Cervical spondylotic myelopathy surgery outcome

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy surgery outcome

Indications and optimal timing for surgical treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) remain unclear, and data from daily clinical practice are warranted.

Gulati et al. investigated clinical outcomes following decompressive surgery for DCM.

Data were obtained from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. The primary outcome was change in the neck disability index (NDI) 1 yr after surgery. Secondary endpoints were the European myelopathy score (EMS), quality of life (EuroQoL 5D [EQ-5D]), numeric rating scales (NRS) for headache, neck pain, and arm pain, complications, and perceived benefit of surgery assessed by the Global Perceived Effect scale.

They included 905 patients operated between January 2012 and June 2018. There were significant improvements in all Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including NDI (mean -10.0, 95% CI -11.5 to -8.4, P < .001), EMS (mean 1.0, 95% CI 0.8-1.1, P < .001), EQ-5D index score (mean 0.16, 95% CI 0.13-0.19, P < .001), EQ-5D visual analogue scale (mean 13.8, 95% CI 11.7-15.9, P < .001), headache NRS (mean -1.1, 95% CI -1.4 to -0.8, P < .001), neck pain NRS (mean -1.8, 95% CI -2.0 to -1.5, P < .001), and arm pain NRS (mean -1.7, 95% CI -1.9 to -1.4, P < .001). According to GPE scale assessments, 229/513 patients (44.6%) experienced “complete recovery” or felt “much better” at 1 yr. There were significant improvements in all PROMs for both mild and moderate-to-severe DCM. A total of 251 patients (27.7%) experienced adverse effects within 3 mo.

Surgery for DCM is associated with significant and clinically meaningful improvement across a wide range of PROMs 1).


Objective scoring of the post-operative neurological function did not correlate with patient-perceived outcomes in Degenerative cervical myelopathy outcome (DCM). Traditional testing of motor and sensory function as part of the neurological assessment may not be sensitive enough to assess the scope of neurological changes experienced by Degenerative cervical myelopathy patients 2).


Hamdan assessed the relation between MRI T2 Weighted images (T2WIhyperintense cord signal and clinical outcome after anterior cervical discectomy in patients with degenerative cervical disc herniation.

This retrospective observational study was conducted on twenty-five patients with degenerative cervical disc prolapse associated with MRI T2WI hyperintense cord signal, at the Department of Neurosurgery, Qena University Hospital, South Valley University from August 2014 to December 2016. A complete clinical and radiological evaluation of the patients was done. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion was done for all patients. Patients were clinically assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 3, 6, and 12 months using Modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale (MJOA). Radiographic assessment was done by preoperative and postoperative T2WI MRI. The statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software (version 22.0).

There were 25 patients included in the study; 16 (64%) females and 9 (36%) males. The mean age was 46.89 ± 7.52 standard deviation (SD) years with range from 26 to 64 years, 3 (12%) patients had worsened in the form of postoperative motor power deterioration, and 14 (56%) patients has no improvement and remain as preoperative condition. The remaining 8 (32%) patients had a reported postoperative improvement of symptoms and signs according to MJOA score. The mean follow-up period (in months) was 11 ± 2.34 (SD). Conclusion:

The presence of T2W hyperintense signal on preoperative MRI predicts a poor surgical outcome in patients with cervical disc prolapse. The regression of T2W ISI postoperatively correlates with better functional outcomes 3).


Whilst decompressive surgery can halt disease progression, existing spinal cord damage is often permanent, leaving patients with lifelong disability.

Early surgery improves the likelihood of recovery, yet the average time from onset of symptoms to correct diagnosis is over 2 years. The majority of delays occur initially, before and within primary care, mainly due to a lack of recognition. Symptom checkers are widely used by patients before medical consultation and can be useful for preliminary triage and diagnosis. Lack of recognition of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) by symptom checkers may contribute to the delay in diagnosis.

The impact of the changes in myelopathic signs following cervical decompression surgery and their relationship to functional outcome measures remains unclear.

Surgery is associated with a significant quality of life improvement. The intervention is cost effective and, from the perspective of the hospital payer, should be supported 4).

Surgical decompression for CSM is safe and results in improved functional status and quality of life in patients around the world, irrespective of differences in medical systems and socio-cultural determinants of health 5).

