Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Sacralization of L5 is a condition that affects 15% of the population. Because of the increased L5 articulations to the sacrum, it is unclear how pelvic incidence and spinopelvic parameters should be measured. PURPOSE: Determine whether patients with L5 sacralization should be radiographically measured with relation to the L5 or S1 vertebrae. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: Prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity database. OUTCOME MEASURES: ODI, SF36 PCS, radiographic spinopelvic parameters.
METHOD(S): Linear regression modeling was used to determine normative TPA and PI-LL based on PI and age in a database of asymptomatic subjects. In an adult spinal deformity database, patients with radiographic evidence of L5 sacralization, had PI, LL and TPA measured from the superior endplate S1 and then also from L5. Patients with instrumentation below L4 at baseline were excluded. The differences in TPA and PI-LL from normative were calculated in the sacralization cohort relative to L5 and S1 and correlated to ODI. Patients were grouped based on PI-LL Schwab modifier (0, +, ++) utilizing their L5 PI-LL and S1 PI-LL. Baseline ODI and SF36 PCS were compared across and within groups and their respective SRS Schwab class.
RESULT(S): Among 1,179 ASD patients, 276 (23.4%) had transitional anatomy, 176 with sacralized L5 (14.9%) and 100 (8.48%) with lumbarization of S1. The 176 with sacralized L5 were analyzed. PI (24.5 +/- 11.0 vs 55.7 +/- 12.0, p=0.001), TPA (11.2 +/- 12.0 vs 20.3 +/- 12.5, p=0.001) and PI-LL (0.67 +/- 21.1 vs 11.4 +/- 20.8, p=0.001) measured utilizing the L5 superior endplate were significantly smaller than those who were measured relative to S1. When measured from S1, 76 (43. %) of patients were SRS Schwab 0, 45 (25.6%) were Class +, and 55 (31.3%) were class ++ compared to 124 (70.5%), 22 (12.5%), and 30 (17.0%) measured from L5 respectively. There were significant differences in ODI and PCS as the Schwab grade increased regardless of L5 or S1 measurement. The L5 group had higher PCS functional scores for Schwab 0 and ++ relative to same grades in the S1 group. Offset from normative TPA (0.5 +/- 11.1 vs 9.6 +/- 10.8, p=0.001) and PI-LL (0.67 +/- 21.1 vs 11.4 +/- 20.8, p=0.001) were smaller when measuring from L5. Moreover, S1 measurements were more correlated with disability by ODI (TPA offset from normative, S1: R=0.326 vs L5: R=0.285; PI-LL Offset from normative, S1: R=0.318 vs L5: R=0.274).
CONCLUSION(S): Measuring the PI at L5 in sacralized anatomy results in underestimating the PILL Schwab grade in a percentage of patients and less correlation with HRQLs. Patients with sacralized L5s should have spinopelvic parameters measured relative to S1. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Preoperative risk stratification is critical to determining which adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients may develop postop complications and to maximize surgical success. Currently it is unknown if a preoperative inflammatory state results in a higher risk for postop complications. This information can be used in risk stratification models to aid in complication avoidance. PURPOSE: To determine if patients with preoperative elevated serum markers for inflammation have higher rates of postoperative complications STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of multicenter prospective ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: C-reactive protein (CRP), Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), complications by type and by severity of intervention: none, mild, moderate and severe. Demographic and surgical variables: age, estimated blood loss (EBL), operating room (OR) time, body mass index (BMI), America Society of Anesthesia physical classification scale (ASA), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), Edmonton frailty scale (EF), 3-column osteotomy (3CO), number of post fusion levels.
