Kirkham B. Wood

Purpose In the treatment of patients with adult spinal deformity, analysis of spinopelvic balance is essential in clinical assessment and surgical planning. There is currently no gold standard for measurement, whether done by hand or with digital software. New semi-automated software exists that purports to increase efficiency, but its reliability is unknown in the literature. Methods Full spine X-rays were retrospectively reviewed from 25 adult patients seen between 2014 and 2017. Patients were included if they had > 5 cm of sagittal imbalance and radiographs of sufficient quality to perform balance measurements, without prior surgical spinal fusion and/or instrumentation. Spinopelvic parameters were measured in two radiographic programs: one with basic, non-spine-specific measurement tools (eUnity, Client Outlook, Waterloo, Canada); and a second with spine-specific semi-automated measurement tools (Sectra, Sectra AB, Linköping, Sweden). Balance parameters included SVA, PI, PT, and LL. Data were compared by examining inter-rater and inter-program reliability using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results The subjects’ mean age was 67.9 ± 13.8 years old, and 32% were male. The inter-program reliability was strong, with ICC values greater than 0.91 for each parameter. Similarly, there was strong inter-observer reliability with ICC values greater than 0.88. These results persisted on delayed repeat measurement (p < 0.001 for all measurements). Conclusion There is excellent inter-observer and inter-program reliability between the basic PACS and semi-automated programs. These data demonstrate that the purported efficiency of semi-automated measurement programs does not come at the cost of measurement reliability.

Purpose The study objectives were to use a large national claims data resource to examine rates of preoperative epidural steroid injections (ESI) in lumbar spine surgery and determine whether preoperative ESI or the timing of preoperative ESI is associated with rates of postoperative complications and reoperations. Methods A retrospective longitudinal analysis of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery for disc herniation and/or spinal stenosis was undertaken using the MarketScan® databases from 2007–2015. Propensity-score matched cohorts were constructed to compare rates of complications and reoperations in patients with and without preoperative ESI. Results Within the year prior to surgery, 120,898 (46.4%) patients had a lumber ESI. The median time between ESI and surgery was 10 weeks. 23.1% of patients having preoperative ESI had more than one level injected, and 66.5% had more than one preoperative ESI treatment. Patients with chronic pain were considerably more likely to have an ESI prior to their surgery [OR 1.62 (1.54, 1.69), p < 0.001]. Patients having preoperative ESI within in close proximity to surgery did not have increased rates of infection, dural tear, neurological complications, or surgical complications; however, they did experience higher rates of reoperations and readmissions than those with no preoperative ESI (p < 0.001). Conclusion Half of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery for stenosis and/or herniation had a preoperative ESI. These were not associated with an increased risk for postoperative complications, even when the ESI was given in close proximity to surgery. Patients with preoperative ESI were more likely to have readmissions and reoperations following surgery.

With the use of constrained condylar knee (CCK) prostheses, dislocation of the knee following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with valgus deformity is rare. In our practice with such patients, however, an abnormally high dislocation rate was noted. It appeared to be associated with the extent of soft-tissue release which varied among surgeons following different sequences of release. We asked in CCK TKA with valgus deformity is releasing both the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) and popliteus tendon (PT) associated with the occurrence of dislocation. This is a case-control study of consecutive patients with valgus deformity who underwent primary CCK TKA between July 2008 and October 2015. The cases and controls were patients with and without postoperative dislocation of the knee, respectively. The extent of the release of lateral soft-tissue structures was compared between the two groups. Other patient characteristics including age, body mass index, pre- and post-operative valgus deformity, preoperative flexion-contracture, and height of the polyethylene insert were compared as well to reduce confounding. Forty-three consecutive patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up were enrolled. 9.3% (4/43) of the patients had postoperative dislocation of the knee. While the dislocated patients did not significantly differ from the controls on most characteristics, they were more likely to have both the LCL and PT released together during the surgery [100% (4/4) vs. 2.6% (1/39), P < 0.001]. Releasing both LCL and PT in CCK TKA with valgus deformity may increase the risk of dislocation, and need to be performed with some caution.

Aims: Patients may present with concurrent symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine, with surgical treatment being indicated for both. Whether arthroplasty of the hip or spinal surgery should be performed first remains uncertain. Materials and Methods: Clinical scenarios were devised for a survey asking the preferred order of surgery and the rationale for this decision for five fictional patients with both OA of the hip and degenerative lumbar disorders. These were symptomatic OA of the hip and: 1) lumbar spinal stenosis with neurological claudication; 2) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with leg pain; 3) lumbar disc herniation with leg weakness; 4) lumbar scoliosis with back pain; and 5) thoracolumbar disc herniation with myelopathy. This survey was sent to 110 members of The Hip Society and 101 members of the Scoliosis Research Society. The choices of the surgeons were compared among scenarios and between surgical specialties using the chi-squared test. The free-text comments were analyzed using text-mining. Results: Responses were received from 51 hip surgeons (46%) and 37 spine surgeons (37%). The percentages of hip surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ differed significantly among scenarios: 59% for scenario 1; 73% for scenario 2; 47% for scenario 3; 47% for scenario 4; and 10% for scenario 5 (p < 0.001). The percentages of spine surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ were 49% for scenario 1; 70% for scenario 2; 19% for scenario 3; 78% for scenario 4; and 0% for scenario 5. There were significant differences between the groups for scenarios 3 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘hip first’; p = 0.012) and 4 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘spine first’; p = 0.006). Conclusion: In patients with coexistent OA of the hip and degenerative disorders of the spine, the question of ‘hip or spinal surgery first’ elicits relatively consistent answers in some clinical scenarios, but remains controversial in others, even for experienced surgeons. The nature of neurological symptoms can influence surgeons’ decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):37–44.