Trends in Intraoperative Assessment of Spinal Alignment: A Survey of Spine Surgeons in the United States. Global spine journal Gullotti, D. M., Soltanianzadeh, A. H., Fujita, S., Inserni, M., Ruppel, E. 3., Franconi, N. G., Zygourakis, C., Protopsaltis, T., Lo, S. L., Sciubba, D. M., Theodore, N. 2022; 12 (2_suppl): 82S-86S

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Survey.OBJECTIVES: To characterize national practices of and shortcomings surrounding intraoperative assessments of spinal alignment.METHODS: Spine surgeons in the US were surveyed to analyze their experience with assessing spinal alignment intraoperatively.RESULTS: 108 US spine surgeons from 77 surgical centers with an average of 19.2 + 8.8 years of surgical experience completed the survey. To assess alignment intraoperatively, 84% (91/108) use C-arm or spot radiographs, 40% (43/108) use full-length radiographs, and 20% utilize the T-bar (22/108). 88% of respondents' surgical centers (93/106) possessed a navigation camera and 63% of respondents (68/108) report using surgical navigation for 40% of their deformity cases on average. Reported deterrents for using current technology to assess alignment were workflow interruption (54%, 58/108), expense (33%, 36/108), and added radiation exposure (26%, 28/108). 87% of respondents (82/94) reported a need for improvement in current capabilities of making intraoperative assessments of spinal alignment.CONCLUSIONS: Corrective surgery for spinal deformity is a complex procedure that requires a high level of expertise to perform safely. The majority of surveyed surgeons primarily rely on radiographs for intraoperative assessments of alignment. Despite the majority of surveyed surgical practices possessing navigation cameras, they are utilized only for a minority of spinal deformity cases. With the majority of surveyed surgeons reporting a need for improvement in technology to assess spinal alignment intraoperatively, 3 of the top design considerations should include workflow interruption, expense, and radiation exposure.

View details for DOI 10.1177/21925682211037273

View details for PubMedID 35393882