METHOD(S): Preoperative labs were drawn on ASD patients and the inflammatory markers were CRP and ESR. CRP thresholds for cardiac risk: normal = 3. The CRP moderate and elevated values were combined into one group named elevated. Normal ESR thresholds: Male age 50, =20, Female >50, =30. Patients were stratified by having normal or elevated markers and rates of complications were compared between the groups. A multivariate model with CRP/ESR and demographic/surgical variables for postoperative complications. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) metrics were compared RESULTS: The total number of patients with preoperative CRP was 159 and ESR was 158. CRP: normal=114 patients (71.7%), moderate elevation=28 (17.6%), severe elevation=17 (10.7%). Combined elevated=45/159(28.3%). Elevated ESR=25(15.8%), normal=133(84.2%). The elevated CRP group had significantly higher rate of moderate complication 13/45(28.9%) vs 16/114(14.0%), p=0.03 and severe complication 15/45 (33.3%) vs 17/114(14.9%, p=0.009. Elevated ESR patients had significantly higher rate of moderate complication 9/25 (36.0%) vs 20/133 (15.0%), p=0.01. In multivariable logistic regression elevated CRP had odds ratio for moderate complication of 3.3 (95% CI 1.4-7.6, p=0.006), and for severe complication of 2.3 (95% CI 1.05-5.1, p=0.037). Multivariable logistic regression for elevated ESR and moderate complication had odds ratio of 2.9 (95%CI 1.04-7.8, p=0.041). Elevated CRP also had significantly higher rate of wound complications (15.6% vs 3.5%, p=0.007) and MSK complications (11.1% vs 1.8%, p=0.01). Elevated ESR had significantly higher rate of cardiac complications (32.0% vs 13.5%, p=0.02) and neurological complications (24.0% vs 9.0%, p=0.03). Elevated CRP had worse preoperative leg pain, SRS Activity and VR12 PCS(p<0.05). Elevated ESR had worse baseline ODI (p=0.03).
CONCLUSION(S): A preoperative inflammatory state as defined by elevated CRP and ESR is an independent risk factor for the development of moderate and severe postop complications. Having elevated preop CRP is 3.3 and 2.3 times more likely to have a moderate and severe complication, respectively. Elevated ESR is 2.9 times more likely to have a moderate complication. This data can be used in risk stratification models to aid in minimizing postoperative complications. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Malalignment following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery can negatively impact clinical outcomes and increase risk of mechanical complications. Despite improved definition of ideal alignment for ASD surgery and increasingly sophisticated preoperative alignment planning tools, it remains unclear whether the preoperative goals for alignment are actually achieved with surgery. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are consistently achieved. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multicenter, prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Operatively treatedASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL), T4-T12 thoracic kyphosis (TK).
METHOD(S): From 2018-2021, ASD patients were enrolled into a prospective ASD study based on three criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL>25degree, TPA>30degree, SVA>15cm, TCobb>70degree or TLCobb>50degree), procedure complexity (>12 levels fused, 3CO or ACR), and/or patient age (>65 and >7 levels fused). The operating surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery, including SVA, PI-LL mismatch and TK. Alignment goals were compared with achieved alignment at 6 weeks postop and the overall mean and SD were calculated for the offset (achieved minus goal) for each measure. Goal alignment was considered attained if the offset was within +/-1 SD of the goal. Demographic, surgical and baseline radiographic measures demonstrating significant association with achieving alignment goal on univariate analysis were used for multivariate regression analysis.
RESULT(S): The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 yrs (SD=14.6 yrs) and 68% were women. Mean number of instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD=3.8) and 24% had a 3-column osteotomy (3CO). Mean (SD) offsets were: SVA=-8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL=-4.6degree (14.6degree), TK=7.2degree (14.7degree), reflecting a tendency to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL relative to goal and to increase TK relative to goal. Surgeons achieved goal alignment (within 1 SD) for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of cases, respectively. On regression analysis: goal SVA was more likely to be achieved with lower baseline SVA (OR=0.993, 95%CI=0.988-0.997, p=0.001) and greater baseline TK (OR=1.016, 95%CI=1.002-1.031, p=0.029); goal PI-LL was more likely to be achieved with greater patient age (OR=1.021, 95%CI=1.002-1.039, p=0.026) and history of previous TL spine surgery (OR=2.028, 95% CI=1.136-3.621, p=0.017); and goal TK was more likely to be achieved with lower baseline SVA (OR=0.995, 95%CI=0.991-0.999; p=0.014). The proportions of patients with achieved alignment within 1 SD of goal were not significantly different for patients with a UIV above T7 vs those with a UIV at or below T7 for SVA (p=0.20), PI-LL (p=0.49) or TK (p=0.06). Notably, patient-specific rods were used in 21 patients and were not associated with greater achievement of goal alignment for any parameter (p>0.8), with similar tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK (p>0.6).
