Object Intraoperative monitoring of the spinal cord has become the standard of care during surgery for pediatric spinal deformity correction. The use of both somatosensory and motor evoked potentials has dramatically increased the sensitivity and specificity of detecting intraoperative neurophysiological changes to the spinal cord, which assists in the intraoperative decision-making process. The authors report on a large, single-center experience with neuromonitoring changes and outline the surgical management of patients who experience significant neuromonitoring changes during spinal deformity correction surgery. Methods The authors conducted a retrospective review of all cases involving pediatric patients who underwent spinal deformity correction surgery at Shriners Hospital for Children, Philadelphia, between January 2007 and March 2010. Five hundred nineteen consecutive cases were reviewed in which neuromonitoring was used, with 47 cases being identified as having significant changes in somatosensory evoked potentials, motor evoked potentials, or both. These cases were reviewed for patient demographic data and surgical characteristics. Results The incidence of significant neuromonitoring changes was 9.1% (47 of 519 cases), including 6 cases of abnormal Stagnara wake-up tests, of which 4 had corroborated postoperative neurological deficits (8.5% of 47 cases, 0.8% of 519). In response to neuromonitoring changes, wake-up tests were performed in 37 (79%) of 47 cases, hardware was adjusted in 15 (32%), anesthesiology interventions were reported in 5 (11%), hardware was removed in 5 (11%), the patient was successfully repositioned in 3 (6%), and the procedure was aborted in 13 (28%). In 1 of the 4 patients with new postoperative deficits, the deficit had fully resolved by the last follow-up; the other 3 patients had persistent neurological impairment as of the most recent follow-up examination. The authors observed a sensitivity of 100% for intraoperative neuromonitoring. Conclusions Due to the profound risks associated with spinal deformity surgery, intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring is an integral tool to warn of impending spinal cord injury. Intraoperative neuromonitoring appears to provide a safe and useful warning mechanism to minimize spinal cord injury that may arise during scoliosis correction surgery in pediatric patients.

Background In presumed aseptic hip and knee revisions, it is common practice to send intraoperative cultures to screen for occult infection. Currently no guidelines exist for the routine use of acid-fast bacillus (AFB) and fungal cultures in this setting. Questions/purposes We established (1) the rate of positive fungal and AFB cultures in aseptic hip and knee revision arthroplasties, (2) factors associated with positive fungal and AFB cultures, (3) the likelihood that positive cultures represent true-positive results, and (4) the hospital charges of sending fungal and AFB cultures routinely. Methods We retrospectively evaluated all 1717 presumed aseptic hip and knee revisions performed from January 2006 to November 2011: 1139 patients had at least one intraoperative fungal culture and 1133 patients had at least one intraoperative AFB culture, with 923 and 920, respectively, achieving 1-year followup. The Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria were used to classify subsequent infections. We attempted to identify risk factors for positive cultures. Results We observed six (0.5%) patients with positive AFB cultures and 19 (1.7%) with positive fungal cultures. Patients undergoing reimplantation procedures were more likely to have a positive fungal culture. The true-positive rate was 0% and 0.1% for AFB and fungal cultures, respectively. The total hospital charges for these cultures over the time frame of our study were USD 1,315,533. Conclusions Given the extremely low rate of true-positive AFB and fungal cultures in presumed aseptic revision joint arthroplasty and the charges associated with maintaining these cultures, we believe their routine use is unwarranted.

Background: Information regarding the treatment of high-grade spondylolisthesis (HGS) in adults has been previously described; however, previous descriptions of the evaluation and surgical management of HGS do not represent more recent and now established approaches. The purpose of the current review is to discuss current concepts in the evaluation and management of patients with HGS. Methods: Literature review. Results: HGS is diagnosed in up to 11.3% of adults with spondylolisthesis and typically presents as nonspecific lower back pain. Regarding evaluation, a thorough history and physical examination should be performed, which may help predict the presence of HGS. Diagnostic imaging, and specifically the use of spino-pelvic parameters, are now commonly implicated in guiding treatment course and prognosis. When surgical intervention is indicated, surgical approaches include in situ fusion variations, reduction and partial reduction with fusion, and vertebrectomy. Although the majority of studies suggest improvements with these approaches, the literature is limited by a low level of evidence with regards to the superiority of one technique when compared with others. Conclusions: HGS is a unique cause of low back pain in adults that carries considerable morbidity, but rarely presents with neurologic symptoms. Although the definitions, classifications, and methods of diagnosis of this spinal deformity have been established and accepted, the ideal surgical management of this deformity remains highly debated. Fusion in situ techniques are often technically easier to perform and provide lower risk of neurologic complications, whereas reduction and fusion techniques offer greater restoration of global spino-pelvic balance. Preoperative spinopelvic parameters may have utility in assisting in procedural selection; however, future, higher-quality and longer-term studies are warranted to determine the optimal surgical intervention among the widely available techniques currently used, and to better define the indications for these interventions.

