Aims. A variety of surgical methods and strategies have been demonstrated for Andersson lesion (AL) therapy. In 2011, we proposed and identified the feasibility of stabilizing the spine without curettaging the vertebral or discovertebral lesion to cure non-kyphotic AL. Additionally, due to the excellent reunion ability of ankylosing spondylitis, we further came up with minimally invasive spinal surgery (MIS) to avoid the need for both bone graft and lesion curettage in AL surgery. However, there is a paucity of research into the comparison between open spinal fusion (OSF) and early MIS in the treatment of AL. The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the clinical outcomes and radiological evaluation of our early MIS approach and OSF for AL. Methods. A total of 39 patients diagnosed with AL who underwent surgery from January 2004 to December 2022 were retrospectively screened for eligibility. Patients with AL were divided into an MIS group and an OSF group. The primary outcomes were union of the lesion on radiograph and CT, as well as the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores immediately after surgery, and at the follow-up (mean 29 months (standard error (SE) 9)). The secondary outcomes were total blood loss during surgery, operating time, and improvement in the radiological parameters: global and local kyphosis, sagittal vertical axis, sagittal alignment, and chin-brow vertical angle immediately after surgery and at the follow-up. Results. Data for 30 patients with AL were evaluated: 14 in the MIS group and 16 in the OSF group. All patients were followed up after surgery; no nonunion complications or instrumentation failures were observed in either group. No significant differences in the VAS and ODI scores were identified between the two groups. Mean ODI improved from 51 (SE 5) to 17 (SE 5) in the MIS group and from 52 (SE 6) to 19 (SE 5) in the OSF group at the follow-up. There were significant improvements in total blood loss (p = 0.025) and operating time (p < 0.001) between the groups. There was also no significant difference in local kyphosis six months postoperatively (p = 0.119). Conclusion. Early MIS is an effective treatment for AL. MIS provides comparable clinical outcomes to those treated with OSF, with less total blood loss and shorter operating time. Our results support and identify the feasibility of solid immobilization achieved by posterior instrumentation without bone graft via MIS for the treatment of AL. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):886–893

We examined the differences in post-operative functional disability and patient satisfaction between 56 patients who underwent a lumbar fusion at three or more levels for degenerative disease (group I) and 69 patients, matched by age and gender, who had undergone a one or two level fusion (group II). Their mean age was 66 years (49 to 84) and the mean follow-up was 43 months (24 to 65). The mean pre-operative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, and the mean post-operative VAS were similar in both groups (p >  0.05), but post-operatively the improvement in ODI was significantly less in group I (40.6%) than in group II (49.5%) (p < 0.001). Of the ten ODI items, patients in group I showed significant problems with lifting, sitting, standing, and travelling (p < 0.05). The most significant differences in the post-operative ODI were observed between patients who had undergone fusion at four or more levels and those who had undergone fusion at less than four levels (p = 0.005). The proportion of patients who were satisfied with their operations was similar in groups I and II (72.7% and 77.0%, respectively) (p = 0.668). The mean number of fused levels was associated with the post-operative ODI (r = 0.266, p = 0.003), but not with the post-operative VAS or satisfaction grade (p > 0.05). Post-operative functional disability was more severe in those with a long-level lumbar fusion, particularly at four or more levels, but patient satisfaction remained similar for those with both long- and short-level fusions

Aims

To determine the value of scoliosis surgery, it is necessary to evaluate outcomes in domains that matter to patients. Since randomized trials on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) are scarce, prospective cohort studies with comparable outcome measures are important. To enhance comparison, a core set of patient-related outcome measures is available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of AIS fusion surgery at two-year follow-up using the core outcomes set.

We compared a group of 46 somatised patients with a control group of 41 non-somatised patients who had undergone elective surgery to the lumbar spine in an attempt to identify pre-operative factors which could predict the outcome. In a prospective single-centre study, the Distress and Risk Assessment method consisting of a modified somatic perception questionnaire and modified Zung depression index was used pre-operatively to identify somatised patients. The type and number of consultations were correlated with functional indicators of outcome, such as the Oswestry disability index and a visual analogue score for pain in the leg after follow-up for six and 12 months. Similar improvements in the Oswestry disability index were found in the somatised and non-somatised groups. Somatised patients who had a good outcome on the Oswestry disability index had an increased number of orthopaedic consultations (50 of 83 patients (60%) vs 29 of 73 patients (39.7%); p = 0.16) and waited less time for their surgery (5.5 months) (. sd. 5.26) vs 10.1 months (. sd. 6.29); p = 0.026). No other identifiable factors were found. A shorter wait for surgery appeared to predict a good outcome. Early review by a spinal surgeon and a reduced waiting time to surgery appear to be of particular benefit to somatised patients

