Browse

You are looking at 21 - 30 of 69 items for

  • By Author: Wolinsky, Jean-Paul x
Clear All
Full access

Mohamad Bydon, Mohamed Macki, Rafael De la Garza-Ramos, Daniel M. Sciubba, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Timothy F. Witham and Ali Bydon

OBJECT

This study aimed to identify the factors predicting an increased risk for reoperation in patients who had undergone a lumbar laminectomy.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of all patients who had undergone firsttime, bilateral laminectomy at 1, 2, or 3 levels for lumbar spondylosis at the authors' institution. Patients who underwent fusion, laminotomy, discectomy, or complete facetectomy were excluded. The patients' preoperative symptoms and comorbidities were also obtained from their medical records.

RESULTS

Over an average follow-up period of 46.8 months, of 500 patients who had undergone laminectomy at 1, 2, or 3 levels, 81 patients (16.2%) developed subsequent spinal disorders that required a reoperation. A multiple logistic regression analysis identified smoking as an independent predictor of reoperation (OR 2.15, p = 0.01). Smoking was also an independent predictor of reoperation after a single-level laminectomy (OR 11.3, p = 0.02) and after a multilevel (that is, involving 2 or 3 levels) laminectomy (OR 1.98, p = 0.05). For 72 patients undergoing reoperation only for spinal degeneration, smoking remained an independent, statistically significant predictor of reoperation (OR 2.06, p = 0.04). Nine patients underwent reoperation for nondegenerative conditions (hematoma, wound infection, or wound dehiscence), and in these patients, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the only statistically significant predictor of reoperation (OR 8.92, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking was the strongest predictor of reoperation in patients who had undergone single-level laminectomy, multilevel laminectomy, or reoperation for progression of spinal degeneration. These findings suggest that smokers have worse outcomes of lumbar decompression than nonsmokers.

Full access

Michelle J. Clarke, Patricia L. Zadnik, Mari L. Groves, Daniel M. Sciubba, Timothy F. Witham, Ali Bydon, Ziya L. Gokaslan and Jean-Paul Wolinsky

OBJECT

Recently, aggressive surgical techniques and a push toward en bloc resections of certain tumors have resulted in a need for creative spinal column reconstruction. Iatrogenic instability following these resections requires a thoughtful approach to adequately transfer load-bearing forces from the skull and upper cervical spine to the subaxial spine.

METHODS

The authors present a series of 7 cases in which lateral mass reconstruction with a cage or fibular strut graft was used to provide load-bearing support, including 1 case of bilateral cage placement.

RESULTS

The authors discuss the surgical nuances of en bloc resection of high cervical tumors and explain their technique for lateral mass cage placement. Additionally, they provide their rationale for the use of these constructs throughout the craniocervical junction and subaxial spine.

CONCLUSIONS

Lateral mass reconstruction provides a potential alternative or adjuvant method of restoring the load-bearing capabilities of the cervical spine.

Free access

Mohamad Bydon, Dimitrios Mathios, Mohamed Macki, Rafael de la Garza-Ramos, Daniel M. Sciubba, Timothy F. Witham, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ziya L. Gokaslan and Ali Bydon

Object

The authors conducted a study to investigate the rate and timing of reoperation due to symptom recurrence after unilateral posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF).

Methods

The authors retrospectively reviewed demographic, surgical, and clinical data from 151 patients who underwent unilateral PCF at their institution with an average follow-up of 4.15 years. The main outcome variables were reoperation rate, time to reoperation, and short- and long-term radiculopathy improvement rates. Kaplan-Meier analyses were conducted to assess risk of reoperation and recurrence of radiculopathy over time.

Results

After index PCF in 151 patients, the overall reoperation rate was 9.9% (15 patients). The average time until reoperation was 2.4 years, and the average last follow-up examination was 4.15 years after the first surgery. Patients who presented with preoperative neck pain in addition to radiculopathy had a higher risk for reoperation and a shorter time to reoperation. The majority of patients who underwent a reoperation had an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (80%). A smaller number of patients had reoperation that included a repeat PCF (6.7%) or laminectomy with posterior cervical fusion (13.3%). The rate of same-level reoperation (6.6%, 10 patients) was significantly higher (p = 0.05) when compared with adjacent-segment (1.3%, 2 patients) or distant-segment (1.9%, 3 patients) reoperation. At last follow-up, the overall rate of improvement in radiculopathy was 85%, with the majority of patients (91.4%) experiencing resolution as early as 1 month after index surgery. Following the subgroup that experienced initial symptom improvement, 16.1% of these patients experienced radiculopathy recurrence an average of 7.3 years after the initial operation. While the reoperation rate for the overall cohort in this series was 9.9%, patients with follow-up periods longer than 2 years had a reoperation rate of 18.3%. Moreover, patients with more than 10 years of follow-up had a reoperation rate of 24.3%.