Background Therapeutic musculoskeletal injections require a clean or sterile skin preparation to minimize the risk of infections. Ultrasound guidance for this procedure requires the use of transmission gel in proximity to the injection site, and its effect on maintaining sterility is unknown. Questions/purposes We asked: (1) Does sterile ultrasound transmission gel increase skin contamination during therapeutic orthopaedic injections? (2) Does nonsterile gel application result in increased contamination? (3) Does a manufacturer-approved ultrasound probe disinfecting agent in the form of 17.2% isopropanol and 0.28% diisobutylphenoxyethoxyethyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride wipes adequately decontaminate the ultrasound transducer? (4) Does 70% isopropyl alcohol effectively decontaminate skin for administration of musculoskeletal injections? Methods Twenty-six healthy volunteers in an outpatient orthopaedic clinical setting were recruited. The subjects' skin was prepared to simulate a therapeutic intraarticular shoulder injection under ultrasound guidance. Four skin swabs for culture from each subject were taken: one sample before preparation with isopropyl alcohol, one sample after skin preparation, one after simulated injection procedure with sterile ultrasound transmission gel using the transducer, and one after mock procedure with nonsterile ultrasound transmission gel. In addition, samples were taken from the nonsterile ultrasound transmission gel and the transducer for culture analysis. Aerobic and anaerobic cultures were incubated during a 5-day period for bacterial species identification. Results Sterile ultrasound gel use results in an increase in skin contamination (odds ratio [OR], 9; 95% CI, 1.4-57.1; p = 0.005). Compared with sterile gel use, application of nonsterile gel did not increase contamination proportion (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.7; p = 0.56). All cultures from nonsterile gel were negative. None of the samples cultured directly from the ultrasound probe were positive for bacteria (0%). Skin preparation with 70% alcohol decreased the proportion of contamination when compared with unprepared skin (OR, 21.0; 95% CI, 3.1-142.2; p = 0.001). Conclusions Use of ultrasound probes and transmission gel results in greater contamination in simulated intraarticular injections of the shoulder. As such, sterile preparation of the entire injection field, including the

Study Design. Retrospective cohort study. Objective. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients who underwent stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) to those who underwent posterolateral fusion (PLF) for symptomatic adjacent segment disease (ASD). Summary of Background Data. Recent studies have suggested that LLIF can successfully treat ASD; however, there are no studies to date that compare LLIF with the traditional open PLF in this cohort. Methods. A total of 47 consecutive patients who underwent LLIF or PLF for symptomatic ASD between January 2007 and August 2016 after failure of conservative management were reviewed for this study. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected on all patients at preoperative, postoperative, and most recent post-operative visit using the Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS)–Back, and VAS–Leg surveys. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, and most recent postoperative radiographs were assessed for pelvic incidence, fusion, intervertebral disc height, segmental and overall lumbar lordosis (LL). Symptomatic ASD was diagnosed if back pain, neurogenic claudication, or lower extremity radiculopathy presented following a previous lumbar fusion. Preoperative plain radiographs were evaluated for evidence of adjacent segment degeneration. Results. A total of 47 patients (23 LLIF, 24 PLF) met inclusion criteria. Operative times (P < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the PLF group. Patients who underwent PLF were discharged approximately 3 days after the LLIF patients (P < 0.001). PROs in the PLF and LLIF cohorts showed significant and equivalent improvement, with equivalent radiographic fusion rates. LLIF significantly improve segmental lordosis (P < 0.001), total LL (P = 0.003), and disc height (P < 0.001) from preoperative to immediate postoperative and final follow-up (P = 0.004, P = 0.019, P ≤ 0.001, respectively). Conclusion. Although LLIF may provide less perioperative morbidity and shorter length of hospitalization, both techniques are safe and effective approaches to restore radiographic alignment and provide successful clinical outcomes in patients with adjacent segment degeneration following previous lumbar fusion surgery. Level of Evidence: 3

No abstract

The management of two cases of elbow dislocation in the dog by closed reduction is described and a brief review of the literature is given.Résumé. L'auteur décrit le traitement de deux cas de dislocation du coude, chez le chien, par réduction obturée et donne une briève bibliographie.Zusammenfassung. Die Behandlung zweier Fälle von Ellbogendislokation durch geschlossene Reduktion wird beschrieben und eine kurze Übersicht der Literatur gegeben.

To explore the safety and the effectiveness of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic spinal surgery, an acute/non-survival animal trial was performed in 5 pigs using rigid and flexible endoscopes, flouroscopy, a holmium-YAG laser, and prototype instruments and implants. Our study aimed to approach the intervertebral disc space and spinal canal using laparoscopic and thoracoscopic techniques and to explore the potential and limits for endoscopic anterior spinal decompression and fusion. In a lateral recumbency access was provided to the anterolateral aspect of the lumbar spine from L1/2 to L7/S1, the thoracic spine was accessible from T2/3 to the diaphragmatic insertion. Complete disc space emptying with penetration into the spinal canal could be performed, epidural bleeding could be controlled by a hemostatic sponge, however bleeding restricted visualization for further endoscopic manipulation in the spinal canal. Intervertebral fusion was accomplished at T6/7, L4/5 and L7/S1 using small fragment plates with 3.5 mm screws and iliac bone grafts or prototype carbon fiber cages. On post mortem examination we found no dural tears and no nerve root damage, all animals had stabilized fusion sites and good implant position. We conclude that minimally invasive thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approaches to the spine are feasible and safe to perform disc decompression and implant placement for spinal fusion. In addition to currently performed laparoscopic interbody fusion, also plate fixation to reestablish lordosis of the lumbar spine is feasible at least in the porcine model. Careful disc decompression must be performed prior to implant introduction to prevent iatrogenic disc protrusion and spinal cord or nerve root compression. However, further surgical exploration of the spinal canal using these techniques does not provide adequate visualization of epidural spaces and therefore must be regarded as unsafe.