A retrospective cohort study.
To determine whether the 11-item modified frailty index (mFI) is associated with readmission rates, complication rates, revision rates, or differences in ...patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients undergoing posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF).
mFI incorporates preexisting medical comorbidities and dependency status to determine physiological reserve. Based on previous literature, it may be used as a predictive tool for identifying postoperative clinical and surgical outcomes.
Patients undergoing elective PCDF at our urban academic medical center from 2014 to 2020 were included. Patients were categorized by mFI scores (0-0.08, 0.09-0.17, 0.18-0.26, and ≥0.27). Univariate statistics compared demographics, comorbidities, and clinical/surgical outcomes. Multiple linear regression analysis evaluated the magnitude of improvement in PROMs at 1 year.
A total of 165 patients were included and grouped by mFI scores: 0 (n=36), 0.09 (n=62), 0.18 (n=42), and ≥0.27 (n=30). The severe frailty group (mFI ≥0.27) was significantly more likely to be diabetic (p <0.001) and have a greater Elixhauser comorbidity index (p =0.001). They also had worse baseline Physical Component Score-12 (PCS-12) (p =0.011) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) (p =0.012) scores and worse 1-year postoperative PCS-12 (p =0.008) and mJOA (p =0.001) scores. On regression analysis, an mFI score of 0.18 was an independent predictor of greater improvement in ΔVisual Analog Scale neck (β =-2.26, p =0.022) and ΔVAS arm (β =-1.76, p =0.042). Regardless of frailty status, patients had similar 90-day readmission rates (p =0.752), complication rates (p =0.223), and revision rates (p =0.814), but patients with severe frailty were more likely to have longer hospital length of stay (p =0.006) and require non-home discharge (p <0.001).
Similar improvements across most PROMs can be expected irrespective of the frailty status of patients undergoing PCDF. Complication rates, 90-day readmission rates, and revision rates are not significantly different when stratified by frailty status. However, patients with severe frailty are more likely to have longer hospital stays and require non-home discharge.
Retrospective cohort study.
To compare radiographic outcomes between unilateral and bilateral cage placement in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF) and to determine if the rate of fusion ...at the 1-year postoperative point was different in patients who received bilateral versus unilateral cages.
There is no clear evidence to dictate whether bilateral or unilateral cages promote superior radiographic or surgical outcomes in TLIF.
Patients >18 years old who underwent primary one- or two-level TLIFs at our institution were identified and propensitymatched in a 3:1 fashion (unilateral:bilateral). Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and radiographic outcomes, including vertebral endplate obliquity, segmental lordosis, subsidence, and fusion status, were compared between groups.
Of the 184 patients included, 46 received bilateral cages. Bilateral cage placement was associated with greater subsidence (1.06±1.25 mm vs. 0.59±1.16 mm, p=0.028) and enhanced restoration of segmental lordosis (5.74°±14.1° vs. -1.57°±10.9°, p=0.002) at the 1-year postoperative point, while unilateral cage placement was associated with an increased correction of endplate obliquity (-2.02°±4.42° vs. 0.24°±2.81°, p<0.001). Bilateral cage placement was significantly associated with radiographic fusion on bivariate analysis (89.1% vs. 70.3%, p=0.018) and significantly predicted radiographic fusion on multivariable regression analysis (estimate, 1.35; odds ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-12.05; p=0.010).
Bilateral interbody cage placement in TLIF procedures was associated with restoration of lumbar lordosis and increased fusion rates. However, endplate obliquity correction was significantly greater for patients who received a unilateral cage.
Retrospective cohort study.
The primary objective of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors for incidental durotomies during lumbar decompression surgeries. In addition, we aimed ...to determine the changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) based on incidental durotomy status.
There is limited literature investigating the affect of incidental durotomy on patient reported outcome measures. While the majority of research does not suggest differences in complications, readmission, or revision rates, many studies rely on public databases, and their sensitivity and specificity for identifying incidental durotomies is unknown.
