Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:protot01
76. Two-year outcomes and radiculopathy resolution following direct vs indirect decompression in single-level lumbar fusion [Meeting Abstract]
Walia, A; Perrier, G; Ani, F; Bono, J; Burapachaisri, A; Patel, H; Kim, N S; O'Connell, B K; Maglaras, C; Protopsaltis, T S; Fischer, C R; Raman, T
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Indirect decompression technique may be limited in that it does not include direct removal of the offending intervertebral disc or osteophyte protruding into the canal. PURPOSE: This study evaluates resolution of radiculopathy and perioperative complications in lumbar fusion with indirect or direct decompression techniques. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective analysis of large single center academic institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 116 single-level lumbar fusion patients with preoperative radiculopathy from 2012 to 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES: Resolution of radiculopathy, visual analog scores (VAS), perioperative complications, motor scores.
METHOD(S): Patients 18 years of age diagnosed with preoperative radiculopathy undergoing single-level lumbar fusion with up to two-year follow-up were grouped by indirect and direct decompression. Direct decompression group included TLIF with or without direct decompression procedure as well as ALIF and LLIF with direct decompression procedure. Indirect decompression group included ALIF and LLIF without direct decompression procedure. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control for differences in age between groups. Outcome measures were compared between groups using means comparison tests. Logistic regression analysis was used to correlate decompression type with symptom resolution over time.
RESULT(S): A total of 116 patients were included in this analysis: 58 direct decompression (mean 53.9y, 67.2% female) and 58 indirect decompression (mean 54.6y, 61.4% female). Direct decompression patients experienced greater blood loss relative to indirect decompression patients (242.4 +/- 128.5 vs 171.79 +/- 143.9 mL, p=0.007). Additionally, direct decompressionpatients experienced full resolution of radiculopathy at 3 months postop at a greater rate than those in the indirect decompression group (OR: 4.742, [1.97-11.41]; 53.1% vs 13.73%, p=0.002). At 6 months, direct decompression patients demonstrated a significantly larger reduction in VAS score 6 months postop (-2.889 +/- 2.3 vs -0.897 +/- 4.3, p=0.044). With regard to motor function, direct decompression patients had improved motor score with respect to the L5 dermatome at 6 months compared to indirect decompression patients (DELTAmotor score from baseline: 0.1714 +/- 0.453 vs -0.024 +/- 0.154, p=0.019).
CONCLUSION(S): Patients who underwent direct decompression experienced significantly greater resolution of preoperative lower extremity radiculopathy at 3 months compared with those who underwent ID alone. At 6 and 12 months, no differences were noted between the two groups. There were no differences in complication rates. At 6 months postop, direct decompression patients had greater improvement in preoperative motor deficit than ID patients. In particularly debilitated patients, these findings may influence surgeons to perform a direct decompression to achieve more rapid resolution of radiculopathy symptoms. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804826
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510422
215. A comparative analysis of single-level lumbar interbody fusion by approach and technique [Meeting Abstract]
Odeh, K; Bono, J; Maglaras, C; Raman, T; Protopsaltis, T S
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In recent years spine surgeons have utilized different techniques and approaches to perform lumbar interbody fusion surgery. We sought to analyze the difference in outcomes between traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (O-TLIF), minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), dual position anterior/lateral lumbar interbody fusion with posterior instrumentation (Dual ALIF/LLIF), and single position anterior/lateral lumbar interbody fusion with posterior instrumentation (Single ALIF/LLIF). PURPOSE: To analyze the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of patient undergoing TLIF, MIS TLIF, Dual ALIF/LLIF, and Single ALIF/LLIF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study at a single institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients undergoing O-TLIF, MIS TLIF, Dual ALIF/LLIF, or Single ALIF/LLIF from 2014 to 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), radiation dose, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and return to OR within 90 days.
METHOD(S): Patients who underwent single level lumbar interbody fusion surgery were analyzed. Patient charts were reviewed for operative time, EBL, LOS, radiation dose, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and return to OR within 90 days. Differences were assessed by ANOVA.