Aims. To identify the incidence and risk factors for five-year same-site recurrent disc herniation (sRDH) after primary single-level lumbar discectomy. Secondary outcome was the incidence and risk factors for five-year sRDH reoperation. Methods. A retrospective study was conducted using prospectively collected data and patient-reported outcome measures, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), between 2008 and 2019. Postoperative sRDH was identified from clinical notes and the centre’s MRI database, with all imaging providers in the region checked for missing events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate five-year sRDH incidence. Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent variables predictive of sRDH, with any variable not significant at the p < 0.1 level removed. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results. Complete baseline data capture was available for 733 of 754 (97.2%) consecutive patients. Median follow-up time for censored patients was 2.2 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1.0 to 5.0). sRDH occurred in 63 patients at a median 0.8 years (IQR 0.5 to 1.7) after surgery. The five-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for sRDH was 12.1% (95% CI 9.5 to 15.4), sRDH reoperation was 7.5% (95% CI 5.5 to 10.2), and any-procedure reoperation was 14.1% (95% CI 11.1 to 17.5). Current smoker (HR 2.12 (95% CI 1.26 to 3.56)) and higher preoperative ODI (HR 1.02 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.03)) were independent risk factors associated with sRDH. Current smoker (HR 2.15 (95% CI 1.12 to 4.09)) was an independent risk factor for sRDH reoperation. Conclusion. This is one of the largest series to date which has identified current smoker and higher preoperative disability as independent risk factors for sRDH. Current smoker was an independent risk factor for sRDH reoperation. These findings are important for spinal surgeons and rehabilitation specialists in risk assessment, consenting patients, and perioperative management. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):315–322

Aims. Repeated lumbar spine surgery has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine and quantify the impact of this association in a national clinical register cohort. Methods. This is a population-based study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine surgery (NORspine). We included 26,723 consecutive cases operated for lumbar spinal stenosis or lumbar disc herniation from January 2007 to December 2018. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), presented as the proportions reaching a patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS; defined as an ODI raw score ≤ 22) and ODI raw and change scores at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the Global Perceived Effect scale, the numerical rating scale for pain, the EuroQoL five-dimensions health questionnaire, occurrence of perioperative complications and wound infections, and working capability. Binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine how the number of previous operations influenced the odds of not reaching a PASS. Results. The proportion reaching a PASS decreased from 66.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 65.4 to 66.7) in cases with no previous operation to 22.0% (95% CI 15.2 to 30.3) in cases with four or more previous operations (p < 0.001). The odds of not reaching a PASS were 2.1 (95% CI 1.9 to 2.2) in cases with one previous operation, 2.6 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.0) in cases with two, 4.4 (95% CI 3.4 to 5.5) in cases with three, and 6.9 (95% CI 4.5 to 10.5) in cases with four or more previous operations. The ODI raw and change scores and the secondary outcomes showed similar trends. Conclusion. We found a dose-response relationship between increasing number of previous operations and inferior outcomes among patients operated for degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine. This information should be considered in the shared decision-making process prior to elective spine surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(4):422–430

Aims. We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences. Methods. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded. Results. Five-year follow-up was completed by 213 (95%) of the eligible patients (mean age 67 years; 155 female (67%)). After five years, ODI was similar irrespective of treatment, with a mean of 25 (SD 18) for decompression alone and 28 (SD 22) for decompression with fusion (p = 0.226). Mean EQ-5D was higher for decompression alone than for fusion (0.69 (SD 0.28) vs 0.59 (SD 0.34); p = 0.027). In the no-DS subset, fewer patients reported decreased leg pain after fusion (58%) than with decompression alone (80%) (relative risk (RR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.97). The frequency of subsequent spinal surgery was 24% for decompression with fusion and 22% for decompression alone (RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.8)). Conclusion. Adding fusion to decompression in spinal stenosis surgery, with or without spondylolisthesis, does not improve the five-year ODI, which is consistent with our two-year report. Three secondary outcomes that did not differ at two years favoured decompression alone at five years. Our results support decompression alone as the preferred method for operating on spinal stenosis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):705–712

