Spine Instrumented Surgery on a Budget—Tools for Lowering Cost Without Changing Outcome

Study Design: Review article. Objectives: There have been substantial increases in the utilization of complex spinal surgery in the last 20 years. Spinal instrumented surgery is associated with high costs as well as significant variation in approach and care. The objective of this manuscript is to identify and review drivers of instrumented spine surgery cost and explain how surgeons can reduce costs without compromising outcome. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed. The literature review returned 217 citations. 27 publications were found to meet the inclusion criteria. The relevant literature on drivers of spine instrumented surgery cost is reviewed. Results: The drivers of cost in instrumented spine surgery are varied and include implant costs, complications, readmissions, facility-based costs, surgeon-driven preferences, and patient comorbidities. Each major cost driver represents an opportunity for potential reductions in cost. With high resource utilization and often uncertain outcomes, spinal surgery has been heavily scrutinized by payers and hospital systems, with efforts to reduce costs and standardize surgical approach and care pathways. Conclusions: Education about cost and commitment to standardization would be useful strategies to reduce cost without compromising patient-reported outcomes after instrumented spinal fusion.

Is There a Role for Preoperative Local Infiltration of Tranexamic Acid in Elective Spine Surgery? A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Analyzing the Efficacy of Intravenous, Local Infiltration, and Topical Administration of Tranexamic Acid

Study Design: Randomized control trial. Objective: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid in reducing blood loss when administered through various routes in instrumented spine surgeries. Methods: A total of 104 patients undergoing instrumented spine surgery were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n = 26 in each group). Groups included (1) ivTXA—intravenous administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) 1 hour prior to surgery, (2) loTXA—local infiltration of TXA bilaterally into the paraspinal musculature prior to incision, (3) tTXA—topical application of TXA just before wound closure, and (4) control group. Outcome measures included intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood loss, need for blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and hematological parameters. Results: All the 3 different modes of TXA administration were found to be effective in reducing blood loss in the treated groups compared with the control group. Intraoperative blood loss was significantly reduced in ivTXA (223.6 ± 40.1 mL, P < .0001) and loTXA (256.07 ± 119 mL, P = .0039) groups when compared with controls (344 ± 88.5 mL).The postoperative blood loss was least in tTXA followed by ivTXA, loTXA, and controls. There was 67% reduction in need for blood transfusion in tTXA group, 55.5% reduction in ivTXA group, and 33% reduction in loTXA group when compared with the control group. Conclusion: In instrumented spine surgery, ivTXA and loTXA were found to be equally effective in reducing the intraoperative blood loss. The tTXA has better postoperative blood conserving effects. This is the first study to detail about safety and efficacy on local infiltration of TXA in spine surgery, which is an effective and safe method for reducing intraoperative blood loss.

Surgeon Management of Osteoporosis in Instrumented Spine Surgery: AOSpine Latin America Survey

Study Design: Survey study. Objective: To determine the impact of osteoporosis (OP) in instrumented spine surgery among Latin American spine surgeons. Methods: An electronic survey on aspects of instrumented spine surgery and OP was sent electronically to all members of AOSpine Latin America (AOSLA): 16 multiple-choice questions included incidence and type of complications experienced, strategies to avoid intraoperative complications, on prevention of complications and OP assessment and treatment prior to surgery. Results: A total of 349 spine surgeons from a universe of 377 surgeons (230 orthopedic surgeons and 147 neurosurgeons), associated members of AOSLA answered the survey. About 80% recalled complications directly related to OP and 71% had revised instrumentation because of OP-related complications. Techniques for prevention of intraoperative complications varied; 65% extended instrumentation to additional segments, 63% performed vertebral body cement injection alone or associated with instrumentation. Preoperative screening was used by 19% but increased to 75% if patients had risk factors. A limit value of bone mineral density for delaying surgery was not established for 66.4% of respondents. Consultation for OP management was requested by 81%, mostly to endocrinology (56.3%). Interestingly, 19% personally managed their patient's OP. Conclusion: This study provides a global perspective on how Latin American spine surgeons manage patients with OP undergoing instrumented spine surgery. Most have faced complications associated with OP and have had to resolve them surgically. Spine surgeons frequently participate partially in managing patients with OP. Most refer patients with OP for treatment to the endocrinology.

Intrawound Treatment for Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Instrumented Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Comparative Effectiveness Review and Meta-Analysis

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To determine the efficacy of intrawound treatments in reducing deep surgical site infections (SSIs) in instrumented spinal surgery. Methods: The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane were systematically searched for intrawound treatments for the prevention of SSIs in clean instrumented spine surgery. Both randomized controlled trials and comparative cohort studies were included. The results of included studies were pooled for meta-analysis. Results: After full text- and reference screening, 20 articles were included. There were 2 randomized controlled trials and 18 observational studies. Sixteen studies investigated the use of intrawound antibiotics, and 4 studies investigated the use of intrawound antiseptics. The relative risk of deep SSI for any treatment was 0.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16-0.44, P < .0001), a significant reduction compared with controls receiving no treatment. For patients treated with local antibiotics the relative risk was 0.29 (95% CI 0.17-0.51, P < .0001), and patients treated with local antiseptics had a relative risk of 0.14 (95% CI 0.05-0.44, P = .0006). Conclusions: Both the use of antibiotic and antiseptic intrawound prophylactics was associated with a significant 3 to 7 times reduction of deep SSIs in instrumented spine surgery. No adverse events were reported in the included studies.