Jon E Block

Dr. Jon E Block

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

36Years (1991-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2017 in Clinical Interventions in Aging
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PNPierce D. Nunley
Pierce D. Nunley
VPVikas V. Patel
Vikas V. Patel
DODouglas G Orndorff
Douglas G Orndorff
WLWilliam F. Lavelle
William F. Lavelle
Jon E BlockJon E Block
Jon E Block
FGFred H. Geisler
Fred H. Geisler
Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis is the most common indication for spine surgery in older adults. Interspinous process decompression (IPD) using a stand-alone spacer that functions as an extension blocker offers a minimally invasive treatment option for intermittent neurogenic claudication associated with spinal stenosis. Methods: This study evaluated the 5-year clinical outcomes for IPD (Superion®) from a randomized controlled US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) noninferiority trial. Outcomes included Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) symptom severity (ss), physical function (pf), and patient satisfaction (ps) subdomains, leg and back pain visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Results: At 5 years, 84% of patients (74 of 88) demonstrated clinical success on at least two of three ZCQ domains. Individual ZCQ domain success rates were 75% (66 of 88), 81% (71 of 88), and 90% (79 of 88) for ZCQss, ZCQpf, and ZCQps, respectively. Leg and back pain success rates were 80% (68 of 85) and 65% (55 of 85), respectively, and the success rate for ODI was 65% (57 of 88). Percentage improvements over baseline were 42%, 39%, 75%, 66%, and 58% for ZCQss, ZCQpf, leg and back pain VAS, and ODI, respectively (all P1.0; all P<0.0001). Seventy-five percent of IPD patients were free from reoperation, revision, or supplemental fixation at their index level at 5 years. Conclusion: After 5 years of follow-up, IPD with a stand-alone spacer provides sustained clinical benefit.

20 February 2017 in Orthopedic Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TGThomas Gausepohl
Thomas Gausepohl
DPDietmar Pennig
Dietmar Pennig
SHSteffen Heck
Steffen Heck
SGSascha Gick
Sascha Gick
PVPaul A. Vegt
Paul A. Vegt
Jon E BlockJon E Block
Jon E Block
The IlluminOss® system (IS) uses a light-curable polymer contained within an inflatable balloon catheter, forming a patient customized intramedullary implant. A registry was established in Germany and The Netherlands to prospectively collect technical and clinical outcomes in patients treated with IS for fractures of the phalange, metacarpal, radius, ulna, distal radius, fibula, clavicle and/or olecranon. Humeral, femoral, tibial and pelvic fractures were included under compassionate use. Procedural success included successful placement of the device at the target fracture site and achievement of fracture stabilization. Clinical and radiographic assessments were made postoperatively through 12 months. One hundred thirty two patients (149 fractures) were enrolled with most fractures (85%) resulting from low-energy trauma. Simple fractures predominated (47%) followed by complex (23%) and wedge (16%) fractures. Procedural success was achieved in all patients and no implants required removal or revision. Normal range of motion was realized in 87% of fractures. Radiographically, there was substantial cortical bridging, total dissolution of the fracture line, and complete fracture healing. Across a variety of fracture types, the IS provides a safe and effective approach for rapid healing and functional recovery.

1 August 2017 in World Neurosurgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PNPierce D. Nunley
Pierce D. Nunley
VPVikas V. Patel
Vikas V. Patel
DODouglas G. Orndorff
Douglas G. Orndorff
WLWilliam F. Lavelle
William F. Lavelle
Jon E BlockJon E Block
Jon E Block
FGFred H. Geisler
Fred H. Geisler

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Morgan Packard LorioMorgan Packard Lorio
Morgan Packard Lorio
DBDouglas Beall
Douglas Beall
ACAaron K. Calodney
Aaron K. Calodney
Kai-Uwe LewandrowskiKai-Uwe Lewandrowski
Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski
Jon E BlockJon E Block
Jon E Block
NMNagy Mekhail
Nagy Mekhail
There is an enormous body of literature that has identified the intervertebral disc as a potent pain generator. However, with regard to lumbar degenerative disc disease, the specific diagnostic criteria lack clarity and fail to capture the primary components which include axial midline low back pain with or without non-radicular/non-sciatic referred leg pain in a sclerotomal distribution. In fact, there is no specific ICD-10-CM diagnostic code to classify and define discogenic pain as a unique source of pain distinct from other recognized sources of chronic low back pain including facetogenic, neurocompressive including herniation and/or stenosis, sacroiliac, vertebrogenic, and psychogenic. All of these other sources have well-defined ICD-10-CM codes. Corresponding codes for discogenic pain remain absent from the diagnostic coding vernacular. The International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery (ISASS) has proposed a modernization of ICD-10-CM codes to specifically define pain associated with lumbar and lumbosacral degenerative disc disease. The proposed codes would also allow the pain to be characterized by location: lumbar region only, leg only, or both. Successful implementation of these codes would benefit both physicians and payers in distinguishing, tracking, and improving algorithms and treatments for discogenic pain associated with intervertebral disc degeneration.

