2.5), P =0.030]. Reoperations were reported in 41.7% of ACDF patients and 10.0% of CDA patients ( P =0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Both CDA and ACDF are effective in treating cervical radiculopathy with sustained improvement in NDI, VAS neck and VAS arm pain at 20 years. CDA demonstrates lower reoperation rates than ACDF. There were no failures of the arthroplasty device requiring reoperation at the index level. The symptomatic nonunion rate of ACDF was 4.2% at 20 years. Despite a higher reoperation rate in the CDA group versus ACDF group, there was no difference in the 20-year NDI, VAS Neck, and VAS arm pain scores.

Lumbar Discectomy With Bone-Anchored Annular Closure Device in Patients With Large Annular Defects: One-Year Results.

BACKGROUND: Reherniation rates following lumbar discectomy are low for most patients; however, patients with a large defect in the annulus fibrosis have a significantly higher risk of recurrence. Previous results from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that the implantation of a bone-anchored annular closure device (ACD) during discectomy surgery lowered the risk of symptomatic reherniation and reoperation over one year with fewer serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to discectomy alone. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this prospective, post-market, historically controlled study was to evaluate the use of an ACD during discectomy, and to confirm the results of the RCT that was used to establish regulatory approval in the United States. METHODS: In this post-market study, all patients (N = 55) received discectomy surgery with a bone-anchored ACD. The comparison population was patients enrolled in the RCT study who had discectomy with an ACD (N = 262) or discectomy alone (N = 272). All other eligibility criteria, surgical technique, device characteristics, and follow-up methodology were comparable between studies. Endpoints included rate of symptomatic reherniation or reoperation, SAEs, and patient-reported measures of disability, pain, and quality of life. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients received ACD implants at 12 sites between May 2020 and February 2021. In the previous RCT, 272 control patients had discectomy surgery alone (RCT-Control), and 262 patients had discectomy surgery with an ACD implant (RCT-ACD). Baseline characteristics across groups were typical of the overall population undergoing lumbar discectomy. The proportion of patients who experienced reherniation and/or reoperation was significantly lower in the ACD group compared to RCT-ACD and RCT-Control groups (p < 0.05). In the ACD study, the one-year rate of symptomatic reherniation was 3.7%, compared to 8.5% in the RCT-ACD group and 17.0% in the RCT-Control group. In the ACD group, the risk of reoperation was 5.5%, compared to 6.5% in the RCT-ACD group and 12.5% in the RCT-Control group. There were no device-related SAEs or device integrity failures in the ACD, and there were clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported measures of disability, pain, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: In this post-market study of bone-anchored ACD in patients with large annular defects, rates of symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and SAEs were all low. Compared to the RCT, the post-market ACD study demonstrated lower rates of reherniation and/or reoperation and measures of back pain one-year post-surgery.

Clinical Significance of Lateral Pedicle Screw Malposition in Lumbar Spine Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine whether lateral pedicle screw breach affects fusion rates and patient-reported outcomes in lumbar fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although lateral pedicle screw malposition is considered relatively benign, few studies have focused specifically on clinical outcomes or fusion rates associated with lateral screw malposition. METHODS: Twelve-month postoperative computed tomography scans were reviewed for lateral breach, severity of breach, and fusion status. Patients with lateral breach were compared with patients with no breach. Outcome measures included Numerical Pain Rating Scale for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and SF-36 physical function (SF-36 PF). Multivariable linear and logistic regression and were adjusted for age, procedure, level, and/or baseline pain score. RESULTS: Forty-five patients (31%) demonstrated 1 or more lateral breaches as compared with 99 patients without breach. After adjusting for baseline scores and fusion level, patients with 2 or more screw breaches experienced SF-36 PF score improvements that were 3.43 points less ( P =0.016) than patients with no lateral breach. After adjusting for baseline Numerical Pain Rating Scale, there was also a significant decrease in the odds of achieving minimally clinical important difference in back pain relief in these patients. There was no observed effect of lateral breach on the odds of successful fusion. CONCLUSIONS: The current study did not observe an association between laterally malpositioned pedicle screws and nonunion. However, results are consistent with a negative effect on SF-36 PF scores and self-reported back pain at 12 months.