Aims. The aim of the study was to determine if there was a direct correlation between the pain and disability experienced by patients and size of their disc prolapse, measured by the disc’s cross-sectional area on T2 axial MRI scans. Methods. Patients were asked to prospectively complete visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores on the day of their MRI scan. All patients with primary disc herniation were included. Exclusion criteria included recurrent disc herniation, cauda equina syndrome, or any other associated spinal pathology. T2 weighted MRI scans were reviewed on picture archiving and communications software. The T2 axial image showing the disc protrusion with the largest cross sectional area was used for measurements. The area of the disc and canal were measured at this level. The size of the disc was measured as a percentage of the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal on the chosen image. The VAS leg pain and ODI scores were each correlated with the size of the disc using the Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC). Intraobserver reliability for MRI measurement was assessed using the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). We assessed if the position of the disc prolapse (central, lateral recess, or foraminal) altered the symptoms described by the patient. The VAS and ODI scores from central and lateral recess disc prolapses were compared. Results. A total of 56 patients (mean age 41.1 years (22.8 to 70.3)) were included. A high degree of intraobserver reliability was observed for MRI measurement: single measure ICC was 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) from 0.97 to 0.99 (p < 0.001)). The PCC comparing VAS leg scores with canal occupancy for herniated disc was 0.056. The PCC comparing ODI for herniated disc was 0.070. We found 13 disc prolapses centrally and 43 lateral recess prolapses. There were no foraminal prolapses in this group. The position of the prolapse was not found to be related to the mean VAS score or ODI experienced by the patients (VAS, p = 0.251; ODI, p = 0.093). Conclusion. The results of the statistical analysis show that there is no direct correlation between the size or position of the disc prolapse and a patient’s symptoms. The symptoms experienced by patients should be the primary concern in deciding to perform discectomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):715–720

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with poor outcome following coccygectomy on patients with chronic coccydynia and instability of the coccyx. Methods. From the Danish National Spine Registry, DaneSpine, 134 consecutive patients were identified from a single centre who had coccygectomy from 2011 to 2019. Patient demographic data and patient-reported outcomes, including pain measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) were obtained at baseline and at one-year follow-up. Patient satisfaction was obtained at follow-up. Regression analysis, including age, sex, smoking status, BMI, duration of symptoms, work status, welfare payment, preoperative VAS, ODI, and SF-36 was performed to identify factors associated with dissatisfaction with results at one-year follow-up. Results. A minimum of one year follow-up was available in 112 patients (84%). Mean age was 41.9 years (15 to 78) and 97 of the patients were female (87%). Regression showed no statistically significant association between the investigated prognostic factors and a poor outcome following coccygectomy. The satisfied group showed a statistically significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes at one-year follow-up from baseline, whereas the dissatisfied group did not show a significant improvement. Conclusion. We did not identify factors associated with poor outcome following coccygectomy. This suggests that neither of the included parameters should be considered contraindications for coccygectomy in patients with chronic coccydynia and instability of the coccyx. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):540–544

Between January 1990 and December 2000 we carried out 226 SB Charité III disc replacements for lumbar disc degeneration in 160 patients. They were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 79 months (31 to 161) to determine the clinical and radiological outcome. The clinical results were collected by an independent observer, who was not involved in patient selection, treatment or follow-up, using a combination of outcome measures, including the Oswestry Disability Index. Pain was recorded using a visual analogue score, and the most recent radiographs were reviewed. Survival of the device was analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method and showed a cumulative survival of 35% at 156 months when radiological failure was taken as the endpoint. The mean improvement in the Oswestry disability index scores after disc replacement was 14% (6% to 21%) and the mean improvement in the pain score was 1.6 (0.46 to 2.73), both falling below the clinically significant threshold. Removal of the implant was required in 12 patients, four because of implant failure. These poor results indicate that further use of this implant is not justified

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of coccygectomy in patients with persistent coccydynia and coccygeal instability. Methods. The Danish National Spine Registry, DaneSpine, was used to identify 134 consecutive patients who underwent surgery, performed by a single surgeon between 2011 and 2019. Routine demographic data, surgical variables, and patient-reported outcomes, including a visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 to 100) for pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and the Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) were collected at baseline and one-year postoperatively. Results. A total of 112 (84%) patients with a minimum follow-up of one year had data available for analysis. Their mean age was 41.9 years, and 15 (13%) were males. At 12 months postoperatively, there were statistically significant improvements (p < 0.001) from baseline for the mean VAS for pain (70.99 to 35.34), EQ-5D (0.52 to 0.75), ODI (31.84 to 18.00), and SF-36 PCS (38.17 to 44.74). A total of 78 patients (70%) were satisfied with the outcome of treatment. Conclusion. Patients with persistent coccydynia and coccygeal instability resistant to nonoperative treatment may benefit from coccygectomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):542–546

