Background

Based on 6-month data from the InVivo Study of Probable Benefit of the Neuro-Spinal Scaffold for Safety and Neurological Recovery in Patients with Complete Thoracic Spinal Cord Injury (INSPIRE) study (NCT02138110), acute implantation of an investigational bioresorbable polymer device (Neuro-Spinal Scaffold [NSS]) appeared to be safe in patients with complete thoracic spinal cord injury (SCI) and was associated with an ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) conversion rate that exceeded historical controls.

Objective

To evaluate outcomes through 24 months postimplantation.

Methods

INSPIRE was a prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study. Eligible patients had traumatic nonpenetrating SCI with a visible contusion on MRI, AIS A classification, neurological level of injury at T2-T12, and requirement for open spine surgery ≤96 hours postinjury.

Results

Nineteen patients underwent NSS implantation. Three patients had early death determined by investigators to be unrelated to the NSS or its implantation procedure. Seven of 16 evaluable patients (44%) had improvement of ≥1 AIS grade at 6 months (primary end point) to AIS B (n = 5) or AIS C (n = 2). Three patients with AIS B at 6 months had further neurological improvement to AIS C by 12 (n = 2) and 24 (n = 1) months, respectively; none have deteriorated per latest available follow-up. No unanticipated or serious adverse device effects were reported.

Conclusion

In this small group of patients with complete thoracic SCI, acute NSS implantation within the spinal cord appeared to be safe with no long-term neurological issues identified during the 24-month follow-up. Patients remain stable, with additional AIS conversions observed in some patients at 12 months and beyond. These data further support the safety and probable benefit of NSS implantation in this patient population.

Background

As of May 4, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected >3.5 million people and touched every inhabited continent. Accordingly, it has stressed health systems worldwide, leading to the cancellation of elective surgical cases and discussions regarding health care resource rationing. It is expected that rationing of surgical resources will continue even after the pandemic peak and may recur with future pandemics, creating a need for a means of triaging patients for emergent and elective spine surgery.

Methods

Using a modified Delphi technique, a cohort of 16 fellowship-trained spine surgeons from 10 academic medical centers constructed a scoring system for the triage and prioritization of emergent and elective spine surgeries. Three separate rounds of videoconferencing and written correspondence were used to reach a final scoring system. Sixteen test cases were used to optimize the scoring system so that it could categorize cases as requiring emergent, urgent, high-priority elective, or low-priority elective scheduling.

Results

The devised scoring system included 8 independent components: neurologic status, underlying spine stability, presentation of a high-risk postoperative complication, patient medical comorbidities, expected hospital course, expected discharge disposition, facility resource limitations, and local disease burden. The resultant calculator was deployed as a freely available Web-based calculator (https://jhuspine3.shinyapps.io/SpineUrgencyCalculator/).

Conclusions

We present the first quantitative urgency scoring system for the triage and prioritizing of spine surgery cases in resource-limited settings. We believe that our scoring system, although not all encompassing, has potential value as a guide for triaging spine surgical cases during the COVID pandemic and post-COVID period.