Han Jo Kim

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive narrative review of cervical alignment parameters, the methods for quantifying cervical alignment, normal cervical alignment values, and how alignment is associated with cervical deformity and myelopathy with discussions of health-related quality of life. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Indications for surgery to correct cervical alignment are not well-defined and there is no set standard to address the amount of correction to be achieved. In addition, classifications of cervical deformity have yet to be fully established and treatment options defined and clarified. METHODS: A survey of the cervical spine literature was conducted. RESULTS: New normative cervical alignment values from an asymptomatic volunteer population are introduced, updated methods for quantifying cervical alignment are discussed, and describing the relationship between cervical alignment, disability, and myelopathy are outlined. Specifically, methods used to quantify cervical alignment include cervical lordosis, cervical sagittal vertical axis, and horizontal gaze with the chin-brow vertical angle. Updated methods include T1 slope. Evidence from a few recent studies suggests correlations between radiographical parameters in the cervical spine and health-related quality of life. Analysis of the cervical regional alignment with respect to overall spinal pelvic alignment is emerging and critical. Cervical myelopathy and sagittal alignment of the cervical spine are closely related as cervical deformity can lead to spinal cord compression and tension. CONCLUSION: Cervical deformity correction should take on a comprehensive approach in assessing global cervical-pelvic relationships and the radiographical parameters that effect health-related quality of life scores are not well-defined. Cervical alignment may be important in assessment and treatment of cervical myelopathy. Future work should concentrate on correlation of cervical alignment parameters to disability scores and myelopathy outcomes. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: STATEMENT 1: Cervical sagittal alignment (cervical SVA and kyphosis) is related to thoracolumbar spinal pelvic alignment and to T1 slope. STATEMENT 2: When significant deformity is clinically or radiographically suspected, regional cervical and relative global spinal alignment should be evaluated preoperatively via standing 3-foot scoliosis X-rays for appropriate operative planning. STATEMENT 3: Cervical sagittal alignment (C2-C7 SVA) is correlated to regional disability, general health scores and to myelopathy severity. STATEMENT 4: When performing decompressive surgery for CSM, consideration should be given to correction of cervical kyphosis and cervical sagittal imbalance (C2-C7 SVA) when present.

In Brief Objectives: To compare perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic left-sided pancreatectomy (LLP) with traditional open left-sided pancreatectomy (OLP) in a multicenter experience. Summary and Background Data: LLP is being performed more commonly with limited data comparing results with outcomes from OLP. Methods: Data from 8 centers were combined for all cases performed between 2002–2006. OLP and LLP cohorts were matched by age, American Society of Anesthesiologists, resected pancreas length, tumor size, and diagnosis. Multivariate analysis was performed using binary logistic regression. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven LPs were performed, with 159 (24%) attempted laparoscopically. Indications were solid lesion in 307 (46%), cystic in 295 (44%), and pancreatitis in 65 (10%) cases. Positive margins occurred in 51 (8%) cases, 335 (50%) had complications, and significant leaks occurred in 108 (16%). Conversion to OLP occurred in 20 (13%) of the LLPs. In the matched comparison, 200 OLPs were compared with 142 LLPs. There were no differences in positive margin rates (8% vs. 7%, P = 0.8), operative times (216 vs. 230 minutes, P = 0.3), or leak rates (18% vs. 11%, P = 0.1). LLP patients had lower average blood loss (357 vs. 588 mL, P < 0.01), fewer complications (40% vs. 57%, P < 0.01), and shorter hospital stays (5.9 vs. 9.0 days, P < 0.01). By MVA, LLP was an independent factor for shorter hospital stay (P < 0.01, odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.19–0.56). Conclusions: In selected patients, LLP is associated with less morbidity and shorter LOS than OLP. Pancreatic fistula rates are similar for OLP and LLP. LLP is appropriate for selected patients with left-sided pancreatic pathology. A multi-institutional study of 667 patients undergoing left pancreatectomy over 5 years was performed. Cohort-matched outcomes for open (N = 200) versus laparoscopic (N = 142) procedures were compared. No differences were seen in major complications or clinically significant fistula rates. Average hospital stay was 3 days shorter for patients undergoing laparoscopic left pancreatectomy.