Aims. The aim of this study was to systematically compare the safety and accuracy of robot-assisted (RA) technique with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted (CT) pedicle screw insertion for spine disease. Methods. A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and WANFANG for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the safety and accuracy of RA compared with conventional freehand with/without fluoroscopy-assisted pedicle screw insertion for spine disease from 2012 to 2019. This meta-analysis used Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance method with mixed-effects model for heterogeneity, calculating the odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The results of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, and risk of bias were analyzed. Results. Ten RCTs with 713 patients and 3,331 pedicle screws were included. Compared with CT, the accuracy rate of RA was superior in Grade A with statistical significance and Grade A + B without statistical significance. Compared with CT, the operating time of RA was longer. The difference between RA and CT was statistically significant in radiation dose. Proximal facet joint violation occurred less in RA than in CT. The postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of RA was smaller than that of CT, and there were some interesting outcomes in our subgroup analysis. Conclusion. RA technique could be viewed as an accurate and safe pedicle screw implantation method compared to CT. A robotic system equipped with optical intraoperative navigation is superior to CT in accuracy. RA pedicle screw insertion can improve accuracy and maintain stability for some challenging areas. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(10):653–666

Aims. Chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease is sometimes treated with fusion. We compared the outcome of three different fusion techniques in the Swedish Spine Register: noninstrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF), instrumented posterolateral fusion (IPLF), and interbody fusion (IBF). Patients and Methods. A total of 2874 patients who were operated on at one or two lumbar levels were followed for a mean of 9.2 years (3.6 to 19.1) for any additional lumbar spine surgery. Patient-reported outcome data were available preoperatively (n = 2874) and at one year (n = 2274), two years (n = 1958), and a mean of 6.9 years (n = 1518) postoperatively and consisted of global assessment and visual analogue scales of leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol five-dimensional index, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and satisfaction with treatment. Statistical analyses were performed with competing-risks proportional hazards regression or analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline variables. Results. The number of patients with additional surgery were 32/183 (17%) in the PLF group, 229/1256 (18%) in the IPLF group, and 439/1435 (31%) in the IBF group. With the PLF group as a reference, the hazard ratio for additional lumbar surgery was 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.72) for the IPLF group and 2.13 (95% CI 1.45 to 3.12) for the IBF group. All patient-reported outcomes improved after surgery (p < 0.001) but were without statistically significant differences between the groups at the one-, two- and 6.9-year follow-ups (all p ≥ 0.12). Conclusion. The addition of interbody fusion to posterolateral fusion was associated with a higher risk for additional surgery and showed no advantages in patient-reported outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1526–1533

Aims. Minimally invasive fixation of pelvic fragility fractures is recommended to reduce pain and allow early mobilization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of two different stabilization techniques in bilateral fragility fractures of the sacrum (BFFS). Methods. A non-randomized, prospective study was carried out in a level 1 trauma centre. BFFS in 61 patients (mean age 80 years (SD 10); four male, 57 female) were treated surgically with bisegmental transsacral stablization (BTS; n = 41) versus spinopelvic fixation (SP; n = 20). Postoperative full weightbearing was allowed. The outcome was evaluated at two timepoints: discharge from inpatient treatment (TP1; Fitbit tracking, Zebris stance analysis), and ≥ six months (TP2; Fitbit tracking, Zebris analysis, based on modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Majeed Score (MS), and the 12-Item Short Form Survey 12 (SF-12). Fracture healing was assessed by CT. The primary outcome parameter of functional recovery was the per-day step count; the secondary parameter was the subjective outcome assessed by questionnaires. Results. Overall, no baseline differences were observed between the BTS and SP cohorts. In total, 58 (BTS = 19; SP = 39) and 37 patients (BTS = 14; SP = 23) could be recruited at TP1 and TP2, respectively. Mean steps per day at TP1 were median 308 (248 to 434) in the BTS group and 254 (196 to 446) in the SP group. At TP2, median steps per day were 3,759 (2,551 to 3,926) in the BTS group and 3,191 (2,872 to 3,679) in the SP group, each with no significant difference. A significant improvement was observed in each group (p < 0.001) between timepoints. BTS patients obtained better results than SP patients in ODI (p < 0.030), MS (p = 0.007), and SF-12 physical status (p = 0.006). In all cases, CT showed sufficient fracture healing of the posterior ring. Conclusion. Both groups showed significant outcome improvement and sufficient fracture healing. Both techniques can be recommended for BFFS, although BTS was superior with respect to subjective outcome. Step-count tracking represents a reliable method to evaluate the mobility level. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):462–468

