Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11 items for

  • Author or Editor: Joshua Rivera x
  • Refine by Access: all x
Clear All Modify Search
Open access

Chih-Chang Chang, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Joshua Rivera, Rory Mayer, and Dean Chou

Iatrogenic flat back deformity generally can be treated with a pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) (Chan et al., 2018; Lu and Chou, 2007). One of the difficulties with PSO is that a controlled closure can sometimes be problematic in that there may be translation of the spine, manual pushing of the spine, and significant stress on the pedicle screws, which may risk loosening. The authors present a video of their surgical technique for PSO closed by passive closure using an open-bottom hinged table. This allows the osteotomy to be closed without any force on the screws and without significant manual forces on the spinal column.

The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/pUECEjKdmSk.

Open access

Chih-Chang Chang, Joshua Rivera, Brenton Pennicooke, Dean Chou, and Praveen V. Mummaneni

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is an increasing disease entity as the population ages. An emerging minimally invasive surgery (MIS) option for the treatment of ASD is the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), which allows indirect foraminal decompression of stenosis as well as segmental deformity correction (DiGiorgio et al., 2017). The authors utilize computer-assisted navigation with OLIF to reduce radiation exposure and improve time efficiency. The authors present a video of navigated oblique lumbar interbody fusion at L3–5 followed by open posterior screw-rod fixation.

The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/zKDT7PhMYf8.

Free access

Chih-Chang Chang, Dean Chou, Brenton Pennicooke, Joshua Rivera, Lee A. Tan, Sigurd Berven, and Praveen V. Mummaneni

OBJECTIVE

Potential advantages of using expandable versus static cages during transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) are not fully established. The authors aimed to compare the long-term radiographic outcomes of expandable versus static TLIF cages.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 1- and 2-level TLIFs over a 10-year period with expandable and static cages was performed at the University of California, San Francisco. Patients with posterior column osteotomy (PCO) were subdivided. Fusion assessment, cage subsidence, anterior and posterior disc height, foraminal dimensions, pelvic incidence (PI), segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) were assessed.

RESULTS

A consecutive series of 178 patients (with a total of 210 levels) who underwent TLIF using either static (148 levels) or expandable cages (62 levels) was reviewed. The mean patient age was 60.3 ± 11.5 years and 62.8 ± 14.1 years for the static and expandable cage groups, respectively. The mean follow-up was 42.9 ± 29.4 months for the static cage group and 27.6 ± 14.1 months for the expandable cage group. Within the 1-level TLIF group, the SL and PI-LL improved with statistical significance regardless of whether PCO was performed; however, the static group with PCOs also had statistically significant improvement in LL and SVA. The expandable cage with PCO subgroup had significant improvement in SL only. All of the foraminal parameters improved with statistical significance, regardless of the type of cages used; however, the expandable cage group had greater improvement in disc height restoration. The incidence of cage subsidence was higher in the expandable group (19.7% vs 5.4%, p = 0.0017). Within the expandable group, the unilateral facetectomy-only subgroup had a 5.6 times higher subsidence rate than the PCO subgroup (26.8% vs 4.8%, p = 0.04). Four expandable cages collapsed over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Expandable TLIF cages may initially restore disc height better than static cages, but they also have higher rates of subsidence. Unilateral facetectomy alone may result in more subsidence with expandable cages than using bilateral PCO, potentially because of insufficient facet release. Although expandable cages may have more power to induce lordosis and restore disc height than static cages, subsidence and endplate violation may negate any significant gains compared to static cages.

