A Modified Open-Door Laminoplasty with Reconstruction of the Cervical Posterior Ligamental Complex to Decrease Axial Pain in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Background:Cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients with multiple segments are usually treated with the posterior approach. But expansive open laminoplasty (ELAP) often results in heavy, rigid, and acid bilges feelings in the neck, shoulder, and back, collectively known as axial symptoms. Objective: To evaluate the effect of modified posterior cervical ligament complex reconstruction and single-door laminoplasty with titanium plate fixation on postoperative axial symptoms in patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis conducted from June 2016 to March 2018 collected more than 132 cases of cervical spondylotic myelopathy at our institute. Group A includes 74 patients and Group B includes 58 patients who use different surgery method. Gender, age, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, post-operative drainage volume, and follow-up time, Visual analogue scoring (VAS), cervical curvature index (CCI) and the cross-sectional area of the posterior cervical muscles of the two groups were recorded. Results: There was statistical significance in the incidence of axial pain 3 months after surgery (P =0.001), 6 months after surgery (P =0.006), and 1 year after surgery (P =0.015). And the VAS score was decreased in group A 1 week (P <0.0001), 1 ,3 month(P=0.0001), 6 months(P=0.0076), and 1 year(P=0.0085) post-surgery compared to group B. Also the CCI and the posterior cervical muscle area between groups A and B (P < 0.0001).Conclusion: Modified single open-door laminoplasty could relieve cervical axial pain in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Surgically Managed Symptomatic Intraspinal Lumbar Facet Synovial Cyst: Outcome of surgical treatment with resection and instrumented posterolateral fusion, a case series.

PURPOSE: There is controversy regarding the treatment of symptomatic synovial cysts (SSC), specifically, the need for a concomitant fusion when surgical resection of the CS is required. We present a retrospective review of a series of patients treated for SSC of the lumbar region during the last 20 years by a single surgeon, analyzing the current available literature. METHODS: Retrospective review. The same surgical technique was applied to all patients. Demographic, clinical, surgical data and synovial cyst recurrence rate were recorded. Postoperative results reported by patients were documented according to the McNab score. RESULTS: 69 subjects, with mean follow-up of 7.4 years. 62% (43) were female, with a mean 57.8 years at the time of surgery. In 91.3% (63), the primary management was conservative for a minimum period of 3 months. All subjects underwent surgery due to the failure of conservative treatment. The segment most operated on was L4-L5 (63.77%). 91.3% (63) of the sample reported excellent and good and 6 subjects (8.6%) fair or poor results. There was no evidence of CS recurrence at the operated level. CONCLUSION: In SSC, it seems that conservative treatment is only effective in a limited number of patients and in the short term. Thus, the recommendation of a surgical indication should proceed as soon as the conservative management fails to result in significant symptom relief. Based on our results, we recommend, together with the resection of the cyst, the instrumentation of the segment to avoid its recurrence and the management of axial pain.

Clinical impact and imaging results after a modified procedure of ACDF: a prospective case-controlled study based on ninety cases with two-year follow-up

Study design This is a prospective case-controlled study. Background To analyze the postoperative axial pain and cage subsidence of patients presenting with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) after a modified procedure of ACDF (mACDF). Methods Ninety patients with CSM were prospectively collected from 2014 to 2018. The patients were divided into spread group and non-spread group (48:42 ratio) according to the cage placement with or without releasing the Caspar cervical retractor after decompression. Spread group received conventional ACDF and non-spread group received mACDF. Patients were followed-up for at least 24 months after surgery. Radiologic data, including height of intervertebral space and Cobb Angle, were collected. Nervous system function was obtained using JOA scores, and level of pain was assessed using VAS scores. Results A total of 90 patients were enrolled and the patients were divided into spread group (n = 48) and none-spread group(n = 42). Cage subsidence of (spread group vs none-spread group) was (0.82 ± 0.68 vs 0.58 ± 0.81) mm, (0.64 ± 0.77 vs 0.34 ± 0.46) mm, (0.48 ± 0.43 vs 0.25 ± 0.28) mm, and (0.45 ± 0.47 vs 0.17 ± 0.32) mm at 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months, respectively. The period exhibiting the most decrease of the height of intervertebral space was 3 months postoperatively. However, there was no statistical difference in the height of intervertebral space, JOA or VAS scores at the final follow-up between the two groups. Conclusions The mACDF can avoid excessive distraction by releasing the Caspar Cervical retractor, restore the “natural height” of cervical vertebra, relieve immediate pain after surgery, and prevent rapid Cage subsidence and the loss of cervical curvature.