OBJECTIVE Although multiple reports have documented significant benefit from surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity (ASD), these procedures can have high complication rates. Previously reported complications rates associated with ASD surgery are limited by retrospective design, single-surgeon or single-center cohorts, lack of rigorous data on complications, and/or limited follow-up. Accurate definition of complications associated with ASD surgery is important and may serve as a resource for patient counseling and efforts to improve the safety of patient care. The authors conducted a study to prospectively assess the rates of complications associated with ASD surgery with a minimum 2-year follow-up based on a multicenter study design that incorporated standardized data-collection forms, on-site study coordinators, and regular auditing of data to help ensure complete and accurate reporting of complications. In addition, they report age stratification of complication rates and provide a general assessment of factors that may be associated with the occurrence of complications. METHODS As part of a prospective, multicenter ASD database, standardized forms were used to collect data on surgery-related complications. On-site coordinators and central auditing helped ensure complete capture of complication data. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, ASD, and plan for operative treatment. Complications were classified as perioperative (within 6 weeks of surgery) or delayed (between 6 weeks after surgery and time of last follow-up), and as minor or major. The primary focus for analyses was on patients who reached a minimum follow-up of 2 years. RESULTS Of 346 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 291 (84%) had a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 2.1 years); their mean age was 56.2 years. The vast majority (99%) had treatment including a posterior procedure, 25% had an anterior procedure, and 19% had a 3-column osteotomy. At least 1 revision was required in 82 patients (28.2%). A total of 270 perioperative complications (145 minor; 125 major) were reported, with 152 patients (52.2%) affected, and a total of 199 delayed complications (62 minor; 137 major) were reported, with 124 patients (42.6%) affected. Overall, 469 complications (207 minor; 262 major) were documented, with 203 patients (69.8%) affected. The most common complication categories included implant related, radiographic, neurological, operative, cardiopulmonary, and infection. Higher complication rates were associated with older age (p = 0.009), greater body mass index (p ≤ 0.031), increased comorbidities (p ≤ 0.007), previous spine fusion (p = 0.029), and 3-column osteotomies (p = 0.036). Cases in which 2-year follow-up was not achieved included 2 perioperative mortalities (pulmonary embolus and inferior vena cava injury). CONCLUSIONS This study provides an assessment of complications associated with ASD surgery based on a prospective, multicenter design and with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Although the overall complication rates were high, in interpreting these findings, it is important to recognize that not all complications are equally impactful. This study represents one of the most complete and detailed reports of perioperative and delayed complications associated with ASD surgery to date. These findings may prove useful for treatment planning, patient counseling, benchmarking of complication rates, and efforts to improve the safety and cost-effectiveness of patient care.

BACKGROUND: As compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) affords improved perioperative outcomes. The role of LDP for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is not defined. STUDY DESIGN: Records from patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) for PDAC from 2000 to 2008 from 9 academic medical centers were reviewed. Short-term (node harvest and margin status) and long-term (survival) cancer outcomes were assessed. A 3:1 matched analysis was performed for ODP and LDP cases using age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and tumor size. RESULTS: There were 212 patients who underwent DP for PDAC; 23 (11%) of these were approached laparoscopically. For all 212 patients, 56 (26%) had positive margins. The mean number of nodes (+/- SD) examined was 12.6 +/-8.4 and 114 patients (54%) had at least 1 positive node. Median overall survival was 16 months. In the matched analysis there were no significant differences in positive margin rates, number of nodes examined, number of patients with at least 1 positive node, or overall survival. Logistic regression for all 212 patients demonstrated that advanced age, larger tumors, positive margins, and node positive disease were independently associated with worse survival; however, method of resection (ODP vs. LDP) was not. Hospital stay was 2 days shorter in the matched comparison, which approached significance (LDP, 7.4 days vs. ODP, 9.4 days, p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: LDP provides similar short- and long-term oncologic outcomes as compared with OD, with potentially shorter hospital stay. These results suggest that LDP is an acceptable approach for resection of PDAC of the left pancreas in selected patients.