Free access

Minghao Wang, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Zhuo Xi, Chih-Chang Chang, Joshua Rivera, Jeremy Guinn, Rory Mayer, and Dean Chou

OBJECTIVE

A consequence of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is graft subsidence, potentially leading to kyphosis, nonunion, foraminal stenosis, and recurrent pain. Bone density, as measured in Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT, may be associated with subsidence. The authors evaluated the association between HUs and subsidence rates after ACDF.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients treated with single-level ACDF at the University of California, San Francisco, from 2008 to 2017 was performed. HU values were measured according to previously published methods. Only patients with preoperative CT, minimum 1-year follow-up, and single-level ACDF were included. Patients with posterior surgery, tumor, infection, trauma, deformity, or osteoporosis treatment were excluded. Changes in segmental height were measured at 1-year follow-up compared with immediate postoperative radiographs. Subsidence was defined as segmental height loss of more than 2 mm.

RESULTS

A total of 91 patients met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in age or sex between the subsidence and nonsubsidence groups. Mean HU values in the subsidence group (320.8 ± 23.9, n = 8) were significantly lower than those of the nonsubsidence group (389.1 ± 53.7, n = 83, p < 0.01, t-test). There was a negative correlation between the HU values and segmental height loss (Pearson’s coefficient −0.735, p = 0.01). Using receiver operating characteristic curves, the area under the curve was 0.89, and the most appropriate threshold of HU value was 343.7 (sensitivity 77.1%, specificity 87.5%). A preoperative lower HU is a risk factor for postoperative subsidence (binary logistic regression, p < 0.05). The subsidence rate and distance between allograft and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) materials were not significantly different (PEEK 0.9 ± 0.7 mm, allograft 1.0 ± 0.7 mm; p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower preoperative CT HU values are associated with cage subsidence in single-level ACDF. Preoperative measurement of HUs may be useful in predicting outcomes after ACDF.

Free access

Ping-Guo Duan, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Jeremy M. V. Guinn, Joshua Rivera, Sigurd H. Berven, and Dean Chou

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate whether fat infiltration of the lumbar multifidus (LM) muscle affects revision surgery rates for adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD) after L4–5 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

A total of 178 patients undergoing single-level L4–5 TLIF for spondylolisthesis (2006 to 2016) were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria were a minimum 2-year follow-up, preoperative MR images and radiographs, and single-level L4–5 TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Twenty-three patients underwent revision surgery for ASD during the follow-up. Another 23 patients without ASD were matched with the patients with ASD. Demographic data, Roussouly curvature type, and spinopelvic parameter data were collected. The fat infiltration of the LM muscle (L3, L4, and L5) was evaluated on preoperative MRI using the Goutallier classification system.

RESULTS

A total of 46 patients were evaluated. There were no differences in age, sex, BMI, or spinopelvic parameters with regard to patients with and those without ASD (p > 0.05). Fat infiltration of the LM was significantly greater in the patients with ASD than in those without ASD (p = 0.029). Fat infiltration was most significant at L3 in patients with ASD than in patients without ASD (p = 0.017). At L4 and L5, there was an increasing trend of fat infiltration in the patients with ASD than in those without ASD, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.354 for L4 and p = 0.077 for L5).

CONCLUSIONS

Fat infiltration of the LM may be associated with ASD after L4–5 TLIF for spondylolisthesis. Fat infiltration at L3 may also be associated with ASD at L3–4 after L4–5 TLIF.

Free access

Vijay Letchuman, Nitin Agarwal, Valli P. Mummaneni, Michael Y. Wang, Saman Shabani, Arati Patel, Joshua Rivera, Alexander F. Haddad, Vivian Le, Joyce M. Chang, Dean Chou, Seema Gandhi, and Praveen V. Mummaneni

OBJECTIVE

There is a learning curve for surgeons performing “awake” spinal surgery. No comprehensive guidelines have been proposed for the selection of ideal candidates for awake spinal fusion or decompression. The authors sought to formulate an algorithm to aid in patient selection for surgeons who are in the startup phase of awake spinal surgery.

METHODS

The authors developed an algorithm for selecting patients appropriate for awake spinal fusion or decompression using spinal anesthesia supplemented with mild sedation and local analgesia. The anesthetic protocol that was used has previously been reported in the literature. This algorithm was formulated based on a multidisciplinary team meeting and used in the first 15 patients who underwent awake lumbar surgery at a single institution.