THE PROFILE OF POTT’S DISEASE IN A SOUTH AMERICAN REFERENCE SERVICE

ABSTRACT Objective: Tuberculosis (TB) represents one of the top ten causes of death in the world. Its insidious onset and nonspecific symptoms usually result in delayed diagnosis. The objective is to evaluate the characteristics of patients with tuberculous spondylodiscitis in follow-up at a South American reference hospital. Method: Retrospective evaluation of the medical records of patients of both sexes and between 0 and 80 years of age diagnosed with tuberculosis of the spine between 2009 and 2018. The variables were analyzed based on groups: epidemiological, clinical, laboratorial, microbiological, imaging tests and treatment. Results: Total of 26 cases, about 80.8% male, mean age 41.6 ± 22.46 years. Axial pain was the most prevalent symptom (84.6%), the VAS score was 6.85 ± 2.87. The mean time between symptom onset and diagnosis was 23.8 ± 24.1 weeks (4-96). The most affected region was the thoracic spine (50% of the cases). Most participants (61.4%) had no change in neurological function (Frankel D and E) at the beginning of treatment and after 6 months, and 84.5% improved. During treatment 34.6% required surgery and the main indication was isolated neurological deficit (55.5%). The most frequently performed procedure was decompression and arthrodesis (55.5%). The average time to cure was 12.0 ± 8.8 months (8-48). Conclusion: Disease with insidious onset, nonspecific symptoms, high frequency of negative microbiological tests in cases with the disease. A small number of the cases required surgical treatment and most of them achieved good neurological recovery. Level of evidence IV; Case series.

POS0243 WHAT DOES REMISSION IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS MEAN FOR CLINICIANS? AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF 200 FRENCH RHEUMATOLOGISTS BASED ON A VIGNETTE EXERCISE INCLUDING 36 CASES AND PRIORITY RATINGS

Background:Treat-to-target in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) aims to achieve and maintain clinical remission/inactive disease or alternatively, low disease activity [1]. However, there is no consensual definition of remission in axSpA: the T2T international task force has proposed Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) inactive disease, but this definition is not widely accepted [1, 2].Objectives:To explore rheumatologists’ perception of remission in axSpA, using vignette cases and a priority exercise.Methods:A steering group of 7 rheumatologists designed a national cross-sectional survey during two face-to-face meetings in 2019-2020. The survey comprised 36 vignette cases: fixed elements included the clinical picture (34 year-old-male with confirmed axSpA, normal C-reactive protein (CRP), without synovitis, enthesitis, dactylitis or extra-articular manifestations) and there were 3 varying parameters (axial pain (0-10) [ranging 2 to 5], fatigue (0-10) [2 to 8], and morning stiffness [<15 minutes, 30 minutes or 1 hour]. For each vignette, the rheumatologist answered binarily: “do you consider this patient in remission: yes/no”. The second part of the survey comprised a priority rating (0-10 priority and 4 top items) of elements important to consider for remission, from a list of 12 items (BASDAI, ASDAS, elements of BASDAI and ASDAS including CRP, NSAIDs use, extra-articular manifestations, and other explanations for the symptoms e.g., fibromyalgia). The analysis was descriptive.Results:Overall, 200 French rheumatologists participated between June and September 2020. Out of 2,400 vignette evaluations (mean of 66 evaluations per vignette), 463 (19%) were classified as remission by rheumatologists. Six vignette cases constituted 56% of all remission cases (Figure 1): these comprised a short duration of morning stiffness (<15 minutes), a low VAS axial pain (2 or 3) but with varying levels of VAS fatigue. When the duration of morning stiffness increased from 15 to 30 minutes and VAS axial pain increased from 2-3 to 4-5 independently, classification as remission decreased from 42% to 12% and from 28-33% to 5-11%, respectively. However, when VAS fatigue increased, it impacted less remission.In priority ratings, 4 items were selected as important by 68-75% of rheumatologists: morning stiffness and axial pain (both included in the vignettes), as well as extra-articular manifestations and NSAID use, whereas only 18% selected fatigue. BASDAI was cited as the 1st priority criteria by 24% of rheumatologists and ASDAS as the 2nd by 16% of rheumatologists.Figure 1.Frequencies of the declared remission states by rheumatologists for each of the 36 vignette casesConclusion:Morning stiffness, axial pain, NSAIDs use, and extra-articular manifestations seem to impact the physicians’ perception of remission in axSpA, whereas fatigue has less impact on remission for rheumatologists. Consensus is needed on remission in axSpA.References:[1Smolen JS et al. Treating axial spondyloarthritis and peripheral spondyloarthritis, especially psoriatic arthritis, to target: 2017 update of recommendations by an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:3–17.[2]Wendling D et al. 2018 update of French Society for Rheumatology (SFR) recommendations about the everyday management of patients with spondyloarthritis. Joint Bone Spine 2018;85:275–84.Funding:This study was funded and organized by Novartis FranceDisclosure of Interests:Krystel Aouad: None declared, Daniel Wendling: None declared, Anne BAGLIN Employee of: Novartis, Maxime Breban: None declared, sabrina DADOUN: None declared, Christophe Hudry: None declared, Anna Moltó: None declared, Edouard Pertuiset: None declared, Laure Gossec: None declared

