Faculty Bibliography
Searched for:
in-biosketch:true
person:passip01
Total Results:
863
P85. Detailed risk factor stratification in adult spinal deformity corrective surgery: a 3-year cost utility analysis [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: A previous study by Pellise et al identified strong preoperative and surgical predictors of major complications. It is unknown which of these risk factors has the most significant impact on cost-effectiveness. PURPOSE: To assess the impact of previously established risk factors on the cost effectiveness of ASD surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 689 ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality adjusted life years (QALYs), utility gained, ODI, total cost.
METHOD(S): ASD patients with baseline (BL) and 2-year postoperative (2Y) data were included. Frailty score, sagittal deformity measures (SVA, PI-LL, T1 Sagittal Tilt), blood loss and surgical time were divided into tertiles, with the highest tertile being classified as high risk. Since some patients have multiple risk factors, they may be included in multiple groups. Descriptive analysis identified demographics, radiographic parameters and surgical factors. Published methods for cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database and CMS.gov definitions. Cost per QALY at 2Y was calculated for each risk factor.
RESULT(S): There were 422 patients included. Of the 381 patients with a risk factor, 77% were fused to the pelvis, 44% were highly frail, 56% had a high deformity, 34% had high EBL and 34% had high operative time. When analyzing BL scores, highly frail patients had the highest mean ODI and EQ-5D. After undergoing surgery, patients with a high EBL had the highest rate of SICU admissions, rate of any complications and rate of major complications. This translated to patients with high EBL having the lowest utility gained at 2Y. Interestingly, patients with high frailty had the highest rates of implant complications and pseudarthrosis resulting in the second highest major complication rates and total estimated cost. Despite this high estimated cost, however, patients with high frailty also achieved the highest utility gained at 2Y resulting in the best cost-utility at two years.
CONCLUSION(S): Despite having higher rates of implant failures, pseudarthrosis, and major complications, highly frail patients managed to generate the highest utility gained and best cost-effectiveness, while higher blood loss had higher rates of complications as well, but demonstrated the lowest utility gained and cost-utility. Therefore, spine surgeons should limit intraoperative risk factors, such as blood loss and operative time, which would minimize postoperative complications and improve overall cost-effectiveness during correction of adult spinal deformity. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): ASD patients with baseline (BL) and 2-year postoperative (2Y) data were included. Frailty score, sagittal deformity measures (SVA, PI-LL, T1 Sagittal Tilt), blood loss and surgical time were divided into tertiles, with the highest tertile being classified as high risk. Since some patients have multiple risk factors, they may be included in multiple groups. Descriptive analysis identified demographics, radiographic parameters and surgical factors. Published methods for cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database and CMS.gov definitions. Cost per QALY at 2Y was calculated for each risk factor.
RESULT(S): There were 422 patients included. Of the 381 patients with a risk factor, 77% were fused to the pelvis, 44% were highly frail, 56% had a high deformity, 34% had high EBL and 34% had high operative time. When analyzing BL scores, highly frail patients had the highest mean ODI and EQ-5D. After undergoing surgery, patients with a high EBL had the highest rate of SICU admissions, rate of any complications and rate of major complications. This translated to patients with high EBL having the lowest utility gained at 2Y. Interestingly, patients with high frailty had the highest rates of implant complications and pseudarthrosis resulting in the second highest major complication rates and total estimated cost. Despite this high estimated cost, however, patients with high frailty also achieved the highest utility gained at 2Y resulting in the best cost-utility at two years.
CONCLUSION(S): Despite having higher rates of implant failures, pseudarthrosis, and major complications, highly frail patients managed to generate the highest utility gained and best cost-effectiveness, while higher blood loss had higher rates of complications as well, but demonstrated the lowest utility gained and cost-utility. Therefore, spine surgeons should limit intraoperative risk factors, such as blood loss and operative time, which would minimize postoperative complications and improve overall cost-effectiveness during correction of adult spinal deformity. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804066
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510742
P102. Chronological comparison of existing frailty indices to predict complications throughout the postoperative course following adult spinal deformity surgery [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The comparison of various frailty indices and their ability to predict complications after ASD surgery has not been investigated. PURPOSE: Assess whether certain frailty indices have predictability of complication rates following ASD surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 689 ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Complication rates, clinical outcomes, cost-utility.
METHOD(S): Operative ASD patients with baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) data were included. Four frailty indices were used for comparison: Passias et al modified ASD frailty index (mFI), Miller et al ASD frailty index (FI-ASD), the ACS-NSQIP 5-Factor frailty index (ACS-FI5), and the FRAIL Scale (PMID:29792992). Patients were stratified into not frail (NF), frail (F) and severely frail (SF). Associations of the indices with EBL, op time, complications, hospital-acquired conditions (HAC: UTI, DVT/PE, SSI), reoperations, SICU stay, and LOS were compared using one-way ANOVA, logistic and linear regression analyses.
RESULT(S): There were 421 ASD patients included (Age: 60.4, BMI: 28.0, CCI: 1.9). Total cohort complication rates: 71% any comp, 27% major (68% were surgical, 32% medical), 35% minor, 25% intraoperative, 18% mechanical, 22% underwent reoperation. Upon presentation, severely frail patients were much more likely to present with a severe ODI (OR: 16, [7.2-29.8]). All four indices significantly correlated with intraop details and comps. During hospital stay, all four indices correlated to SICU time and total LOS. Only FRAIL Scale correlated with SICU admission rate (OR: 1.2, [1.03-8.8]), while no index was predictive of comps prior to discharge (all p>.05). ASD-FI had the strongest correlation with periop comps, including HACs (OR: 1.2, [1.1-6.3]), any (OR: 1.2, [1.02-7.3]) and major comps (OR: 1.5, [1.1-4.7]). When assessing 2Y comps, logistic regression analysis demonstrated correlation between ASD-FI, mFI, and FRAIL Scale indices and any comps, major comps and reoperation. However, mFI was the only correlate for all 2Y comps (any, major, minor, mech, reop), along with highest OR for predicting mechanical comps (OR: 1.6, [1.3-1.9]). Clinically, ASD-FI SF group had the greatest improvement (ODI,SRS-Total), while mFI SF had lowest rates of improvement. Given their higher complication rates, this translated to higher cost per QALY by 2 years for SF pts when stratified by mFI (p<.001).