RESULTS

A total of 15 patients who underwent decompression or lumbar fusion using the awake protocol were reviewed. The mean patient age was 61 ± 12 years, with a median BMI of 25.3 (IQR 2.7) and a mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 2.1 ± 1.7; 7 patients (47%) were female. Key patient inclusion criteria were no history of anxiety, 1 to 2 levels of lumbar pathology, moderate stenosis and/or grade I spondylolisthesis, and no prior lumbar surgery at the level where the needle is introduced for anesthesia. Key exclusion criteria included severe and critical central canal stenosis or patients who did not meet the inclusion criteria. Using the novel algorithm, 14 patients (93%) successfully underwent awake spinal surgery without conversion to general anesthesia. One patient (7%) was converted to general anesthesia due to insufficient analgesia from spinal anesthesia. Overall, 93% (n = 14) of the patients were assessed as American Society of Anesthesiologists class II, with 1 patient (7%) as class III. The mean operative time was 115 minutes (± 60 minutes) with a mean estimated blood loss of 46 ± 39 mL. The median hospital length of stay was 1.3 days (IQR 0.1 days). No patients developed postoperative complications and only 1 patient (7%) required reoperation. The mean Oswestry Disability Index score decreased following operative intervention by 5.1 ± 10.8.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors propose an easy-to-use patient selection algorithm with the aim of assisting surgeons with patient selection for awake spinal surgery while considering BMI, patient anxiety, levels of surgery, and the extent of stenosis. The algorithm is specifically intended to assist surgeons who are in the learning curve of their first awake spinal surgery cases.

Free access

Enrique Vargas, Dennis T. Lockney, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Alexander F. Haddad, Joshua Rivera, Xiao Tan, Alysha Jamieson, Yasmine Mahmoudieh, Sigurd Berven, Steve E. Braunstein, and Dean Chou

OBJECTIVE

Within the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) classification, tumor-related potential spinal instability (SINS 7–12) may not have a clear treatment approach. The authors aimed to examine the proportion of patients in this indeterminate zone who later required surgical stabilization after initial nonoperative management. By studying this patient population, they sought to determine if a clear SINS cutoff existed whereby the spine is potentially unstable due to a lesion and would be more likely to require stabilization.

METHODS

Records from patients treated at the University of California, San Francisco, for metastatic spine disease from 2005 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy-five patients with tumor-related potential spinal instability (SINS 7–12) who were initially treated nonoperatively were included. All patients had at least a 1-year follow-up with complete medical records. A univariate chi-square test and Student t-test were used to compare categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively, between patients who ultimately underwent surgery and those who did not. A backward likelihood multivariate binary logistic regression model was used to investigate the relationship between clinical characteristics and surgical intervention. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) and single-variable logistic regression were performed as a function of SINS.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients with a total of 292 spinal metastatic sites were included in this study; 26 (34.7%) patients underwent surgical intervention, and 49 (65.3%) did not. There was no difference in age, sex, comorbidities, or lesion location between the groups. However, there were more patients with a SINS of 12 in the surgery group (55.2%) than in the no surgery group (44.8%) (p = 0.003). On multivariate analysis, SINS > 11 (OR 8.09, CI 1.96–33.4, p = 0.004) and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score < 60 (OR 0.94, CI 0.89–0.98, p = 0.008) were associated with an increased risk of surgery. KPS score was not correlated with SINS (p = 0.4). RPA by each spinal lesion identified an optimal cutoff value of SINS > 10, which were associated with an increased risk of surgical intervention. Patients with a surgical intervention had a higher incidence of complications on multivariable analysis (OR 2.96, CI 1.01–8.71, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a mean SINS of 11 or greater may be at increased risk of mechanical instability requiring surgery after initial nonoperative management. RPA showed that patients with a KPS score of 60 or lower and a SINS of greater than 10 had increased surgery rates.