Six-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial of i-FACTOR Peptide-Enhanced Bone Graft Versus Local Autograft in Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Investigational Device Exemption study demonstrated the superiority of i-FACTOR compared with local autograft bone in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) at 12 and 24 months postoperatively in a composite end point of overall success. OBJECTIVE: To report the final, 6-year clinical and radiological outcomes of the FDA postapproval study. METHODS: Of the original 319 subjects enrolled in the Investigational Device Exemption study, 220 participated in the postapproval study (106 i-FACTOR and 114 control). RESULTS: The study met statistical noninferiority success for all 4 coprimary end points. Radiographic fusion was achieved in 99% (103/104) and 98.2% (109/111) in i-FACTOR and local autograft subjects, mean Neck Disability Index improvement from baseline was 28.6 (24.8, 32.3) in the i-FACTOR and 29.2 (25.6, 32.9) in the control group, respectively (noninferiority P < .0001). The neurological success rate at 6 years was 95.9% (70/73) in i-FACTOR subjects and 93.7% (70/75) in local autograft subjects (noninferiority P < .0001). Safety outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. Secondary surgery on the same or different cervical levels occurred in 20/106 (18.9%) i-FACTOR subjects and 23/114 (20.2%) local autograft subjects ( P = .866). Secondary outcomes (pain, SF-36 physical component score and mental component score) in i-FACTOR subjects were similar to those in local autograft subjects. CONCLUSION: i-FACTOR met all 4 FDA-mandated noninferiority success criteria and demonstrated safety and efficacy in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical radiculopathy through 6 years postoperatively. Safety outcomes are acceptable, and the clinical and functional outcomes observed at 12 and 24 months remained at 72 months.

Single-Level Cervical Disc Replacement Using a PEEK-on-Ceramic Implant: Results of a Multicenter FDA IDE Trial With 24-Month Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Many early cervical total disc replacements (TDRs) produced motion through a ball-and-socket action, with metal endplates articulating with a plastic core. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is used increasingly for spinal implants due to its mechanical properties and lack of artifacts on imaging. A TDR was designed with titanium-coated PEEK endplates and a ceramic core. The purpose of this study was to compare this TDR with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to treat single-level cervical disc degeneration. METHODS: This was a prospective, nonrandomized, historically controlled, multicenter US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) trial. Patients received the PEEK-on-ceramic Simplify® Cervical Artificial Disc (n = 150). The historic control group included 117 propensity-matched ACDF patients from an earlier IDE trial. The primary outcome was a composite success classification at the 24-month follow-up. Outcome measures included the Neck Disability Index (NDI), neurological status, adverse events, subsequent surgery, a visual analog scale assessing neck and arm pain, and the Dysphagia Handicap Index. Radiographic assessment included flexion/extension range of motion and heterotopic ossification. Facet joints were assessed at 24 months using MRI. RESULTS: The success rate was significantly greater in the TDR group vs the ACDF group (93.0% vs 73.6%; P < .001). Mean NDI, neck pain, and arm pain scores improved significantly in both groups at all follow-up points. Mean NDI scores in the TDR group were significantly lower than ACDF scores at all follow-up points. There were no significant differences in the rates of serious adverse events. The range of motion of the TDR level had increased significantly by 3 months and remained so throughout follow-up. Facet joint assessment by MRI in the TDR group showed little change from preoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The TDR had an acceptable safety profile and a significantly greater composite success rate than ACDF. These results support that the PEEK-on-ceramic TDR is a viable alternative to ACDF for single-level symptomatic disc degeneration. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study found that the PEEK-on-ceramic TDR is a viable treatment for symptoms related to cervical disc degeneration and offers similar or superior outcomes compared with fusion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Two-Year Clinical and Radiological Outcomes in Patients With Diabetes Undergoing Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from the multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational device exemption study. OBJECTIVE: Studies on outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in individuals with diabetes are scarce. We compared 24-month radiological and clinical outcomes in individuals with and without diabetes undergoing single-level ACDF with either i-FACTOR or local autologous bone. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2013, 319 individuals with single-level degenerative disc disease (DDD) and no previous fusion at the index level underwent ACDF. The presence of diabetes determined the 2 cohorts. Data collected included radiological fusion evaluation, neurological outcomes, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, and the 36-Item Short Form Survey Version 2 (SF-36v2) Physical and Mental component summary scores. RESULTS: There were 35 individuals with diabetes (11.1%; average body mass index [BMI] = 32.99 kg/m2; SD = 5.72) and 284 without (average BMI = 28.32 kg/m2; SD = 5.67). The number of nondiabetic smokers was significantly higher than diabetic smokers: 73 (25.70%) and 3 (8.57%), respectively. Preoperative scores of NDI, VAS arm pain, and SF-36v2 were similar between the diabetic and nondiabetic participants at baseline; however, VAS neck pain differed significantly between the cohorts at baseline (P = .0089). Maximum improvement for NDI, VAS neck and arm pain, and SF-36v2 PCS and MCS scores was seen at 6 months in both cohorts and remained stable until 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: ACDF is effective for cervical radiculopathy in patients with diabetes. Diabetes is not a contraindication for patients requiring single-level surgery for cervical DDD.

