Elin Winkler

Purpose: Hypoplastic pedicles of the thoracolumbar spine (<5 mm diameter) are often found in syndromic deformities of the spine and pose a challenge in pedicle screw instrumentation. 3D-printed patient-specific guides might help overcome anatomical difficulties when instrumenting pedicles with screws, thereby reducing the necessity for less effective fixation methods such as hooks or sublaminar wires. In this study, the surgical feasibility and clinical outcome of patients with hypoplastic pedicles following pedicle screw instrumentation with 3D-printed patient-specific guides were assessed. Methods: Hypoplastic pedicles were identified on preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans in six patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion surgery between 2017 and 2020. Based on these preoperative CT scans, patient-specific guides were produced to help with screw instrumentation of these thin pedicles. Postoperatively, pedicle-screw-related complications or revisions were analyzed. Results: 93/105 (88.6%) pedicle screws placed with patient-specific guides were instrumented. 62/93 (66.7%) of these instrumented pedicles were defined as hypoplastic with a mean width of 3.07 mm (SD ±0.98 mm, 95% CI [2.82–3.32]). Overall, 6 complications in the 62 hypoplastic pedicles (9.7%) were observed and included intraoperatively managed 4 cerebrospinal fluid leaks, 1 pneumothorax and 1 delayed revision due to 2 lumbar screws (2/62, 3.3%) impinging the L3 nerve root causing a painful radiculopathy. The mean follow-up time was 26.7 (SD ±11.7) months. Complications were only noted when the pedicle-width-to-screw-diameter ratio measured less than 0.62. Conclusion: Patient-specific 3D-printed guides can aid in challenging instrumentation of hypoplastic pedicles in the thoracolumbar spine, especially if the pedicle-width-to-screw-diameter ratio is greater than 0.62.

Background Context.: Proper patient selection is crucial for the outcome of surgically treated degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Nevertheless, there is still not a clear consensus regarding the optimal treatment option for patients with DLSS. Purpose.: To investigate the treatment failure rate and introduce a simple, preoperative score to aid surgical decision-making. Study Design/Setting.: Retrospective observational study Patient Sample.: Four hundred forty-five patients who underwent surgical decompression for DLSS. Outcome Measures.: Treatment failure (defined as conversion to a fusion of a previously decompressed level) of lumbar decompression Materials and Methods.: Several risk factors associated with worse outcomes and treatment failures, such as age, body mass index, smoking status, previous surgery, low back pain (LBP), facet joint effusion, disk degeneration, fatty infiltration of the paraspinal muscles, the presence of degenerative spondylolisthesis and the facet angulation, were investigated. Results.: At a mean follow-up of 44±31 months, 6.5% (29/445) of the patients underwent revision surgery with spinal fusion at an average of 3±9 months following the lumbar decompression due to low back or leg pain. The baseline LBP (≥7) [odds ratio (OR)=5.4, P2 mm) in magnetic resonance imaging (OR=4.2, P4) (OR=3.2, P=0.03) were associated with an increased risk for treatment failure following decompression for DLSS. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that a score≥6 points yielded a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 64% for predicting a treatment failure following lumbar decompression for DLSS in the present cohort. Conclusions.: The newly introduced score quantifying amounts of LBP, facet effusions, and disk degeneration, could predict treatment failure and the need for revision surgery for DLSS patients undergoing lumbar decompression without fusion. Patients with scores >6 have a high chance of needing fusion following decompression surgery. Level of Evidence.: Retrospective observational study, Level III