Free access

Ping-Guo Duan, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Joshua Rivera, Jeremy M. V. Guinn, Minghao Wang, Zhuo Xi, Bo Li, Hao-Hua Wu, Christopher P. Ames, Shane Burch, Sigurd H. Berven, and Dean Chou

OBJECTIVE

Patients undergoing long-segment fusions from the lower thoracic (LT) spine to the sacrum for adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction are at risk for proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK). One mechanism of PJK is fracture of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) or higher (UIV+1), which may be related to bone mineral density (BMD). Because Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT correlate with BMD, the authors evaluated whether HU values were correlated with PJK after long fusions for ASD.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective study of patients older than 50 years who had undergone ASD correction from the LT spine to the sacrum in the period from October 2007 to January 2018 and had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Demographic and spinopelvic parameters were measured. HU values were measured on preoperative CT at the UIV, UIV+1, and UIV+2 (2 levels above the UIV) levels and were assessed for correlations with PJK.

RESULTS

The records of 127 patients were reviewed. Fifty-four patients (19 males and 35 females) with a mean age of 64.91 years and mean follow-up of 3.19 years met the study inclusion criteria; there were 29 patients with PJK and 25 patients without. There was no statistically significant difference in demographics or follow-up between these two groups. Neither was there a difference between the groups with regard to postoperative pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI minus LL (PI-LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), or sagittal vertical axis (SVA; all p > 0.05). Postoperative pelvic tilt (p = 0.003) and T1 pelvic angle (p = 0.014) were significantly higher in patients with PJK than in those without. Preoperative HUs at UIV, UIV+1, and UIV+2 were 120.41, 124.52, and 129.28 in the patients with PJK, respectively, and 152.80, 155.96, and 160.00 in the patients without PJK, respectively (p = 0.011, 0.02, and 0.018). Three receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for preoperative HU values at the UIV, UIV+1, and UIV+2 as a predictor for PJK were established, with areas under the ROC curve of 0.710 (95% CI 0.574–0.847), 0.679 (95% CI 0.536–0.821), and 0.681 (95% CI 0.539–0.824), respectively. The optimal HU value by Youden index was 104 HU at the UIV (sensitivity 0.840, specificity 0.517), 113 HU at the UIV+1 (sensitivity 0.720, specificity 0.517), and 110 HU at the UIV+2 (sensitivity 0.880, specificity 0.448).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing long-segment fusions from the LT spine to the sacrum for ASD, PJK was associated with lower HU values on CT at the UIV, UIV+1, and UIV+2. The measurement of HU values on preoperative CTs may be a useful adjunct for ASD surgery planning.

Restricted access

Praveen V. Mummaneni, Ibrahim Hussain, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Robert K. Eastlack, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Juan S. Uribe, Richard G. Fessler, Paul Park, Leslie Robinson, Joshua Rivera, Dean Chou, Adam S. Kanter, David O. Okonkwo, Pierce D. Nunley, Michael Y. Wang, Frank La Marca, Khoi D. Than, Kai-Ming Fu, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for spinal deformity uses interbody techniques for correction, indirect decompression, and arthrodesis. Selection criteria for choosing a particular interbody approach are lacking. The authors created the minimally invasive interbody selection algorithm (MIISA) to provide a framework for rational decision-making in MIS for deformity.

