Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: Racial disparities in postoperative outcomes are unfortunately common. We present data assessing race as an independent risk factor for postoperative complications after spine surgery for Native American (NA) and African American (AA) patients compared with Caucasians (CA). Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried for spine procedures performed in 2015. Data was subdivided by surgery, demography, comorbidity, and 30-day postoperative outcomes, which were then compared by race. Regression was performed holding race as an independent risk factor. Results: A total of 4803 patients (4106 CA, 522 AA, 175 NA) were included in this analysis. AA patients experienced longer length of stay (LOS) and operative times ( P < .001) excluding lumbar fusion, which was significantly shorter ( P = .035). AA patients demonstrated higher comorbidity burden, specifically for diabetes and hypertension ( P < .005), while NA individuals were higher tobacco consumers ( P < .001). AA race was an independent risk factor associated with longer LOS across all cervical surgeries (β = 1.54, P <.001), lumbar fusion (β = 0.77, P = .009), and decompression laminectomy (β = 1.23, P < .001), longer operative time in cervical fusion (β = 12.21, P = .032), lumbar fusion (β = -24.00, P = .016), and decompression laminectomy (OR = 20.95, P < .001), greater risk for deep vein thrombosis in lumbar fusion (OR = 3.72, P = .017), and increased superficial surgical site infections (OR = 5.22, P = .001) and pulmonary embolism (OR = 5.76, P = .048) in decompression laminectomy. NA race was an independent risk factor for superficial surgical site infections following cervical fusion (OR = 14.58, P = .044) and decompression laminectomy (OR = 4.80, P = .021). Conclusion: AA and NA spine surgery patients exhibit disproportionate comorbidity burden and greater 30-day complications compared with CA patients. AA and NA race were found to independently affect rates of complications, LOS, and operation time.

Background: The therapeutic efficacy of orthobiologic therapies for rotator cuff repair is difficult to evaluate owing to reporting inconsistences. In response, the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics (MIBO) guidelines were developed to ensure standard reporting on orthobiologic therapies. Purpose: To systematically review clinical studies evaluating platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for full-thickness rotator cuff repair and adherence to MIBO guidelines. Study Design: Scoping review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A search was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies reporting on rotator cuff tears (≥1 cm) surgically repaired with PRP. Patient demographics, biologic intervention, and adherence to the MIBO guidelines were systematically reviewed. Results: A total of 19 studies (1005 patients) were included in this review. Across all studies, 58.5% of the MIBO checklist items for PRP were reported. Out of 47 checklist items, 19 were reported in over 85% of studies, whereas 22 were reported in less than half of studies. Details of whole-blood processing and characteristics, as well as PRP processing and characteristics, were reported inconsistently, and no study provided adequate information to enable the precise replication of preparation protocols for PRP. Conclusion: This systematic review highlights the current reporting deficiencies within the scientific literature of important variables for evaluating PRP for full-thickness rotator cuff repair. There was widespread variability among published studies that evaluate PRP for this application and, more specifically, studies were limited by inconsistent universal reporting of whole-blood and PRP processing and postprocessing characteristics. To improve our understanding of biologic efficacy and to promote repeatability, stricter adherence to the MIBO guidelines is necessary. We propose that the checklist limitations be addressed and that modification of the MIBO guidelines be considered to improve the reporting of individual components within certain categories.