Search Results

You are looking at 11 - 14 of 14 items for

  • Author or Editor: Jacob L. Goldberg x
  • Refine by Level: All x
  • Refine by Access: all x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

nlm-article

Cover Journal of Neurosurgery

Endonasal, supraorbital, and transorbital approaches: minimal access endoscope-assisted surgical approaches for meningiomas in the anterior and middle cranial fossae

Joseph A. Carnevale, Abhinav Pandey, Cristopher Ramirez-Loera, Jacob L. Goldberg, Evan D. Bander, Fraser Henderson Jr., Sumit N. Niogi, Abtin Tabaee, Ashutosh Kacker, Vijay K. Anand, Andrew Kim, Apostolos John Tsiouris, Kyle J. Godfrey, and Theodore H. Schwartz

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive endoscope-assisted approaches to the anterior skull base offer an alternative to traditional open craniotomies. Given the restrictive operative corridor, appropriate case selection is critical for success. In this paper, the authors present the results of three different minimal access approaches to meningiomas of the anterior and middle fossae and examine the differences in the target areas considered appropriate for each approach, as well as the outcomes, to determine whether the surgical goals were achieved.

METHODS

A consecutive series of the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA), supraorbital approach (SOA), or transorbital approach (TOA) for newly diagnosed meningiomas of the anterior and middle fossa skull base between 2007 and 2022 were examined. Probabilistic heat maps were created to display the distribution of tumor volumes for each approach. Gross-total resection (GTR), extent of resection, visual and olfactory outcomes, and postoperative complications were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 525 patients who had meningioma resection, 88 (16.7%) were included in this study. EEA was performed for planum sphenoidale and tuberculum sellae meningiomas (n = 44), SOA for olfactory groove and anterior clinoid meningiomas (n = 36), and TOA for spheno-orbital and middle fossa meningiomas (n = 8). The largest tumors were treated using SOA (mean volume 28 ± 29 cm3), followed by TOA (mean volume 10 ± 10 cm3) and EEA (mean volume 9 ± 8 cm3) (p = 0.024). Most cases (91%) were WHO grade I. GTR was achieved in 84% of patients (n = 74), which was similar to the rates for EEA (84%) and SOA (92%), but lower than that for TOA (50%) (p = 0.002), the latter attributable to spheno-orbital (GTR: 33%) not middle fossa (GTR: 100%) tumors. There were 7 (8%) CSF leaks: 5 (11%) from EEA, 1 (3%) from SOA, and 1 (13%) from TOA (p = 0.326). All resolved with lumbar drainage except for 1 EEA leak that required a reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive approaches for anterior and middle fossa skull base meningiomas require careful case selection. GTR rates are equally high for all approaches except for spheno-orbital meningiomas, where alleviation of proptosis and not GTR is the primary goal of surgery. New anosmia was most common after EEA.

Restricted access

nlm-article

Cover Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

Does diabetes affect outcome or reoperation rate after lumbar decompression or arthrodesis? A matched analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database data set

Presented at the 2023 AANS/CNS Joint Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves

James Mooney, Karim Rizwan Nathani, Daniel Zeitouni, Giorgos D. Michalopoulos, Michael Y. Wang, Domagoj Coric, Andrew K. Chan, Daniel C. Lu, Brandon A. Sherrod, Oren N. Gottfried, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Khoi D. Than, Jacob L. Goldberg, Ibrahim Hussain, Michael S. Virk, Nitin Agarwal, Steven D. Glassman, Mark E. Shaffrey, Paul Park, Kevin T. Foley, Dean Chou, Jonathan R. Slotkin, Luis M. Tumialán, Cheerag D. Upadhyaya, Eric A. Potts, Kai-Ming G. Fu, Regis W. Haid, John J. Knightly, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Erica F. Bisson, Anthony L. Asher, and Mohamad Bydon

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a known risk factor for postsurgical and systemic complications after lumbar spinal surgery. Smaller studies have also demonstrated diminished improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), with increased reoperation and readmission rates after lumbar surgery in patients with DM. The authors aimed to examine longer-term PROs in patients with DM undergoing lumbar decompression and/or arthrodesis for degenerative pathology.

METHODS

The Quality Outcomes Database was queried for patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression and/or arthrodesis for degenerative pathology. Patients were grouped into DM and non-DM groups and optimally matched in a 1:1 ratio on 31 baseline variables, including the number of operated levels. Outcomes of interest were readmissions and reoperations at 30 and 90 days after surgery in addition to improvements in Oswestry Disability Index, back pain, and leg pain scores and quality-adjusted life-years at 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

The matched decompression cohort comprised 7836 patients (3236 [41.3] females) with a mean age of 63.5 ± 12.6 years, and the matched arthrodesis cohort comprised 7336 patients (3907 [53.3%] females) with a mean age of 64.8 ± 10.3 years. In patients undergoing lumbar decompression, no significant differences in nonroutine discharge, length of stay (LOS), readmissions, reoperations, and PROs were observed. In patients undergoing lumbar arthrodesis, nonroutine discharge (15.7% vs 13.4%, p < 0.01), LOS (3.2 ± 2.0 vs 3.0 ± 3.5 days, p < 0.01), 30-day (6.5% vs 4.4%, p < 0.01) and 90-day (9.1% vs 7.0%, p < 0.01) readmission rates, and the 90-day reoperation rate (4.3% vs 3.2%, p = 0.01) were all significantly higher in the DM group. For DM patients undergoing lumbar arthrodesis, subgroup analyses demonstrated a significantly higher risk of poor surgical outcomes with the open approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with and without DM undergoing lumbar spinal decompression alone have comparable readmission and reoperation rates, while those undergoing arthrodesis procedures have a higher risk of poor surgical outcomes up to 90 days after surgery. Surgeons should target optimal DM control preoperatively, particularly for patients undergoing elective lumbar arthrodesis.