Background: Metatarsal pronation has been claimed to be a risk factor for hallux valgus recurrence. A rounded shape of the lateral aspect of the first metatarsal head has been identified as a sign of persistent metatarsal pronation after hallux valgus correction. This study investigated the derotational effect of a reversed L-shaped (ReveL) osteotomy combined with a lateral release to correct metatarsal pronation. The primary hypothesis was that most cases showing a positive round sign are corrected by rebalancing the metatarsal-sesamoid complex. We further assumed that the inability to correct the round sign might be a risk factor for hallux valgus recurrence. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 266 cases treated with a ReveL osteotomy for hallux valgus deformity. The radiologic measurements were performed on weightbearing foot radiographs preoperatively, at an early follow-up (median, 6.2 weeks), and the most recent follow-up (median, 13 months). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified risk factors for hallux valgus recurrence (hallux valgus angle [HVA] ≥ 20 degrees). Results: A preoperative positive radiographic round sign was present in 40.2% of the cases, of which 58.9% turned negative after the ReveL osteotomy ( P < .001). Hallux valgus recurred in 8.6%. Risk factors for recurrence were a preoperative HVA >30 degrees (odds ratio [OR] = 5.3, P < .001), metatarsus adductus (OR = 4.0, P = .004), preoperative positive round sign (OR = 3.3, P = .02), postoperative HVA >15 degrees (OR = 74.9; P < .001), and postoperative positive round sign (OR = 5.3, P = .008). Cases with a positive round sign at the most recent follow-up had a significantly higher recurrence rate than those with a negative round sign (22.7% vs 5.9%, P < .001). Conclusion: The ReveL osteotomy corrected a positive round sign in 58.9%, suggesting that not all hallux valgus deformities may need proximal derotation to negate the radiographic appearance of the round sign. A positive round sign was found to be an independent risk factor for hallux valgus recurrence. Further 3-dimensional analyses are necessary to better understand the effects and limitations of distal translational osteotomies to correct metatarsal pronation. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series.

Background: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) often leads to amputations in the lower extremity. Data on the influence of the initial anatomical DFO localization on ultimate major amputation are limited. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, 583 amputation episodes in 344 patients (78 females, 266 males) were analyzed. All received a form of amputation in combination with antibiotic therapy. A multivariate logistic regression analysis with the primary outcome “major amputation” defined as an amputation above the ankle joint was performed. The association of risk factors including location of DFO, coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, neuropathy, nephropathy, and Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy was analyzed. Results: Among 583 episodes, DFO was located in the forefoot in 512 (87.8%), in the midfoot in 43 (7.4%), and in the hindfoot in 28 episodes (4.8%). Overall, 53 of 63 (84.1%) major amputations were performed because of DFO in the setting of peripheral artery disease as primary indication. Overall, limb loss occurred in 6.1% (31/512) of forefoot, 20.9% (9/43) of midfoot, and 46.4% (13/28) of hindfoot DFO. Among these, 22 (41.5%) were performed as the primary treatment, whereas 31 (58.5%) followed previously failed minor amputations. Among this latter group of secondary major amputations, the DFO was localized to the forefoot in 23 of 583 (3.9%), the midfoot in 4 of 583 (0.7%) and the hindfoot in 4 of 583 (0.7%). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, initial hindfoot localization was a significant factor ( P < .05), whereas peripheral artery disease, smoking, and a midfoot DFO were not found to be risk factors. Conclusion: In our retrospective series, the frequency of limb loss in DFO increased with more proximal initial foot DFO lesions, with almost half of patients losing their limbs with a hindfoot DFO. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Purpose The cortical bone trajectory (CBT) is an alternative to the traditional pedicle screw trajectory (TT) in posterior spinal instrumentation, enhancing screw contact with cortical bone and therefore increasing fixation strength. Additional to the trajectory, insertion depth (pericortical vs. bicortical placement) could be a relevant factor affecting the fixation strength. However, the potential biomechanical benefit of a bicortical placement of CBT screws is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantify the fixation strength of pericortical- versus bicortical-CBT (pCBT versus bCBT) screws in a randomized cadaveric study. Methods Pedicle screws were either placed pericortical or bicortical with a CBT in 20 lumbar vertebrae (2 × 20 instrumented pedicles) from four human spine cadavers by using patient-specific templates. Instrumented specimens underwent physiological cyclic loading testing (1′800′000 cycles, 10 Hz), including shear and tension loads as well as bending moments. Translational and angular displacements of the screws were quantified and compared between the two techniques. Results There was a slight decrease in translational (0.2 mm ± 0.09 vs. 0.24 mm ± 0.11) and angular displacements (0.06° ± 0.05 vs. 0.13° ± 0.11) of bCBT screws when compared with pCBT screws after 1′800′000 cycles. However, the results were non-significant (p > 0.05). Conclusion The authors do not recommend placing CBT screws bicortically, as no relevant biomechanical advantage is gained while the potential risk for iatrogenic injury to structures anterior to the spine is increased.