Patients undergoing lumbar decompression with or without fusion at a single tertiary care center were grouped based on the presence of a durotomy. Multivariate analysis was performed for length of stay (LOS), hospital readmissions, and changes in PROMs. To identify surgical risk factors for durotomy, 3:1 propensity matching was performed using stepwise logistic regression. The sensitivity and specificity of the International Classification of Disease, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes (G96.11 and G97.41) were also assessed.
Of the 3,684 consecutive patients who underwent lumbar decompressions, 533 (14.5%) had durotomies, and a complete set of PROMs (preoperative and 1-year postoperative) were available for 737 patients (20.0%). Incidental durotomy was an independent predictor of increased LOS but not hospital readmission or worse PROMs. The durotomy repair method was not associated with hospital readmission or LOS. However, repair with collagen graft and suture predicted reduced improvement in Visual Analog Scale back (β =2.56, p=0.004). Independent risk factors for incidental durotomies included revisions (odds ratio OR, 1.73; p<0.001), levels decompressed (OR, 1.11; p=0.005), and preoperative diagnosis of spondylolisthesis or thoracolumbar kyphosis. The sensitivity and specificity of ICD-10 codes were 5.4% and 99.9%, respectively, for identifying durotomies.
The durotomy rate for lumbar decompressions was 14.5%. No differences in outcomes were detected except for increased LOS. Database studies relying on ICD codes should be interpreted with caution due to the limited sensitivity in identifying incidental durotomies.
Retrospective cohort.
To determine (1) the effects of serotonin reuptake inhibitors in pseudarthrosis rates after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) and (2) to identify ...patient-reported outcome measures in patients taking serotonin reuptake inhibitors.
Recent literature suggests that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) may inhibit fracture healing via downregulation of osteoblast differentiation. Spinal fusion supplementation with osteoblast-rich substances enhances spinal fusion, thus SSRIs may be detrimental.
Patients with 1-year postoperative dynamic cervical spine radiographs following ACDF were grouped into serotonin reuptake inhibitor prescriptions (SSRI, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor SNRI, or tricyclic antidepressant TCA) and no prescription (atypical antidepressant or no antidepressant). Pseudarthrosis was defined as ≥1 mm interspinous process motion on dynamic radiographs. Logistic regression models were controlled for confounding to analyze pseudarthrosis rates. Alpha was set at p - values of <0.05.
Of the 523 patients who meet the inclusion criteria, 137 (26.2%) were prescribed an SSRI, SNRI, or TCA. Patients with these prescriptions were more likely to have pseudarthrosis (p =0.008) but not a revision surgery due to pseudarthrosis (p =0.219). Additionally, these patients had worse 1-year postoperative mental component summary (MCS)-12 (p =0.015) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) (p =0.006). The multivariate logistic regression analysis identified SSRI/SNRI/TCA use (odds ratio OR, 1.82; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.11-2.99; p =0.018) and construct length (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.50-2.44; p <0.001) as pseudarthrosis predictors. A SSRI/SNRI/TCA prescription was a revision surgery predictor due to adjacent segment disease on univariate analysis (OR, 2.51; p =0.035) but not on multivariate logistic regression analysis (OR, 2.24; p =0.10).
Patients taking serotonin reuptake-inhibiting antidepressants are at increased risk of worse postoperative outcome scores, including NDI and MCS-12, likely due to their underlying depression. This may contribute to their greater likelihood of having adjacent segment surgery. Additionally, preoperative use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors in patients undergoing an ACDF is a predictor of radiographic pseudarthrosis but not pseudarthrosis revision.
Single-center retrospective cohort.
To compare surgical outcomes of patients based on lumbar drain variables relating to output and duration.
The use of drains following lumbar spine surgery, ...specifically with respect to hospital readmission, postoperative hematoma, postoperative anemia, and surgical site infections, has been controversial.
Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent lumbar fusion with a postoperative drain between 2017 and 2020 were included and grouped based on hospital readmission status, last 8-hour drain output (<40 mL cutoff), or drain duration (2 days cutoff). Total output of all drains, total output of the primary drain, drain duration in days, drain output per day, last 8-hour output, penultimate 8-hour output, and last 8-hour delta (last 8-hour output subtracted by penultimate 8-hour output) were collected. Continuous and categorical data were compared between groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed to determine whether drain variables can predict hospital readmission, postoperative blood transfusions, and postoperative anemia. Alpha was 0.05.
Our cohort consisted of 1,166 patients with 111 (9.5%) hospital readmissions. Results of regression analysis did not identify any of the drain variables as independent predictors of hospital readmission, postoperative blood transfusion, or postoperative anemia. ROC analysis demonstrated the drain variables to be poor predictors of hospital readmission, with the highest area under curve of 0.524 (drain duration), corresponding to a sensitivity of 61.3% and specificity of 49.9%.
Drain output or duration did not affect readmission rates following lumbar spine surgery.
Objectives: The objectives of our study were to (1) determine if physical therapy (PT) impacts patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after lumbar decompression surgery and (2) determine if PT impacts ...postsurgical readmissions or reoperations after lumbar decompression surgery.
Methods: Patients >18 years of age who underwent primary one- or two-level lumbar decompression at our institution were identified. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, surgical outcomes (all-cause 90 days readmissions and 90 days surgical readmissions), and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) were compared between the groups. Multivariate linear regression was utilized to determine the individual predictors of 90 days readmissions and PROMs at the 1-year postoperative point. Alpha was set at P < 0.05.
Results: Of the 1003 patients included, 421 attended PT postoperatively. On univariate analysis, PT attendance did not significantly impact 90-day surgical reoperations (P = 0.225). Although bivariate analysis suggests that attendance of PT is associated with worse improvement in physical function (P = 0.041), increased preoperative Visual Analogue Scale leg pain (0 = 0.004), and disability (P = 0.006), as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index, our multivariate analysis, which accounts for confounding variables found there was no difference in PROM improvement and PT was not an independent predictor of 90-day all-cause readmissions (P = 0.06). Instead, Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = 0.025) and discharge to a skilled nursing facility (P = 0.013) independently predicted greater 90-day all-cause readmissions.
Conclusions: Postoperative lumbar decompression PT attendance does not significantly affect clinical improvement, as measured by PROMs or surgical outcomes including all-cause 90 days readmissions and 90-day surgical readmissions.
To evaluate the (1) 90-day surgical outcomes and (2) 1-year revision rate of robotic versus nonrobotic lumbar fusion surgery.
Patients >18 years of age who underwent primary lumbar fusion surgery at ...our institution were identified and propensity-matched in a 1:1 fashion based on robotic assistance during surgery. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and surgical outcomes, including 90-day surgical complications and 1-year revisions, were collected. Multivariable regression analysis was performed. Significance was set to
< 0.05.
Four hundred and fifteen patients were identified as having robotic lumbar fusion and were matched to a control group. Bivariant analysis revealed no significant difference in total 90-day surgical complications (
= 0.193) or 1-year revisions (
= 0.178). The operative duration was longer in robotic surgery (287 + 123 vs. 205 + 88.3,
≤ 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that robotic fusion was not a significant predictor of 90-day surgical complications (odds ratio OR = 0.76 0.32-1.67,
= 0.499) or 1-year revisions (OR = 0.58 0.28-1.18,
= 0.142). Other variables identified as the positive predictors of 1-year revisions included levels fused (OR = 1.26 1.08-1.48,
= 0.004) and current smokers (OR = 3.51 1.46-8.15,
= 0.004).
Our study suggests that robotic-assisted and nonrobotic-assisted lumbar fusions are associated with a similar risk of 90-day surgical complications and 1-year revision rates; however, robotic surgery does increase time under anesthesia.