POS1045 Ixekizumab efficacy on spinal pain, disease activity and quality of life in patients with psoriatic arthritis presenting with symptoms suggestive of axial involvement

Background:Many patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) experience back pain and stiffness, which may suggest axial involvement [1]. The prevalence of axial involvement in PsA varies between 25-70% [2]. Ixekizumab (IXE), a monoclonal antibody with high affinity for IL17-A, has been studied in Phase 3 trials in patients with PsA (SPIRIT-P1 [Biologic-naïve; NCT01695239] and SPIRIT-P2 [Inadequate response or intolerant to 1 or 2 TNF inhibitors (TNFi); NCT02349295]) [3] [4].Objectives:To determine the efficacy of IXE up to 52 weeks (Wks) in reducing axial symptoms in patients with active PsA presenting with symptoms suggestive of axial involvement.Methods:This post-hoc analysis included data from two subpopulations of patients with PsA (pooled SPIRIT-P1 and -P2). Symptoms suggestive of axial involvement were defined as Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) Q2 (back pain) ≥4, and an average of Q5 + Q6 (intensity and duration of morning stiffness in the spine) ≥4 at baseline. Patients included in the sensitivity analysis subgroup 1 were, in addition to the above-mentioned overall analysis criteria, <45 years of age, while patients included in sensitivity analysis subgroup 2 were aged <45 but also had elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) (> 5 mg/l) at baseline. Efficacy of IXE was analysed using BASDAI questions, total BASDAI, mBASDAI (without Q3), and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) change from baseline, as well as BASDAI50 response and Short-Form-36 physical component summary (SF-36 PCS) improvement, at Wks 16, 24 and 52. Treatment comparison was done using logistic regression for BASDAI50, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model for other endpoints. Missing data for binary and continuous endpoints were imputed by non-responder imputation and modified baseline observation carried forward (mBOCF), respectively.Results:A total of 313 patients (placebo (PBO), N=151; IXE Q4W, N=162) met the overall analysis inclusion criteria. Baseline values for BASDAI and ASDAS related endpoints were balanced across treatment arms (Table 1). Improvement in axial symptoms were significantly greater in patients treated with IXE compared to PBO at Wks 16 and 24 (Figure 1. next page) Improvement in quality of life (QoL) measures (SF-36 PCS) were also significantly greater in patients treated with IXE compared to PBO at Wks 16 and 24 (Table 1). Similar results were observed for patients < 45 years, and in patients < 45 years with CRP > 5 mg/l at baseline (sensitivity analysis, data not shown).Table 1.Baseline values and change from baseline (mBOCF) in the overall analysis population at Wks 16, 24 and 52 for BASDAI and ASDAS related endpoints in patients with PsA and axial pain. Data presented as mean (SD) unless otherwise specified. ‡p<0.001 vs PBO.Conclusion:IXE is effective in reducing axial symptoms and improving QoL in patients with active PsA presenting with symptoms suggestive of axial involvement.References:[1]Yap KS. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(11)[2]Feld J. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2018;14[3]Orbai A. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2020[online][4]Genovese MC. Rheumatol. 2018;57(11)Figure 1.Change from baseline (mBOCF) in BASDAI and ASDAS related endpoints in patients with PsA and axial pain in the overall analysis population. Data presented as mean (SD). ‡p<0.001 vs PBO.Acknowledgements:Edel Hughes, an employee of Eli Lilly and Company, provided editorial and writing support.Disclosure of Interests:Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Paid instructor for: Boeheringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boeheringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Glaxo Smith Kline, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Galapagos, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Rebecca Bolce Shareholder of: Employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Employee and shareholder of Eli Lilly and Company, David Sandoval Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Currently employed by Eli Lilly and Company, So Young Park Shareholder of: Eli Lilly & Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly & Company, Soyi Liu Leage Shareholder of: Owns Lilly shares (company producing drug/devices for use in rheumatology), Employee of: Employee of Eli Lilly and Company, Peter Nash Speakers bureau: Honoraria for lectures on behalf Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Roche, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Boehringer, Samsung, Consultant of: Advice on behalf Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Roche, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Boehringer, Samsung, Grant/research support from: Research funding for clinical trials on behalf Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Roche, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Boehringer, Samsung, Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer.

