BACKGROUND Iatrogenic aortic injury from pedicle screw malpositioning or anterior prominence in posterior spinal fusion represents a rare but potentially devasting complication. While intraoperative aortic injury is associated with hemodynamic instability, delayed presentations of pedicle screw aortic impingement or violation often present insidiously with pseudoaneurysm or vascular remodeling in clinically asymptomatic patients. Currently, there is a lack of guidance in the field for the recommended surveillance, urgency of operative intervention, and optimal surgical management of delayed pedicle screw aortic injuries. OBSERVATIONS The following case study discusses the open treatment of delayed thoracic aortic penetration from an excessively long T12 pedicle screw in an asymptomatic adolescent patient with idiopathic scoliosis. The pedicle screw prominence anteriorly was corrected by burring the screw tip until it was flush with the vertebral body. The associated aortic injury was addressed with open vascular repair via primary anastomosis supplemented with a bovine pericardial patch. LESSONS Complete aortic wall penetration from an excessively long thoracic pedicle screw with otherwise stable screw positioning may be addressed most effectively with a single anterior surgical approach for open aortic repair and screw tip burring.

Background: The utility of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) is well established for some spine surgeries (eg, intramedullary tumor resection, scoliosis deformity correction), but its benefit for most degenerative spine surgery, including anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), remains debated. National datasets provide "big data"approaches to study the impact of IONM on spine surgery outcomes; however, if administrative coding in these datasets misrepresents actual IONM usage, conclusions will be unreliable. The objective of this study was to compare estimated rates (administrative coding) to actual rates (chart review) of IONM for ACDF at our institution and extrapolate findings to estimated rates from 2 national datasets. Methods: Patients were included from 3 administrative coding databases: the authors' single institution database, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). Estimated and actual institutional rates of IONM during ACDF were determined by administrative codes (International Classification of Diseases [ICD] or Current Procedural Terminology [CPT]) and chart review, respectively. National rates of IONM during ACDF were estimated using the NIS and NSQIP datasets. Results: Estimated institutional rates of IONM for ACDF were much higher with CPT than ICD coding (73.2% vs 16.5% in 2019). CPT coding for IONM better approximated actual IONM usage at our institution (74.6% in 2019). Estimated IONM utilization rates for ACDF in national datasets varied widely: 0.76% in CPT-based NSQIP and 18.4% in ICD-based NIS. Conclusions: ICD coding underestimated IONM usage during ACDF at our institution, whereas CPT coding was more accurate. Unfortunately, the CPT-based NSQIP is nearly devoid of IONM codes, as it has not been a collection focus of that surgical registry. ICD-based datasets, such as the NIS, likely fail to accurately capture IONM usage. Multicenter and/or national datasets with accurate IONM utilization data are needed to inform surgeons, insurers, and guideline authors on whether IONM has benefit for various spine surgery types.