Restricted access

nlm-article

Cover Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy and driving abilities: defining the prevalence and long-term postoperative outcomes using the Quality Outcomes Database

Nitin Agarwal, Sarah E. Johnson, Mohamad Bydon, Erica F. Bisson, Andrew K. Chan, Saman Shabani, Vijay Letchuman, Giorgos D. Michalopoulos, Daniel C. Lu, Michael Y. Wang, Raj Swaroop Lavadi, Regis W. Haid, John J. Knightly, Brandon A. Sherrod, Oren N. Gottfried, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Jacob L. Goldberg, Michael S. Virk, Ibrahim Hussain, Steven D. Glassman, Mark E. Shaffrey, Paul Park, Kevin T. Foley, Brenton Pennicooke, Domagoj Coric, Jonathan R. Slotkin, Cheerag Upadhyaya, Eric A. Potts, Luis M. Tumialán, Dean Chou, Kai-Ming G. Fu, Anthony L. Asher, and Praveen V. Mummaneni

OBJECTIVE

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) can cause significant difficulty with driving and a subsequent reduction in an individual’s quality of life due to neurological deterioration. The positive impact of surgery on postoperative patient-reported driving capabilities has been seldom explored.

METHODS

The CSM module of the Quality Outcomes Database was utilized. Patient-reported driving ability was assessed via the driving section of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) questionnaire. This is an ordinal scale in which 0 represents the absence of symptoms while driving and 5 represents a complete inability to drive due to symptoms. Patients were considered to have an impairment in their driving ability if they reported an NDI driving score of 3 or higher (signifying impairment in driving duration due to symptoms). Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to evaluate mediators of baseline impairment and improvement at 24 months after surgery, which was defined as an NDI driving score < 3.

RESULTS

A total of 1128 patients who underwent surgical intervention for CSM were included, of whom 354 (31.4%) had baseline driving impairment due to CSM. Moderate (OR 2.3) and severe (OR 6.3) neck pain, severe arm pain (OR 1.6), mild-moderate (OR 2.1) and severe (OR 2.5) impairment in hand/arm dexterity, severe impairment in leg use/walking (OR 1.9), and severe impairment of urinary function (OR 1.8) were associated with impaired driving ability at baseline. Of the 291 patients with baseline impairment and available 24-month follow-up data, 209 (71.8%) reported postoperative improvement in their driving ability. This improvement seemed to be mediated particularly through the achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in neck pain and improvement in leg function/walking. Patients with improved driving at 24 months noted higher postoperative satisfaction (88.5% vs 62.2%, p < 0.01) and were more likely to achieve a clinically significant improvement in their quality of life (50.7% vs 37.8%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-third of patients with CSM report impaired driving ability at presentation. Seventy-two percent of these patients reported improvements in their driving ability within 24 months of surgery. Surgical management of CSM can significantly improve patients’ driving abilities at 24 months and hence patients’ quality of life.

Restricted access

nlm-article

Cover Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

Comparing posterior cervical foraminotomy with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in radiculopathic patients: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database

Praveen V. Mummaneni, Erica F. Bisson, Giorgos Michalopoulos, William J. Mualem, Sally El Sammak, Michael Y. Wang, Andrew K. Chan, Regis W. Haid, John J. Knightly, Dean Chou, Brandon A. Sherrod, Oren N. Gottfried, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Jacob L. Goldberg, Michael S. Virk, Ibrahim Hussain, Nitin Agarwal, Steven D. Glassman, Mark E. Shaffrey, Paul Park, Kevin T. Foley, Brenton Pennicooke, Domagoj Coric, Jonathan R. Slotkin, Eric A. Potts, Kai-Ming G. Fu, Anthony L. Asher, and Mohamad Bydon

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between posterior foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients presenting with cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

The Quality Outcomes Database was queried for patients who had undergone ACDF or posterior foraminotomy for radiculopathy. To create two highly homogeneous groups, optimal individual matching was performed at a 5:1 ratio between the two groups on 29 baseline variables (including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, underlying pathologies, and levels treated). Outcomes of interest were length of stay, reoperations, patient-reported satisfaction, increase in EQ-5D score, and decrease in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores for arm and neck pain as long as 1 year after surgery. Noninferiority analysis of achieving patient satisfaction and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in PROs was performed with an accepted risk difference of 5%.

RESULTS

A total of 7805 eligible patients were identified: 216 of these underwent posterior foraminotomy and were matched to 1080 patients who underwent ACDF. The patients who underwent ACDF had more underlying pathologies, lower EQ-5D scores, and higher NDI and neck pain scores at baseline. Posterior foraminotomy was associated with shorter hospitalization (0.5 vs 0.9 days, p < 0.001). Reoperations within 12 months were significantly more common among the posterior foraminotomy group (4.2% vs 1.9%, p = 0.04). The two groups performed similarly in PROs, with posterior foraminotomy being noninferior to ACDF in achieving MCID in EQ-5D and neck pain scores but also having lower rates of maximal satisfaction at 12 months (North American Spine Society score of 1 achieved by 65.2% posterior foraminotomy patients vs 74.6% of ACDF patients, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The two procedures were found to be offered to different populations, with ACDF being selected for patients with more complicated pathologies and symptoms. After individual matching, posterior foraminotomy was associated with a higher reoperation risk within 1 year after surgery compared to ACDF (4.2% vs 1.9%). In terms of 12-month PROs, posterior foraminotomy was noninferior to ACDF in improving quality of life and neck pain. The two procedures also performed similarly in improving NDI scores and arm pain, but ACDF patients had higher maximal satisfaction rates.