Clinical Impact and Imaging Results after A Modified Procedure of ACDF: A Prospective Case-Controlled Study Based on Ninety Cases With Two-Year Follow-Up

Study design This is a prospective case-controlled studyBackground: To analyze the postoperative axial pain and cage subsidence of patients presenting with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) after a modified procedure of ACDF (mACDF). Methods: 90 patients with CSM were prospectively collected from 2014 to 2018. The patients were divided into spread group and non-spread group (48:42 ratio) according to the cage placement with or without releasing the Caspar cervical retractor after decompression. Spread group received conventional ACDF and non-spread group received mACDF. Patients were followed-up for at least 24 months after surgery. Radiologic data, including height of intervertebral space and Cobb Angle, were collected. Nervous system function was obtained using JOA scores, and level of pain was assessed using VAS scores.Results: A total of 90 patients were enrolled and the patients were divided into spread group (n=48) and none-spread group(n=42). Cage subsidence of (spread group vs none-spread group) was (0.82±0.68 vs 0.58±0.81) mm, (0.64±0.77 vs 0.34±0.46) mm, (0.48±0.43 vs 0.25±0.28) mm, and (0.45±0.47 vs 0.17±0.32) mm at 3months, 6months, 12months and 24 months, respectively. The period exhibiting the most decrease of the height of intervertebral space was 3 months postoperatively. However, there was no statistical difference in the height of intervertebral space, JOA or VAS scores at the final follow-up between the two groups. Conclusion: The mACDF can avoid excessive distraction by releasing the Caspar Cervical retractor, restore the "natural height" of cervical vertebra, reduce the occurrence of axial pain in patients with CSM involving single-level, and prevent rapid Cage subsidence and the loss of cervical curvature.

Clinical impact and imaging results after a modified procedure of ACDF: a prospective case-controlled study based on ninety cases with two-year follow-up

Study design This is a prospective case-controlled studyPurpose: To analyze the postoperative axial pain and cage subsidence of patients presenting with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) after a modified procedure of ACDF (mACDF). Methods: 90 patients with CSM were prospectively collected from 2014 to 2018. The patients were divided into spread group and non-spread group (48:42 ratio) according to the cage placement with or without releasing the Caspar cervical retractor after decompression. Spread group received conventional ACDF and non-spread group received mACDF. Patients were followed-up for at least 24 months after surgery. Radiologic data, including height of intervertebral space and Cobb Angle, were collected. Nervous system function was obtained using JOA scores, and level of pain was assessed using VAS scores.Results: A total of 90 patients were enrolled and the patients were divided into spread group (n=48) and none-spread group(n=42). Cage subsidence of (spread group vs none-spread group) was (0.82±0.68 vs 0.58±0.81) mm, (0.64±0.77 vs 0.34±0.46) mm, (0.48±0.43 vs 0.25±0.28) mm, and (0.45±0.47 vs 0.17±0.32) mm at 3months, 6months, 12months and 24 months, respectively. The period exhibiting the most decrease of the height of intervertebral space was 3 months postoperatively. However, there was no statistical difference in the height of intervertebral space, JOA or VAS scores at the final follow-up between the two groups. Conclusion: The mACDF can avoid excessive distraction by releasing the Caspar Cervical retractor, restore the "natural height" of cervical vertebra, reduce the occurrence of axial pain in patients with CSM involving single-level, and prevent rapid Cage subsidence and the loss of cervical curvatur