Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) cause significant morbidity and mortality in orthopaedic surgical practice, although the incidence following surgery to the lumbosacral spine is less than following lower limb surgery. Our objective was to compare our rate of thromboembolic complications with those published elsewhere and investigate whether the adoption of additional pharmacological measures reduced the incidence of clinically evident DVT and PE. This retrospective study was undertaken to investigate the incidence of DVT/ PE during the 10 years from 1 January 1985 to 31 December 1994, and then to assess the effectiveness of an anticoagulant policy introduced during 1995 using low dose aspirin or LMH in high risk cases. All records for spinal operations were reviewed for thrombo-embolic complications by reference to the Scottish Morbidity Record form SMR1. To ensure that all patients were compliant with the policy, data for the whole of 1995 was omitted and the period 1 January 1996 to 31 December 2003 was taken to assess its effectiveness. Surgery was done with the patient in the kneeling, seated prone position which leaves the abdomen free and avoids venous kinking in the legs. Records of a total of 1,111 lumbar spine operations were performed from 1 January 1985 to 31December 2004 were reviewed. The overall incidence of thrombo-embolic complications was 0.29%. A total of 697 operations were performed from 1 January 1985 to 31 December 1994 with two cases of DVT and no cases of PE giving thromboembolic complication rate of 0.29%. During the period 1 January 1996 to 31 December 2003, 414 operations resulted in one case of DVT and no cases of PE, a rate of 0.24%. The incidence of symptomatic thromboembolic complications in lumbar spinal surgery is low in the kneeling, seated prone operating position, whether or not anticoagulation is used.

Low back pain (LBP) is a worldwide phenomenon. The UK studies place LBP as the largest single cause of absence from work; up to 80% of the population will experience LBP at least once in their lifetime. Most individuals do not seek medical care and are not disabled by their pain once it is managed by nonoperative measures. However, around 10% of patients go on to develop chronic pain. This review outlines the basics of the traditional approach to spinal surgery for chronic LBP secondary to osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine as well as explains the novel concepts and terminology of back pain surgery. Traditionally, the stepwise approach to surgery starts with local anaesthetic and steroid injection followed by spinal fusion. Fusion aims to alleviate pain by preventing movement between affected spinal segments; this commonly involves open surgery, which requires large soft tissue dissection and there is a possibility of blood loss and prolonged recovery time. Established minimally invasive spine surgery techniques (MISS) aim to reduce all of these complications and they include laparoscopic anterior lumbar interbody fusion and MISS posterior instrumentation with pedicle screws and rods. Newer MISS techniques include extreme lateral interbody fusion and axial interbody fusion. The main problem of fusion is the disruption of the biomechanics of the rest of the spine; leading to adjacent level disease. Theoretically, this can be prevented by performing motion-preserving surgeries such as total disc replacement, facet arthroplasty, and non fusion stabilisation. We outline the basic concepts of the procedures mentioned above as well as explore some of the novel surgical therapies available for chronic LBP.

Conservative management gives satisfactory results in 56% of patients compared to 70 - 80% for operative methods. The studies on conservative methods are mostly dated, with less stringent outcome measures. Conservative management is safe, and has a low frequency of non-union. It is most applicable in regions where facilities are suboptimal, in patients unfit for surgery, and in children. When considering operative management, intramedullary devices appear to give better results than extramedullary devices, particularly when the medial buttress of the proximal femur is compromised. However, when operative treatment is undertaken, it should be by experienced surgeons using the technique with which they are most familiar.

Summary Myeloma is one of the most common malignancies that results in osteolytic lesions of the spine. Complications, including pathological fractures of the vertebrae and spinal cord compression, may cause severe pain, deformity and neurological sequelae. They may also have significant consequences for quality of life and prognosis for patients. For patients with known or newly diagnosed myeloma presenting with persistent back or radicular pain/weakness, early diagnosis of spinal myeloma disease is therefore essential to treat and prevent further deterioration. Magnetic resonance imaging is the initial imaging modality of choice for the evaluation of spinal disease. Treatment of the underlying malignancy with systemic chemotherapy together with supportive bisphosphonate treatment reduces further vertebral damage. Additional interventions such as cement augmentation, radiotherapy, or surgery are often necessary to prevent, treat and control spinal complications. However, optimal management is dependent on the individual nature of the spinal involvement and requires careful assessment and appropriate intervention throughout. This article reviews the treatment and management options for spinal myeloma disease and highlights the value of defined pathways to enable the proper management of patients affected by it.

Purpose New interspinous process decompression devices (IPDs) provide an alternative to conservative treatment and decompressive surgery for patients with neurogenic intermittent claudication (NIC) due to degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). APERIUS Ò is a minimally invasive IPD that can be implanted percutaneously. This multicentre prospective study was designed to make a preliminary evaluation of safety and effectiveness of this IPD up to 12 months post-implantation. Methods After percutaneous implantation in 156 patients with NIC due to DLSS, data on symptoms, quality of life, pain, and use of pain medication were obtained for up to 12 months.Results Early symptom and physical function improvements were maintained for up to 12 months, when 60 and 58 % of patients maintained an improvement higher than the Minimum Clinically Important Difference for Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) symptom severity and physical function, respectively. Leg, buttock/groin, and back pain were eased throughout, and the use and strength of related pain medication were reduced. Devices were removed from 9 % of patients due to complications or lack of effectiveness. Conclusions Overall, in a period of up to 12 months follow-up, the safety and effectiveness of the APERIUS Ò offered a minimally invasive option for the relief of NIC complaints in a high proportion of patients. Further studies are underway to provide insight on outcomes and effectiveness compared to other decompression methods, and to develop guidance on optimal patient selection.