The successful management of CSM depends upon an early and accurate diagnosis, an objective assessment of impairment and disability, and an ability to predict outcome. In this field, quantitative measures are increasingly used by clinicians to grade functional and neurological status and to provide decision-making support 6).


In addition, objective assessment tools allow clinicians to quantify myelopathy severity, predict outcome, and evaluate surgical benefits by tracking improvements throughout follow-up 7) 8) 9).

Several outcome measures assess functional impairment and quality of life in patients with cervical myelopathy 10) 11) 12) 13) 14).

A validated “gold standard,” however, has not been established, preventing the development of quantitative guidelines for CSM management 15).

In this field, one of the most widely accepted tool for assessing functional status is the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale (mJOA).

Some studies have found that resolution of T2 hyperintensity in subjects with CSM who undergo ventral decompressive surgery correlates with improved functional outcomes. Other studies have found little correlation with postoperative outcome 16) 17).

Machine learning for degenerative cervical myelopathy

see Machine learning for degenerative cervical myelopathy.

References


1) Gulati S, Vangen-Lønne V, Nygaard ØP, Gulati AM, Hammer TA, Johansen TO, Peul WC, Salvesen ØO, Solberg TK. Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Nationwide Registry-Based Observational Study With Patient-Reported Outcomes. Neurosurgery. 2021 Jul 29:nyab259. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyab259. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34325471.2) McGregor SM, Detombe S, Goncalves S, Doyle-Pettypiece P, Bartha R, Duggal N. Does the Neurological Exam Correlate with Patient Perceived Outcomes in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy? World Neurosurg. 2019 Aug 2. pii: S1878-8750(19)32111-4. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.07.195. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 31382071.3) Hamdan ARK. The Relation between Cord Signal and Clinical Outcome after Anterior Cervical Discectomy in Patients with Degenerative Cervical Disc Herniation. Asian J Neurosurg. 2019 Jan-Mar;14(1):106-110. doi: 10.4103/ajns.AJNS_262_17. PubMed PMID: 30937019; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6417293.4) Witiw CD, Tetreault LA, Smieliauskas F, Kopjar B, Massicotte EM, Fehlings MG. Surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a patient centered quality of life and health economic evaluation. Spine J. 2016 Oct 25. pii: S1529-9430(16)31022-1. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.10.015. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 27793760.5) Fehlings MG, Ibrahim A, Tetreault L, Albanese V, Alvarado M, Arnold P, Barbagallo G, Bartels R, Bolger C, Defino H, Kale S, Massicotte E, Moraes O, Scerrati M, Tan G, Tanaka M, Toyone T, Yukawa Y, Zhou Q, Zileli M, Kopjar B. A Global Perspective on the Outcomes of Surgical Decompression in Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Results from the Prospective Multicenter AOSpine International Study on 479 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 May 27. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26020847.6) , 15) Singh A, Tetreault L, Casey A, et al. A summary of assessment tools for patients suffering from cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review on validity, reliability, and responsiveness [published online ahead of print September 5, 2013]. Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-013-2935-x.7) Laing RJ. Measuring outcome in neurosurgery. Br J Neurosurg 2000;14:181–4.8) Holly LT, Matz PG, Anderson PA, et al. Clinical prognostic indicators of surgical outcome in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2009;11:112–8.9) Kalsi-Ryan S, Singh A, Massicotte EM, et al. Ancillary outcome measures for assessment of individuals with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:S111–22.10) Singh A, Crockard HA. Quantitative assessment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy by a simple walking test. Lancet 1999;354:370–3.11) Nurick S. The natural history and the results of surgical treatment of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain 1972;95:101–8.12) Olindo S, Signate A, Richech A, et al. Quantitative assessment of hand disability by the nine-hole-peg test (9-HPT) in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:965–7.13) Hosono N, Sakaura H, Mukai Y, et al. A simple performance test for quantifying the severity of cervical myelopathy [erratum in: J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:1534]. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:1210–3.14) Casey AT, Bland JM, Crockard HA. Development of a functional scoring system for rheumatoid arthritis patients with cervical myelopathy. Ann Rheum Dis 1996;55:901–6.16) Sarkar S, Turel MK, Jacob KS, Chacko AG. The evolution of T2-weighted intramedullary signal changes following ventral decompressive surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21(4):538-546.17) Vedantam A, Rajshekhar V. Change in morphology of intramedullary T2- weighted increased signal intensity after anterior decompressive surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39(18):1458-1462.