Lumbar Discectomy With Barricaid Device Implantation in Patients at High Risk of Reherniation: Initial Results From a Postmarket Study.

Background Patients with large defects in the annulus fibrosus following lumbar discectomy have high rates of symptomatic reherniation and reoperation. An FDA randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a bone-anchored device (Barricaid, Intrinsic Therapeutics, Woburn, MA) that occludes the annular defect reported significantly lower risk of symptomatic reherniation and reoperation compared to patients receiving discectomy only. However, results of the Barricaid device in real-world use remain limited.  Methods This was a post-market study to determine the real-world outcomes of the Barricaid device when used in addition to primary lumbar discectomy in patients with large annular defects. Main outcomes included leg pain severity, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), adverse events, symptomatic reherniation, and reoperation. Imaging studies were read by an independent imaging core laboratory. This paper reports the initial three-month primary endpoint results from the trial; one-year patient follow-up is ongoing. Results Among 55 patients (mean age 41±13 years, 60% male), the mean percent reduction in leg pain severity was 92%, and the mean percent reduction in ODI score was 79%. The three-month rate of symptomatic reherniation was 3.6% and the rate of reoperation was 1.8%. The serious adverse event rate was 5.5%; no device migrations or fractures were observed.  Conclusion Among patients with large annular defects following lumbar discectomy treated with the Barricaid device in real-world conditions, early results demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in patient symptoms and low rates of symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and complications, which were comparable to those observed with the device in an FDA-regulated trial.

Far Lateral/Extraforaminal Approaches for Microdiscectomy and Foraminal Decompression in the Lumbar Spine.

Far lateral approaches to the lumbar spine are uncommon procedures but are essential techniques for spine surgeons to understand and master for the treatment of extraforaminal disk herniations and foraminal stenosis. We present our preferred approaches for open and minimally invasive techniques to perform extraforaminal decompressions and/or discectomies in the lumbar spine.

Remote Virtual Spinal Evaluation in the Era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: With the COVID-19 pandemic disrupting many facets of our society, physicians and patients have begun using telemedicine as a platform for the delivery of health care. One of the challenges in implementing telemedicine for the spine care provider is completing a comprehensive spinal examination. Currently, there is no standardized methodology to complete a full spinal examination through telemedicine. METHODS: We propose a novel, remote spinal examination methodology that is easily implemented through telemedicine, where the patient is an active participant in the successful completion of his or her examination. This type of examination has been validated in a neurology setting. To facilitate the telemedicine visit, we propose that video instruction be shared with the patient prior to the telemedicine visit to increase the efficacy of the examination. RESULTS: Since the issuance of stay-at-home order across the states, many spine practices around the country have rapidly adopted and increased their telemedicine program to continue provide care for patients during COVID-19 pandemic. At a tertiary academic center in a busy metropolitan area, nearly 700 telemedicine visits were successfully conducted during a 4-week period. There were no remote visits being done prior to the shutdown. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of our proposed remote spinal examination has the potential to serve as a guideline for the spine care provider to efficiently assess patients with spine disease using telemedicine. Because these are only suggestions, providers should tailor examination to each individual patient's needs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It is likely that physicians will incorporate telemedicine into health care delivery services even after the COVID-19 pandemic subsides because of telemedicine's efficiency in meeting patient needs. Using the standard maneuvers provided in our study, spine care providers can perform a nearly comprehensive spine examination through telemedicine. Further studies will be needed to validate the reproducibility and reliability of our methodology.

