Aims. Surgical approaches to cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) remain controversial. The purpose of the present study was to analyze and compare the long-term neurological recovery following anterior decompression with fusion (ADF) and posterior laminectomy and fusion with bone graft and internal fixation (PLF) based on > ten-year follow-up outcomes in a single centre. Methods. Included in this retrospective cohort study were 48 patients (12 females; mean age 55.79 years (SD 8.94)) who were diagnosed with cervical OPLL, received treatment in our centre, and were followed up for 10.22 to 15.25 years. Of them, 24 patients (six females; mean age 52.88 years (SD 8.79)) received ADF, and the other 24 patients (five females; mean age 56.25 years (SD 9.44)) received PLF. Clinical data including age, sex, and the OPLL canal-occupying ratio were analyzed and compared. The primary outcome was Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and the secondary outcome was visual analogue scale neck pain. Results. Compared with the baseline, neurological function improved significantly after surgery in all patients of both groups (p < 0.001). The JOA recovery rate in the ADF group was significantly higher than that in the PLF group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative cervical pain between the two groups (p = 0.387). The operating time was longer and intraoperative blood loss was greater in the PLF group than the ADF group. More complications were observed in the ADF group than in the PLF group, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion. Long-term neurological function improved significantly after surgery in both groups, with the improvement more pronounced in the ADF group. There was no significant difference in postoperative neck pain between the two groups. The operating time was shorter and intraoperative blood loss was lower in the ADF group; however, the incidence of perioperative complications was higher. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(9):768–775

Aims. With resumption of elective spine surgery services in the UK following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a multicentre British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) collaborative study to examine the complications and deaths due to COVID-19 at the recovery phase of the pandemic. The aim was to analyze the safety of elective spinal surgery during the pandemic. Methods. A prospective observational study was conducted from eight spinal centres for the first month of operating following restoration of elective spine surgery in each individual unit. Primary outcome measure was the 30-day postoperative COVID-19 infection rate. Secondary outcomes analyzed were the 30-day mortality rate, surgical adverse events, medical complications, and length of inpatient stay. Results. In all, 257 patients (128 males) with a median age of 54 years (2 to 88) formed the study cohort. The mean number of procedures performed from each unit was 32 (16 to 101), with 118 procedures (46%) done as category three prioritization level. The majority of patients (87%) were low-medium “risk stratification” category and the mean length of hospital stay was 5.2 days. None of the patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection, nor was there any mortality related to COVID-19 during the 30-day follow-up period, with 25 patients (10%) having been tested for symptoms. Overall, 32 patients (12%) developed a total of 34 complications, with the majority (19/34) being grade 1 to 2 Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications. No patient required postoperative care in an intensive care setting for any unexpected complication. Conclusion. This study shows that safe and effective planned spinal surgical services can be restored avoiding viral transmission, with diligent adherence to national guidelines and COVID-19-secure pathways tailored according to the resources of the individual spinal units. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1096–1101

Aims

To report the development of the technique for minimally invasive lumbar decompression using robotic-assisted navigation.

This review provides a concise outline of the advances made in the care of patients and to the quality of life after a traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) over the last century. Despite these improvements reversal of the neurological injury is not yet possible. Instead, current treatment is limited to providing symptomatic relief, avoiding secondary insults and preventing additional sequelae. However, with an ever-advancing technology and deeper understanding of the damaged spinal cord, this appears increasingly conceivable. A brief synopsis of the most prominent challenges facing both clinicians and research scientists in developing functional treatments for a progressively complex injury are presented. Moreover, the multiple mechanisms by which damage propagates many months after the original injury requires a multifaceted approach to ameliorate the human spinal cord. We discuss potential methods to protect the spinal cord from damage, and to manipulate the inherent inhibition of the spinal cord to regeneration and repair. Although acute and chronic SCI share common final pathways resulting in cell death and neurological deficits, the underlying putative mechanisms of chronic SCI and the treatments are not covered in this review.

Aims

Psychoeducative prehabilitation to optimize surgical outcomes is relatively novel in spinal fusion surgery and, like most rehabilitation treatments, they are rarely well specified. Spinal fusion patients experience anxieties perioperatively about pain and immobility, which might prolong hospital length of stay (LOS). The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine if a Preoperative Spinal Education (POSE) programme, specified using the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) and designed to normalize expectations and reduce anxieties, was safe and reduced LOS.