ABSTRACT Objectives: The purpose of this study is to identify if construct length affects the rate of surgical complications and instrumentation revision following surgical fixation of subaxial and ...thoracolumbar Type B and C fractures. This study evaluates the effect of ankylosing spondylitis/diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (AS/DISH) within this population on outcomes. Methods: Retrospective review of 91 cervical and 89 thoracolumbar Type B and C fractures. Groups were divided by construct length for analysis: short-segment (constructs spanning two or less segments adjacent to the fracture) and long-segment (constructs spanning more than two segments adjacent to the vertebral fracture). Results: For cervical fractures, construct length did not impact surgical complications ( P = 0.641), surgical hardware revision ( P = 0.167), or kyphotic change ( P = 0.994). For thoracolumbar fractures, construct length did not impact surgical complications ( P = 0.508), surgical hardware revision ( P = 0.224), and kyphotic change ( P = 0.278). Cervical Type B fractures were nonsignificantly more likely to have worsened kyphosis ( P = 0.058) than Type C fractures. Assessing all regions of the spine, a diagnosis of AS/DISH was associated with an increase in kyphosis ( P = 0.030) and a diagnosis of osteoporosis was associated with surgical hardware failure ( P = 0.006). Conclusion: Patients with short-segment instrumentation have similar surgical outcomes and changes in kyphosis compared to those with long-segment instrumentation. A diagnosis of AS/DISH or osteoporosis was associated with worse surgical outcomes.
Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques offer promising improvements in the management of thoracolumbar trauma. Recent advances in MIS techniques and instrumentation for degenerative conditions ...have heralded a growing interest in employing these techniques for thoracolumbar trauma. Specifically, surgeons have applied these techniques to help manage flexion- and extension-distraction injuries, neurologically intact burst fractures, and cases of damage control. Minimally invasive surgical techniques offer a means to decrease blood loss, shorten operative time, reduce infection risk, and shorten hospital stays. Herein, we review thoracolumbar minimally invasive surgery with an emphasis on thoracolumbar trauma classification, minimally invasive spinal stabilization, surgical indications, patient outcomes, technical considerations, and potential complications.
Retrospective cohort.
To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between approach techniques for the treatment of multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).
Both anterior and ...posterior approaches for the surgical treatment of cervical myelopathy are successful techniques in the treatment of myelopathy. However, the optimal treatment has yet to be determined, especially for multilevel disease, as the different approaches have separate complication profiles and potentially different impacts on HRQoL metrics.
Retrospective review of a prospectively managed single institution database of patient-reported outcome measures after 3 and 4-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for DCM. The electronic medical record was reviewed for patient baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes whereas preoperative radiographs were analyzed for baseline cervical lordosis and sagittal balance. Bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to compare the two groups.
We identified 153 patients treated by ACDF and 43 patients treated by PCDF. Patients in the ACDF cohort were younger (60.1 ± 9.8 vs . 65.8 ± 6.9 yr; P < 0.001), had a lower overall comorbidity burden (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 2.25 ± 1.61 vs . 3.07 ± 1.64; P = 0.002), and were more likely to have a 3-level fusion (79.7% vs . 30.2%; P < 0.001), myeloradiculopathy (42.5% vs . 23.3%; P = 0.034), and cervical kyphosis (25.7% vs . 7.69%; P = 0.027). Patients undergoing an ACDF had significantly more improvement in their neck disability index after surgery (-14.28 vs . -3.02; P = 0.001), and this relationship was maintained on multivariate analysis with PCDF being independently associated with a worse neck disability index (+8.83; P = 0.025). Patients undergoing an ACDF also experienced more improvement in visual analog score neck pain after surgery (-2.94 vs . -1.47; P = 0.025) by bivariate analysis.
Our data suggest that patients undergoing an ACDF or PCDF for multilevel DCM have similar outcomes after surgery.