Lumbar Pedicle Morphology and Vertebral Dimensions in Isthmic and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis-A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: The pedicle screw is the most common device used to achieve fixation in fusion of spondylolistheses. Safe and accurate placement with this technique relies on a thorough understanding of the bony anatomy. There is a paucity of literature comparing the surgically relevant osseous anatomy in patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and an isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). The goal of this study was to determine the differences in the osseous anatomy in patients with a DS and those with an IS. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study was conducted on patients with a single-level, symptomatic L4-L5 DS or a single-level, symptomatic L5-S1 IS. Magnetic resonance imaging for these patients was reviewed. Morphometries of the pedicle and vertebral body were analyzed by 2 independent observers for the levels from L3 to S1, and radiographic parameters were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 572 levels in 143 patients were studied, including 103 patients with a DS and 40 with an IS. After accounting for confounders, IS and DS had an independent effect on transverse vertebral body width, pedicle height and width, and sagittal pedicle angle. Patients with an IS had a smaller pedicle height (P < .001) and pedicle width (P = .001) than patients with DS. In addition, the angulation of the pedicles varied on the basis of the diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The osseous anatomy is significantly different in patients with a DS than with an IS. Patients with an IS have smaller pedicles in the lumbar spine. Also, the L4 and L5 pedicles are more caudally angulated and the S1 pedicle is less medialized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding the differences in pedicle anatomy is important for the safe placement of pedicle screws.

Consensus on the Role of Antibiotic Use in SSI Following Spinal Surgery.

In July of 2018, the Second International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection convened in Philadelphia, PA was held to discuss issues regarding infection in orthopedic patients and to provide consensus recommendations on these issues to practicing orthopedic surgeons. During this meeting, attending delegates divided into subspecialty groups to discuss topics specifics to their respective fields, which included the spine. At the spine subspecialty group meeting, delegates discussed and voted upon the recommendations for 63 questions regarding the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infection in spinal surgery. Of the 63 questions, 17 focused on the use of antibiotics in spine surgery, for which this article provides the recommendations, voting results, and rationales.

Value of Cervical Disk Arthroplasty.

Over the last decade, several of the Food and Drug Administration-regulated investigational device exemption (IDE) trials have compared multiple cervical disk arthroplasty (CDA) devices to anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) showing comparable and even superior patient-reported outcomes. CDA has been an increasingly attractive option because of the positive outcomes and the motion-preserving technology. However, with the large burden that health care expenditures place on the economy, the focus is now on the value of treatment options. Cost-effectiveness studies assess value by evaluating both outcomes and cost, and recently several have been conducted comparing CDA and ACDF. The results have consistently shown that CDA is a cost-effective alternative, however, in comparison to ACDF the results remain inconclusive. The lack of incorporation of disease specific measures into health state utility values, the inconsistent methods of calculating cost, and the fact that a vast majority of the results have come from industry-sponsored studies makes it difficult to form a definitive conclusion. Despite these limitations, both procedures have proven to be safe, effective, and cost-efficient alternatives.

Evaluation and Management of Pyogenic and Tubercular Spine Infections.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the most current diagnostic tools and treatment options for pyogenic and tubercular spine infection. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have focused on risk factors for failed nonoperative management in order to improve patient selection. Also, spine instrumentation and different grafting options have been safely utilized in the setting of an active infection without increasing the incidence of reoccurrence. However, the optimal surgical technique has yet to be established and instead should be patient specific. Spine infections include a broad spectrum of disorders including discitis, vertebral osteomyelitis, and spinal epidural abscess. It is paramount to recognized spine infections early due to the potential catastrophic consequences of paralysis and sepsis. The management of spine infections continues to evolve as newer diagnostic tools and surgical techniques become available. Magnetic resonance imaging with contrast is the imaging study of choice and computed tomography-guided biopsies are crucial for guiding antibiotic selection. Antibiotics are the mainstay of treatment and surgery is indicated in patients with neurological deficits, sepsis, spinal instability, and those who have failed nonoperative treatment.