Long-Term Radiographic and Functional Outcomes of Patients With Absence of Radiographic Union at 2 Years After Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective radiographic investigation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term radiographic and functional outcomes of patients in whom there is absence of radiographic union at 2 years after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: Thirty-one patients were evaluated at standard postoperative time intervals per index trial protocol. Plain film radiographic fusion criteria at the arthrodesis level was defined as interspinous motion (ISM) <1 mm with corresponding motion at a non-arthrodesed superjacent level ISM ≥4 mm. Radiographs and functional outcome measures were acquired at each follow-up visit. Delayed union was defined as lack of radiographic union by 24 months. RESULTS: Nine patients demonstrated radiographic evidence of delayed radiographic union at 24 months. Of those 9 patients, 5 patients demonstrated evidence of union during the follow-up period to 72 months. Despite the absence of radiographic union based on our criteria, 3 of the 4 remaining patients reported remarkable improvements in pain scores and functional outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The natural history of delayed union at 24 months after ACDF was still favorable despite the prolonged delay in union. The majority of patients (5 of 9) without radiographic union at 24 months did proceed to radiographic union by final follow-up. In addition, patients that did not meet our criteria for fusion maintained postoperative improvements in patient-reported outcome scores. In summary, our study patients undergoing a single-level ACDF with asymptomatic radiographic delayed union at 24 months can expect maintained improvements in postoperative patient-reported outcomes scores and can still progress to successful radiographic fusion.

Evaluation of DIAM™ Spinal Stabilization System for lower lumbar disc degenerative disease: A randomized, prospective, single-site study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of DIAM Spinal Stabilization System compared with nonoperative treatment for patients with low back pain and lower lumbar disc degenerative disease. METHODS: A single center collected prospective outcomes data on 38 patients randomized to an interspinous device or non-operative treatment for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disc disease with treatment crossover allowed at 6 months. RESULTS: At all postoperative timepoints out to 2-years, statistically significant improvements in ODI and back pain scores were observed with the interspinous device. Clinically significant improvements (ODI >15-point improvement) were seen in 87.5% of DIAM patients at 2-years postoperatively. A high cross-over rate was noted from the non-operative cohort to the operative group (12 of 15) due to continued pain with nonoperative care. Additionally, 80% of patients receiving the DIAM implant reported a >15-point ODI reduction from pre-surgical scores at 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: The DIAM device demonstrates improvement in ODI and Back Pain scores maintained out to a 2-year follow-up timepoint and performed superior to conventional nonoperative treatment regimens commonly used in low back pain.

Functional Outcomes Associated With Adjacent-level Ossification Disease 10 Years After Cervical Disc Arthroplasty or ACDF.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of a prospective, randomized control Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational device exemption trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with Bryan cervical disc arthroplasty. OBJECTIVE: Determine the clinical significance of adjacent-level ossification disease (ALOD) on long-term functional outcomes after ACDF or arthroplasty. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: ALOD occurs when the anterior longitudinal ligament and annulus adjacent to the index surgical level calcifies. As previously reported, ALOD happens more commonly after an arthrodesis than an arthroplasty. No investigation has previously examined 10-year clinical outcomes associated with ALOD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty patients were included in the 10-year follow-up. The index level was radiographically blinded and the cephalad-adjacent level was evaluated for ALOD. These scores underwent statistical analysis to compare the 2 surgical groups (ACDF and arthroplasty) for differences in the development of ALOD at a decade follow-up. Two investigational groups, on the basis of a high or low ALOD score, then proceeded through statistical analysis to compare the functional outcomes of patients in each group. RESULTS: Statistical evaluation of ALOD findings in patients from each surgical group found a significantly higher rate of high-grade ALOD in patients who underwent cervical arthrodesis with plate fixation compared with cervical arthroplasty (68.2% vs. 11.1%, P=0.0003). Functional outcomes of patients were also assessed at the 10-year mark and outcomes in patients with either high-grade or low-grade ALOD were compared. When stratified by high versus low-grade ALOD, no significant difference was found for Neck Disability Index (NDI) (P=0.6431), VAS-arm (P=0.4497), or VAS-neck (P=0.8700) scores between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that there are no significant long-term functional outcome differences between patients with and without significant ALOD. Our findings suggest ALOD may be a radiographic finding that does not alter patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-therapeutic.