Convexity meningioma surgery

Convexity meningioma surgery

Convexity meningioma surgery indications.

Preoperative embolization of intracranial meningioma.

see Surgical safety checklist.

see Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis.

see Skin Preparation.

For convexity meningioma, the head is positioned so that the center of the tumor is uppermost, the same position as described for parasagittal tumors or for tumors close to the midline.

The incision and bone flap must be large enough to allow for excision of a good margin of dura around the tumor attachments.

The meningeal arteries are occluded as they are exposed.

These tumors can be removed intact by placing gentle traction on the dural attachment and working circumferentially around the tumor to divide the attachments to the cortex. However, if the surface of the tumor cannot be easily visualized without placing significant retraction on the cortex, internal decompression of the tumor is done and the capsule is reflected into the area of decompression.

In a situation where the tumor arises over the frontal temporal junction and grows into the sylvian fissure, the medial capsule and the dural attachment may extend down onto the lateral floor of the anterior fossa and anterior wall of the middle fossa, and the medial capsule of the tumor can be attached to branches of the middle cerebral artery.

A study showed that meningioma recurrence was unlikely when autologous cranioplasty was done with refashioned hyperostotic bone. This could be done in the same setting with meningioma excision. There was no recurrence at a mean of 5-year follow-up in convexity meningiomas 1).

Right Convexity Meningioma from Surgical Neurology International on Vimeo.

Left Frontal Convexity Meningioma from Surgical Neurology International on Vimeo.

An accurate and real-time model of soft tissue is critical for surgical simulation for which a user interacts haptically and visually with simulated patients. A paper focuses on the real-time deformation model of brain tissue for the interactive surgical simulation, such as neurosurgical simulation.

A new Finite Element Method (FEM) based model with constraints is proposed for the brain tissue in neurosurgical simulation. A new energy function of constraints characterizing the interaction between the virtual instrument and the soft tissue is incorporated into the optimization problem derived from the implicit integration scheme. Distance and permanent deformation constraints are introduced to describe the interaction in the convexity meningioma dissection and hemostasis. The proposed model is particularly suitable for GPU-based computing, making it possible to achieve real-time performance.

Simulation results show that the simulated soft tissue exhibits the behaviors of adhesion and permanent deformation under the constraints. Experiments show that the proposed model is able to converge to the exact solution of the implicit Euler method after 96 iterations. The proposed model was implemented in the development of a neurosurgical simulator, in which surgical procedures such as dissection of convexity meningioma and hemostasis were simulated 2).


1)

Lau BL, Che Othman MI, Fakhri M, San Liew DN, San Lim S, Bujang MA, Hieng Wong AS. Does putting back hyperostotic bone flap in meningioma surgery causes tumor recurrence? An observational prospective study. World Neurosurg. 2019 Mar 26. pii: S1878-8750(19)30863-0. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.03.183. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 30926555.
2)

Hou W, Liu PX, Zheng M. A new model of soft tissue with constraints for interactive surgical simulation. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2019 Jul;175:35-43. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2019.03.018. Epub 2019 Apr 1. PubMed PMID: 31104713.

Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

https://mssic.org/

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) is a statewide quality improvement collaborative involving orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons with the aim of improving the quality of care of spine surgery. The objective of this collaborative is to heighten patient care outcomes while consequently increasing the efficiency of treatment.

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) is a prospectivelongitudinalmulticenterquality-improvement collaborative.

Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) prospectively collects data on all patients undergoing operations for degenerative and/or deformity indications.