CONCLUSION(S): Frailty imposes a significant burden on adult spinal deformity patients from the moment of presentation through cost-utility at two years. Assessing frailty by different measures demonstrated meaningful differences in complications and outcomes. These findings highlight the impact of frailty stratification during surgical planning to effectively assess the risk of patients undergoing corrective surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): Operative ASD patients with baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) data were included. Four frailty indices were used for comparison: Passias et al modified ASD frailty index (mFI), Miller et al ASD frailty index (FI-ASD), the ACS-NSQIP 5-Factor frailty index (ACS-FI5), and the FRAIL Scale (PMID:29792992). Patients were stratified into not frail (NF), frail (F) and severely frail (SF). Associations of the indices with EBL, op time, complications, hospital-acquired conditions (HAC: UTI, DVT/PE, SSI), reoperations, SICU stay, and LOS were compared using one-way ANOVA, logistic and linear regression analyses.
RESULT(S): There were 421 ASD patients included (Age: 60.4, BMI: 28.0, CCI: 1.9). Total cohort complication rates: 71% any comp, 27% major (68% were surgical, 32% medical), 35% minor, 25% intraoperative, 18% mechanical, 22% underwent reoperation. Upon presentation, severely frail patients were much more likely to present with a severe ODI (OR: 16, [7.2-29.8]). All four indices significantly correlated with intraop details and comps. During hospital stay, all four indices correlated to SICU time and total LOS. Only FRAIL Scale correlated with SICU admission rate (OR: 1.2, [1.03-8.8]), while no index was predictive of comps prior to discharge (all p>.05). ASD-FI had the strongest correlation with periop comps, including HACs (OR: 1.2, [1.1-6.3]), any (OR: 1.2, [1.02-7.3]) and major comps (OR: 1.5, [1.1-4.7]). When assessing 2Y comps, logistic regression analysis demonstrated correlation between ASD-FI, mFI, and FRAIL Scale indices and any comps, major comps and reoperation. However, mFI was the only correlate for all 2Y comps (any, major, minor, mech, reop), along with highest OR for predicting mechanical comps (OR: 1.6, [1.3-1.9]). Clinically, ASD-FI SF group had the greatest improvement (ODI,SRS-Total), while mFI SF had lowest rates of improvement. Given their higher complication rates, this translated to higher cost per QALY by 2 years for SF pts when stratified by mFI (p<.001).
CONCLUSION(S): Frailty imposes a significant burden on adult spinal deformity patients from the moment of presentation through cost-utility at two years. Assessing frailty by different measures demonstrated meaningful differences in complications and outcomes. These findings highlight the impact of frailty stratification during surgical planning to effectively assess the risk of patients undergoing corrective surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803967
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510872
51. How good are surgeons at achieving their goal sagittal alignment following adult deformity surgery? [Meeting Abstract]
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
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
EMBASE:2019803884
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5511012
161. Expectations of clinical improvement following corrective surgery for adult cervical deformity based on functional disability at presentation [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Surgical intervention has been shown to be an effective treatment modality for adult cervical deformity (CD), yet patient-reported outcomes vary even when patients are optimally realigned. While patients with higher baseline disability have more room for improvement, we propose there may be a threshold beyond which greater disability limits health-related quality of life (HRQL) improvement due to elevated risks and a point of no return. PURPOSE: To assess impact of baseline disability on HRQL outcomes. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective study of prospectively enrolled CD patients in a multicenter CD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 116 CD patients were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: HRQL, neck disability index (NDI), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ5D).
METHOD(S): CD patients with baseline (BL) and 2-year follow-up (2Y) were included. The cohort was ranked into quartiles by baseline NDI, from lowest/best score (Q1) to highest/worst score (Q4). Means comparison tests analyzed differences between disability groups. Multivariate Analyses (MVA) assessed differences in outcomes of interest controlling for covariates including BL deformity, HRQLs, surgical details and complications.
RESULT(S): A total of 116 patients met inclusion criteria (age: 60.97+/-10.45 yrs, BMI: 28.73+/-7.59kg/m2, CCI: 0.94+/-1.31). The cohort presented with mean BL cSVA was 38.54 +/- 19.43mm, TS-CL: 37.34 +/- 19.73, and mJOA: 13.62 +/- 2.71. Surgically, patients had an average of 8.44 +/- 3.41 levels fused, with 53.5% of patients undergoing decompression and 48.3% undergoing osteotomy. Mean BL NDI and numerical rating scale (NRS) of the cohort were 48.33 +/- 17.99 and 6.74 +/- 2.48 respectively. Mean BL NDI by disability group was as follows: Q1: 25.04 +/- 8.19, Q2: 41.61 +/- 2.77, Q3: 53.31 +/- 4.32, and Q4: 69.52 +/- 8.35. MVA assessing improvement in NRS neck and NRS back, found significant differences between disability groups (both p=.007). Patients in Q2 demonstrated the greatest improvement in NRS neck at 2 years (-3.93), which was greater than those in Q3 (-1.61, p=.032) and Q4 (-1.41, p=.015). Patients in Q2 demonstrated greater improvement in NRS back at 2 years (-1.71), compared to those in Q4 (+0.84, p=.010). Rates of MCID in NRS neck were also significantly different across disability groups (p=.023). Patients in Q2 met MCID at the highest rates (69.9%) of all groups, higher than those in Q4 (30.3%), p=.039. MVA found patients in Q2 demonstrated the greatest improvement in EQ5D at 2 years (+0.082), compared to Q1 (+0.073), Q3 (+0.022), and Q4 (+0.014), p=.034. Finally, patients in Q2 demonstrated the greatest improvement in mJOA score from baseline (+1.517), p=.042.
