A 71-year-old man with castration-resistant Stage IVB prostate cancer developed symptomatic oligometastatic disease in the lumbar spine and bilateral proximal femurs. He was treated with a single-position L2-L4 kyphoplasty with concomitant prone left-sided femoral prophylactic cephalomedullary nailing. Six months later when he again lost the ability to ambulate, he was treated with a single-position L4-L5 laminectomy for an epidural tumor with prone right-sided femoral prophylactic cephalomedullary nailing.

Single-position prone surgery of the spine and prone femoral nailing is feasible and improves on traditional multiposition approaches, eliminating the need to reposition or change tables during management.

Single-prone-lateral (PL) positioning is a new technique that allows for simultaneous anterior and posterior lumbar spine surgery. However, there is a concern regarding the risk of lumbar plexus injury in PL positioning. This study compared the risk of lumbar plexus damage and the overall safety profile of a modified PL (mPL) position to the standard PL (sPL) position for lateral lumbar spine fusion surgery. A crossover soft cadaveric study was conducted with two raters examining the comparative outcomes of position A: sPL and position B: mPL. The mPL position differs from the sPL position in that the ipsilateral arm is placed at the side of the body rather than above the head. To assess positive results (no lumbar plexus injury) between positions A and B, a mixed effects logistic regression model was utilized. The odds ratio of a good result between positions B and A was also determined. The odds ratio of the favorable outcome between position B and A was 1.77, indicating significantly higher odds of a favorable outcome in the modified position B than in the control or position A. The mPL positioning outperformed the sPL positioning in terms of safety and efficacy for lateral lumbar spine fusion. The mPL positioning may reduce the risk of lumbar plexus injury by allowing for a more direct approach to the lumbar spine and by avoiding excessive stretching of the lumbar plexus.

Patient positioning on the surgical table is a critical step in every spine surgery. The most common surgical positions in spine surgery are supine, prone and lateral decubitus. There are countless lesions that can occur during spine surgery due to patient mispositioning. Ulnar nerve and brachial plexus injuries are the most common nerve lesions seen in malpositioned patients. Devastating complications due to increased intraocular pressure or excessive abdominal pressure can also occur in prone decubitus and are real concerns that the surgical team must be aware of. All members of the surgical team (including surgeons, anesthesiologists and nurses) should know how to correctly position the patient, identify possible positioning errors and know how to avoid them in order to prevent postoperative morbidity. This work pretends to do a review of the most common positions during spine surgery, alert to errors that can happen during the procedure and how to avoid them.

The objective of this study was to make surgeons aware of a potential pressure complication in posterior spine surgery for patients with hereditary spherocytosis (HS) and to present a plausible hypothesis for injury. Posterior spine surgery is common practice for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Common, less severe surgical risks include pressure ulcers; while rare, more severe pressure complications include rhabdomyolysis and compartment syndrome. In patients with HS, a familial hemolytic disorder with altered red cell deformability, it is unknown if their red cell disorder is an additional risk factor for pressure-related surgical injuries. Two patients with HS, an 18-year-old male and a 17-year-old female, were both post-splenectomy and underwent revision posterior spinal fusion and instrumentation for progressive AIS. Surgery lasted 9 hours and 7 hours respectively, with no intraoperative complications other than prolonged surgical time due to revision nature of the deformities. Thigh redness and swelling was noted in both patients directly deep to the thigh pads. Thigh myonecrosis was diagnosed with eventual recovery in both cases. Patients with HS may be at inherent more risk of pressure complications during posterior spine surgery. We propose that thigh myonecrosis occurs with decreased perfusion and hemolysis from HS erythrocytes' inherent fragility, decreased deformability within capillaries, and prolonged microvasculature compression from positioning, causing poor microvascular perfusion, tissue ischemia, and reperfusion injury. Level of veidence: IV.

BACKGROUND Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) of the thigh after elective primary total knee arthroplasty is rare. If not recognized and treated promptly, devastating consequences may result. Certain regional anesthesia techniques are thought to mask the symptoms of acute compartment syndrome, but there are no cases reported of adductor canal catheters masking the symptoms of thigh compartment syndrome. We report a case where symptoms and diagnosis of acute anterior thigh compartment syndrome were not masked by a functioning adductor canal catheter. CASE REPORT A 56-year-old male developed anterior thigh compartment syndrome after an elective primary total knee arthroplasty. Surgery was performed under spinal anesthesia with periarticular local infiltration analgesia. Postoperatively, an adductor canal catheter was placed, atraumatically, under ultrasound guidance in the recovery room with a plan to begin a continuous infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine 10 hours after the periarticular injection. Six hours after surgery, the patient complained of tightness and 10/10 pain in his right thigh, which was initially managed with parenteral opioids with moderate success. Continuous infusion through the adductor canal catheter was started and pain improved to 6/10 aching pain. Nonetheless, two hours after starting the continuous infusion, the patient reported tightness, swelling, and 10/10 pressure-like pain that was not relieved by the peripheral catheter infusion or PRN boluses of additional opioids. Due to the patient's symptomatology compartment pressures were measured. The anterior compartment pressure was 47 mm Hg and emergent anterior compartment fasciotomy was performed. CONCLUSIONS In this case, a functioning adductor canal catheter did not mask symptoms of, or delay diagnosis of, acute compartment syndrome in the thigh.