Aims. The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk of additional surgery in the lumbar spine and to describe long-term changes in patient-reported outcomes after surgery for lumbar disc herniation in adolescents and young adults. Patients and Methods. We conducted a retrospective study design on prospectively collected data from a national quality register. The 4537 patients were divided into two groups: adolescents (≤ 18 years old, n = 151) and young adults (19 to 39 years old, n = 4386). The risk of additional lumbar spine surgery was surveyed for a mean of 11.4 years (6.0 to 19.3) in all 4537 patients. Long-term patient-reported outcomes were available at a mean of 7.2 years (5.0 to 10.0) in up to 2716 patients and included satisfaction, global assessment for leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for leg and back pain, EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary and Physical Component Summary scores. Statistical analyses were performed with Cox proportional hazard regression, chi-squared test, McNemar’s test, Welch–Satterthwaite t-test, and Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test. Results. Any type of additional lumbar spine surgery was seen in 796 patients (18%). Surgery for lumbar disc herniation accounted for more than half of the additional surgeries. The risk of any additional surgery was 0.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6 to 1.4) and the risk of additional lumbar disc herniation surgery was 1.0 (0.6 to 1.7) in adolescents compared with the young adult group. Both age groups improved their patient-reported outcome data after surgery (all p < 0.001). Changes between short- (mean 1.9 years (1.0 to 2.0)) and long-term follow-up (mean 7.2 years (5.0 to 10.0)) were small. Conclusion. The risk of any additional lumbar spine surgery and additional lumbar disc herniation surgery was similar in adolescents and young adults. All patient-reported outcomes improved from preoperative to the short-term follow-up, while no likely clinically important differences between the short- and long-term follow-up were seen within both groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1534–1541

Aims. This study of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip aimed to: 1) characterize the contribution of the hip, spinopelvic complex, and lumbar spine when moving from the standing to the sitting position; 2) assess whether abnormal spinopelvic mobility is associated with worse symptoms; and 3) identify whether spinopelvic mobility can be predicted from static anatomical radiological parameters. Patients and Methods. A total of 122 patients with end-stage OA of the hip awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA) were prospectively studied. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; Oxford Hip Score, Oswestry Disability Index, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Score) and clinical data were collected. Sagittal spinopelvic mobility was calculated as the change from the standing to sitting position using the lumbar lordosis angle (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic-femoral angle (PFA), and acetabular anteinclination (AI) from lateral radiographs. The interaction of the different parameters was assessed. PROMs were compared between patients with normal spinopelvic mobility (10° ≤ ∆PT ≤ 30°) or abnormal spinopelvic mobility (stiff: ∆PT < ± 10°; hypermobile: ∆PT > ± 30°). Multiple regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were used to test for possible predictors of spinopelvic mobility. Results. Standing to sitting, the hip flexed by a mean of 57° (. sd. 17°), the pelvis tilted backwards by a mean of 20° (. sd. 12°), and the lumbar spine flexed by a mean of 20° (. sd. 14°); strong correlations were detected. There was no difference in PROMs between patients in the different spinopelvic mobility groups. Maximum hip flexion, standing PT, and standing AI were independent predictors of spinopelvic mobility (R. 2. = 0.42). The combined thresholds for standing was PT ≥ 13° and hip flexion ≥ 88° in the clinical examination, and had 90% sensitivity and 63% specificity of predicting spinopelvic stiffness, while SS ≥ 42° had 84% sensitivity and 67% specificity of predicting spinopelvic hypermobility. Conclusion. The hip, on average, accounts for three-quarters of the standing-to-sitting movement, but there is great variation. Abnormal spinopelvic mobility cannot be screened with PROMs. However, clinical and standing radiological features can predict spinopelvic mobility with good enough accuracy, allowing them to be used as reliable screening tools. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:902–909