Association Between Opioid Use and Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Randomized Trial Evaluating Basivertebral Nerve Ablation for the Relief of Chronic Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a primary indication for opioid therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the hypothesis that CLBP patients reporting reduced opioid use have superior functional outcomes following basivertebral nerve (BVN) radiofrequency ablation. METHODS: This post hoc analysis from a sham-controlled trial examined short-acting opioid use from baseline through 1 yr. Opioid use was stratified into 3 groups by two blinded external reviewers. Two-sample t-tests were used to compare Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measurements between those patients who increased or decreased their opioid usage compared to baseline. RESULTS: Actively treated patients with decreased opioid use at 12 mo had a mean ODI improvement of 24.9 ± 16.0 (n = 27) compared to 7.3 ± 9.8 (n = 18) for patients reporting increased opioid use (P < .001). In the sham arm, the improvements in ODI were 17.4 ± 16.1 (n = 19) and 1.2 ± 14.3 (n = 5; P = .053) for the patients reporting decreased vs increased opioid usage, respectively. Actively treated patients reporting decreased opioid use had a mean improvement in VAS of 3.3 ± 2.5 (n = 27) compared to 0.6 ± 1.8 (n = 18) for patients reporting increased opioid use (P < .001). In the sham arm, the improvements in VAS were 2.5 ± 2.6 (n = 19) and 1.4 ± 1.9 (n = 5; P = .374) for patients reporting decreased vs increased opioid use, respectively. CONCLUSION: Subjects undergoing BVN ablation who decreased opioid use had greater improvement in ODI and VAS scores compared with those reporting increased opioid usage. There is an association between functional benefit from BVN ablation and reduced opioid use.

No S.C.A.R.E. Protocol: A Streamlined Safety Protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the proven success of anterior cervical surgery (ACS) postoperative issues can arise, with retropharyngeal hematoma (RH) being one of the most feared. A recent USA Today article highlighted the failed management and subsequent death of patients developing RH after ACS. The article calls into question the safety of performing ACS in an outpatient setting. METHODS: We tested the knowledge of 20 healthcare professionals (4 surgeons, 16 ancillary providers) regarding ways to minimize the post-ACS complications. We used a multiple-choice and fill-in-the-blank test. We then developed a No S.C.A.R.E. safety protocol and after teaching the same professionals, re-administered the examination to assess improvement. RESULTS: We identified large gaps in knowledge between spine surgeons and other providers (92.3% versus 31.2%) on preintervention testing. Postintervention testing showed significant improvement in nonsurgeon scores (31.2% to 86.1%, P < 0.01). Improvement was also seen in provider confidence after completion of the education module. CONCLUSION: Previous studies demonstrate that the incidence of RH necessitating evacuation after ACS is extremely small (<1%). For rare complications, healthcare teams may benefit from educational modules and standardized protocols. After implementation of our No S.C.A.R.E. protocol, provider knowledge and confidence markedly improved. We recommend similar education modules and protocols be used at other institutions performing ACS.

i-Factor™ Bone Graft vs Autograft in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: 2-Year Follow-up of the Randomized Single-Blinded Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Study.

BACKGROUND: i-Factor™ Bone Graft (Cerapedics Inc, Westminster, Colorado) is a composite bone substitute material consisting of P-15 synthetic collagen fragment adsorbed onto anorganic bone mineral suspended in an inert biocompatible hydrogel carrier. A pivotal, noninferiority, US FDA Investigational Device Exemption study demonstrated the benefits of i-Factor™ compared to local autograft bone in single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion at 1-yr postoperative. OBJECTIVE: To report 2-yr follow-up. METHODS: Subjects randomly received either autograft (n = 154) or i-Factor™ (n = 165) in a cortical ring allograft and followed using radiological, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: At 2 yr, the fusion rate was 97.30% and 94.44% in i-Factor™ and autograft subjects, respectively (P = .2513), and neurological success rate was 94.87% (i-Factor™) and 93.79% (autograft; P = .7869). Neck Disability Index improved 28.30 (i-Factor™) and 26.95 (autograft; P = .1448); Visual Analog Scale arm pain improved 5.43 (i-Factor™) and 4.97 (autograft) (p = .2763); Visual Analog Scale neck pain improved 4.78 (i-Factor™) and 4.41 (autograft; P = .1652), Short Form-36 (SF-36v2) Physical Component Score improved 10.23 (i-Factor™) and 10.18 (autograft; P = .4507), and SF36v2 Mental Component Score improved 7.88 (i-FactorTM) and 7.53 (autograft; P = .9872). The composite endpoint of overall success (fusion, Neck Disability Index improvement >15, neurological success, and absence of re-operations) was greater in i-Factor™ subjects compared to autograft subjects (69.83% and 56.35%, respectively, P = .0302). Twelve (7.45%) i-Factor™ subjects and 16 (10.53%) autograft subjects underwent re-operation (P = .3411). There were no allergic reactions associated with i-Factor™. CONCLUSION: Use of i-Factor™ in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is effective and safe, and results in similar outcomes compared to local autograft bone at 2 yr following surgery.