CONCLUSION(S): Patients in Q2, with mean baseline NDI of 42, consistently demonstrated the greatest improvement in HRQLs whereas those in Q4, with mean baseline NDI of 70, saw the least improvement. Thus, baseline NDI between 39 and 44 may represent a disability "wweet spot," within which operative intervention maximizes patient reported outcomes. Furthermore, delaying intervention until patients are severely disabled, beyond an NDI of 61, limits benefits of surgical correction in cervical deformity patients. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): CD patients with baseline (BL) and 2-year follow-up (2Y) were included. The cohort was ranked into quartiles by baseline NDI, from lowest/best score (Q1) to highest/worst score (Q4). Means comparison tests analyzed differences between disability groups. Multivariate Analyses (MVA) assessed differences in outcomes of interest controlling for covariates including BL deformity, HRQLs, surgical details and complications.
RESULT(S): A total of 116 patients met inclusion criteria (age: 60.97+/-10.45 yrs, BMI: 28.73+/-7.59kg/m2, CCI: 0.94+/-1.31). The cohort presented with mean BL cSVA was 38.54 +/- 19.43mm, TS-CL: 37.34 +/- 19.73, and mJOA: 13.62 +/- 2.71. Surgically, patients had an average of 8.44 +/- 3.41 levels fused, with 53.5% of patients undergoing decompression and 48.3% undergoing osteotomy. Mean BL NDI and numerical rating scale (NRS) of the cohort were 48.33 +/- 17.99 and 6.74 +/- 2.48 respectively. Mean BL NDI by disability group was as follows: Q1: 25.04 +/- 8.19, Q2: 41.61 +/- 2.77, Q3: 53.31 +/- 4.32, and Q4: 69.52 +/- 8.35. MVA assessing improvement in NRS neck and NRS back, found significant differences between disability groups (both p=.007). Patients in Q2 demonstrated the greatest improvement in NRS neck at 2 years (-3.93), which was greater than those in Q3 (-1.61, p=.032) and Q4 (-1.41, p=.015). Patients in Q2 demonstrated greater improvement in NRS back at 2 years (-1.71), compared to those in Q4 (+0.84, p=.010). Rates of MCID in NRS neck were also significantly different across disability groups (p=.023). Patients in Q2 met MCID at the highest rates (69.9%) of all groups, higher than those in Q4 (30.3%), p=.039. MVA found patients in Q2 demonstrated the greatest improvement in EQ5D at 2 years (+0.082), compared to Q1 (+0.073), Q3 (+0.022), and Q4 (+0.014), p=.034. Finally, patients in Q2 demonstrated the greatest improvement in mJOA score from baseline (+1.517), p=.042.
CONCLUSION(S): Patients in Q2, with mean baseline NDI of 42, consistently demonstrated the greatest improvement in HRQLs whereas those in Q4, with mean baseline NDI of 70, saw the least improvement. Thus, baseline NDI between 39 and 44 may represent a disability "wweet spot," within which operative intervention maximizes patient reported outcomes. Furthermore, delaying intervention until patients are severely disabled, beyond an NDI of 61, limits benefits of surgical correction in cervical deformity patients. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803969
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510862
142. Loss of sagittal correction >3 years after adult spinal deformity surgery [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The durability of adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is key for cost-effective treatment. Malalignment is one of the main reasons for revision surgery. PURPOSE: To investigate risk factors for loss of correction within the instrumented lumbar spine following ASD surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of a prospective database. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 321 ASD patients with minimum 3 -year follow-up. OUTCOME MEASURES: L1-S1, L4-S1 and L1-L4 lumbar lordosis.
METHOD(S): A total of 321 patients who underwent fusion of the lumbar spine (=5 levels, LIV S1/ilium) with a revision-free follow-up =3 years were identified. Patients were stratified by the change in PI-LL from 6 weeks to 3 years postop as Maintained vs Loss > 5degree. Those with a loss due to instrumentation failure (broken rod, screw pullout, etc.) were excluded before comparisons. Changes in regional and focal lordosis over time were investigated with repeated measures ANOVA and factor comparison.