METHODS

A retrospective data set of circumferential MIS (cMIS) for adult spinal deformity (ASD) collected over a 5-year period was analyzed by level in the lumbar spine to identify surgeon preferences and evaluate segmental lordosis outcomes. These data were used to inform a Delphi session of minimally invasive deformity surgeons from which the algorithm was created. The algorithm leads to 1 of 4 interbody approaches: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), anterior column release (ACR), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Preoperative and 2-year postoperative radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Eleven surgeons completed 100 cMISs for ASD with 338 interbody devices, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. The type of interbody approach used at each level from L1 to S1 was recorded. The MIISA was then created with substantial agreement. The surgeons generally preferred LLIF for L1–2 (91.7%), L2–3 (85.2%), and L3–4 (80.7%). ACR was most commonly performed at L3–4 (8.4%) and L2–3 (6.2%). At L4–5, LLIF (69.5%), TLIF (15.9%), and ALIF (9.8%) were most commonly utilized. TLIF and ALIF were the most selected approaches at L5–S1 (61.4% and 38.6%, respectively). Segmental lordosis at each level varied based on the approach, with greater increases reported using ALIF, especially at L4–5 (9.2°) and L5–S1 (5.3°). A substantial increase in lordosis was achieved with ACR at L2–3 (10.9°) and L3–4 (10.4°). Lateral interbody arthrodesis without the use of an ACR did not generally result in significant lordosis restoration. There were statistically significant improvements in lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence–LL mismatch, coronal Cobb angle, and Oswestry Disability Index at the 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the MIISA provides consistent guidance for surgeons who plan to perform MIS for deformity. For L1–4, the surgeons preferred lateral approaches to TLIF and reserved ACR for patients who needed the greatest increase in segmental lordosis. For L4–5, the surgeons’ order of preference was LLIF, TLIF, and ALIF, but TLIF failed to demonstrate any significant lordosis restoration. At L5–S1, the surgical team typically preferred an ALIF when segmental lordosis was desired and preferred a TLIF if preoperative segmental lordosis was adequate.

Restricted access

Andrew K. Chan, Praveen V. Mummaneni, John F. Burke, Rory R. Mayer, Erica F. Bisson, Joshua Rivera, Brenton Pennicooke, Kai-Ming Fu, Paul Park, Mohamad Bydon, Steven D. Glassman, Kevin T. Foley, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Eric A. Potts, Mark E. Shaffrey, Domagoj Coric, John J. Knightly, Michael Y. Wang, Jonathan R. Slotkin, Anthony L. Asher, Michael S. Virk, Panagiotis Kerezoudis, Mohammed A. Alvi, Jian Guan, Regis W. Haid, and Dean Chou

OBJECTIVE

Reduction of Meyerding grade is often performed during fusion for spondylolisthesis. Although radiographic appearance may improve, correlation with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is rarely reported. In this study, the authors’ aim was to assess the impact of spondylolisthesis reduction on 24-month PRO measures after decompression and fusion surgery for Meyerding grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis with a minimum 24-month follow-up, and quantitative correlation between Meyerding slippage reduction and PROs was performed. Baseline and 24-month PROs, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)–back pain (NRS-BP), NRS-leg pain (NRS-LP), and satisfaction (North American Spine Society patient satisfaction questionnaire) scores were noted. Multivariable regression models were fitted for 24-month PROs and complications after adjusting for an array of preoperative and surgical variables. Data were analyzed for magnitude of slippage reduction and correlated with PROs. Patients were divided into two groups: < 3 mm reduction and ≥ 3 mm reduction.

RESULTS

Of 608 patients from 12 participating sites, 206 patients with complete data were identified in the QOD and included in this study. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were similarly distributed between the cohorts except for depression, listhesis magnitude, and the proportion with dynamic listhesis (which were accounted for in the multivariable analysis). One hundred four (50.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm (mean 5.19, range 3 to 11), and 102 (49.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction < 3 mm (mean 0.41, range 2 to −2). Patients in both groups (slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm, and slippage reduction < 3 mm) reported significant improvement in all primary patient reported outcomes (all p < 0.001). There was no significant difference with regard to the PROs between patients with or without intraoperative reduction of listhesis on univariate and multivariable analyses (ODI, EQ-5D, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, or satisfaction). There was no significant difference in complications between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant improvement was found in terms of all PROs in patients undergoing decompression and fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. There was no correlation with clinical outcomes and magnitude of Meyerding slippage reduction.