Geographic variations in clinical presentation and outcomes of decompressive surgery in patients with symptomatic degenerative cervical myelopathy: analysis of a prospective, international multicenter cohort study of 757 patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a progressive degenerative spine disease and the most common cause of spinal cord impairment in adults worldwide. Few studies have reported on regional variations in demographics, clinical presentation, disease causation, and surgical effectiveness. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in demographics, causative pathology, management strategies, surgical outcomes, length of hospital stay, and complications across four geographic regions. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This is a multicenter international prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study includes a total of 757 symptomatic patients with DCM undergoing surgical decompression of the cervical spine. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures are the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Short Form 36 version 2 (SF-36v2), the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scale, and the Nurick grade. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The baseline characteristics, disease causation, surgical approaches, and outcomes at 12 and 24 months were compared among four regions: Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and North America. RESULTS: Patients from Europe and North America were, on average, older than those from Latin America and Asia Pacific (p=.0055). Patients from Latin America had a significantly longer duration of symptoms than those from the other three regions (p<.0001). The most frequent causes of myelopathy were spondylosis and disc herniation. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament was most prevalent in Asia Pacific (35.33%) and in Europe (31.75%), and hypertrophy of the ligamentum flavum was most prevalent in Latin America (61.25%). Surgical approaches varied by region; the majority of cases in Europe (71.43%), Asia Pacific (60.67%), and North America (59.10%) were managed anteriorly, whereas the posterior approach was more common in Latin America (66.25%). At the 24-month follow-up, patients from North America and Asia Pacific exhibited greater improvements in mJOA and Nurick scores than those from Europe and Latin America. Patients from Asia Pacific and Latin America demonstrated the most improvement on the NDI and SF-36v2 PCS. The longest duration of hospital stay was in Asia Pacific (14.16 days), and the highest rate of complications (34.9%) was reported in Europe. CONCLUSIONS: Regional differences in demographics, causation, and surgical approaches are significant for patients with DCM. Despite these variations, surgical decompression for DCM appears effective in all regions. Observed differences in the extent of postoperative improvements among the regions should encourage the standardization of care across centers and the development of international guidelines for the management of DCM.

Rare Complications of Cervical Spine Surgery: Pseudomeningocoele.

STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective, multicenter cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Rare complications of cervical spine surgery are inherently difficult to investigate. Pseudomeningocoele (PMC), an abnormal collection of cerebrospinal fluid that communicates with the subarachnoid space, is one such complication. In order to evaluate and better understand the incidence, presentation, treatment, and outcome of PMC following cervical spine surgery, we conducted a multicenter study to pool our collective experience. METHODS: This study was a retrospective, multicenter cohort study of patients who underwent cervical spine surgery at any level(s) from C2 to C7, inclusive; were over 18 years of age; and experienced a postoperative PMC. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (0.08%) developed a postoperative PMC, 6 (46.2%) of whom were female. They had an average age of 48.2 years and stayed in hospital a mean of 11.2 days. Three patients were current smokers, 3 previous smokers, 5 had never smoked, and 2 had unknown smoking status. The majority, 10 (76.9%), were associated with posterior surgery, whereas 3 (23.1%) occurred after an anterior procedure. Myelopathy was the most common indication for operations that were complicated by PMC (46%). Seven patients (53%) required a surgical procedure to address the PMC, whereas the remaining 6 were treated conservatively. All PMCs ultimately resolved or were successfully treated with no residual effects. CONCLUSIONS: PMC is a rare complication of cervical surgery with an incidence of less than 0.1%. They prolong hospital stay. PMCs occurred more frequently in association with posterior approaches. Approximately half of PMCs required surgery and all ultimately resolved without residual neurologic or other long-term effects.