CONCLUSION(S): Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ~25% of patients operated for ASD, with a tendency to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Patients at greatest risk tended to be those with more severe baseline deformity. Further advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment planning to the operating room. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Evidence on long-term surgical recovery in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients who are both frail and have an invasive procedure is limited. PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate frail and invasive patients with 5-year recovery kinetics. We hypothesize that patients who are both frail and have invasive surgeries will have adverse postoperative recovery kinetics STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 133 ASD patients with complete HRQOL data at preoperative, 1-year, 2-year, 5-year follow-up were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Integrated Health State Scores (IHS) in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-form 36 (SF-36) physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component score, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22r measures METHODS: ASD-FI scores were used to stratify non-frail (0.3) patients. ASD-SR scores were used to stratify low invasive (90) surgeries. Using ASD-FI and ASD-SR, patients were separated into four cohorts: non-frail low invasive (NFLI), frail low invasive (FLI), non-frail high invasive (NFHI), and frail high invasive (FHI). HRQOLs at 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years were normalized against preoperative values. AUC was calculated across time points to generate an integrated health state score (IHS). Multivariable linear regression was used to compare IHS scores of FLI, NFHI, and FHI to NFLI while controlling for age, gender, comorbidity, and radiographic alignment.
RESULT(S): Of 633 eligible ASD patients, 339 had 5-year follow-up. Of those, 125 patients with complete HRQOL data at preoperative, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year visits were included; 27.2% (34) were NFLI, 20.0% (25) were FLI, 26.4% (33) were NFHI, and 26.4% (33) were FHI. Using NFLI as the referent, FLI and NFHI did not have differences in ODI, MCS, PCS or SRS-22r IHS scores (P >0.05). On multivariable analysis of integrated health scores, FHI had higher MCS (7.6 vs 5.47; P=0.0188), SRS activity (6.97 vs 5.67; P=0.0004), SRS pain (8.49 vs 6.4; P=0.001), SRS appearance (8.97 vs 6.81; P=0.0014), SRS satisfaction (11.71 vs 7.97; P=0.0033), and SRS total (7.49 vs. 6.09; P=0.0002), indicating more improved recovery over a 5-year period. Patients who were FHI had higher rates of complications (P <0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): Despite having more complications, patients who were frail and underwent more invasive surgeries were more likely to have greater overall improvement in activity, pain, and satisfaction over a 5-year period relative to preoperative baseline. Our results suggest that frailty in combination with invasiveness do not hinder long-term postoperative recovery kinetics, in comparison to frailty or invasiveness alone. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: As adult spinal deformity (ASD) prevalence increases in our ever-aging population there is a concomitant increase in poor bone quality. ASD surgery is expensive and carries a high complication profile. It is important to optimize modifiable preoperative risk factors, such as osteopenia or osteoporosis. Additional diagnostic modalities such as a DEXA can add cost, delay diagnosis, and can be an additional insurance hurdle. Some studies suggest HU's can be utilized as a proxy for frailty, but it is unclear if this is useful in risk stratification. PURPOSE: Our goal was to evaluate the relationship between bone health as measured by HU's and PJK and identify a HU threshold in which PJK risk is increased. We hypothesize that HU will correlate with occurrence of PJK after ASD surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: Of 1,330 pts eligible, 997 (74.9%) had complete 2Y follow-up. Of these, 605 meet inclusion criteria with 110 (18.18%) patients having a PJK. OUTCOME MEASURES: Development of PJK within 2 years of surgery.
