Traumatic injuries to the spine can be common in the setting of blunt trauma and delayed diagnosis can have a deleterious effect on patients’ health. The goals of treatment in managing spine trauma are prevention of neurological injury, providing stability to the spine, and correcting post-traumatic deformity. Minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) techniques are an alternative to open spine surgery for treatment of spine fractures. MISS is also a viable treatment in the setting of damage control orthopedics, when patients with multiple traumatic injuries may be unable to tolerate a traditional open approach. MISS techniques have been used in the treatment of unstable fractures with or without spinal cord injury, flexion and extension-distraction injuries, and unstable sacral fractures. Traditional open surgeries have been associated with increased blood loss, longer operative times, and a higher risk for surgical site infection (SSI). MISS techniques have the potential to reduce open approach-associated morbidity, and improve postoperative care and rehabilitation. MISS techniques for spine trauma are an indispensable option in the treatment armamentarium of spine surgeons.

Study Design: Meta-analysis of evidence level I to IV studies. Objective: To compare decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion in the treatment of grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). Methods: Following established guidelines, we systematically reviewed 3 electronic databases to assess studies evaluating patients with grade I DS. We stratified all patients into 2 cohorts; the first cohort underwent a decompression-type surgery, and the second cohort underwent decompression plus fusion. We noted clinical outcomes, complications, reoperations, and surgical details such as blood loss. Descriptive statistics and random-effects models were used to determine the specified outcome metrics with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: In both cohorts, the pain (legs and lower back) significantly decreased and the physical component of the Short Form 36 showed better patient clinical outcomes. The decompression cohort had a 5.8% complication rate (95% CI = 1.7-2.1), and the decompression plus fusion cohort had an 8.3% complication rate (95% CI = 5.5-11.6). The reoperation rate was higher in the decompression-only cohort (8.5%; 95% CI = 2.9-17.0) compared with the decompression plus fusion cohort (4.9%; 95% CI = 2.5-7.9). Conclusions: There does not appear to be any advantage of one procedure over the other. Patients undergoing decompression alone tended to be older with a higher percentage of leg pain, whereas patients additionally undergoing fusion tended to be younger with more lower back pain. The decompression-only cohort had fewer complications but a higher revision rate.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare the likelihood of missing a scheduled telemedicine and in-person appointments for spine patients. The secondary objective is to assess the impact of socioeconomic status on missed telemedicine and in-person appointments. Methods: Patients with scheduled outpatient appointments with orthopedic spine faculty between 2019 and 2021 were divided by appointment type: telemedicine (N = 4,387) and in-person (N = 3810). Socioeconomic status was assessed using Area Deprivation Index (ADI) stratified based on percentile: low (75) levels of socioeconomic disadvantage. The primary outcome measure was missed clinic appointments, which was defined as having at least one appointment that was cancelled or labeled “no show.” Results: Patients with in-person appointments missed appointments more often than patients with telemedicine visits (51.3% vs 24.7%, P < .001). Patients with high ADI missed their in-person appointments more often than patients with medium and low ADI (59.5% vs 52.2% and 47.5%, P < .001). There was no difference in missed telemedicine visits between patients with high, medium, and low ADI (27.6% vs 24.8% vs 23.8%, P = .294). Patients that missed an appointment were 41.9% more likely to be high ADI (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20–1.68, P < .001) and 13.4% more likely to be medium ADI (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03–1.26, P = .015) compared with low ADI patients. Conclusions: Telemedicine may serve a role in reducing disparity in appointment attendance. While further studies are needed to validate these findings, spine surgeons should consider offering telemedicine as an option to patients.

Retrospective case series. Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) represents a common postoperative complication of all elective surgeries. The aim of this study was to identify demographic, comorbid, and surgical factors risk factors for POUR in patients who underwent elective thoracolumbar spine fusion. Following institutional review board approval, patients who underwent elective primary or revision thoracic and lumbar instrumented spinal fusion in a 2-year period in tertiary and academic institution were reviewed. Sex, age, BMI, preoperative diagnosis, comorbid conditions, benign prostatic hyperplasia, diabetes, primary or revision surgery status, narcotic use, and operative factors were collected and analyzed between patients with and without POUR. Of the 217 patients reviewed, 54 (24.9%) developed POUR. The average age for a patient with POUR was 67 ± 9, as opposed to 59 ± 10 for those without (P < .0001). Single-level fusions were associated with a 0% incidence of POUR, compared with 54.5% in 6 or more levels. The average hospital stay was increased by 1 day for those who had POUR (5.8 ± 3.3 vs 4.9 ± 3.9 days). There was no significant association with other demographic variables, comorbid conditions, or surgical factors. POUR was a common complication in our patient cohort, with an incidence of 24.9%. Our findings demonstrate that patients who developed POUR are significantly older and have larger constructs. Patients who developed POUR also had longer in-hospital stays. Although our study supports other findings in the spine literature, more prospective data is needed to define diagnostic criteria of POUR as well as its management.