Conclusions

PCF is a procedure performed to address nerve root compression in the cervical spine. The authors evaluated 151 patients who underwent unilateral PCF and found a reoperation rate of 9.9% at an average of 2.4 years after the initial surgery (6.6% at same level, 3.3% elsewhere). The reoperation rates reached 18.3% and 24.3% in patients with follow-up periods longer than 2 and 10 years, respectively. The authors' analysis revealed that patients with no preoperative neck pain had the lowest rates of revision surgery after PCF.

Full access

Michelle J. Clarke, Patricia L. Zadnik, Mari L. Groves, Hormuzdiyar H. Dasenbrock, Daniel M. Sciubba, Wesley Hsu, Timothy F. Witham, Ali Bydon, Ziya L. Gokaslan and Jean-Paul Wolinsky

Object

Traditionally, hemisacrectomy and internal hemipelvectomy procedures have required both an anterior and a posterior approach. A posterior-only approach has the potential to complete an en bloc tumor resection and spinopelvic reconstruction while reducing surgical morbidity.

Methods

The authors describe 3 cases in which en bloc resection of the hemisacrum and ilium and subsequent lumbopelvic and pelvic ring reconstruction were performed from a posterior-only approach. Two more traditional anterior and posterior staged procedures are also included for comparison.

Results

In all 3 cases, an oncologically appropriate surgery and spinopelvic reconstruction were performed through a posterior-only approach.

Conclusions

The advantage of a midline posterior approach is the ability to perform a lumbosacral reconstruction, necessary in cases in which the S-1 body is iatrogenically disrupted during tumor resection.

Full access

Camilo A. Molina, Christopher P. Ames, Dean Chou, Laurence D. Rhines, Patrick C. Hsieh, Patricia L. Zadnik, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ziya L. Gokaslan and Daniel M. Sciubba

Object

Chordomas involving the mobile spine are ideally managed via en bloc resection with reconstruction to optimize local control and possibly offer cure. In the cervical spine, local anatomy poses unique challenges, limiting the feasibility of aggressive resection. The authors present a multi-institutional series of 16 cases of cervical chordomas removed en bloc. Particular attention was paid to clinical outcome, complications, and recurrence. In addition, outcomes were assessed according to position of tumor at the C1–2 level versus the subaxial (SA) spine (C3–7).

Methods

The authors reviewed cases involving patients who underwent en bloc resection of cervical chordoma at 4 large spine centers. Patients were included if the lesion epicenter involved the C-1 to C-7 vertebral bodies. Demographic data and details of surgery, follow-up course, exposure to adjuvant therapy, and complications were obtained. Outcome was correlated with presence of tumor in C1–2 versus subaxial spine via a Student t-test.

Results

Sixteen patients were identified (mean age at presentation 55 ± 14 years). Seven cases (44%) cases involved C1–2, and 16 involved the subaxial spine. Median survival did not differ significantly different between the C1–2 (72 months) and SA (60 months) groups (p = 0.65). A combined (staged anteroposterior) approach was used in 81% of the cases. Use of the combined approach was significantly more common in treatment of subaxial than C1–2 tumors (100% vs 57%, p = 0.04). En bloc resection was attempted via an anterior approach in 6% of cases (C1–2: 14.3%; SA: 0%; p = 0.17) and a posterior approach in 13% of cases (C1–2: 29%; SA: 0%; p = 0.09). The most commonly reported margin classification was marginal (56% of cases), followed by violated (25%) and wide (19%). En bloc excision of subaxial tumors was significantly more likely to result in marginal margins than excision of C1–2 tumors (C1–2: 29%; SA: 78%; p = 0.03). C1–2 tumors were associated with significantly higher rates of postoperative complications (C1–2: 71%; SA: 22%; p = 0.03). Both local and distant tumor recurrence was greatest for C1–2 tumors (local C1–2: 29%; local SA: 11%; distant C1–2: 14%; distant SA: 0%). Statistical analysis of tumor recurrence based on tumor location was not possible due to the small number of cases. There was no between-groups difference in exposure to postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy. There was no difference in median survival between groups receiving proton beam radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus no radiation therapy (p = 0.8).

Conclusions

Compared with en bloc resection of chordomas involving the subaxial cervical spine, en bloc resection of chordomas involving the upper cervical spine (C1–2) is associated with poorer outcomes, such as less favorable margins, higher rates of complications, and increased tumor recurrence. Data from this cohort do not support a statistically significant difference in survival for patients with C1–2 versus subaxial disease, but larger studies are needed to further study survival differences.

Full access

Mohamad Bydon, Risheng Xu, Anubhav G. Amin, Mohamed Macki, Paul Kaloostian, Daniel M. Sciubba, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ali Bydon, Ziya L. Gokaslan and Timothy F. Witham

Object

A number of imaging techniques have been introduced to minimize the risk of pedicle screw placement. Intraoperative CT has been recently introduced to assist in spinal instrumentation. The aim of this study was to study the effectiveness of intraoperative CT in enhancing the safety and accuracy of pedicle screw placement.