METHOD(S): Operative ASD patients (scoliosis >20, SVA>5cm, PT>25, or TK>60) with available baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) radiographic and HRQL data were included if they had a preop CT. HU were measured from axial views within the cancellous body (x3) at both L1 and UIV with the mean value calculated for each. Threshold linear regression with Bayesian information criteria was utilized to identify optimal cut-offs of risk factors for PJK. Multivariable analysis (MVA) controlled for PJK prophylaxis and surgeon. Additionally, risk factors identified were controlled against each other.
RESULT(S): Threshold regression identified that cut-offs of <125 HU for UIV, >63 years for age, >0.31 for ASD-FI, and >47degree for preoperative T4-12 thoracic kyphosis, and <10 levels fused were predictive of PJK on bivariate analysis (P<0.05 for all). On MVA, age > 63 years old (OR 4.7; P = 0.003), female gender (OR 3.33; P=0.035), HU at UIV vertebrae <125 (2.83; P=0.008), ASD-FI >0.31 (OR 4.02; P=0.011), TK > 46degree (OR 3.75; P=0.003), and < 10 levels fused (OR 3.31; P=0.0310) were associated with increased odds of PJK.
CONCLUSION(S): Bone health as measured by HU appears to be an independent predictor of PJK after ASD surgery, specifically values <125 at the UIV. It also parallels frailty in prediction of PJK and can potentially be used as a proxy for frailty assessment. This can be easily measured and could help with risk stratification in the future. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: While past research has shown racial disparities exist in the outcomes and utilization of spine surgery, those studies were often performed on nondisease-specific national databases, which may capture different patient populations and complication rates compared to prospective multicenter databases. PURPOSE: Purpose: 1) Assess racial disparities for enrollment in two prospective multicenter databases (ASD-

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Prior reports have focused on grading fusion status after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery; however, few focused on fusion status after 4-years postop. PURPOSE: To identify risk factors for nonunion in a prospective cohort of ASD patients with long-term follow-up (=4 years). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective multicenter observational series. PATIENT SAMPLE: Database enrollment required age =18 years, scoliosis =20degree, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) =5cm, pelvic tilt =25degree, or thoracic kyphosis =60degree. OUTCOME MEASURES: Fusions were rated as bilaterally fused (A), unilaterally fused (B), partially fused (C), or not fused (D). Primary outcome was fusion (grade A or B) vs nonunion (grade C or D) at minimum 4-year follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included health-related quality of life (HRQL) (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Short Form-36 [SF-36] scores, Scoliosis Research Society-22 [SRS-22r] scores).
METHOD(S): Surgically treated ASD patients prospectively enrolled into a multicenter study (2008-2020) were assessed for fusion (grade A or B) vs nonunion (grade C or D). Inclusion required postop fusion grading at minimum 4-year follow-up. Demographics, frailty, comorbidities, alignment (baseline and initial correction), index surgery (total levels fused, iliac fixation, interbody fusion [IBF], use of bone morphogenetic protein [BMP] and/or demineralized bone matrix [

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Sagittal alignment is integral to a patient's quality of life. Posterior spinal fusion (PSF) is currently the standard for correcting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Vertebral body tethering (VBT) is a fusionless growth modulating surgical technique used to treat AIS. It relies on the Hueter-Volkmann Law. Indications for this procedure include patients who have coronal curves up to 50degree, growth remaining, and no excessive thoracic kyphosis. VBT has been shown to have good coronal plane deformity correction. There have been fewer examinations of the sagittal effects of VBT. PURPOSE: To determine if VBT is a non-inferior treatment for correction of AIS with regard to sagittal alignment compared to PSF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with AIS who underwent correction surgeries with LIV in the lumbar spine from 2013 to 2021 with pre- and minimum two-year postoperative standing full spine plain films. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sagittal vertical axis (SVA), cervical SVA (cSVA), pelvic tilt (PT), thoracic kyphosis (TK), cervical lordosis (CL), L4-S1 lordosis (L4L), T1 pelvic angle (TPA) and pelvic incidence lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL).
