Objectives: To continue the line of a previous publication using steroid for acute spinal cord injury (SCI) by spine surgeons from Latin America (LA) and assess the current status of methylprednisolone (MP) prescription in Europe (EU), Asia Pacific (AP), North America (NA), and Middle East (ME) to determine targets for educational activities suitable for each region.
Methods: The English version of a previously published questionnaire was used to evaluate opinions about MP administration in acute SCI in LA, EU, AP, NA, and ME. This Internet-based survey was conducted by members of AOSpine. The questionnaire asked about demographic features, background with management of spine trauma patients, routine administration of MP in acute SCI, and reasons for MP administration.
Results: A total of 2659 responses were obtained for the electronic questionnaire from LA, EU, AP, NA, and ME. The number of spine surgeons that treat SCI was 2206 (83%). The steroid was used by 1198 (52.9%) surgeons. The uses of MP were based predominantly on the National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study III study (n = 595, 50%). The answers were most frequently given by spine surgeons from AP, ME, and LA. These regions presented a statistically significant difference from North America (P < .001). The number of SCI patients treated per year inversely influenced the use of MP. The higher the number of patients treated, the lower the administration rates of MP observed.
Conclusions: The study identified potential targets for educational campaigns, aiming to reduce inappropriate practices of MP administration.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study, 139 women, underwent transvaginal surgery for anterior and/or apical POP > stage 2, 69 patients had SIM A and 70 patients had SSF. The objective cure was defined as POP ≤ stage 1 anterior, apical according to POP-Q. Subjective cure is patient's negative feedback to question 2 and 3 of pelvic organ prolapse distress inventory 6 (POPDI-6). Patient's satisfaction was reported using validated quality of life questionnaires. Multi-channel urodynamic study was used to report any voiding problems related to the prolapse surgery 6 months after surgery.
RESULTS: 119 patients completed a minimum of 3 years follow-up. 89.8% is the overall prolapse correction success rate for SIM A and 73.3% for SSF group (p = 0.020), and 96.6% versus 73.4% at the anterior vaginal compartment respectively (p ≤ 0.001). Statistically significant difference was noticed in apical compartment with 98.3% with SIM A and 85.0% with SSF (p = 0.009). The subjective success rate, 86.4% in the SIM A and 70.0% in the SSF arm (p = 0.030) was significantly noted. Only, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) showed significant improvement. Operation time and intra-operative blood loss tend to be more with SIM A.
CONCLUSION: SIM A has better 3 years objective and subjective cure rate than SSF in the anterior and/or apical compartment prolapse.
METHODS: A questionnaire survey was sent by e-mail to members of AOSpine to evaluate their familiarity and use of PROMs instruments and to assess the barriers to their use in spine care practice in LA, EU, AP, NA, and ME.
RESULTS: A total of 1634 AOSpine members from LA, EU, AP, NA, and ME answered the electronic questionnaire. The percentage of spine surgeons who were familiar with the generic health-related quality of life questionnaire was 71.7%. In addition, 31.9% of respondents did not use any PROMs routinely. The main barriers to implementing PROMs were lack of time to administer the questionnaires (57%) followed by lack of staff to assist in data collection (55%), and the long time to fill out the questionnaires (46%). The routine use of questionnaires was more frequent in NA and EU and less common in LA and ME (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: We found that 31.9% of spine surgeons do not use the PROMs questionnaire routinely. This appears to occur because of lack of knowledge regarding their importance, absence of reimbursement for this extra work, minimal financial support for clinical research, the cost of implementation, and lack of concern among physicians.
PURPOSE: To report the outcome of 50 patients with spinal metastases treated with minimally invasive stabilization (MISt) using fluoroscopic guided percutaneous pedicle screws with/without minimally invasive decompression.
OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The advent of minimally invasive percutaneous pedicle screw stabilization system has revolutionized the treatment of spinal metastasis.
METHODS: Between 2008 and 2013, 50 cases of spinal metastasis with pathological fracture(s) with/without neurology deficit were treated by MISt at our institution. The patients were assessed by Tomita score, pain score, operation time, blood loss, neurological recovery, time to ambulation and survival.
RESULTS: The mean Tomita score was 6.3±2.4. Thirty seven patients (74.0%) required minimally invasive decompression in addition to MISt. The mean operating time was 2.3±0.5 hours for MISt alone and 3.4±1.2 hours for MISt with decompression. Mean blood loss for MISt alone and MISt with decompression was 0.4±0.2 L and 1.7±0.9 L, respectively. MISt provided a statistically significant reduction in visual analog scale pain score with mean preoperative score of 7.9±1.4 that was significantly decreased to 2.5±1.2 postoperatively (p=0.000). For patients with neurological deficit, 70% displayed improvement of one Frankel grade and 5% had an improvement of 2 Frankel grades. No patient was bed-ridden postoperatively, with the average time to ambulation of 3.4±1.8 days. The mean overall survival time was 11.3 months (range, 2-51 months). Those with a Tomita score <8 survived significantly longer than those a Tomita score ≥8 with a mean survival of 14.1±12.5 months and 6.8±4.9 months, respectively (p=0.019). There were no surgical complications, except one case of implant failure.
CONCLUSIONS: MISt is an acceptable treatment option for spinal metastatic patients, providing good relief of instability back pain with no major complications.