In the absence of trauma, compartment syndrome of the thigh is rare. Several case reports have described compartment syndrome in the presence of trauma, comorbid medical conditions, and acute muscle overuse. Very few reports have demonstrated an acute onset of atraumatic thigh compartment syndrome.

A 24-year-old man presented to the Emergency Department (ED) with a painful and swollen left thigh immediately after a night of dancing at a concert. He was found to have an elevated intracompartmental quadriceps pressure of 45 mm Hg in the ED, which led to his transfer to the operating room for an emergent fasciotomy. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Although acute, atraumatic compartment syndrome of the thigh is a rare entity, failure to diagnose it promptly can lead to muscle necrosis, permanent neurologic deficits, and amputation.

OBJECT There are a variety of surgical positions that provide optimal exposure of the dorsal lumbar spine. These include the prone, kneeling, knee-chest, knee-elbow, and lateral decubitus positions. All are positions that facilitate exposure of the spine. Each position, however, is associated with an array of unique complications that result from excessive pressure applied to the torso or extremities. The authors reviewed clinical studies reporting complications that arose from positioning of the patient during dorsal exposures of the lumbar spine. METHODS MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science database searches were performed to find clinical studies reporting complications associated with positioning during lumbar spine surgery. For articles meeting inclusion criteria, the following information was obtained: publication year, study design, sample size, age, operative time, type of surgery, surgical position, frame or table type, complications associated with positioning, time to first observed complication, long-term outcomes, and evidence-based recommendations for complication avoidance. RESULTS Of 3898 articles retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, 34 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies reported complications associated with use of the prone position, and 7 studies investigated complications after knee-chest positioning. Complications associated with the knee-elbow, lateral decubitus, and supine positions were each reported by a single study. Vision loss was the most commonly reported complication for both prone and knee-chest positioning. Several other complications were reported, including conjunctival swelling, Ischemic orbital compartment syndrome, nerve palsies, thromboembolic complications, pressure sores, lower extremity compartment syndrome, and shoulder dislocation, highlighting the assortment of possible complications following different surgical positions. For prone-position studies, there was a relationship between increased operation time and position complications. Only 3 prone-position studies reported complications following procedures of less than 120 minutes, 7 studies reported complications following mean operative times of 121-240 minutes, and 9 additional studies reported complications following mean operative times greater than 240 minutes. This relationship was not observed for knee-chest and other surgical positions. CONCLUSIONS This work presents a systematic review of positioning-related complications following prone, knee-chest, and other positions used for lumbar spine surgery. Numerous evidence-based recommendations for avoidance of these potentially severe complications associated with intraoperative positioning are discussed. This investigation may serve as a framework to educate the surgical team and decrease rates of intraoperative positioning complications.

There are very few reported cases of compartment syndrome of the leg following spinal surgery via a posterior approach. An association between compartment syndrome and muscle over-activity via nerve stimulation during evoked potential monitoring was first suggested in 2003. No further reports have suggested this link. We present a multicentre retrospective review of a series of five patients who developed compartment syndrome of the leg following spinal surgery via a posterior approach, whilst un-paralysed and with combined sensory (SSEP)/motor evoked potential (MEP) monitoring with an aim of highlighting this possible causative factor.

All data were collected contemporaneously and retrospective analysis was performed. We then arranged for a multidisciplinary review of the cases including surgeons, anaesthetists, radiologists, neurophysiologists and theatre and ward nursing staff. Finally, the literature was reviewed.

All patients were operated on by three different surgeons, on different operating tables/mattresses in the prone position. The common factors were un-paralysed patients having motor/sensory monitoring, mechanical calf pumps and total intravenous anaesthesia. Three patients underwent surgical decompression of their compartments and two were treated expectantly. Three patients had confirmed intra-compartmental changes on MRI consistent with compartment syndrome and one had intra-compartmental pressure monitoring which confirmed the diagnosis.

Previous cases in the literature have related to mal-positioning on the Jackson table or use of the knee-chest position for surgery. This was not the case for our patients; therefore, we suspect an association between overactive muscle stimulation and muscle necrosis. Further experimental studies investigating this link are required.