METHOD(S): Radiographic analyses was completed with independent samples t-test with significance set to p <0.05.
RESULT(S): A total of 99 patients were included, 49 VBT and 50 PSF. There were no differences in age or levels instrumented between groups. The VBT cohort Lenke class breakdown is 23% 1A, 13% 1C, 31% 3C. 18% 5C, and 15% 6C, while the PSF cohort consisted of 42% 1A, 6% 1B, 2% 2C, 2% 3B, 12% 3C, 2% 5B, 24% 5C, and 10% 6C. At Baseline, the VBT cohort had lower SVA (-0.7mm+/-3.7 vs 2.2mm+/-5.0, p=0.001), CL (-0.9degree+/-18.2 vs 11.6degree+/-12.8, p=0.001), L4-S1 Lordosis (20.7degree+/-16.0 vs 41.6degree+/-10.2, p=0.001), and higher cSVA (3.3mm+/-1.6 vs -0.95mm+/-3.1, p=0.001) than those who were fused. Postoperatively, VBT patients have an overall higher L4-S1 Lordosis (36.0degree+/-10.1vs 18.3degree+/-12.5, p=0.001), cSVA (3.4mm+/-1.4 vs -3.7mm+/-2.1, p=0.001), and lower CL (-4.3degree+/-18.4 vs 7.0degree+/-12.2, p=0.001). The PSF cohort had a larger change in cSVA (2.8mm+/-4.0 vs 0mm+/-1.6, p=0.001) from baseline to 2-year follow-up compared to VBT. No differences in the change of L4-S1 Lordosis (VBT 1.5degree+/-12.3 vs 4.1degree+/-10.9, p=0.3), TPA (VBT -1.6degree+/-6.8 vs -1.4degree+/-8.5, p=0.89), PT (VBT -0.5degree+/-7.8 vs -1.9degree+/-8.5, p=0.42), or PI-LL (0.2degree+/-12.0 vs -0.5degree+/-14.0, p=0.81) were observed.
CONCLUSION(S): VBT and PSF for AIS result in statistically similar changes in sagittal alignment parameters. The fact that we showed similar results comparing sagittal alignment in fusion and VBT groups indicates that VBT is non-inferior from a sagittal perspective. It is important to maintain sagittal alignment when correcting AIS. Future work can examine the long-term effect of VBT on sagittal alignment. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients maintain upright posture by compensating through their spine, pelvis and lower extremities. Little data exist quantifying the contribution of lower extremity compensation through the hips, knees, and ankles to maintain upright posture. PURPOSE: Evaluate the effect of the lower limb compensation by numerically unfolding patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multicenter, prospective cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 288 patients surgically treated for complex ASD with preoperative full body images. OUTCOME MEASURES: Horizontal distance between vertebra centroid and ankle.
METHOD(S): Surgical ASD patients were enrolled into a prospective study based on three criteria deformity severity (PI-LL>25degree, TPA>30degree, SVA>15cm, TCobb>70degree or TLCobb>50degree), procedure complexity (>12 levels fused, 3CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and >7 levels fused). Preop full-body images were evaluated and age and PI-adjusted normative values were used to model spine alignment based upon three configurations: COMP (all lower extremity compensatory mechanisms maintained), PARTIAL (removal of ankle dorsiflexion and knee flexion, maintained hip extension), UNCOMP (ankle, knee, and hip compensation eliminated by reset PT to the age and PI norms). The three configurations were compared, and COMP alignment was stratified by TPA percentiles to investigate the offsets from each vertebra to the ankle joint acting as a surrogate of the gravity line in free-standing position.
