INTRODUCTIONScreening for scoliosis started in Singapore schools in 1982 and is currently being done for both boys and girls, as part of the annual school-based health screening programme in all primary and secondary schools. The screening levels in the current protocol were based on the 1997 prevalence study by Wong et al. In the study, it appeared that there was a significant increase in prevalence rates between 9- and 11-year-old girls (i.e. between Primary 4 and Primary 6) but there was no data on the prevalence rates of scoliosis in 10-year-old girls (Primary 5) and in 12-year-old girls (Secondary 1). In order to decide on whether to make changes to the screening levels, a review was conducted to determine the prevalence of scoliosis among the 10-year-old girls (in Primary 5) and 12-year-old girls (in Secondary 1).

MATERIALS AND METHODSA total of 93,626 female students, aged between 9 and 13 years old were screened. The study covered all of the 183 primary schools and only 83 of the 165 secondary schools due to a disruption of health screening in schools during the outbreak of SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome). In mid-2003, schools in Singapore were closed because Singapore was one of the countries affected by SARS. Scoliosis screening was done for all female students in the Primary 4, 5 and 6 levels as well as in the Secondary 1 and 2 levels. Male students were routinely screened for scoliosis in the Primary 6 and Secondary 2 levels. Scoliosis screening was done by measuring the angle of trunk rotation (ATR) using a scoliometer. All students with ATR >or=5 degrees were referred to the Student Health Centre (SHC) where second-tier screening was done. At SHC, if ATR >or=5 degrees , postero-anterior radiograph of the spine was done. Of the 3186 female students in the primary level, aged between 9 and 13 years old who were referred to SHC for the second-tier screening, 2438 attended, and for secondary students aged between 12 and 13 years old, 1587 out of 1720 students attended.

RESULTSThe prevalence rates of idiopathic adolescent scoliosis for the 9- to 13-year-old female students were 0.27%, 0.64%, 1.58%, 2.22% and 2.49%, respectively, which showed an increasing trend in the prevalence rates with increasing age. There was a significant increase in the prevalence rates of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) in the 10- to 11-year-old females compared to the 9-year-old females (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4; P = 0.010). There was also a significant increase in the prevalence rates in the 12- to 13-year-old females (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.3; P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONSThe study showed a significant increase in the prevalence rates of scoliosis in the 10- to 11-year-old female students and again a significant increase in the prevalence rates in the 12- to 13-year-old female students. Since the prevalence rate for the 9-year-old females was quite low (0.27%), and there was a significant increase in the prevalence rates in the 10- to 11-year-old and 12- to 13-year-old females, it was recommended that screening for females be performed every year commencing at 10 years old (Primary 5) until 13 years old (Secondary 2).

Adolescent ; Child ; Female ; Humans ; Prevalence ; Scoliosis ; epidemiology

INTRODUCTIONThe objective of this study was to examine the clinical outcome of single-level lumbar artificial disc replacement (ADR) compared to that of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease (DDD) in an Asian population.

METHODSThis was a retrospective review of 74 patients who had surgery performed for discogenic lower backs that involved only the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. All the patients had lumbar DDD without radiculopathy or spondylolithesis, and concordant pain with discogram at the pathological level. The patients were divided into two groups--those who underwent ADR and those who underwent TLIF.

RESULTSA trend suggesting that the ADR group had better perioperative outcomes (less blood loss, shorter operating time, shorter hospital stay and shorter time to ambulation) than the TLIF group was observed. However, a trend indicating that surgical-approach-related complications occurred more frequently in the ADR group than the TLIF group was also observed. The rate of revision surgery was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONOur findings suggest that for the treatment of discogenic lower back pain, lumbar ADR has better perioperative outcomes and a similar revision rate when compared with TLIF. However, the use of ADR was associated with a higher incidence of surgical-approach-related complications. More studies with bigger cohort sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of ADR in lumbar DDD.

Adult ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration ; surgery ; Lumbar Vertebrae ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures ; methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Singapore ; epidemiology ; Spinal Fusion ; methods ; Total Disc Replacement ; methods ; Treatment Outcome

Methods: We reviewed the evidence behind telemedicine and described our clinical protocol, patient selection criteria, and workflow for telemedicine. We discussed a simple methodology to convert pre-existing traditional clinic resources into telemedicine tools, along with future challenges. Results: Our methodology was successfully and easily applied in our clinical practice, with a streamlined workflow allowing our spine surgery service to implement telemedicine as a consultation modality in line with the national recommendations of social distancing. Conclusions Telemedicine was well incorporated into our outpatient practice using the above workflow. We believe that the use of telemedicine via videoconferencing can become part of the new normal and a safe strategy for healthcare systems as both a medical and an economic countermeasure against COVID-19.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis on 288 patients (246 for final analysis) who underwent MSTS between 2005–2015. Data collected were demographics and peri/postoperative clinical and radiological features. Early and late radiological SF were defined as presentation before and after 3 months from index surgery, respectively. Univariate and multivariate models of competing risk regression analysis were designed to determine the risk factors for SF with death as a competing event. Results: We observed 14 SFs (5.7%) in 246 patients; 10 (4.1%) underwent revision surgery. Median survival was 13.4 months. The mean age was 58.8 years (range, 21–87 years); 48.4% were women. The median time to failure was 5 months (range, 1–60 months). Patients with SF were categorized into three groups: (1) SF when the primary implant was revised (n=5, 35.7%); (2) peri-construct progression of disease requiring extension (n=5, 35.7%); and (3) SFs that did not warrant revision (n=4, 28.5%). Four patients (28.5%) presented with early failure. SF commonly occurred at the implant-bone interface (9/14) and all patients had a spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS) >7. Thirteen patients (92.8%) who developed failure had fixation spanning junctional regions. Multivariate competing risk regression showed that preoperative Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score was a significant risk factor for implant failure (adjusted sub-hazard ratio, 7.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.63–30.07; p<0.0009). Conclusions The incidence of SF (5.7%) was low in patients undergoing MSTS although these patients did not undergo spinal fusion. Preoperative ambulators involved a 7 times higher risk of failure than non-ambulators. Preoperative SINS >7 and fixations spanning junctional regions were associated with SF. Majority of construct failures occurred at the implant-bone interface.

Methods: We recruited young patients with nonspecific low back pain for <3 months, who were otherwise healthy. Each patient had EOS images taken in the flexed, erect and extended positions, in random order, as well as magnetic resonance imaging to assess for disk degeneration. Angular and disk height measurements were performed and compared in all three postures using paired t-tests. Changes in disk height relative to the erect posture were caclulated to determine the alignment-specific load-bearing area of each FSU. Results: Eighty-three patients (415 lumbar intervertebral disks) were studied. Significant alignment changes were found between all three postures at L1/2, and only between erect and flexion at the other FSUs. Disk height measurements showed that the neutral axis of the spine, marked by zones where disk heights did not change, varied between postures and was level specific. The load-bearing areas were also found to be more anterior in flexion and more posterior in extension, with the erect spine resembling the extended spine to a greater extent. Conclusions Load-bearing areas of the lumbar spine are sagittal alignment-specific and level-specific. This may imply that, depending on the surgical realignment strategy, attention should be paid not just to placing an intervertebral cage “as anterior as possible” for generating lordosis, but also on optimizing load-bearing in the lumbar spine.

Methods: We reviewed the evidence behind telemedicine and described our clinical protocol, patient selection criteria, and workflow for telemedicine. We discussed a simple methodology to convert pre-existing traditional clinic resources into telemedicine tools, along with future challenges. Results: Our methodology was successfully and easily applied in our clinical practice, with a streamlined workflow allowing our spine surgery service to implement telemedicine as a consultation modality in line with the national recommendations of social distancing. Conclusions Telemedicine was well incorporated into our outpatient practice using the above workflow. We believe that the use of telemedicine via videoconferencing can become part of the new normal and a safe strategy for healthcare systems as both a medical and an economic countermeasure against COVID-19.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis on 288 patients (246 for final analysis) who underwent MSTS between 2005–2015. Data collected were demographics and peri/postoperative clinical and radiological features. Early and late radiological SF were defined as presentation before and after 3 months from index surgery, respectively. Univariate and multivariate models of competing risk regression analysis were designed to determine the risk factors for SF with death as a competing event. Results: We observed 14 SFs (5.7%) in 246 patients; 10 (4.1%) underwent revision surgery. Median survival was 13.4 months. The mean age was 58.8 years (range, 21–87 years); 48.4% were women. The median time to failure was 5 months (range, 1–60 months). Patients with SF were categorized into three groups: (1) SF when the primary implant was revised (n=5, 35.7%); (2) peri-construct progression of disease requiring extension (n=5, 35.7%); and (3) SFs that did not warrant revision (n=4, 28.5%). Four patients (28.5%) presented with early failure. SF commonly occurred at the implant-bone interface (9/14) and all patients had a spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS) >7. Thirteen patients (92.8%) who developed failure had fixation spanning junctional regions. Multivariate competing risk regression showed that preoperative Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score was a significant risk factor for implant failure (adjusted sub-hazard ratio, 7.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.63–30.07; p<0.0009). Conclusions The incidence of SF (5.7%) was low in patients undergoing MSTS although these patients did not undergo spinal fusion. Preoperative ambulators involved a 7 times higher risk of failure than non-ambulators. Preoperative SINS >7 and fixations spanning junctional regions were associated with SF. Majority of construct failures occurred at the implant-bone interface.

Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 199 patients with surgically treated thoracolumbar fractures operated between January 2007 and January 2018. The potential risk factors for the development of AEs as well as the development of common complications were evaluated by univariate analysis, and a multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors predictive of the above. Results: The overall rate of AEs was 46.7%; 83 patients (41.7%) had nonsurgical AEs, whereas 24 (12.1%) had surgical adverse events. The most common AEs were urinary tract infections in 43 patients (21.6%), and hospital-acquired pneumonia in 21 patients (10.6%). On multivariate logistic regression, a Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity (TLICS) score of 8–10 (odds ratio [OR], 6.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33–17.51), the presence of polytrauma (OR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.17–5.99), and undergoing open surgery (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.09–4.88) were significant risk factors for AEs. The absence of neurological deficit was associated with a lower rate of AEs (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31–0.70). Conclusions This study suggests the presence of polytrauma, preoperative American Spinal Injury Association score, and TLICS score are predictive of AEs in patients with surgically treated thoracolumbar fractures. The results might also suggest a role for minimally invasive surgical methods in reducing AEs in these patients.