RESULT(S): Mean age 64 yrs, BMI 28 kg/m2, 80% female. The baseline alignment (PI-LL=21+/-19degree, T1PA=26+/-12degree) was corrected to PI-LL=3+/-13degree, and T1PA=18+/-10degree at 3 yrs (mean 3Y follow-up: 45+/-11m, with 44+/-11 mo between early and late follow-up). Eighty-two patients (25.5%) lost >5degree of PI-LL correction (mean loss 10+/-5degree). After exclusion of patients with instrumentation failure, 52 patients (Loss) with a mean loss of correction of 8.6+/-2.9 were compared to 222 controls with maintained LL correction. Demographics were similar between groups (age: 63 vs 61 p=0.15; Sex: 78.4% F vs 88.5% p=0.10). There were no significant differences in use of osteotomy, 3CO, and IBF between Loss and Maintained LL (all p >0.1). There was no significant difference in number of levels fused (11 vs 12 p=0.39), rod material (CoCr 59.4% vs 58.8% p=0.34), and BMP use (88.7% vs 84.6% p=0.41) but Loss had less supplemental rod use (5.8% vs 23.4% p=0.004). Comparison between Maintained and Loss revealed a similar PI-LL mismatch at pre-op (16.7+/-18.7 vs 20.9+/-18.3 p=0.14) and final postop (1.8+/-12.5 vs 5.1+/-14.5 p=0.11) but a significantly smaller PI-LL for Loss at early postop (0.6+/-12.8 vs -3.5+/-13.7 p=0.41). Distally, Maintained had a significant improvement in L4-S1 lordosis from preop to early postop (p=0.013), with no significant difference from early to final follow-up. In contrast, patients in the Loss group had no difference in L4-S1 from preop to early postop (p=0.14), but showed a significant loss of correction at 3 years (p <0.001). Proximally, significant increase between pre and early postop in L1-L4 (all p <0.001), with Loss and Maintained reaching similar early postop value (p=0.34). However, from early postop to final follow up, Loss showed a significant decrease in proximal lordosis (p <0.001) while Maintained did not (p=0.08), corresponding with a smaller absolute L1-L4 in the Loss cohort at 3 yrs (p=0.002). Screw orientation showed a significant decrease from early to late follow-up between the L1 and S1 screws for Loss (1.3+/-4.1 p=0.031), without any changes across the L4-S1 segment (-0.1+/-2.9 p=0.97).
CONCLUSION(S): Approximately a quarter of patients lose an average of 10degree of their 6-week correction by 3 years. Lordosis is lost proximally through the instrumentation (ie, tulip/shank angle shifts and/or rod bending), but lost distally through bone "settling" through the instrumentation itself. The use of supplemental rods and avoiding sagittal overcorrection may help mitigate this loss. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): A total of 321 patients who underwent fusion of the lumbar spine (=5 levels, LIV S1/ilium) with a revision-free follow-up =3 years were identified. Patients were stratified by the change in PI-LL from 6 weeks to 3 years postop as Maintained vs Loss > 5degree. Those with a loss due to instrumentation failure (broken rod, screw pullout, etc.) were excluded before comparisons. Changes in regional and focal lordosis over time were investigated with repeated measures ANOVA and factor comparison.
RESULT(S): Mean age 64 yrs, BMI 28 kg/m2, 80% female. The baseline alignment (PI-LL=21+/-19degree, T1PA=26+/-12degree) was corrected to PI-LL=3+/-13degree, and T1PA=18+/-10degree at 3 yrs (mean 3Y follow-up: 45+/-11m, with 44+/-11 mo between early and late follow-up). Eighty-two patients (25.5%) lost >5degree of PI-LL correction (mean loss 10+/-5degree). After exclusion of patients with instrumentation failure, 52 patients (Loss) with a mean loss of correction of 8.6+/-2.9 were compared to 222 controls with maintained LL correction. Demographics were similar between groups (age: 63 vs 61 p=0.15; Sex: 78.4% F vs 88.5% p=0.10). There were no significant differences in use of osteotomy, 3CO, and IBF between Loss and Maintained LL (all p >0.1). There was no significant difference in number of levels fused (11 vs 12 p=0.39), rod material (CoCr 59.4% vs 58.8% p=0.34), and BMP use (88.7% vs 84.6% p=0.41) but Loss had less supplemental rod use (5.8% vs 23.4% p=0.004). Comparison between Maintained and Loss revealed a similar PI-LL mismatch at pre-op (16.7+/-18.7 vs 20.9+/-18.3 p=0.14) and final postop (1.8+/-12.5 vs 5.1+/-14.5 p=0.11) but a significantly smaller PI-LL for Loss at early postop (0.6+/-12.8 vs -3.5+/-13.7 p=0.41). Distally, Maintained had a significant improvement in L4-S1 lordosis from preop to early postop (p=0.013), with no significant difference from early to final follow-up. In contrast, patients in the Loss group had no difference in L4-S1 from preop to early postop (p=0.14), but showed a significant loss of correction at 3 years (p <0.001). Proximally, significant increase between pre and early postop in L1-L4 (all p <0.001), with Loss and Maintained reaching similar early postop value (p=0.34). However, from early postop to final follow up, Loss showed a significant decrease in proximal lordosis (p <0.001) while Maintained did not (p=0.08), corresponding with a smaller absolute L1-L4 in the Loss cohort at 3 yrs (p=0.002). Screw orientation showed a significant decrease from early to late follow-up between the L1 and S1 screws for Loss (1.3+/-4.1 p=0.031), without any changes across the L4-S1 segment (-0.1+/-2.9 p=0.97).
CONCLUSION(S): Approximately a quarter of patients lose an average of 10degree of their 6-week correction by 3 years. Lordosis is lost proximally through the instrumentation (ie, tulip/shank angle shifts and/or rod bending), but lost distally through bone "settling" through the instrumentation itself. The use of supplemental rods and avoiding sagittal overcorrection may help mitigate this loss. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803975
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510852
182. Impact of realignment schemas on rates of proximal junctional changes in adult spinal deformity surgery [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Operative intervention for adult spinal deformity (ASD) is associated with high rates of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF). Multiple attempts have been made to guide realignment for ASD corrective surgery, yet the predominance have been based on functional gains, which may or may not directly impact such junctional malcompensation. PURPOSE: To assess impact of baseline patient deformity and surgical realignment on rates of PJK and PJF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective study of patients prospectively enrolled in a single center ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 298 ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK); proximal junctional Failure (PJF).