31 January 2017 in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
VPVikas Patel
Vikas Patel
GAGunnar B. J. Andersson
Gunnar B. J. Andersson
SGSteven R. Garfin
Steven R. Garfin
DRDonald L. Resnick
Donald L. Resnick
Jon E BlockJon E Block
Jon E Block
Due to the risk associated with exposure to ionizing radiation, there is an urgent need to identify areas of CT scanning overutilization. While increased use of diagnostic spinal imaging has been documented, no previous research has estimated the magnitude of follow-up imaging used to evaluate the postoperative spine. This retrospective cohort study quantifies the association between spinal surgery and CT utilization. An insurance database (Humana, Inc.) with ≈ 19 million enrollees was employed, representing 8 consecutive years (2007–2014). Surgical and imaging procedures were captured by anatomic-specific CPT codes. Complex surgeries included all cervical, thoracic and lumbar instrumented spine fusions. Simple surgeries included discectomy and laminectomy. Imaging was restricted to CT and MRI. Postoperative imaging frequency extended to 5-years post-surgery. There were 140,660 complex spinal procedures and 39,943 discectomies and 49,889 laminectomies. MRI was the predominate preoperative imaging modality for all surgical procedures (median: 80%; range: 73–82%). Postoperatively, CT prevalence following complex procedures increased more than two-fold from 6 months (18%) to 5 years (≥40%), and patients having a postoperative CT averaged two scans. For simple procedures, the prevalence of postoperative CT scanning never exceeded 30%. CT scanning is used frequently for follow-up imaging evaluation following complex spine surgery. There is emerging evidence of an increased cancer risk due to ionizing radiation exposure with CT. In the setting of complex spine surgery, actions to mitigate this risk should be considered and include reducing nonessential scans, using the lowest possible radiation dose protocols, exerting greater selectivity in monitoring the developing fusion construct, and adopting non-ferromagnetic implant biomaterials that facilitate MRI postoperatively.

1 January 2016 in International Journal of Spine Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
WNWarren F. Neely
Warren F. Neely
FFFrank Fichtel
Frank Fichtel
DMDiana Cardenas del Monaco
Diana Cardenas del Monaco
Jon E BlockJon E Block
Jon E Block
Many first generation stand-alone fusion cages required endplate decortication and surgical impaction during the procedure resulting in segmental subsidence, implant migration and loss of lordosis postoperatively. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate radiographically, in a large series of patients, whether engineering and design modifications incorporated in a specific stand-alone, expandable interbody fusion device (VariLift(®)-L) adequately addressed previously recognized deficiencies of stand-alone interbody cages. In this retrospective chart review of 470 patients (642 treated levels), we evaluated radiographic evidence of fusion, subsidence and migration following a one- or two-level PLIF procedure utilizing this stand-alone expandable interbody fusion device. A secondary objective was to corroborate the low morbidity and symptomatic improvements achieved with previous interbody cage devices used to treat symptomatic disc degeneration. The average postoperative followup was 3.9 ± 1.8 years and a solid fusion rate of 94% was achieved among patients with ≥ 9 months of radiographic followup. Subsidence > 3 mm was noted at 10 levels with no cases of device migration. Composite back pain severity scores improved from 8.5 ± 1.5 preoperatively to 0.8 ± 1.5 at final followup (p<0.001) and 94% of patients met or exceeded the minimal clinical important difference of 3.8 points. Eighteen patients required reoperation following the index procedure; 16 of these patients were treated for adjacent segment disease. The VariLift-L device has excellent clinical and technical performance characteristics, providing adequate stabilization of the anterior column without the need for supplemental posterior instrumentation. Level of Evidence IV. IRB Approval: Expedited Federal Register Categories 5& 7: Methodist IRB 3/30/2011; Informed Consent statement: retrospective data collection, patients signed consent forms allowing for data to be used for research. This stand-alone expandable fusion device produced high fusion rates, a low incidence of reoperation and effective symptom relief in a "real world" setting among a large group of patients with refractory symptomatic disc degeneration.