In 2013, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) and Blue Care Network (BCN) established the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) as a Collaborative Quality Initiative (CQI). MSSIC is one of the newest of 21 other CQIs that have significantly improved and continue to improve the quality of patient care throughout the state of Michigan. METHODS MSSIC focuses on lumbar and cervical spine surgery, specifically indications such as stenosis, disk herniation, and degenerative disease. Surgery for tumors, traumatic fractures, deformity, scoliosis, and acute spinal cord injury are currently not within the scope of MSSIC. Starting in 2014, MSSIC consisted of 7 hospitals and in 2015 included another 15 hospitals, for a total of 22 hospitals statewide. A standardized data set is obtained by data abstractors, who are funded by BCBSM/BCN. Variables of interest include indications for surgery, baseline patient-reported outcome measures, and medical history. These are obtained within 30 days of surgery. Outcome instruments used include the EQ-5D general health state score (0 being worst and 100 being the best health one can imagine) and EQ-5D-3 L. For patients undergoing lumbar surgery, a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale for leg and back pain and the Oswestry Disability Index for back pain are collected. For patients undergoing cervical surgery, a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale for arm and neck pain, Neck Disability Index, and the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score are collected. Surgical details, postoperative hospital course, and patient-reported outcome measures are collected at 90-day, 1-year, and 2-year intervals. RESULTS As of July 1, 2015, a total of 6397 cases have been entered into the registry. This number reflects 4824 eligible cases with confirmed surgery dates. Of these 4824 eligible cases, 3338 cases went beyond the 120-day window and were considered eligible for the extraction of surgical details, 90-day outcomes, and adverse events. Among these 3338 patients, there are a total of 2469 lumbar cases, 862 cervical cases, and 7 combined procedures that were entered into the registry.

In addition to functioning as a registry, MSSIC is also meant to be a platform for quality improvement with the potential for future initiatives and best practices to be implemented statewide in order to improve quality and lower costs. With its current rate of recruitment and expansion, MSSIC will provide a robust platform as a regional prospective registry. Its unique funding model, which is supported by BCBSM/BCN, will help ensure its longevity and viability, as has been observed in other CQIs that have been active for several years 1).


Macki et al. aimed to identify which factors are significantly associated with return-to-work after lumbar surgery at long-term follow-up.

Summary of background data: Prior publications have created a clinically relevant predictive model for return-to-work, wherein educationgenderrace, comorbidities, and preoperative symptoms increased the likelihood of return-to-work at 3 months after lumbar surgery. They sought to determine if these trends 1) persisted at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively, or 2) differed among preoperatively employed versus unemployed patients.

MSSIC was queried for all patients undergoing lumbar operations (2014-2019). All patients intended to return to work postoperatively. Patients were followed for up to 2 years postoperatively. Measures of association were calculated with multivariable generalized estimating equations (GEE).

Return-to-work increased from 63% (3542/5591) at 90 days postoperatively to 75% (3143/4147) at 1 year and 74% (2133/2866) at 2 years postoperatively. Following GEE, neither clinical nor surgical variables predicted return-to-work at all three-time intervals: 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Only socioeconomic factors reached statistical significance at all follow-up points. Preoperative employment followed by insurance status had the greatest associations with return-to-work. In a sub-analysis of patients who were preoperatively employed, insurance was the only factor with significant associations with return-to-work at all three follow-up intervals. The return-to-work rates among unemployed patients at baseline increased from 29% (455/1100) at 90 days, 44% (495/608) at 1 year, and 46% (366/426) at 2 years postoperatively. The only two significant factors associated with return-to-work at all three follow-up intervals were Medicaid, as compared to private insurance, and male gender.

In patients inquiring about long-term return-to-work after lumbar surgery, health insurance status represents the important determinant of employment status.Level of Evidence: 2 2).


While a complex myriad of socio-economic factors interplay between race and surgical success, they identified modifiable risk factors, specifically depression, that may improve patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among African American patients after elective lumbar spine surgery 3).


Correction of sagittal balance is associated with greater odds of discharge to home. These findings, coupled with the recognized implications of admission to a rehabilitation facility, will emphasize the importance of spine surgeons accounting for the sagittal vertical axis (SVA) in their surgical planning of MIS lumbar interbody fusions 4)


Using MSSIC, Zakaria et al. sought to identify the relationship between a positive Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) screening, which is predictive of depression, and patient satisfactionreturn to work, and achieving Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) minimal clinically important difference (MCID) scores up to 2 years after lumbar fusion.

Data from a total of 8585 lumbar fusion patients were analyzed. Patient satisfaction was measured by the North American Spine Society patient satisfaction index. A positive PHQ-2 score is one that is ≥ 3, which has an 82.9% sensitivity and 90.0% specificity in detecting major depressive disorder. Generalized estimating equation models were constructed; variables tested include age, sex, race, past medical history, severity of surgery, and preoperative opioid usage.