Methods

The authors included all cases from December 2009 through July 2012 in which intraoperative CT scanning was used to confirm pedicle screw placement.

Results

A total of 203 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of 1148 screws, 103 screws (8.97%) were revised intraoperatively in 72 patients (35.5%): 14 (18.42%) were revised in the cervical spine (C-2 or C-7), 25 (7.25%) in the thoracic spine, and 64 (8.80%) in the lumbar spine. Compared with screws in the thoracic and lumbar regions, pedicle screws placed in the cervical region were statistically more likely to be revised (p = 0.0061). Two patients (0.99%) required reoperations due to undetected misplacement of pedicle screws.

Conclusions

The authors describe one of the first North American experiences using intraoperative CT scanning to confirm the placement of pedicle screws. Compared with a similar cohort of patients from their institution who had pedicle screws inserted via the free-hand technique with postoperative CT, the authors found that the intraoperative CT lowers the threshold for pedicle screw revision, resulting in a statistically higher rate of screw revision in the thoracic and lumbar spine (p < 0.0001). During their 2.5-year experience with the intraoperative CT, the authors did not find a reduction in rates of reoperation for misplaced pedicle screws.

Full access

Paul E. Kaloostian, Patricia L. Zadnik, Jennifer E. Kim, Mari L. Groves, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Timothy F. Witham, Ali Bydon and Daniel M. Sciubba

Pheochromocytomas of the spine are uncommon and require careful preoperative planning. The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts of 5 patients with metastatic spinal pheochromocytoma who had undergone surgical treatment over the past 10 years at their medical center. They reviewed patient age, history of pheochromocytoma resection, extent and location of metastases, history of alpha blockage, surgical level, surgical procedure, postoperative complications, tumor recurrence, and survival. Metastases involved the cervical (1 patient), thoracic (3 patients), and lumbar (2 patients) levels. Preoperative treatment included primary pheochromocytoma resection, chemotherapy, alpha blockade, embolization, and radiation. Three patients had tumor recurrence, and 2 underwent 2-stage reoperations for tumor extension. Hemodynamic complications were common: 2 patients developed pulseless electrical activity arrest within 4 months after surgery, 1 patient had profound postoperative tachycardia with fever and an elevated creatine kinase level, and 1 patient experienced transient postoperative hypotension and paraplegia. One patient died of complications related to disseminated cerebral and spinal disease.

With careful preoperative and surgical management, patients with symptomatic metastatic spinal pheochromocytoma can benefit from aggressive surgical treatment. Postoperative cardiovascular complications are common even months after surgery, and patients should be closely monitored long term.

Free access

Mohamad Bydon, Risheng Xu, David Santiago-Dieppa, Mohamed Macki, Daniel M. Sciubba, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ali Bydon, Ziya L. Gokaslan and Timothy F. Witham

Object

The aim of this study was to study the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing instrumented posterior fusion of the lumbar spine.

Methods

The authors present 511 patients who underwent instrumented arthrodesis for lumbar degenerative disease over a 23-year period at a single institution. Patients underwent follow-up for an average of 39.73 ± 46.52 months (± SD) after the index lumbar arthrodesis procedure.

Results

The average patient age was 59.45 ± 13.48 years. Of the 511 patients, 502 (98.24%) presented with back pain, 379 (74.17%) with radiculopathy, 76 (14.87%) with motor weakness, and 32 (6.26%) with preoperative bowel/bladder dysfunction. An average of 2.04 ± 1.03 spinal levels were fused. Postoperatively, patients experienced a significant improvement in back pain (p < 0.0001) and radiculopathy (p < 0.0001). Patients with fusions excluding the sacrum (floating fusions) were statistically more likely to develop adjacent-segment disease (ASD) than those with fusion constructs ending at S-1 distally (p = 0.030) but were less likely to develop postoperative radiculopathy (p = 0.030). In the floating fusion cohort, 31 (12.11%) of 256 patients had cephalad ASD, whereas 39 (15.29%) of 255 patients in the lumbosacral cohort had cephalad ASD development; this was not statistically different (p = 0.295). This suggests that caudad ASD development in the floating fusion cohort is due to the added risk of an unfused L5–S1 vertebral level. Because of the elevated risk of symptomatic radiculopathy but lower risk of ASD, patients in the lumbosacral fusion cohort had a reoperation rate similar to those undergoing floating fusions (p = 0.769).

Conclusions

In this paper, the authors present one of the largest cohorts in the Western literature of patients undergoing instrumented fusion for degenerative lumbar spine disease. Patients who had floating lumbar fusions were statistically more likely to develop ASD over time than those who had lumbosacral fusions incorporating the S-1 spinal segment, but were less likely to experience postoperative radicular symptoms. Additional prospective studies may more clearly delineate the long-term risks of instrumented posterolateral fusions of the lumbar spine.