RESULT(S): A total of 1,226 patients underwent a single level lumbar interbody fusion (440 O-TLIF, 423 MIS TLIF, 316 Dual ALIF/LLIF, 47 Single ALIF/LLIF). There were no significant differences in BMI or gender between the groups, but in the O-TLIF cohort average age (60) was higher than MIS-TLIF (54), Dual ALIF/LLIF(52), and Single ALIF/LLIF (50) p < 0.001. There were also significant differences in average operative time (221 mins O-TLIF, 212 mins MIS TLIF, 277 mins dual ALIF/LLIF, 277 mins single ALIF/LLIF, p < 0.001), EBL (360 ml O-TLIF, 167ml MIS TLIF, 235 ml Dual ALIF/LLIF, 253 ml Single ALIF/LLIF, p<0.001), radiation dose (20 mGy O-TLIF, 51 mGy MIS TLIF, 43 mGy Dual ALIF/LLIF, 62 mGy Single ALIF/LLIF, p < 0.001). There was no difference in LOS, intraoperative complications, or 90-day complications between the groups, except a higher rate of neurological deficit in dual ALIF/LLIF (1.6%, p < 0.03). Post hoc analysis demonstrated statistical significance in operative time in the Dual ALIF/LLIF as compared to all the other groups. O-TLIF demonstrated a larger EBL and less radiation as compared to all the other groups as well as a longer operative time than Single ALIF/LLIF. Dual ALIF/LLIF demonstrated a longer operative time and increased rate of neurological deficit as compared to MIS TLIF.
CONCLUSION(S): In comparing different techniques for single level lumbar interbody fusion there were similar outcomes in LOS, perioperative complications and 90-day complications between all the groups. Open TLIF was associated with increased estimate blood loss and less radiation than all the other groups Dual position ALIF/LLIF surgery was associated with a longer operative time than all the other groups. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803849
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5511102
78. Increased risk of postoperative L5 nerve root palsy with ALIF compared to TLIF [Meeting Abstract]
Deveza, L; Ani, F; Raman, T; Protopsaltis, T S; Kim, Y H
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: L5 nerve root palsy is a complication that can occur after ALIF indirect decompression. It is thought to occur due to the dimensional change in the L5 foramen that can either compress or cause a stretch neuropraxia of the nerve root. While this complication has been observed, reports and studies highlighting its incidence and risk are lacking. PURPOSE: To determine whether ALIF leads to an increased risk in L5 palsy, we sought to compare the relative risk compared to TLIF. We hypothesize that since foraminotomy is part of the TLIF procedure, it should demonstrate a difference in nerve root palsy compared to ALIF indirect decompression. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A single institution retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 626 patients (262 ALIF, 179 open TLIF, 185 MIS TLIF). The study period was 2017 to 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were postoperative leg pain, sensory deficits, and motor weakness in tibialis anterior (TA), extensor hallucis longus (EHL) and gastrocnemius (GC). Secondary outcomes were infection, return to operating room (OR), and return to emergency center (EC) within 90 days.
METHOD(S): Retrospective comparative cohort study comparing ALIF vs TLIF. Inclusion criteria were all patients who underwent L5-S1 ALIF or L5-S1 TLIF (both open and MIS). Multilevel surgeries were excluded. The rate of postop nerve palsy was compared for the two treatment approaches. Chi-square was performed for all categorical comparisons and ANOVA was performed for continuous statistical comparisons.
RESULT(S): There were subtle differences in baseline characteristics between groups. ALIF patients were younger (p = 0.016), had less BMI (p = 0.026) and less likely to smoke (p = 0.008). There were no differences in gender or diabetes status. Patients undergoing TLIF (open and MIS) were more likely to be operated for lumbar spinal stenosis and radiculopathy (p < 0.001). There was an overall 3% rate of neuro deficits in the study population with a higher rate in those undergoing ALIF (5.3%) compared with open TLIF (0.6%) and MIS TLIF (2.2%) (p = 0.011). There was a rate of 3.1% EHL palsy in the ALIF group which was higher than TLIF (both open and MIS) (p = 0.048). There was a trend towards higher TA and GC nerve deficits in the ALIF group, but the difference was not significant. Additionally, there was a trend towards higher rates of return to OR for nerve deficit in the ALIF group, but this was not significant. However, ALIF patients had higher return to OR in 90 days for any reason (p = 0.01). There were no further differences between the groups. Among the 14 ALIF patients with any nerve deficit, 7 followed up at 3 mos and 5 in 1 year. At 3 mos, 5 of 7 patients had improvement in their nerve deficit and at 1 year, 5 of 5 patients had improved their deficiency.
CONCLUSION(S): This study demonstrates a higher rate of L5 nerve root palsy with ALIF compared to TLIF as evidenced by higher rates of EHL palsy with a rate of 3.1% in our study population. The study, however, is limited by its retrospective nature and subtle differences noted in demographics. Despite these differences, ALIF patient characteristics tended to be more favorable, which are unlikely to confound results of higher postoperative nerve deficits. Further study will be required to understand the mechanisms and radiological risk factors for postoperative L5 palsy after ALIF. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804070
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510722
P108. Outcomes of operative treatment for adult cervical deformity: a prospective, multicenter assessment with minimum 2-year followup [Meeting Abstract]
EliasElias; Bess, S; Line, B; Lafage, V; Lafage, R; Klineberg, E O; Kim, H J; Passias, P G; Nasser, Z; Gum, J L; Kebaish, K M; Eastlack, R K; Daniels, A H; Mundis, G M; Hostin, R A; Protopsaltis, T S; Hamilton, D K; Gupta, M C; Hart, R A; Schwab, F J; Burton, D C; Ames, C P; Shaffrey, C I; Smith, J S
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Adult cervical deformity (ACD) can have profound impact on health-related quality of life (HRQL). Operative treatment for ACD is associated with high complication rates due to the complexity of surgery and the frailty of the patients affected. Very few studies have focused on outcomes of operative ACD treatment. PURPOSE: To assess whether operative treatment for ACD significantly improves HRQL at minimum 2-yr followup. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multicenter, prospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Operatively treated ACD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Neck Disability Index (NDI), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and numeric rating scale (NRS) for neck and back pain.
METHOD(S): Operatively treated ACD patients were assessed at baseline, standardized follow-up intervals and through direct mailings. Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) included: NDI, mJOA, EQ-5D and NRS for neck and back pain. Complications were classified as perioperative (=30 days) or delayed (>30 days). Analyses focused on patients with minimum 2-yr followup.
RESULT(S): Of 169 ACD patients, the 102 (60%) with minimum 2-yr followup (mean=3.4 yrs, SD=1.9 yrs, range=2 to 8.1 yrs) had a mean age of 62 yrs (SD=11) and 64% were women. Surgical approaches included anterior-only (22.8%), posterior-only (39.6%) and combined (37.6%). The mean numbers of vertebrae fused anteriorly and posteriorly were 4.3 (SD=1.1) and 9.4 (SD=3.4), respectively, with 16% having a 3-column osteotomy. PROMs significantly improved from baseline to last follow-up, including NDI (47.3 to 33.0), mJOA (12.0 to 12.8; for patients with baseline score 0.05). Overall, 58 (56.9%) patients had at least 1 complication, 41 (40.2%) had at least 1 perioperative complication, and 35 (34.3%) had at least 1 delayed complication. The most common complications included dysphagia (18.6%), distal junctional kyphosis (6.9%), instrumentation failure (6.9%), cardiac events (6.9%), dysphonia (4.9%), nerve sensory deficit (3.9%) and respiratory failure (3.9%). For patients with at least 2-yr follow-up, 12 patients underwent a total of 15 reoperations (9 had 1 and 3 had 2). Notably, the 67 patients who did not achieve 2-yr follow-up were similar to study patients based on demographics, comorbidities and baseline PROMs. Reflective of the frailty of this patient population, there were 18 deaths among the 67 patients without minimum 2-yr followup. These deaths occurred between 0.2 and 34.8 months following surgery. Although most occurred at least 6 months after surgery and likely were not directly related to surgery, 4 occurred within 4 months of surgery, including 1 due OSA/narcotics, 1 due to pneumonia, and 2 with unknown causes.
CONCLUSION(S): This multicenter, prospective analysis demonstrates that operative treatment for ACD provides significant improvement of HRQL at minimum 2-yr (mean 3.4-yr) followup. These findings may prove useful for patient counseling in the context of the substantial impact of ACD. Further studies will be needed to assess the long-term durability and cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment for ACD. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804068
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510732
148. Impact of self-reported loss of balance and gait disturbance on adult spinal deformity surgery outcomes [Meeting Abstract]
Diebo, B G; Alsoof, D; Lafage, R; Passias, P G; Ames, C P; Shaffrey, C I; Burton, D C; Deviren, V; Line, B; Soroceanu, A; Hamilton, D K; Klineberg, E O; Mundis, G M; Kim, H J; Gum, J L; Smith, J S; Lewis, S J; Kelly, M P; Kebaish, K M; Gupta, M C; Nunley, P D; Eastlack, R K; Hostin, R A; Protopsaltis, T S
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Prior studies assessed the association between underlying neurological condition and worse outcomes following spinal surgery with recent emphasis of self-reported loss of balance (Imbalance) by Uribe et al. PURPOSE: To investigate if patients with self-reported loss of balance have poorer outcomes following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of prospectively collected database. PATIENT SAMPLE: ASD patients with baseline and 2-year radiographic and patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) data were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics, radiographic outcomes, complications, and PROM were compared from baseline to 2-year follow up.
METHOD(S): Patients undergoing a long spinal fusion with no prior history of spine surgery were retained. Patients were grouped according to imbalance and unsteady gait. The groups were propensity matched by age, PI-LL, and surgical invasiveness score. Demographics, radiographic, complications and PROM were compared from baseline to 2-year post-op.
RESULT(S): A total of 212 patients were reported (106 patients in each group). The mean age (64 vs 63 years), BMI (27.2 vs 27.0 kg/m2), and gender (76% vs 87% female) were not significantly different for patients with imbalance and without imbalance respectively (all p >0.05). Patients in the imbalance group had a higher Frailty Index Score compared to patients without imbalance (3.74 vs 2.33, p <0.001). At baseline, the sagittal profile for both groups were comparable with regard to PT, PI-LL, and SVA. Patients with loss of balance had a significantly lower thoracic Cobb angle (25.27degree vs 37.45degree, p <0.001) and lumbar Cobb angle (37.03degree vs 45.53degree, p=0.004), although the global coronal alignment was similar (imbalance:41.51 mm vs 34.25 mm, p=0.155). Patients with imbalance had worse PROM measures, including ODI (45.15 vs 36.62), SF-36 Mental Component Score (44.04 vs 51.76), SF-36 Physical Component Score (30.17 vs 35.10), and SRS-22 Mental domain score (3.28 vs 3.80) (p <0.001 for all). Postoperatively, patients with imbalance had less PT correction (-1.45degree vs -3.60degree, p=0.039) for a comparable correction in their PI-LL (-11.93degree vs-15.08degree, p=0.144) by 2-year follow-up. Both groups demonstrated similar improvements in their coronal plane deformity. Imbalance patients had higher rates of radiographic PJK at 2-year follow-up (26.4% vs 14.2%, p=0.026). Furthermore, patients with reported imbalance have significantly higher rate of implant related complications (47.2% vs 34.0%, p=0.05). After controlling for age, baseline sagittal parameters, PI-LL correction and Charlson Comorbidity Index, patients with imbalance had 2.2 times increased odds of sustaining PJK by 2 years.
CONCLUSION(S): Patients with a self-reported loss of balance and unsteady gait have significantly worse baseline frailty and PROMs, represented by poorer mental health and physical function. Although those patients had higher rates of PJK and implant-related complications, surgical intervention significantly improved their quality of life. Despite the improvement, they remained with lower PROMs by 2-year follow-up. Therefore, in the clinic setting and with limited institutional access to Frailty scores, asking patients if they have loss of balance or unsteady gait is a simple yet powerful question which may trigger their preoperative risk stratification and optimization. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803946
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510902
144. Prophylactic proximal junctional measures improves cost efficacy of adult spinal deformity surgery, with optimal cost utility seen in those with concurrent optimal realignment [Meeting Abstract]
Passias, P G; Krol, O; Lafage, R; Smith, J S; Line, B; Joujon-Roche, R; Tretiakov, P; Williamson, T; Imbo, B; Yeramaneni, S; Dave, P; Daniels, A H; Gum, J L; Protopsaltis, T S; Hamilton, D K; Soroceanu, A; Scheer, J K; Eastlack, R K; Kelly, M P; Nunley, P D; Alan, N; Klineberg, E O; Kebaish, K M; Hostin, R A; Gupta, M C
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Prophylaxis usage has been established in literature as an important component of minimizing the risk of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF) development. However, literature is scarce on the effects of prophylaxis in patients who have achieved adequate postoperative alignment and those who maintained poor alignment postoperatively. PURPOSE: To investigate how PJK prophylaxis impacts rates of PJK and PJF with and without ideal alignment and the associated cost/cost-effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of a prospective adult thoracolumbar deformity database. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 1,541 patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiographic alignment, patient-reported outcome measures (ODI), cost per QALY.
METHOD(S): Operative adult spinal deformity patients (scoliosis >20degree, SVA>5cm, PT>25degree, or TK>60degree) with an UIV at L1 or below and available baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) radiographic and HRQL data were included. "Matched" and "unmatched" alignment refers to the age-adjusted alignment criteria. PJK prophylaxis was defined by usage of cement, hooks or tethers. PJF was defined as PJK with reoperation. Costs were calculated using the PearlDiver database, accounting for additional costs of prophylaxis when applicable, through estimates from Medicare pay scales for services within a 30-day window, including estimates regarding costs of postoperative complications, outpatient healthcare encounters, revisions and medical related readmissions. QALY was calculated using SF6D.
RESULT(S): A total of 738 ASD patients or below met inclusion criteria (59.9yrs+/-14.0, 79%F, BMI: 27.7 kg/m2 +/-6.0, CCI: 1.8 +/-1.7). Surgically, patients had a mean level fused of 11.1+/-4.4, LOS of 7.9 days+/-4.4, EBL of 1577 mL, operative time of 377 min, with 63% undergoing an osteotomy. Forty percent of patients had PJK prophylaxis. Controlling for age, CCI, BL osteoporosis, levels fused, usage of 3CO, UIV, BL SVA and BL PI-LL, patients who were matched postoperatively in PT, SVA, or PI-LL had lowered PJF rates (OR:.5, 95% CI:.28-.86, p=.01) with prophylaxis. Among those unmatched in either SVA, PILL, or PT by 6W, prophylaxis significantly reduced the rates of PJK and PJF as well (p <0.05). ANCOVA controlling for age, CCI, BL osteoporosis, levels fused, usage of 3CO, UIV, BL SVA and BL PI-LL shows patients with ideal age-adjusted alignment and prophylaxis resulted in a lower cost per QALY by 2Y ($399,948 vs $514,228, p <.001). Similarly, in unmatched patients, prophylaxis resulted in a substantially lower cost per QALY by 2Y ($466,409 vs 672, 024, p <.001), primarily due to decreased costs of reoperation and greater improvements in QALY among prophylaxis cohorts.
CONCLUSION(S): Despite additional surgical cost, optimization of radiographic realignment in conjunction with utilization of proximal junctional failure prophylactic techniques achieves ideal cost utility, predominately due to the minimization of mechanical failure related reoperations. Even among those not achieving optimal alignment, junctional prophylactic measures improved cost utility, emphasizing its critical role of minimization of junctional failures to achieve cost efficiency in adult spinal deformity surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019804840
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510402
P25. A rough road to recovery: the impact of complications after adult spinal deformity surgery on specific health-related quality of life domains [Meeting Abstract]
Line, B; Bess, S; Ames, C P; Burton, D C; Eastlack, R K; Mundis, G M; Gum, J L; Lafage, V; Lafage, R; Daniels, A H; Gupta, M C; Hamilton, D K; Kelly, M P; Passias, P G; Protopsaltis, T S; Hart, R A; Kebaish, K M; Schwab, F J; Shaffrey, C I; Smith, J S; Klineberg, E O; International, Spine Study Group; Kim, H J
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Previous reports indicate postoperative complications have minimal impact on long-term outcomes after ASD surgery. Little data has evaluated the impact of complications on specific heath domains during postoperative period. PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of specific complications on patient reported health domains compared to patients with no complications. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective, multicenter, propensity score matched analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: ASD patients enrolled into a prospective multi-center study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Oswestry Disability Index, Scoliosis Research Society-22r questionnaire (SRS-22r), Short Form-36v2 questionnaire (SF-36), postoperative complications.
METHOD(S): Surgically treated ASD patients enrolled into a multicenter study were assessed for postoperative complications requiring surgery including wound (WOUND), pseudoarthrosis (PSEUDO), neurologic (NEURO) and malalignment (MAL) and matched to patients with no complications (NOCOMP) using inverse probability weighting for demographic, radiographic and surgical variables. Health domains for SRS-22r, and SF-36 were evaluated at regular time intervals, domain scores normalized to the date of revision surgery, and compared to patients with no complications at minimum 2-year follow-up.
RESULT(S): A total of 566 of 1130 were analyzed, average 3.6 yrs (range: 1.9 to 9). WOUND (n=12) compared to NOCOMP (n=390) had worse SF-36 physical function(21.7 vs 27.4), social function(19.6 vs 28.9), general health (-7.3 vs 8.9) and vitality (-0.9 vs 26.6,p < 0.05). PSEUDO (n=64) was worse than NOCOMP for SRS-22r function, 1.4 vs 2.1, and SF-36 social function, (17.1 vs 28.9) (p < 0.05). NEURO (n=28) was worse than NOCOMP for SRS-22r (0.9 vs 2.1), SF-36 bodily pain (14.7 vs 35.7) and social function (13.4 vs 28.9) (p < 0.05). MAL (n=72) was worse than NOCOMP for SRS-22r pain, (2.7 vs 3.4), function (1.2 vs 2.1), self-image (3.0 vs 3.9), SF-36 bodily pain (27.6 vs 35.7), physical function (18.7 vs 27.4), and social function (11.6 vs 28.9) (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): Counter to previous reports, specific postoperative complications requiring surgery uniquely impact specific health domains, resulting in worse patient reported quality of life compared to ASD patients with no complications. Social function was negatively impacted for all complications, while wound complications negatively impacted patient perceived general health and vitality and patients with malalignment requiring surgery reported worse self-image. These data highlight new findings that postoperative complications have a negative impact on specific aspects of ASD quality of life that can undermine the potential benefits of ASD surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright
EMBASE:2019803834
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5511122
231. Validation of the current risk calculators used in spine surgery [Meeting Abstract]
Arain, A; Williamson, T; Walia, A; Mian, B; Maglaras, C; Dave, P; O'Connell, B K; Raman, T; Ani, F; Bono, J; Meng, G P; Protopsaltis, T S; Passias, P G
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
EMBASE:2019804842
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510392
161. Expectations of clinical improvement following corrective surgery for adult cervical deformity based on functional disability at presentation [Meeting Abstract]
Joujon-Roche, R; Passias, P G; Smith, J S; Lafage, R; Line, B; Williamson, T; Tretiakov, P; Krol, O; Imbo, B; Protopsaltis, T S; Scheer, J K; Mir, J; Eastlack, R K; Mundis, G M; Kelly, M P; Klineberg, E O; Kebaish, K M; Hostin, R A; Kim, H J; Hart, R A; Burton, D C; Shaffrey, C I; Schwab, F J; Bess, S; Lafage, V
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
EMBASE:2019803969
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510862
50. High surgical invasiveness combined with frailty is associated with greater improvement throughout long-term recovery after ASD surgery with minimum five-year follow-up [Meeting Abstract]
Mo, K; Neuman, B J; Yeramaneni, S; Raad, M; Hostin, R A; Passias, P G; Gum, J L; Lafage, R; Protopsaltis, T S; Gupta, M C; Ames, C P; Klineberg, E O; Hamilton, D K; Schwab, F J; Kelly, M P; Burton, D C; Daniels, A H; Kim, H J; Hart, R A; Line, B; Lafage, V; Smith, J S; Bess, S; Lenke, L G; Shaffrey, C I; Kebaish, K M; International, Spine Study Group
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
EMBASE:2019804147
ISSN: 1878-1632
CID: 5510592