METHOD(S): ASD patients with 2-year (2Y) data, UIV above L1 and LIV at S1 or pelvis were included. Those with evidence of PJK at 6-weeks postoperatively were excluded. Six-week radiographs were used to assess alignment by 5 published alignment systems: SRS-Schwab, GAP Score, age-adjusted (AA), Roussouly (Rous), and the newly published sagittal age-adjusted score (SAAS). To compare the impact of each alignment system on rates of PJK and PJF by level of baseline deformity, all radiographic measurements used to calculate SRS-Schwab, AA, Rous, GAP and SAAS were re-scaled from 0 to 100 using the min-max of the cohort for each respective angle. Normalized values were then summed to compute a composite "deformity score" for each patient. Patients were ranked by deformity score into 3 groups: mild, moderate, and severe. Means comparison tests were used to assess rates of PJK and PJF (defined as PJK with reoperation) by alignment system in the cohort and by deformity group. Multivariate logistic regressions controlling for covariates such as age, PJK prophylaxis, and osteoporosis were used to generate odds ratios (OR) and identify the alignment systems associated with lower odds of developing PJK and PJF.
RESULT(S): A total of 298 patients met inclusion (62.5yrs, BMI: 27.5kg/m2, CCI: 1.5, 76% F). Overall, 33.6% of the cohort developed PJK and 6.7% developed PJF. MVA of the cohort found those aligned to AA had a 55% lower odds of PJK (OR: 0.453, [0.283, 0.727], p=.001) and 60.4% lower odds of PJF (OR: 0.396, [0.169, 0.933], p=.034). Subanalysis of patients presenting with mild deformity scores (N=71) found none of the alignment systems reduced odds of PJK or PJF (all p>.05). Subanalysis of patients presenting with moderate deformity scores (N=108) found those meeting AA had 79% lower odds of PJK (OR: 0.210, [0.072, 0.615], p=.004), yet none of the alignment systems significantly reduced odds of PJF. In those severe deformity scores (N=119), meeting Schwab significantly reduced odds of PJK (OR: 0.492, [0.318, 0.761], p=.001). With regard to PJF, in those with severe deformity scores, alignment to Schwab (OR: 0.235, [0.104, 0.532], p=.001) and AA significantly reduced odds of PJF (OR: 0.352, [0.124, 0.994], p=.049).
CONCLUSION(S): This study aimed to assess impact of realignment to published systems on rates of PJK and PJF in surgical correction of adult spinal deformity. Overally, those meeting age-adjusted alignment had lowest rates of PJK and PJF. Morover, further analysis revealed that moderately and severely deformed patients beneit benefit from realignment to age adjusted criteria. However, none of the alignment systems were associated with lower odds of PJK or PJF in those presenting with mild deformity. This may indicate a certain level of PJK and PJF is not preventable by optimal realignment alone. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): ASD patients with 2-year (2Y) data, UIV above L1 and LIV at S1 or pelvis were included. Those with evidence of PJK at 6-weeks postoperatively were excluded. Six-week radiographs were used to assess alignment by 5 published alignment systems: SRS-Schwab, GAP Score, age-adjusted (AA), Roussouly (Rous), and the newly published sagittal age-adjusted score (SAAS). To compare the impact of each alignment system on rates of PJK and PJF by level of baseline deformity, all radiographic measurements used to calculate SRS-Schwab, AA, Rous, GAP and SAAS were re-scaled from 0 to 100 using the min-max of the cohort for each respective angle. Normalized values were then summed to compute a composite "deformity score" for each patient. Patients were ranked by deformity score into 3 groups: mild, moderate, and severe. Means comparison tests were used to assess rates of PJK and PJF (defined as PJK with reoperation) by alignment system in the cohort and by deformity group. Multivariate logistic regressions controlling for covariates such as age, PJK prophylaxis, and osteoporosis were used to generate odds ratios (OR) and identify the alignment systems associated with lower odds of developing PJK and PJF.
RESULT(S): A total of 298 patients met inclusion (62.5yrs, BMI: 27.5kg/m2, CCI: 1.5, 76% F). Overall, 33.6% of the cohort developed PJK and 6.7% developed PJF. MVA of the cohort found those aligned to AA had a 55% lower odds of PJK (OR: 0.453, [0.283, 0.727], p=.001) and 60.4% lower odds of PJF (OR: 0.396, [0.169, 0.933], p=.034). Subanalysis of patients presenting with mild deformity scores (N=71) found none of the alignment systems reduced odds of PJK or PJF (all p>.05). Subanalysis of patients presenting with moderate deformity scores (N=108) found those meeting AA had 79% lower odds of PJK (OR: 0.210, [0.072, 0.615], p=.004), yet none of the alignment systems significantly reduced odds of PJF. In those severe deformity scores (N=119), meeting Schwab significantly reduced odds of PJK (OR: 0.492, [0.318, 0.761], p=.001). With regard to PJF, in those with severe deformity scores, alignment to Schwab (OR: 0.235, [0.104, 0.532], p=.001) and AA significantly reduced odds of PJF (OR: 0.352, [0.124, 0.994], p=.049).
CONCLUSION(S): This study aimed to assess impact of realignment to published systems on rates of PJK and PJF in surgical correction of adult spinal deformity. Overally, those meeting age-adjusted alignment had lowest rates of PJK and PJF. Morover, further analysis revealed that moderately and severely deformed patients beneit benefit from realignment to age adjusted criteria. However, none of the alignment systems were associated with lower odds of PJK or PJF in those presenting with mild deformity. This may indicate a certain level of PJK and PJF is not preventable by optimal realignment alone. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803852
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5511092
P110. Should age adjusted realignment goals vary based on patient frailty status in adult spinal deformity? [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Adaptation of age-adjusted alignment has gained popularity for its correlation with clinical improvement and lowering rates of proximal junctional kyphosis. Age-adjusted parameters correlate with outcomes. However, frailty may be a better predictor of each following ASD surgery. PURPOSE: To adjust the Sagittal Age-Adjusted Score (SAAS) to accommodate frailty in alignment considerations will increase the predictability of clinical outcomes and junctional failure. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 689 ASD Patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Mechanical complications, PJF, PJK and ODI.
METHOD(S): Included: surgical ASD pts with 2Y data. Frailty assessed by ASD modified Frailty Index (ASD-mFI).
Outcome(s): proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF), major mechanical complications, and Smith et al Best Clinical Outcome (BCO), defined as ODI 4.5. Linear regression analysis established a 6W score based on SAAS component scores, frailty and ODI US norms per published by Lafage et al. Logistic regression followed by conditional inference tree (CIT) analysis generated categorical thresholds. Logistic regression analysis controlling for age, baseline deformity and revision status generated odds ratios for the continuous score. Thirty percent of the cohort was used as a random sample for internal validation.
RESULT(S): There were 412 pts included. BL frailty categories: 57% not frail, 30% frail and 14% severely frail. Overall, by 2Y, 39% of patients developed PJK, 8% PJF, 21% mechanical complications, 22% underwent reoperation and 15% met BCO. SAAS only correlated with development of PJF. The ASD-mFI demonstrated correlation with all outcomes except PJK (all p1.4, offset: 0.75-1.4, sseverely offset:.05). Internal validation saw these outcomes maintain significance between categories, with significant adjusted correlation to meeting BCO (OR: 3.8, 1.1-13.5; p=.037).
CONCLUSION(S): Consideration of physiologic age, in addition to chronological age, may be beneficial in management of operative goals to maximize clinical outcomes while minimizing junctional failure. This combination enables the spine surgeon to fortify a surgical plan for even the most challenging patients undergoing adult spinal deformity surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): Included: surgical ASD pts with 2Y data. Frailty assessed by ASD modified Frailty Index (ASD-mFI).
Outcome(s): proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF), major mechanical complications, and Smith et al Best Clinical Outcome (BCO), defined as ODI 4.5. Linear regression analysis established a 6W score based on SAAS component scores, frailty and ODI US norms per published by Lafage et al. Logistic regression followed by conditional inference tree (CIT) analysis generated categorical thresholds. Logistic regression analysis controlling for age, baseline deformity and revision status generated odds ratios for the continuous score. Thirty percent of the cohort was used as a random sample for internal validation.
RESULT(S): There were 412 pts included. BL frailty categories: 57% not frail, 30% frail and 14% severely frail. Overall, by 2Y, 39% of patients developed PJK, 8% PJF, 21% mechanical complications, 22% underwent reoperation and 15% met BCO. SAAS only correlated with development of PJF. The ASD-mFI demonstrated correlation with all outcomes except PJK (all p1.4, offset: 0.75-1.4, sseverely offset:.05). Internal validation saw these outcomes maintain significance between categories, with significant adjusted correlation to meeting BCO (OR: 3.8, 1.1-13.5; p=.037).
CONCLUSION(S): Consideration of physiologic age, in addition to chronological age, may be beneficial in management of operative goals to maximize clinical outcomes while minimizing junctional failure. This combination enables the spine surgeon to fortify a surgical plan for even the most challenging patients undergoing adult spinal deformity surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804816
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510462
145. Does preoperative rehabilitation for adult spinal deformity surgery improve patient recovery kinetics and cost effectiveness? [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Preoperative rehabilitation programs have recently been implemented to prepare patients for surgery and to promote patient health. In this cohort, preoperative rehabilitation consisted of physical and mental components. Patients were referred for physical therapy for 3 months, 3 days a week for core, paraspinal and leg strengthening, with a review of postop protocols to do at home, including gait and balance training. Patients were also referred for cognitive behavioral therapy for 2 weeks to prepare for the stress of surgery. Patients were excluded if they presented with any of the following at baseline (BL): severe neurological deficit (<3/5), minimal ambulation or current depression/anxiety. PURPOSE: Identify if preoperative rehabilitation influences patients' ability to recover and adult spinal deformity correction cost-effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 689 adult spinal deformity patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative rehabilitation, recovery kinetics, cost effectiveness.
METHOD(S): Adult spinal deformity patients with baseline (BL) and two-year (2Y) follow-up, and available preoperative rehabilitation and economic data were included. Patients were divided on whether or not they completed a preoperative rehabilitation assignment (Prehab) or not (no Prehab). Normalized HRQL scores at BL and follow-up intervals (6W, 1Y, 2Y) were generated. Normalized HRQLs were plotted and area under the curve was calculated, generating one number describing overall recovery (Integrated Health State [IHS]). Cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database. This data is representative of national average Medicare cost differentiated by complication/comorbidity outcome, surgical approach, and revision status. Cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at 2Y were calculated. Multivariate logistic regression analysis assessed patient reported outcomes and cost adjusting for baseline and surgical characteristics.
RESULT(S): A total of 100 patients were included (36 Prehab, 64 no Prehab). Age (59.2 vs 56.2), gender (F: 58% vs 45%), body mass index (32.9 vs 31.4), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.8 vs 3.9) were similar between groups (P >0.05). OpTime, EBL, and length of construct were similar between groups (p >0.05). Normalized HRQLs determined Prehab patients to exhibit better ODI than no Prehab patients at 2Y follow-up, p 0.05. Cost effectiveness was determined via cost per QALY: Prehab = $14,463 and not Prehab = $45,515, p <0.05.
CONCLUSION(S): Patients who had a preoperative rehabilitation prior to corrective surgery were in a better state of postoperative back disability at two-year follow-up. While both patient cohorts had improvement following surgery, patients with preoperative rehabilitation had greater utility gained at two-year follow-up. Costs by procedure and cost effectiveness were better for patients who had preoperative rehabilitation. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): Adult spinal deformity patients with baseline (BL) and two-year (2Y) follow-up, and available preoperative rehabilitation and economic data were included. Patients were divided on whether or not they completed a preoperative rehabilitation assignment (Prehab) or not (no Prehab). Normalized HRQL scores at BL and follow-up intervals (6W, 1Y, 2Y) were generated. Normalized HRQLs were plotted and area under the curve was calculated, generating one number describing overall recovery (Integrated Health State [IHS]). Cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database. This data is representative of national average Medicare cost differentiated by complication/comorbidity outcome, surgical approach, and revision status. Cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at 2Y were calculated. Multivariate logistic regression analysis assessed patient reported outcomes and cost adjusting for baseline and surgical characteristics.
RESULT(S): A total of 100 patients were included (36 Prehab, 64 no Prehab). Age (59.2 vs 56.2), gender (F: 58% vs 45%), body mass index (32.9 vs 31.4), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.8 vs 3.9) were similar between groups (P >0.05). OpTime, EBL, and length of construct were similar between groups (p >0.05). Normalized HRQLs determined Prehab patients to exhibit better ODI than no Prehab patients at 2Y follow-up, p 0.05. Cost effectiveness was determined via cost per QALY: Prehab = $14,463 and not Prehab = $45,515, p <0.05.
CONCLUSION(S): Patients who had a preoperative rehabilitation prior to corrective surgery were in a better state of postoperative back disability at two-year follow-up. While both patient cohorts had improvement following surgery, patients with preoperative rehabilitation had greater utility gained at two-year follow-up. Costs by procedure and cost effectiveness were better for patients who had preoperative rehabilitation. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803840
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5511112
P3. How to make ends meet: a risk assessment for pseudarthrosis and cost benefit analysis of BMP-2 in adult spinal deformity surgery [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 (BMP-2) has not shown superior benefit in terms of overall cost-effectiveness after implementation during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. However, it remains to be shown whether certain discrete populations do obtain cost-utility from use of BMP-2. PURPOSE: Generate a score to determine usage of BMP-2 and correlate with rates of pseudarthrosis. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of a single-center ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 689 ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost utility, pseudarthrosis.
METHOD(S): ASD patients with BL and 2-year(2Y) data included. BMP-2 kit size and cost: small - 4.2 mg ($21,800), medium - 8.4 mg ($23,667), large - 12 mg ($25,617). Published methods converted ODI to SF-6D. QALYs utilized a 3% discount rate for residual decline. Cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database and assessed for Complications and Comorbidities and Major Complications and Comorbidities according to CMS.gov definitions. Binary logistic regression analyses determined significant predictors for development of pseudarthrosis. Established weights were generated for predictive variables via back-step logistic regression for a risk score to predict development of pseudarthrosis. Risk score was then validated via Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve method analysis. Categories via conditional inference tree (CIT) analysis-derived thresholds were tested for cost-utility of BMP-2 usage. Marginalized means for utility gained and Cost per QALY were calculated within each risk score category, controlling for age, history of prior fusion, and baseline deformity and disability.
RESULT(S): Included: 387 ASD patients. Of 387, 64% received BMP-2 (1% small, 4% medium, 59% large). There were 17 (4.4%) of patients that developed pseudarthrosis by two years, 9 (2.3%) of which underwent reoperation. BMP-2 use, regardless of kit size, did not significantly lower pseudarthrosis rates overall (OR: 0.4, [0.2-1.04]). A predictive risk score for development of pseudarthrosis was formed by the following preoperative variables: age, frailty, history of diabetes, osteoporosis, depression, ASA grade, and baseline L4-S1 and T1PA. Via ROC method, this predictive risk score generated an AUC of 0.87. Following CIT machine learning, thresholds for the BMP Risk Score were derived: >5 No Risk (NoR), 3-5 Low Risk (LowR), 2-3 Moderate Risk (ModR), and <2 High Risk (HighR). The rates of pseudarthrosis for each category were: NoR - 0%; LowR - 1.6%; ModR - 9.3%; HighR - 24.3%. When assessing BMP-2 use and its cost-utility within each group, patients receiving BMP-2 had similar QALYs to those that did not receive BMP-2 (0.163 vs 0.171, p=.65). BMP-2 usage had significantly worse cost-utility in both NoR and LowR cohorts (both p<.05). In ModR patients, BMP-2 usage had equivocal cost-utility ($680,532.35 vs $580,380.21, p=.14). In the HighR cohort, the cost-utility difference narrowed even further (BMP-2 use: $743,155.21 vs $719,628.79, p=.82).
CONCLUSION(S): Our study shows BMP-2 has equivocal cost-utility within those at moderate and high risk for developing pseudarthrosis within two years following spinal deformity correction. The generated predictive score can better aid spine surgeons assess risk and enhance justification for the use of BMP-2 during surgical intervention for adult spinal deformity. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): ASD patients with BL and 2-year(2Y) data included. BMP-2 kit size and cost: small - 4.2 mg ($21,800), medium - 8.4 mg ($23,667), large - 12 mg ($25,617). Published methods converted ODI to SF-6D. QALYs utilized a 3% discount rate for residual decline. Cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database and assessed for Complications and Comorbidities and Major Complications and Comorbidities according to CMS.gov definitions. Binary logistic regression analyses determined significant predictors for development of pseudarthrosis. Established weights were generated for predictive variables via back-step logistic regression for a risk score to predict development of pseudarthrosis. Risk score was then validated via Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve method analysis. Categories via conditional inference tree (CIT) analysis-derived thresholds were tested for cost-utility of BMP-2 usage. Marginalized means for utility gained and Cost per QALY were calculated within each risk score category, controlling for age, history of prior fusion, and baseline deformity and disability.
