CI, confidence intervalMCID, minimal clinically important differenceMI-TLIF, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionODI, Oswestry Disability IndexO-TLIF, open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionVAS, Visual Analog Scale.

Based on moderate-to-good quality of evidence, chemoprophylaxis is beneficial in preventing VTE, with no significant increase in either major or minor bleeding complications in patients undergoing cranial and spinal procedures. Further research is needed to determine whether this conclusion holds true for more specific subpopulations.

OBJECTIVE Paraplegia and paraparesis following aortic aneurysm repair occur at a substantially high rate and are often catastrophic to patients, their families, and the overall health care system. Spinal cord injury (SCI) following open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair is reported to be as high as 20% in historical controls. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of CSF drainage (CSFD) on SCI following TAAA repair. METHODS In August 2015 a systematic literature search was performed using clinicaltrials.gov, the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus that identified 3478 articles. Of these articles, 10 met inclusion criteria. Random and fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed using both pooled and subset analyses based on study type. RESULTS The meta-analysis demonstrated that CSFD decreased SCI by nearly half (relative risk 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.25–0.70; p = 0.0009) in the pooled analysis. This effect remained in the subgroup analysis of early SCI but did not remain significant in late SCI. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis showed that CSFD could be an effective strategy in preventing SCI following aortic aneurysm repair. Care should be taken to prevent complications related to overdrainage. No firm conclusions can be drawn about the newer endovascular procedures at the current time.

BACKGROUND:Bibliometrics is defined as the study of statistical and mathematical methods used to quantitatively analyze scientific literature. The application of bibliometrics in neurosurgery continues to evolve. OBJECTIVE: To calculate a number of publication productivity measures for almost all neurosurgical residents and departments within North America. These measures were correlated with survey results on the educational environment within residency programs. METHODS: During May to June 2017, data were collected from departmental websites and Scopus to compose a bibliometric database of neurosurgical residents and residency programs. Data related to authorship value and study content were collected on all articles published by residents. A survey of residency program research and educational environment was administered to program directors and coordinators; results were compared with resident academic productivity. RESULTS:The median number of publications in residency was 3; median h-index and Resident index were 1 and 0.17 during residency, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in academic productivity among male neurosurgical residents compared with females. The majority of articles published were tier 1 clinical articles. Residency program research support was significantly associated with increased resident productivity (P < .001). Scholarly activity requirements were not associated with increased resident academic productivity. CONCLUSION: This study represents the most comprehensive bibliometric assessment of neurosurgical resident academic productivity during training to date. New benchmarks for individual and department academic productivity are provided. A supportive research environment for neurosurgical residents is associated with increased academic productivity, but a scholarly activity requirement was, surprisingly, not shown to have a positive effect.