RESULT(S): A total of 288 patients met inclusion criteria (60+/-15yo, 70.5% female, 27.4+/-5.9 BMI). COMP spine deformity magnitude included PI-LL 15+/-24, TPA 24+/-14, and SVA 65+/-69mm. As the model transitioned from COMP to UNCOMP alignment, the initial posterior translation of the pelvis decreased significantly to an anterior translation vs the ankle (P.Shift 30 to -7.6 mm). This was associated with a decrease in pelvic retroversion (PT 24.1 to 16.1), hip extension (SFA 203 to 200), knee flexion (KA 5.5 to -0.4), and ankle dorsiflexion (AA 5.3 to 3.7). As a result, the anterior malalignment of the trunk significantly increased SVA (65 to 120mm) and G-SVA (C7-Ankle from 36 to 127 mm), leading to a three-fold increase in bending moments sustained by the ankle joint. The stratification of the COMP position by TPA percentiles revealed that as the deformity increases, the vertebrae above T8 translate anteriorly, those below T10 move posteriorly, with the T8-T10 segment remaining ~3cm posterior to the ankle joint independently of the deformity severity.
CONCLUSION(S): Removal of lower limbs' compensation revealed an unsustainable truncal malalignment with a three-fold increase of bending moments at the ankle joints. Combined, lower limb compensations permit "reducing" the SVA by two-fold and the C7-ankle SVA by three-fold. From a mechanical point of view, this compensation permits maintaining the trunk center of mass (T9) at a fixed offset of ~3 cm from the ankle joint. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The ACS-NSQIP and SpineSage are both easy to use and readily available online perioperative risk calculators The ACS-NSQIP calculator predicts perioperative complications after surgery, but lacks more spine-specific predictors. The SpineSage platform was developed as a tool built for predicting complications in spine surgery. While a limited number of studies have shown it be predictive of both overall and major medical complications in spine surgery, large external validation studies are limited and none have directly compared NSQIP against SpineSage in the same cohort of spine surgery patients. PURPOSE: Assess the ACS-NSQIP Risk Calculator and SpineSage informatics platform for prediction of perioperative complications in spine surgery STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 440 patients undergoing thoracolumbar spine with or without fusion. OUTCOME MEASURES: Any complication, serious complication, pneumonia, cardiac, dural tear, SSI, UTI, VTE, reoperation, death and LOS METHODS: Each patient was entered into the ACS-NSQIP and SpineSage calculators and predicted risk for specific complications were directly compared to actual risks. Paired t-tests compared the differences between calculators and their predictability of complications. Patients were ranked based on risk predicted for each complication and the highest tertile for each was isolated. Multivariate regression controlling for age and gender was used to determine if the highest tertile for each risk calculator had predictability in complications following spine surgery.
RESULT(S): Mean LOS 4.2+3 days, EBL 444+300 mL, operative time 256+240 min, and levels instrumented 2.1+2.3. When assessing the four complications predicted by SpineSage there were significant differences in three of the four variables, as SpineSage underpredicted the risk of all and serious-complications (p.5). Both calculator tertiles were trending towards significance for major medical complications (SpineSage: OR: 2.0, [0.94-4.23], p=.073; ACS-NSQIP: OR: 1.8,[0.96-3.48],p=.067). When examining any medical risk, only ACS NSQIP had significant predictability for any medical complication (OR: 2.1, [1.3-3.3]; p=.003).
CONCLUSION(S): Similar to previous studies, the ACS-NSQIP score underpredicted most complications, with the exception of LOS and death. In contrast to previous studies, our data suggest SpineSage was not predictive of actual rates of complications. As both calculators are highly accessible and provide at least some objective perioperative risk data points, we recommend them as a guiding tool but not as an absolute endpoint for clinical decision making as they may be inaccurate and insensitive. Further, higher powered studies elucidating the findings in this study should be conducted. Additionally, the assessment of these calculators for a specific subset of patients, such as deformity, degenerative or pediatrics, can further help guide clinicians regarding the utility of these calculators for their particular patient populations. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright