Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The choice of surgical approach in CD surgery is often dictated by surgeon preference and experience. This choice could significantly impact the costs and outcomes of an operation, therefore the approaches should be analyzed in order to determine the optimal approach from a cost-utility perspective. The cost utility of different surgical approaches in cervical deformity (CD) has not been investigated in the literature. PURPOSE: Investigate the cost utility of differing approaches in operative CD patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective multicenter cervical deformity database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 105 CD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), Quality adjusted life years (QALYs), Cost per quality adjusted life years.
METHOD(S): Included CD patients (C2-C7 Cobb>10degreeor CK>10degree, cSVA>4cm or CBVA>25degree) >18yr with follow-up (1-year) surgical and health related quality of life scores. Costs were calculated using the PearlDiver database, which reflects both private insurance and Medicare reimbursement claims. QALYs and cost per QALY were calculated using a 3% discount rate to account for residual decline to life expectancy (78.7 years). After accounting for complications, LOS, revisions, and death, cost per QALY at 1Y and life expectancy [LE] were calculated for surgical approach (anterior-only, posterior-only [excluding PSO and VCR to account for differences in instrumentation], combined). In a subanalysis, approach groups were propensity-score matched for TS-CL to account for baseline (BL) deformity.
RESULT(S): A total of 105 CD patients met inclusion criteria (61.9 yrs, 63% female, 28.6kg/m2, CCI: 0.97). By approach, 21.9% underwent anterior only, 37.1% posterior only and 41% combined approaches. Average number of levels fused was 6.9, with a mean EBL of 948 ml and total operative time of 544.2 minutes. Mean EQ5D at BL was 0.74+/-0.07 and at 1Y was 0.79+/-0.08 (a difference of 0.05+/-0.08). Average difference in EQ5D from BL to 1Y was significant (p=0.002) across approach: 0.093 anterior-only, 0.021 posterior-only, 0.044 combined. 13% (3) of anterior-only patients underwent a revision, 10.3% (4) of posterior and 13.9% (6) of combined approaches. The average costs per surgery for CD patients at 1-year undergoing surgery by anterior approach was $27,640.75, $38,499.44 posterior-only, and $36,553.41 combined approach (p>0.05).The cost per QALY was higher for posterior-only patients at 1-year ($948,946.81) compared to anterior-only ($152,616.65) and combined ($424,110.14), p<0.001. If the utility gained was sustained to life expectancy, the cost per QALY for the anterior-only group was $21,665.87, posterior-only was $134,715.06 and combined approach was $60,207.82., p<0.001. After PSM for TS-CL, 15 patients remained in each group. The cost per QALY remained higher for posterior-only patients at 1-year and LE (both p<0.050).
CONCLUSION(S): After accounting for comorbidities, complications, revisions, and death, all surgical approaches showed improvement in postoperative EQ5D scores, however posterior approach demonstrated overall lower cost effectiveness. CD patients who underwent anterior-only approach had the lowest average costs for CD corrective surgery, as well as the lowest cost per QALY (best cost-effectiveness) compared to posterior and combined approaches. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cervical deformity (CD) severity has been linked to poor quality of life and severe neck pain. However, little is known of the relationship between surgical invasiveness accounting for cervical deformity severity and frailty status. PURPOSE: Investigate the outcomes of CD surgery by invasiveness, frailty status and baseline degree of deformity. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Ninety-six CD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: HRQL measurements: NDI, EQ5D, mJOA.
METHOD(S): Inclusion criteria was defined as operative CD patients (C2-C7 Cobb>10degreeor CK>10degree, cSVA>4cm or CBVA>25degree) >18yr with follow up (1-year) radiographic and HRQL scores, NDI, mJOA and EQ5D. Patients were stratified by severity of deformity by TS-CL, categorized by the new-mJOA based modifiers: Low/Mod <45degree (Low-Mod); Severe >45degree(Sev). Frailty scores were calculated based upon the modified CD frailty index by Passias et. Al and categorized into severely frail (SF) >=0.5 and not SF (N-SF)<0.5. Patients were categorized by their frailty and deformity status (Low-Mod/N-SF; Low-Mod/SF; Sev/N-SF; Sev/SF). Logistic regression analysis assessed the relationship between increasing invasiveness and outcomes (DJK, complications). Within the significant frailty/deformity risk groups, decision tree analysis assessed thresholds for an invasiveness severity cut-off point, below which experiencing a reoperation, complication, DJK occurrence and poor mJOA were higher.
RESULT(S): Ninety-six CD patients met inclusion criteria (62.2+/-10.2 years, 66% female, 28.4+/-7.4 kg/m2). By approach: 19.8% anterior-only, 47.9% posterior-only, 32.3% combined (levels fused: 7.7+/-3.9). By deformity severity: 23.7% Low, 40.9% Moderate, 34.4% Severe, while frailty assessment placed 32.3% in N-SF and 67.7% SF. This categorized the patients into deformity/frailty groups as follows: 19.8% Low-Mod/N-SF(19), 13.5%(13) Sev/N-SF, 44.8%(43) Low-Mod/SF, 21.9%(21) Sev/SF. Logistic regression analysis found a significant relationship between increasing deformity severity and occurrence of severe postop DJK(1.053 [1.016-1.093], p= 0.005), complications(1.045 [1.012 - 1.080], p=0.007), revision by 1-year(1.059 [1.000-1.122], p= 0.049). Additionally, increasing invasiveness and occurrence of severe DJK (1.030 [1.007-1.054], p= 0.024) and revision (1.026 [1.008 - 1.044], p=0.005). Invasiveness increased with deformity and frailty severity: 53.6 Low-Mod/N-SF, 81.4 Sev/N-SF, 56.4 Low-Mod/SF, 79.8 Sev/SF; p=0.002. After defining a favorable outcome as no occurrence of severe DJK, no major complications and no revisions, and 1Y mJOA improvement (28.1%), invasiveness scores were compared within deformity/frailty groups between patients who met/did not meet the favorable outcome. For the NSF deformity groups, those with a favorable outcome had larger invasiveness scores (Low-Mod: 58.7 vs 48.5; Sev: 77.7 vs 89.6). For the SF deformity groups, the favorable outcome had significantly lower invasiveness scores for the Low-Mod deformity group (38.1 vs 62.9, p=0.008), while the Sev/SF deformity favorable outcome group remained larger (86.8 vs 79.4), though this was not significant. For the Low-Mod/SF group an invasiveness cutoff score of <48 where achieving a favorable outcome was 3x higher (3.08[1.2-7.9], p=0.019).
CONCLUSION(S): For SF patients, when deformity severity is low to moderate, surgeons may limit the invasiveness of their procedures in order to account for the patient's susceptibility to poor outcomes. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Prior studies demonstrated that symptomatic adult spinal deformity (SASD) is a heterogeneous condition with varying degrees of negative health impact depending on the specific type and severity of deformity. Currently, there is some controversy regarding the subset of SASD with global coronal malalignment (GCM) and its associated health impact. Moreover, few reports have assessed the health impact of this global coronal parameter in comparison to other deformity types. A comparative study of deformity types with severe global malalignment (eg, severe GCM) may provide clinically relevant insights and identify potential differences in demographics and health impact. PURPOSE: To compare demographics and health impact of SASD patients with severe global malalignment (primary sagittal [SAG-only] vs primary coronal [COR-only] vs sagittal+coronal [MIX]). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter database. PATIENT SAMPLE: Enrollment required age >=18 yrs and one of the following: scoliosis >=20degree, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) >=5cm, pelvic tilt >=25degree, and/or thoracic kyphosis >=60degree. OUTCOME MEASURES: Short Form-36 (SF-36) PCS score.
METHOD(S): Consecutive SASD patients from a prospective multicenter database were evaluated for type and severity of global malalignment. Severe alignment thresholds included SVA >=10cm (SAG-only), GCM >=6cm (COR-only), or both SVA >=10cm and GCM >=6cm (MIX). SF-36 PCS scores were compared with U.S. normative values.
RESULT(S): Of 492 SASD patients that met threshold alignment criteria, 463 (94%) completed the SF-36 and were included (78% women, mean age 65 years, mean BMI 28.6 kg/m2, previous spine surgery in 65%). Deformity types were SAG-only (58%), COR-only (19%) and MIX (23%). COR-only had more women (94%, p<0.001), younger age (61 years, p=0.004), and lower BMI (26 kg/m2, p<0.001). Charlson Comorbity Index (CCI) scores and total number of comorbidities were comparable among the deformity types (p>0.05). All deformity types were 'frail' based on ASD-Frailty Index scores (SAG-only [3.9], COR-only [3.1], MIX [4.0]). Overall mean PCS was lower compared to similar age- and gender-matched U.S. normative values (29.0 vs 45.3, p<0.001). Mean PCS was significantly different between deformity types (p<0.001): SAG-only (28.5) vs COR-only (33.1) vs MIX (27.0). PCS offsets from normative population scores were significantly different between deformity types (p=0.001): SAG-only (-16.6) vs COR-only (-13.4) vs MIX (-18.2).
CONCLUSION(S): Demographic comparisons demonstrated significantly more women, younger age, and lower BMI in the COR-only deformity type. Severe global malalignment (SVA >=10cm and/or GCM >=6cm) had substantial debilitating impact on health, with MIX deformity type (i.e., severe global sagittal and coronal malalignment) experiencing the greatest health impact. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Complications occur commonly following adult spinal deformity surgery. Length of stay may be influenced by the type of surgical intervention, and/or by postoperative complication and the intervention required to treat that complication. PURPOSE: To understand the impact of complications and their intervention severity on the incremental increase in length of stay. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of prospective ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: The study included 1418 adult spinal deformity patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Neurologic complications, HRQL scores.
METHOD(S): ASD patients (>18yrs, scoliosis >=20degree, SVA >=5cm, PT >=25degree and/or TK >60degree). Complications were classified based on complication type, and intervention severity (grade 0, no intervention, Grade 1 minimal intervention (medication change, etc), Grade 2 moderate (cardioversion, chest tube, etc), grade 3 major intervention (return to OR).
RESULT(S): Of the 1418 patients included, 901 had at least one complication event, with 568 with a complication before discharge. Three hundred and six had an event that required a reoperation and 275 were readmitted for their event. When determining LOS, a baseline was established that was influenced by the type of surgery and placed into three groups based on osteotomy (O) and interbody use (I); Group 1 (n408): 0% O, 75% I, LOS=7.9, Group 2 (n374): 100% O, 0% I, LOS=11.9, Group 3 (n595) 100% O and I, LOS=11.2. Having a complication event prior to discharge led to an increase of 1-4 days for each group (p<0.01). This was true for every complication, regardless of type, but was worse for renal and pneumonia. The increase in LOS was most driven by the intervention required. No intervention had an LOS of 6.9, Grade 1 +1.2 days, Grade 2, +1.8 days, Grade 3 +2.5 days. Using the sum of a weighted intervention score (SUM=1*#grade1 + 2*#grade2 + 3*#grade3), we can even more accurately predict the incremental increase in LOS. This occurs until a weighted score of 7 which accurately predicts an increase of 7.5 days.
CONCLUSION(S): Length of stay following ASD is predicted by the type of surgical intervention, and postoperative complication profile. Additional days are most predicted by the type of complication and by intervention severity. A weighted intervention score can predict the additional LOS and is useful to help understand the impact of complications. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: AI algorithms have shown substantial promise in medical image analysis. Previous studies of ASD clusters have analyzed alignment metrics - this study sought to complement these efforts by analyzing images of anatomical landmarks. PURPOSE: We hypothesized that a neural-network-based artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm would cluster preoperative lateral radiographs of into groups with distinct morphology. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 915 patients with adult spinal deformity and preoperative lateral radiographs. OUTCOME MEASURES: Schwab modifiers for SVA and PI-LL, three-column osteotomy, upper instrumented vertebrae, baseline Oswestry Disability Index, and 2-year likelihood of reaching MCID in ODI (set at -12.8). Proximal junctional kyphosis and proximal junctional failure were defined using previously published radiographic criteria.
METHOD(S): Vertebral locations for C3-L5, sacral endplate, and femoral heads were measured on lateral radiographs. Pixel locations were used to create a black-and-white overlay to the image, which was subsequently standardized for size and position using the femoral heads and sacral endplate. These images were used to train a self-organizing map (SOM). SOMs are a form of artificial neural network frequently employed in unsupervised classification tasks.
RESULT(S): In total, 915 preoperative lateral radiographs were analyzed. A 2 x 3, toroidal SOM was trained. The mean spine shape was plotted for each cluster. Alignment, surgical characteristics, and outcomes were compared between clusters. Clusters C and D exhibited a particularly high proportion of patients with optimal (ie, modifier 0) values of PI-LL (65.0% and 68.5%) and SVA (72.8% and 53.1%). Conversely, clusters B, E, and F tended to have poor (ie, modifier ++) PI-LL (74.8%, 66.9%, and 74.6%) and SVA (75.5%, 48.6%, and 58.7%). 3-CO was most common among cluster A (26.8%), cluster B (32.6%), and cluster F (32.7%). UIV at T7-T12 was most common among cluster B (51.1%) and cluster F (60.3%). ODI <30 was most prevalent among cluster D (31.4%). There was little difference, however, between groups in likelihood of reaching MCID in ODI at 2-year follow-up. PJK and PJF were particularly prevalent among clusters A (51.2% and 15.5%) and E (50.4% and 18.7%).
CONCLUSION(S): This study developed a self-organizing map that clustered preoperative lateral radiographs of ASD patients into groups with highly distinct overall spinal morphology. These clusters predicted alignment, surgical characteristics, and HRQOL. Further studies of this classification approach will expand to compare pre- and postoperative radiographs. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: This study evaluates the necessity of a multi-rod construct to help prevent a pseudarthrosis in ASD surgery of lesser magnitude. Regardless of an interbody at L5/S1, a multi-rod construct does not decrease the risk of developing a pseudarthrosis. If a pseudarthrosis develops in patients who undergo an interbody fusion at L5/S1, it is more likely to occur above the L5/S1 level and the number of rods used does not decrease this risk. PURPOSE: To examine the necessity of IBF and multi-rod use to prevent pseudarthrosis in these lesser magnitude ASD surgeries. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a multicenter database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 483 patients met our inclusion criteria of pelvic fixation, > 2 year follow up, >5 levels fused, no 3-column osteotomy (3CO), and no multi-level interbody fusions. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pseudarthrosis rate and location in ASD patients.
METHOD(S): A multi-center database was evaluated to identify patients with pelvic fixation, > 2 year follow up, >5 levels fused, and no 3-column osteotomy (3CO). We define a lesser magnitude ASD surgery as surgeries that do not include 3CO or multi-level interbody fusions. In this cohort, ASD patients with and without an IBF at L5/S1 were assessed to evaluate if the number of rods had an impact on the pseudarthrosis rate. Pseudarthrosis was determined by intraoperative findings or record review. Fisher's exact tests, univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify predictors of pseudo.
RESULT(S): A total of 483 patients met our inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 48 months. Of those, 321 (66%) had interbody at L5/S1 (IBF). Twenty-three percent of IBF patients had a MR construct and 77% had a SR construct. In the non-IBF group, 33% had a MR construct. In the IBF group, the MR construct did not impact the pseudarthrosis rate compared to a SR construct, (6.8% vs 5.2% respectively, p=.35). In the IBF group, 29% (4) of MR patients and 75% (6) of SR patients with pseudo received BMP. However, regardless of the rod construct, ASD patients with an interbody at L5/S1 had an increased risk of having a pseudarthrosis above this level (OR.096, p=.045). Also, the MR construct did not decrease the risk of developing a pseudarthrosis in the non-IBF group (0% vs 4.5%, p=.18).
CONCLUSION(S): In ASD surgery of lesser magnitude, a multi-rod construct does not decrease the risk of developing a pseudarthrosis. Patients who have an interbody fusion at L5/S1 are more likely to develop a pseudarthrosis above this level, regardless of the rod construct. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Frailty is a baseline measure of disability that transcends age alone and has been determined a strong predictor of outcomes following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. This postop impact calls for investigation of unique adjustment of Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) scores accounting for frailty. This adjustment in spinal proportion may help surgical planning for individualized, optimal postop outcomes. PURPOSE: Modify the GAP score with frailty to optimize outcomes in surgical ASD patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a single-surgeon comprehensive ASD database PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 140 ASD patients OUTCOME MEASURES: Frailty-adjusted GAP scores; Health Related Quality of Life scores (HRQLs): ODI, SRS-22 METHODS: Surgical ASD patients (SVA>=5cm, PT>=25degree, or TK >=60degree, >3 levels fused) >=18 years old with available baseline (BL) radiographic data were isolated in the single-center Comprehensive Spine Quality Database (Quality). Patients were dichotomized by the ASD frailty index, F (Not Frail, Frail). Linear regression analysis established radiographic equations for frailty-adjusted GAP Scores at baseline and 2-years involving relative pelvic version, relative lumbar lordosis, lordosis distribution index, relative spinopelvic alignment, and an age factor to formulate a sagittal plane score. Patients were restratified into frailty-adjusted proportionality groups: Proportional (<5.8), Moderately Disproportional (MD) (5.8-7), Severely Disproportional (SD) (>7). Frailty-adjusted GAP proportionality at 2-years were compared to adjusted-BL to determine whether patients improved, deteriorated or remained the same in their spine proportion.
RESULT(S): A total of 140 patients were included (55.5+/-16.4 yrs, 77.5% female, 25.2+/-4.7 kg/m2). BL frailty: 32.8% not frail, 67.2% frail. Primary analyses demonstrated correlation between BL frailty score and BL and 2-year GAP scores(P<0.001). Linear regression analysis(p<0.001) developed a frailty-adjusted GAP threshold equation: 4.4 + 0.93*(frailty score). Adjusted-baseline scores were taken and re-stratified based distribution and placed 26.4% of patients in Proportional, 26.6% MD, and 44% SD. BL adjusted GAP scores by frailty group: 5.3 Not Frail, 7.5 Frail; p<0.001. At 2-years, GAP scores were grouped into the frailty-adjusted proportionality groups: 66.2% Proportional, 10.8% MD, and 23.1% SD. Patients who were 2-year MD/SD underwent significantly more reoperations (>33.5%) compared to Proportional (12.8%), p=0.015. SD 2-year patients developed increased PJK at the 1-year mark (40%, Proportional: 13.9%, MD:7.1%, p=0.003), as well as had worse 2-year ODI and SRS-22 satisfaction scores(p<0.050). 47.5% improved in GAP (63.4% of frail patients), 12.3% deteriorated, and 40.2% remained in the same proportionality group at 2-year follow up.
CONCLUSION(S): Significant associations exist between frailty and spinal proportion. By adjusting the GAP proportionality groups accounting for baseline frailty contributed to improved outcomes and minimized reoperations. The adjusted GAP groups appeal for less rigorous spine proportion goals in severely frail patients. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Opioid use prior to surgery is associated with worse postop outcomes. Little is known regarding the economic impact that preop opioid use has upon patient preferred health state, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and the cost/QALY of surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD). PURPOSE: Compare the health state preference values, QALYs, and cost/QALY for operatively treated ASD patients that used opioids vs did not use opioids prior to surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Cost/QALY analysis of operatively treated patients identified from a prospective, multi-center ASD study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Propensity score matched (PSM) cohorts of patients that used opioids (OPIOID) vs nonusers (NON) prior to ASD surgery, at 1- and minimum 2-year follow up. OUTCOME MEASURES: Short Form-36v2 questionnaire (SF-36), SF6D derived from SF-36, hospital costs for operative treatment of ASD based on CMS DRG reimbursements, QALYs, cost/QALY for index surgery, perioperative complications, and 1- and 2-year postop opioid use.
METHOD(S): ASD patients (age>18 years) enrolled into a prospective multicenter ASD database were divided into preop opioid (OPIOID) vs nonopioid (NON) users. PSM was performed to control for confounding demographic, radiographic, and surgical variables. Preop, 1-year, and minimum 2-year postop SF6D values obtained, 1- and 2-year post QALYs were calculated using SF6D change from baseline, hospital costs at the time of index surgery were calculated using CMS DRG reimbursements adjusted for inflation to 2019 US dollars, cost/QALY evaluated at 1- and 2-years postop, perioperative complications, and 1- and 2-year postop opioid use was evaluated for OPIOID vs NON.
RESULT(S): DRG data was available for 182/262 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Following PSM, preoperative demographics, radiographic parameters, surgical treatment, and mean follow up (3.4 vs 3.3 years) were similar for OPIOID (n=68) vs NON (n=114), respectively (p>0.05). OPIOID had longer ICU (49 vs 23 hours) and hospital stay (9.7 vs 6.8 days) than NON, respectively (p<0.05). SF6D was worse for OPIOID at preop (0.521 vs 0.598), 1-year (0.613 vs 0.749), and 2-years postop (0.626 vs 0.749) than NON, respectively (p<0.05). QALYs were worse at 1- (0.567 vs 0.674) and 2-years postop (0.674 vs 0.825) for OPIOID vs NON, respectively (p<0.05). Cost of care at index surgery was greater for OPIOID ($83,363.02) vs NON ($70,281.17). Cost/QALY was higher for OPIOID at 1-year ($150,294.51vs $107,947.19) and 2-years postoperative ($69,615.78 vs $48,761.14) than NON (p<0.05). Perioperative complications were similar for OPIOID vs NON (p>0.05). Continued opioid use at 2-years postop was greater for OPIOID (52.4%) vs NON (8.7%; p>0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): Opioid use prior to ASD surgery is associated with worse patient perceived health state and greater costs to society. After controlling for patient demographics, deformity magnitude, and type of surgery, OPIOID had greater cost of care, despite similar perioperative complication rates. At 2-years postop both OPIOID and NON demonstrated cost effectiveness of index surgery (cost/QALY<$100,000), however the residual cost to society was $21,300 greater for OPIOID vs NON. Over 52% of OPIOD had continued opioid usage at 2-years postop compared to 8.7% of NON. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Numerous strategies are used to minimize PJK in (ASD). The use of PPS is one such strategy. Studying this topic is difficult as there is a lack of homogeneity in the patient population being studied. PURPOSE: Investigate if PPS minimizes the risk of perioperative PJK compared to traditional open techniques. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity database PATIENT SAMPLE: Inclusion criteria are age >18, and one of the following: PT>25, PI-LL>10, or SVA>5 cm. OUTCOME MEASURES: NRS leg, ODI, SF-12, EQ5D, SRS-22.
METHOD(S): A prospective database was retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria are age >18, and one of the following: PT>25, PI-LL>10, or SVA>5 cm. Patients were grouped as MIS (all PPS no open component) or OPEN. Propensity matching was used to create 2 equal groups controlling for: age, BMI, Preop (PI-LL, PI, TPA), and post op (PI-LL correction and posterior levels fused). PJK was evaluated in 2 groups: Mild (PJK10) 10degree change from preop and severe (PJK20) a 20degree change, as previously reported.
RESULT(S): A total of 1,023 patients met criteria: 114 MIS and 909 OPEN. MIS were older with higher BMI. No significant difference was found between groups in preop alignment or SRS Schwab classification. OPEN had more levels fused (11.3 vs 5.5), change in PI-LL (14.9 vs 9.3) and LL (16.2 vs 9.7; all p<0.01). After matching: 77 patients in each group with no difference in demographics or levels fused (6.26 +/- 3.7 OPEN; 6.23 +/- 3.4 MIS). At 1YR NRS leg, ODI, SF-12, EQ5D, SRS-22 were equal. MIS had improved NSR Back compared to OPEN (2.6 vs 3.4; p=0.047). Alignment (PI-LL, TPA, SVA, LL, PT, PI) showed no difference preop, 6 weeks or at 1YR. PJK10 was 23.9% OPEN v 20.3% in MIS at 6 weeks and 28.6% and 19.5% at 1 YR (p>0.59). PJK20 was 2.6% in OPEN vs 3.9% in MIS at 1YR (p=1). The PJK angle was not different (4.3 v 4.2). MIS had less EBL (510 v 1574 cc; p=0.000) longer OR time (448 v 373 min; p=0.022) and more interbodies (3.4 vs 2.1; p=0.000). There was no difference in rate of revision surgery (14.3% OPEN vs 10.4%). Major complications occurred more frequently in OPEN (23.4% vs 9.1%).
CONCLUSION(S): While the use of percutaneous fixation intuitively seems protective for PJK, our study found that when controlling for radiographic deformity, deformity correction, demographics and the magnitude of surgical intervention that percutaneous fixation is equivalent to open techniques in rate of perioperative PJK. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The thoracolumbar junction poses increased risk for high stress on upper lumbar discs when not adequately fused. However, controversy persists. This study evaluates outcomes of upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) selection in the thoracic versus the upper lumbar spine when fusing to the sacrum. PURPOSE: To compare revision rates for thoracolumbar fusions to the sacrum and pelvis at 1- and 2-year follow-up, stratified by UIV selection. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study at a single institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 968 patients who had thoracolumbar fusion surgery between 2012-2018 with at least one year of postoperative follow-up. OUTCOME MEASURES: Reoperation rates from 1 and 2 years after revision surgery, reoperation diagnoses, body mass index (BMI), gender, Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI), perioperative complications, ASA grade (ASA), operative time (OT), and blood loss (EBL).
METHOD(S): A retrospective review of patients undergoing revision spinal fusion with lower instrumented vertebra of S1 or pelvis between 2012-2018 at a single institution was performed. Patients with less than 1 year of follow-up after their index procedure were excluded from the analysis. Patients were categorized based on UIV into 6 groups: T9-T11, L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5. Demographic and operative data were collected and compared between the different UIV groups in each cohort using chi-squared and ANOVA tests. Revision rates at 1- and 2-year follow-up and the reasons for revision were compared between groups.
RESULT(S): There were 168 revision spinal fusions that reached 1-year follow-up, with 54 having UIV at T9-T11, 2 fusions L1 to sacrum, 26 fusions L2 to sacrum, 25 fusions L3 to sacrum, 36 fusions L4 to sacrum, 23 fusions L5 to sacrum. There was significant difference in patient age, with oldest in the L1 group (65.5+/-3.5) and youngest in the L5 group (51+/-15.4 p<0.001). There was significant difference in gender as both cases in L2 was female and L5 fusions only had 39.1% females (p = 0.006). There were no differences in BMI, CCI, and ASA. EBL (1891.6mL+/-1226.9mL p <0.001) and length of stay (7.7+/-3.0 p <0.001) was highest in the T9-11 UIV group. Operative time was highest in the L1 (464.5+/-174.7 p<0.001) UIV group. Levels added on top of prior fusion were calculated by subtracting UIV of index fusion to past UIV. Adding on 2 levels had a 1-year revision rate of 14.3% (p = 0.032), while adding on 1 level had a 0% 1-year revision rate. Adding on 4 levels had a revision rate of 12.5%, and adding on 7 levels had a 50% 1-year revision rate. At 2 years, adding on 1 level had revision rate of 25% and adding on 2 levels had a revision rate of 20% (p = 0.769). There is no statistically significant difference in perioperative complication rates between UIV groups (p = 0.114). The reoperation rate at 1 year for all levels was 9% and highest in UIV at L1 (50%, p=0.06). At 2-year follow-up, the reoperation rate for the total cohort was 32.34% with the highest revision rate for fusion from L2 to sacrum (53.85%) followed by (T9-T11 sacrum fusion 42.31%, L4 to sacrum31.71%, L3 to sacrum 30%, L5 to sacrum 25.04%, L1 to sacrum 25%, p=0.195). Grouping the UIV into lower thoracic (T9-T11), upper lumbar (L2-L3), and lower lumbar (L4-L5) showed similar revision rates at one year (p=0.697). At two years, lower thoracic group had a revision rate of 40% versus, 23.3% in the upper lumbar group (p =0.399).
CONCLUSION(S): There is no statistically significant difference in reoperation rates for revision thoracolumbar fusions to the sacrum/pelvis associated with different UIV selection. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright