Browsing by Author "Heller, Joshua E"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    A survey-based study of wrong-level lumbar spine surgery: the scope of the problem and current practices in place to help avoid these errors.
    (World neurosurgery, 2013-03) Groff, Michael W; Heller, Joshua E; Potts, Eric A; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Smith, Justin S

    Objective

    To understand better the scope of wrong-level lumbar spine surgery and current practices in place to help avoid such errors.

    Methods

    The Joint Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves (Spine Section) developed a survey on single-level lumbar spine decompression surgery. Invitations to complete the Web-based survey were sent to all Spine Section members. Respondents were assured of confidentiality.

    Results

    There were 569 responses from 1045 requests (54%). Most surgeons either routinely (74%) or sometimes (11%) obtain preoperative imaging for incision planning. Most surgeons indicated that they obtained imaging after the incision was performed for localization either routinely before bone removal (73%) or most frequently before bone removal but occasionally after (16%). Almost 50% of reporting surgeons have performed wrong-level lumbar spine surgery at least once, and >10% have performed wrong-side lumbar spine surgery at least once. Nearly 20% of responding surgeons have been the subject of at least one malpractice case relating to these errors. Only 40% of respondents believed that the site marking/"time out" protocol of The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has led to a reduction in these errors.

    Conclusions

    There is substantial heterogeneity in approaches used to localize operative levels in the lumbar spine. Existing safety protocols may not be mitigating wrong-level surgery to the extent previously thought.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Failure of lumbopelvic fixation after long construct fusions in patients with adult spinal deformity: clinical and radiographic risk factors: clinical article.
    (Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2013-10) Cho, Woojin; Mason, Jonathan R; Smith, Justin S; Shimer, Adam L; Wilson, Adam S; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Shen, Francis H; Novicoff, Wendy M; Fu, Kai-Ming G; Heller, Joshua E; Arlet, Vincent

    Object

    Lumbopelvic fixation provides biomechanical support to the base of the long constructs used for adult spinal deformity. However, the failure rate of the lumbopelvic fixation and its risk factors are not well known. The authors' objective was to report the failure rate and risk factors for lumbopelvic fixation in long instrumented spinal fusion constructs performed for adult spinal deformity.

    Methods

    This retrospective review included 190 patients with adult spinal deformity who had long construct instrumentation (> 6 levels) with iliac screws. Patients' clinical and radiographic data were analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups: a failure group and a nonfailure group. A minimum 2-year follow-up was required for inclusion in the nonfailure group. In the failure group, all patients were included in the study regardless of whether the failure occurred before or after 2 years. In both groups, the patients who needed a revision for causes other than lumbopelvic fixation (for example, proximal junctional kyphosis) were also excluded. Failures were defined as major and minor. Major failures included rod breakage between L-4 and S-1, failure of S-1 screws (breakage, halo formation, or pullout), and prominent iliac screws requiring removal. Minor failures included rod breakage between S-1 and iliac screws and failure of iliac screws. Minor failures did not require revision surgery. Multiple clinical and radiographic values were compared between major failures and nonfailures.

    Results

    Of 190 patients, 67 patients met inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. The overall failure rate was 34.3%; 8 patients had major failure (11.9%) and 15 had minor failure (22.4%). Major failure occurred at a statistically significant greater rate in patients who had undergone previous lumbar surgery, had greater pelvic incidence, and had poor restoration of lumbar lordosis and/or sagittal balance (that is, undercorrection). Patients with a greater number of comorbidities and preoperative coronal imbalance showed trends toward an increase in major failures, although these trends did not reach statistical significance. Age, sex, body mass index, smoking history, number of fusion segments, fusion grade, and several other radiographic values were not shown to be associated with an increased risk of major failure. Seventy percent of patients in the major failure group had anterior column support (anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion) while 80% of the nonfailure group had anterior column support.

    Conclusions

    The incidence of overall failure was 34.3%, and the incidence of clinically significant major failure of lumbopelvic fixation after long construct fusion for adult spinal deformity was 11.9%. Risk factors for major failures are a large pelvic incidence, revision surgery, and failure to restore lumbar lordosis and sagittal balance. Surgeons treating adult spinal deformity who use lumbopelvic fixation should pay special attention to restoring optimal sagittal alignment to prevent lumbopelvic fixation failure.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Long-Segment Fusion for Adult Spinal Deformity Correction Using Low-Dose Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2: A Retrospective Review of Fusion Rates.
    (Neurosurgery, 2016-08) Schmitt, Paul J; Kelleher, John P; Ailon, Tamir; Heller, Joshua E; Kasliwal, Manish K; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Smith, Justin S

    Background

    Although use of very high-dose recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) has been reported to markedly improve fusion rates in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery, most centers use much lower doses due to cost constraints. How effective these lower doses are for fusion enhancement remains unclear.

    Objective

    To assess fusion rates using relatively low-dose rhBMP-2 for ASD surgery.

    Methods

    This was a retrospective review of consecutive ASD patients that underwent thoracic to sacral fusion. Patients that achieved 2-year follow-up were analyzed. Impact of patient and surgical factors on fusion rate was assessed, and fusion rates were compared with historical cohorts.

    Results

    Of 219 patients, 172 (78.5%) achieved 2-year follow-up and were analyzed. Using an average rhBMP-2 dose of 3.1 mg/level (average total dose = 35.9 mg/case), the 2-year fusion rate was 73.8%. Cancellous allograft, local autograft, and very limited iliac crest bone graft (<20 mL, obtained during iliac bolt placement) were also used. On multivariate analysis, female sex was associated with a higher fusion rate, whereas age, comorbidity score, deformity type, and 3-column osteotomy were not. There were no complications directly attributable to rhBMP-2.

    Conclusion

    Fusion rates for ASD using low-dose rhBMP-2 were comparable to those reported for iliac crest bone graft but lower than for high-dose rhBMP-2. Importantly, there were substantial differences between patients in the present series and those in the historical comparison groups that could not be fully adjusted for based on available data. Prospective evaluation of rhBMP-2 dosing for ASD surgery is warranted to define the most appropriate dose that balances benefits, risks, and costs.

    Abbreviations

    ASD, adult spinal deformityICBG, iliac crest bone graftOR, odds ratiorhBMP-2, recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2RR, risk ratioTCO, 3-column osteotomy.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Spine Surgical Subspecialty and Its Effect on Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    (Spine, 2023-05) Lambrechts, Mark J; Canseco, Jose A; Toci, Gregory R; Karamian, Brian A; Kepler, Christopher K; Smith, Michael L; Schroeder, Gregory D; Hilibrand, Alan S; Heller, Joshua E; Grasso, Giovanni; Gottfried, Oren; Kebaish, Khaled M; Harrop, James S; Shaffrey, Christopher; Vaccaro, Alexander R

    Study design

    Systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Objective

    To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify if intraoperative or postoperative differences in outcomes exist between orthopedic and neurological spine surgeons.

    Summary of background data

    Spine surgeons may become board certified through orthopedic surgery or neurosurgical residency training, and recent literature has compared surgical outcomes between surgeons based on residency training background with conflicting results.

    Materials and methods

    Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted and included articles comparing outcomes between orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to determine the quality of studies. Forest plots were generated using mean differences (MD) for continuous variables and odds ratios (OR) for binomial variables, and 95% CI was reported.

    Results

    Of 615 search term results, 16 studies were identified for inclusion. Evaluation of the studies found no differences in readmission rates [OR, ref: orthopedics: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.901, 1.09); I2 = 80%], overall complication rates [OR, ref: orthopedics: 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.10); I2 = 70%], reoperation rates [OR, ref: orthopedics: 0.91 (95% CI: 0.82, 1.00); I2 = 86%], or overall length of hospital stay between orthopedic spine surgeons and neurosurgeons [MD: -0.19 days (95% CI: -0.38, 0.00); I2 = 98%]. However, neurosurgeons ordered a significantly lower rate of postoperative blood transfusions [OR, ref: orthopedics: 0.49 (95% CI: 0.41, 0.57); I2 = 75%] while orthopedic spine surgeons had shorter operative times [MD: 14.28 minutes, (95% CI: 8.07, 20.49), I2 = 97%].

    Conclusions

    Although there is significant data heterogeneity, our meta-analysis found that neurosurgeons and orthopedic spine surgeons have similar readmission, complication, and reoperation rates regardless of the type of spine surgery performed.