Aims. We compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of using a polyetheretherketone cage with (TiPEEK) and without a titanium coating (PEEK) for instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Materials and Methods. We conducted a randomised clinical pilot trial of 40 patients who were scheduled to undergo a TLIF procedure at one or two levels between L2 and L5. The Oswestry disability index (ODI), EuroQoL-5D, and back and leg pain were determined pre-operatively, and at three, six, and 12 months post-operatively. Fusion rates were assessed by thin slice CT at three months and by functional radiography at 12 months. Results. At final follow-up, one patient in each group had been lost to follow-up. Two patients in each of the PEEK and TiPEEK groups were revised for pseudarthrosis (p = 1.00). The rate of complete or partial fusion at three months was 91.7% in both groups. Overall, there were no significant differences in ODI or in radiological outcomes between the groups. Conclusion. Favourable results with identical clinical outcomes and a high rate of fusion was seen in both groups. The titanium coating appears to have no negative effects on outcome or safety in the short term. A future study to determine the effect of titanium coating is warranted. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1366–72

Aims. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia and to examine its impact on patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Patients and Methods. This case-control study included two groups: one group consisting of patients with DLSS and a second group of control subjects without low back or neck pain and related leg pain. Five control cases were randomly selected and matched by age and gender (n = 77 cases and n = 385 controls) for each DLSS case. Appendicular muscle mass, hand-grip strength, sit-to-stand test, timed up and go (TUG) test, and clinical outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and the EuroQol EQ-5D were compared between the two groups. Results. The prevalence of sarcopenia, as defined by hand-grip strength, was significantly higher in the DLSS group (24%) when compared with the age- and gender-matched control group (12%) (p = 0.004). In the DLSS group, the sarcopenia subgroup demonstrated inferior results for the TUG test and ODI scores when compared with the non-sarcopenia subgroup (p = 0.006 and p = 0.039, respectively) after adjusting for age and gender. Conclusion. This study demonstrated a higher prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with DLSS and highlighted its negative effect on clinical outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1093–8

We have studied 180 patients (128 men and 52 women) who had undergone lumbar discectomy at a mean of 25.4 years (20 to 32) after operation. Pre-operatively, most patients (70 patients; 38.9%) had abnormal reflexes and/or muscle weakness in the leg (96 patients; 53.3%). At follow-up 42 patients (60%) with abnormal reflexes pre-operatively had fully recovered and 72 (75%) with pre-operative muscle impairment had normal muscle strength. When we looked at patient-reported outcomes, we found that the Short form-36 summary scores were similar to the aged-matched normative values. No disability or minimum disability on the Oswestry disability index was reported by 136 patients (75.6%), and 162 (90%) were satisfied with their operation. The most important predictors of patients’ self-reported positive outcome were male gender and higher educational level. No association was detected between muscle recovery and outcome. Most patients who had undergone lumbar discectomy had long-lasting neurological recovery. If the motor deficit persists after operation, patients can still expect a long-term satisfactory outcome, provided that they have relief from pain immediately after surgery

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of repeat epidural steroid injections as a form of treatment for patients with insufficiently controlled or recurrent radicular pain due to a lumbar or cervical disc herniation. Patients and Methods. A cohort of 102 patients was prospectively followed, after an epidural steroid injection for radicular symptoms due to lumbar disc herniation, in 57 patients, and cervical disc herniation, in 45 patients. Those patients with persistent pain who requested a second injection were prospectively followed for one year. Radicular and local pain were assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS), functional outcome with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or the Neck Pain and Disability Index (NPAD), as well as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12). Results. A second injection was performed in 17 patients (29.8%) with lumbar herniation and seven (15.6%) with cervical herniation at a mean of 65.3 days . (sd. 46.5) and 47 days . (sd. 37.2), respectively, after the initial injection. All but one patient, who underwent lumbar microdiscectomy, responded satisfactorily with a mean VAS for leg pain of 8.8 mm . (sd. 10.3) and a mean VAS for arm pain of 6.3 mm . (. sd. 9) one year after the second injection, respectively. Similarly, functional outcome and HRQoL were improved significantly from the baseline scores: mean ODI, 12.3 (. sd. 12.4; p < 0.001); mean NPAD, 19.3 (. sd. 24.3; p = 0.041); mean SF-12 physical component summary (PCS) in lumbar herniation, 46.8 (. sd. 7.7; p < 0.001); mean SF-12 PCS in cervical herniation, 43 (. sd. 6.8; p = 0.103). Conclusion. Repeat steroid injections are a justifiable form of treatment in symptomatic patients with lumbar or cervical disc herniation whose symptoms are not satisfactorily relieved after the first injection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1364–71