RESULT(S): Included: 387 ASD patients. Of 387, 64% received BMP-2 (1% small, 4% medium, 59% large). There were 17 (4.4%) of patients that developed pseudarthrosis by two years, 9 (2.3%) of which underwent reoperation. BMP-2 use, regardless of kit size, did not significantly lower pseudarthrosis rates overall (OR: 0.4, [0.2-1.04]). A predictive risk score for development of pseudarthrosis was formed by the following preoperative variables: age, frailty, history of diabetes, osteoporosis, depression, ASA grade, and baseline L4-S1 and T1PA. Via ROC method, this predictive risk score generated an AUC of 0.87. Following CIT machine learning, thresholds for the BMP Risk Score were derived: >5 No Risk (NoR), 3-5 Low Risk (LowR), 2-3 Moderate Risk (ModR), and <2 High Risk (HighR). The rates of pseudarthrosis for each category were: NoR - 0%; LowR - 1.6%; ModR - 9.3%; HighR - 24.3%. When assessing BMP-2 use and its cost-utility within each group, patients receiving BMP-2 had similar QALYs to those that did not receive BMP-2 (0.163 vs 0.171, p=.65). BMP-2 usage had significantly worse cost-utility in both NoR and LowR cohorts (both p<.05). In ModR patients, BMP-2 usage had equivocal cost-utility ($680,532.35 vs $580,380.21, p=.14). In the HighR cohort, the cost-utility difference narrowed even further (BMP-2 use: $743,155.21 vs $719,628.79, p=.82).
CONCLUSION(S): Our study shows BMP-2 has equivocal cost-utility within those at moderate and high risk for developing pseudarthrosis within two years following spinal deformity correction. The generated predictive score can better aid spine surgeons assess risk and enhance justification for the use of BMP-2 during surgical intervention for adult spinal deformity. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804053
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510762
52. Patients with additional medical comorbidities failed to maintain MCID+ status at five years following adult spinal deformity surgery [Meeting Abstract]
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Evidence on long-term maintenance of health status in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients who improve above MCID threshold (MCID+) at 2 years following surgery is limited. PURPOSE: This study aims to: (1) evaluate whether patients who reached MCID+ status at two years postoperatively will maintain MCID+ status at 5 years, (2) identify risk factors associated with maintaining MCID+ status, and (3) Assess whether maintaining MCID+ status at 5 years is associated with satisfaction with surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery with minimum 5-year follow-up who achieved 2-year MCID in ODI were identified. OUTCOME MEASURES: Maintenance of MCID+ status at 5 years for Oswestry Diability Index (ODI).
METHOD(S): Patients who maintained MCID+ status at 5 years and those who did not formed the comparison groups. Multivariable logistic regression, controlling for age, complications after two years and two-year alignment, was used to identify risk factors associated with the inability to maintain MCID+ status. In a separate multivariable logistic regression, whether maintaining MCID+ status was associated with 5-year surgical satisfaction was assessed.
RESULT(S): Of 633 eligible patients, 339 had 5-year data. Of 133 with both 2- and 5-year data, 70 who achieved 2-year MCID in ODI were included. 30% (21) failed to maintain MCID+ status at 5 years. Preoperatively, 33% (23) were narcotic users, 47% (33) were frail and mean surgical invasiveness was 96.6+/-36.02. On multivariable logistic regression, preoperative variables were assessed: CCI > 3 (OR 5.75; p=0.026), ASA grade > 2 (OR 5.25; p=0.015), anemia (OR 19.74; p=0.009), and cancer (OR 6.46; p=0.015) were associated with increased odds of failure to maintain MCID+ status at 5-year follow-up. Patients who failed to maintain MCID+ status at 5 years had a higher odds of being unsatisfied with the surgery (OR 15.66; p=0.001). Frailty and surgical invasiveness had no significant impact on MCID+ status at 5 years.
CONCLUSION(S): Preoperative comorbid conditions significantly impact patient's long-term ability to maintain the positive gains in health-related quality of life measures from the surgery. Surgeons should continue to monitor and treat the chronic conditions to ensure maintenance of long-term recovery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
METHOD(S): Patients who maintained MCID+ status at 5 years and those who did not formed the comparison groups. Multivariable logistic regression, controlling for age, complications after two years and two-year alignment, was used to identify risk factors associated with the inability to maintain MCID+ status. In a separate multivariable logistic regression, whether maintaining MCID+ status was associated with 5-year surgical satisfaction was assessed.
RESULT(S): Of 633 eligible patients, 339 had 5-year data. Of 133 with both 2- and 5-year data, 70 who achieved 2-year MCID in ODI were included. 30% (21) failed to maintain MCID+ status at 5 years. Preoperatively, 33% (23) were narcotic users, 47% (33) were frail and mean surgical invasiveness was 96.6+/-36.02. On multivariable logistic regression, preoperative variables were assessed: CCI > 3 (OR 5.75; p=0.026), ASA grade > 2 (OR 5.25; p=0.015), anemia (OR 19.74; p=0.009), and cancer (OR 6.46; p=0.015) were associated with increased odds of failure to maintain MCID+ status at 5-year follow-up. Patients who failed to maintain MCID+ status at 5 years had a higher odds of being unsatisfied with the surgery (OR 15.66; p=0.001). Frailty and surgical invasiveness had no significant impact on MCID+ status at 5 years.
CONCLUSION(S): Preoperative comorbid conditions significantly impact patient's long-term ability to maintain the positive gains in health-related quality of life measures from the surgery. Surgeons should continue to monitor and treat the chronic conditions to ensure maintenance of long-term recovery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804014
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510782
