3.

The overall SSI rate for the examined CSM cohort was 1.15 %. This study identified increased BMI and operative time ≥208 min as predictors of infection in surgical CSM patients. This information should be carefully considered in delivering patient education and future efforts to optimize risk in CSM patients indicated for surgical intervention.

No abstract

Background: Full-body stereographs for adult spinal deformity (ASD) have enhanced global deformity and lower-limb compensation associations. The advent of age-adjusted goals for classic ASD parameters (sagittal vertical axis, pelvic tilt, spino-pelvic mismatch [PI-LL]) has enabled individualized evaluation of successful versus failed realignment, though these remain to be radiographically assessed postoperatively. This study analyzes pre-and postoperative sagittal alignment to quantify patient-specific correction against age-adjusted goals, and presents differences in compensation in patients whose postoperative profile deviates from targets. Methods: Single-center retrospective review of ASD patients ! 18 years with biplanar full-body stereographic xrays. Inclusion: ! 4 levels fused, complete baseline and early (6-month) follow-up imaging. Correction groups generated at postoperative visit for actual alignment compared to age-adjusted ideal values for pelvic tilt, PILL , and sagittal vertical axis derived from clinically relevant formulas. Patients that matched exact 6 10-year threshold for ageadjusted targets were compared to unmatched cases (undercorrected or overcorrected). Comparison of spinal alignment and compensatory mechanisms (thoracic kyphosis, hip extension, knee flexion, ankle flexion, pelvic shift) across correction groups were performed with ANOVA and paired t tests. Results: The sagittal vertical axis, pelvic tilt, and PILL of 122 patients improved at early postoperative visits (P , .001). Of lower-extremity parameters, knee flexion and pelvic shift improved (P , .001), but hip extension and ankle flexion were similar (P. .170); global sagittal angle decreased overall, reflecting global postoperative correction (8.38 versus 4.48, P , .001). Rates of undercorrection to age-adjusted targets for each spino-pelvic parameter were 30.3% (sagittal vertical axis), 41.0% (pelvic tilt), and 43.6% (PI-LL). Compared to matched/overcorrections, undercorrections recruited increased posterior pelvic shift to compensate (P , .001); knee flexion was recruited in undercorrections for sagittal vertical axis and pelvic tilt; thoracic hypokyphosis was observed in PILL undercorrections. All undercorrected groups displayed consequentially larger global sagittal angle (P , .001). Conclusions: Global alignment cohort improvements were observed, and when comparing actual to age-adjusted alignment, undercorrections recruited pelvic and lower-limb flexion to compensate.

No abstract

4.

No abstract

OBJECTIVENeck and back pain are highly prevalent conditions that account for major disability. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) are the two most common functional status measures for neck and back pain. However, no single instrument exists to evaluate patients with concurrent neck and back pain. The recently developed Total Disability Index (TDI) combines overlapping elements from the ODI and NDI with the unique items from each. This study aimed to prospectively validate the TDI in patients with spinal deformity, back pain, and/or neck pain.METHODSThis study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a single center. The 14-item TDI, derived from ODI and NDI domains, was administered to consecutive patients presenting to a spine practice. Patients were assessed using the ODI, NDI, and EQ-5D. Validation of internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and validity of reconstructed NDI and ODI scores derived from TDI were assessed.RESULTSA total of 252 patients (mean age 55 years, 56% female) completed initial assessments (back pain, n = 115; neck pain, n = 52; back and neck pain, n = 55; spinal deformity, n = 55; and no pain/deformity, n = 29). Of these patients, 155 completed retests within 14 days. Patients represented a wide range of disability (mean ODI score: 36.3 ± 21.6; NDI score: 30.8 ± 21.8; and TDI score: 34.1 ± 20.0). TDI demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.922) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96). Differences between actual and reconstructed scores were not clinically significant. Subanalyses demonstrated TDI’s ability to quantify the degree of disability due to back or neck pain in patients complaining of pain in both regions.CONCLUSIONSThe TDI is a valid and reliable disability measure in patients with back and/or neck pain and can capture each spine region’s contribution to total disability. The TDI could be a valuable method for total spine assessment in a clinical setting, and its completion is less time consuming than that for both the ODI and NDI.