Methods: Twenty-one patients undergoing ACDF/ACCF with a bone graft/metallic cage treatment for cervical injuries involving all three columns from January 2016 to July 2018 were included in the study. All of the patients were followed up monthly for the first 3 months and then every 6 months, until their last follow-up visit. Results: Nineteen patients had AO type C injuries and were managed with ACDF, and two patients with AO type B injuries were managed with ACCF. Fifteen had a complete spinal cord injury, while six had an incomplete spinal cord injury (American Spinal Injury Association B, C, and D). The mean segmental kyphosis at presentation of 12.2°±4.4° improved in the postoperative period to -7.2°±2.5°. At their final follow-up, all the patients showed clinical improvements when assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (6.8–1.8), Oswestry Disability Index score (59.7–34.9), and Spinal Cord Independence Measure score (24.8–36.4). One patient in the ACDF group needed a secondary posterior fixation because of instability. Conclusions An anterior approach to the cervical spine in cervical fracture dislocations is an effective treatment showing an optimal recovery rate in terms of patient-reported outcomes and structural stability, with the added advantages of less blood loss and the fact that the technique requires less instrumentation.

Methods: Seventeen fellowship-trained spinal TB experts representing different geographical regions of India completed an online survey consisting of questions pertaining to the conservative management of spinal TB (antitubercular therapy) and 30 clinical case vignettes including a wide spectrum of presentations of spinal TB with no or minimal neurological deficit. The variability in the responses for questions and case wise variability with respect to surgical decision making was assessed using the index of qualitative variation (IQV). The average tendency to operate (TTO) was calculated for various groups of respondents. Results: High variability was observed in all questions regarding conservative spinal TB management (IQV > 0.8). Among the 30 case vignettes, 14 were found to have high variability with respect to surgical decision making (IQV > 0.8). With respect to levels of fixation, all but two cases had poor or slight agreement. Younger age and practice in a government or tertiary care teaching hospital were factors associated with a higher TTO. Conclusions Significant variability was detected in treatment practices for the management of spinal TB among experts. Most of the case vignettes were found to have significant heterogeneity with respect to surgical decision making, which reflects a significant lack of consensus and lacunae in literature.

This retrospective case series of prospective data aims to describe the transaxillary approach for the treatment of upper thoracic spine pathology. Various surgical techniques and approaches have been reported across the literature to address upper thoracic spine pathology, including the cervicothoracic approach, anterior transsternal approach, posterolateral approach, supraclavicular approach, and lateral parascapular approaches. These techniques are invasive. A minimally invasive, less morbid, and direct access approach to the pathology of the upper thoracic spine has not been reported in the literature. Patients with pathology affecting the first thoracic vertebra up to the sixth thoracic vertebra were classified into the upper thoracic spine group. Patients with pathology below the sixth thoracic vertebra were excluded. Patients not having a minimum follow-up of 12 months were also excluded. The study analyzed 18 patients. The mean preoperative modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score was 7.2±1.44, which improved to 10.16±1.2 (p<0.05). The majority (14/18) of the patients had an excellent outcome. Three patients had good outcomes, and one patient had a fair outcome. Five cases of intraoperative dural leak were recorded, and one patient had postoperative neurological deficit. The transaxillary approach is a safe, viable, muscle-sparing, and minimally invasive approach for ventral pathologies of the upper thoracic spine.

This study was designed to systematically review and meta-analyze the functional and radiological outcomes between lateral and posterior approaches in adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). Both lateral (lumbar, extreme, and oblique) and posterior interbody fusion (posterior lumbar and transforaminal) are used for deformity correction in patients with ADS with unclear comparison in this cohort of patients in the existing literature. A literature search using three electronic databases was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of lateral (group L) and posterior interbody fusion (group P) in patients with ADS with curves of 10°–40°. Group P was further subdivided into minimally invasive surgery (MIS-P) and open posterior (Op-P) subgroups. Data on functional, radiological, and operative outcomes, length of hospital stay (LOHS), fusion rates, and complications were extracted and meta-analyzed using the random-effects model. A total of 18 studies (732 patients) met the inclusion criteria. No significant difference was found in functional and radiological outcomes between the two groups on data pooling. Total operative time in the MIS-P subgroup was less than that of group L (233.86 minutes vs. 401 minutes, p <0.05). The total blood loss in group L was less than that in the Op-P subgroup(477 mL vs. 1,325.6 mL, p <0.05). Group L had significantly less LOHS than the Op-P subgroup (4.15 days vs. 13.5 days, p <0.05). No significant difference was seen in fusion rates, but complications were seen except for transient sensorimotor weakness (group L: 24.3%, group P: 5.6%; p <0.05). Complications, such as postoperative thigh pain (7.7%), visceral injuries (2%), and retrograde ejaculation (3.7%), were seen only in group L while adjacent segment degeneration was seen only in group P (8.6%). Lateral approach has an advantage in blood loss and LOHS over the Op-P subgroup. The MIS-P subgroup has less operative time than group L, but with comparable blood loss and LOHS. No significant difference was found in functional, radiological, fusion rates, pseudoarthrosis, and complications, except for transient sensorimotor deficits. Few complications were approach-specific in each group.