Spine
-
Prospective cohort study. ⋯ The MCID for the 6WT in lumbar DDD patients is variable, depending on the calculation technique. We propose a MCID of 92m (z score of 1.0), based on the average of all three methods. Using a z score as MCID allows for the standardization of clinically meaningful change and attenuates age- and sex-related differences.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Retrospective cohort analysis. ⋯ Plastic spinal closure for 1 to 4 level revision posterior thoracolumbar fusions had no advantage in reducing wound complications over spine surgeon closure but increased postoperative seroma formation.Level of Evidence: 4.
-
Observational Study
Subjective and Objective Change in Cervical Spine Mobility After Single-level Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.
Prospective, observational study. ⋯ The concern of many patients of being severely restricted in their cervical spine mobility after single-level ACDF can be denied. Objectively, the rotation even showed a significant improvement. Regarding the subjective restriction, which is more important for the patients, we found a significant improvement in general and for all directions of movement after surgery.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Retrospective cohort study. ⋯ We summarized the medical costs and cost-effectiveness of three different surgical methods for ASD in patients with different backgrounds over 2 years postoperatively. The medical expense for the initial surgery was highest in the LLIF group, and the cumulative improvement in QALY over the 2 years tended to be higher in the LLIF group, but the difference was not significant; the overall cost-effectiveness was lowest in the LLIF group.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
A retrospective study. ⋯ Posterior decompression relieves LBP as well as leg pain. Long-lasting LBP and concurrent symptomatic cervical myelopathy are important predictors for inadequate LBP relief. There were no reliable imaging parameters predictive of inadequate LBP relief.Level of Evidence: 4.