Multivariate analysis was performed. Patients with a positive PHQ-2 score (i.e., ≥ 3) were less likely to be satisfied after lumbar fusion at 90 days (relative risk [RR] 0.93, p < 0.001), 1 year (RR 0.92, p = 0.001), and 2 years (RR 0.92, p = 0.028). A positive PHQ-2 score was also associated with decreased likelihood of returning to work at 90 days (RR 0.76, p < 0.001), 1 year (RR 0.85, p = 0.001), and 2 years (RR 0.82, p = 0.031). A positive PHQ-2 score was predictive of failure to achieve an ODI MCID at 90 days (RR 1.07, p = 0.005) but not at 1 year or 2 years after lumbar fusion.

A multivariate analysis based on information from a large, multicenter, prospective database on lumbar fusion patients was performed. The authors found that a positive score (≥ 3) on the PHQ-2, which is a simple and accurate screening tool for depression, predicts an inability to return to work and worse satisfaction up to 2 years after lumbar fusion. Depression is a treatable condition, and so in the same way that patients are medically optimized before surgery to decrease postoperative morbidity, perhaps patients should have preoperative psychiatric optimization to improve postoperative functional outcomes 5).


Ninety-day readmission occurred in 9.0% of patients, mainly for painwound infection, and radicular symptoms. Increased focus on postoperative pain may decrease readmissions. Among factors impacting the likelihood of 90-d readmission, early postoperative ambulation may be most easily modifiable. Optimization of preexisting medical conditions could also potentially decrease readmission risk 6).


Multivariate analysis identified the common adverse events after cervical spine surgery, along with their associated risk factors. They found that early mobilization after cervical spine surgery has the potential to significantly decrease adverse events 7).


1)

Chang V, Schwalb JM, Nerenz DR, Pietrantoni L, Jones S, Jankowski M, Oja-Tebbe N, Bartol S, Abdulhak M. The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative: a statewide Collaborative Quality Initiative. Neurosurg Focus. 2015 Dec;39(6):E7. doi: 10.3171/2015.10.FOCUS15370. PMID: 26621421.
2)

Macki M, Anand SK, Hamilton T, Lim S, Mansour T, Bazydlo M, Schultz L, Abdulhak MM, Khalil JG, Park P, Aleem I, Easton R, Schwalb JM, Nerenz D, Chang V. Analysis of Factors associated with Return to Work After Lumbar Surgery up to 2-years follow-up: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021 Jul 7. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004163. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34265812.
3)

Macki M, Hamilton T, Lim S, Telemi E, Bazydlo M, Nerenz DR, Zakaria HM, Schultz L, Khalil JG, Perez-Cruet MJ, Aleem IS, Park P, Schwalb JM, Abdulhak MM, Chang V. Disparities in outcomes after spine surgery: a Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2021 May 7:1-9. doi: 10.3171/2020.10.SPINE20914. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 33962387.
4)

Macki M, Fadel HA, Hamilton T, Lim S, Massie LW, Zakaria HM, Pawloski J, Chang V. The influence of sagittal spinopelvic alignment on patient discharge disposition following minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion. J Spine Surg. 2021 Mar;7(1):8-18. doi: 10.21037/jss-20-596. PMID: 33834123; PMCID: PMC8024762.
5)

Zakaria HM, Mansour TR, Telemi E, Asmaro K, Macki M, Bazydlo M, Schultz L, Nerenz DR, Abdulhak M, Schwalb JM, Park P, Chang V. Use of Patient Health Questionnaire-2 scoring to predict patient satisfaction and return to work up to 1 year after lumbar fusion: a 2-year analysis from the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019 Aug 23:1-8. doi: 10.3171/2019.6.SPINE1963. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 31443085.
6)

Park P, Nerenz DR, Aleem IS, Schultz LR, Bazydlo M, Xiao S, Zakaria HM, Schwalb JM, Abdulhak MM, Oppenlander ME, Chang VW. Risk Factors Associated With 90-Day Readmissions After Degenerative Lumbar Fusion: An Examination of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) Registry. Neurosurgery. 2019 Sep 1;85(3):402-408. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyy358. PMID: 30113686.
7)

Zakaria HM, Bazydlo M, Schultz L, Pahuta MA, Schwalb JM, Park P, Aleem I, Nerenz DR, Chang V; MSSIC Investigators. Adverse events and their risk factors 90 days after cervical spine surgery: analysis from the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019 Feb 15:1-13. doi: 10.3171/2018.10.SPINE18666. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 30771759.
WhatsApp WhatsApp us
%d bloggers like this: