Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Lateral interbody fusion (LLIF) is often performed with biologic adjuvants to promote fusion. Commercially available bone allograft containing allogeneic stem cells (ASC) and bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP) are designed to promote fusion while avoiding the morbidity of iliac crest autograft; however, no study to date has directly compared the two in LLIF. The ASC studied is Osteocel Pro (NuVasive, Inc). PURPOSE: This non-industry funded study compares fusion rate, complications, and costs between LLIF with BMP and ASC. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Single center retrospective comparative study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with 1-3 lumbar levels treated with LLIF. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes measures are fusion at 1 year postoperative, complication rates, length of stay, and costs.
METHOD(S): A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients treated with LLIF and ASC or BMP from February 2012 through September 2017. Patients were included who had from 1-3 lumbar levels treated with LLIF and at least 1 year of radiographic follow up. Interbody fusion was assessed on lumbar X-ray images using a validated scale.
RESULT(S): A total of 94 patients were included representing 162 levels fused. Of these, 74 patients and 133 levels were treated with BMP; 20 patients and 29 levels were treated with ASC. Comparing patients treated with BMP or ASC, there were no differences in age [61.6 vs 60.4, p=0.7], BMI [29.8 vs 28.3, p=0.3], gender [60.8% vs 55.0% female], smoking status [12.2% vs 10.0%, p=1], diabetes [28.4% vs 15.0%, p=0.2], Charleston Comorbidity Index [4.3 vs 3.5, p=0.2], revision status [47.3% vs 45.0%, p=0.9], intraoperative complications [4.1% vs 5.0%, p=1], postoperative complications [37.8% vs 30.0%, p=0.5], or blood loss [881 vs 528ml, p=0.2]. More levels were fused in the BMP group (1.8 vs 1.45, p=0.04) and the BMP group tended toward a longer length of stay [4.8 vs 3.8 days, p=0.06]. There was a nonsignificant trend toward a higher fusion rate with BMP vs ASC[98.5% vs 93.1%, p=0.1]. The average amount of rhBMP used per level was 2.0 cc compared to 5.9 cc of ASC. There was no difference in the cost of the BMP per level compared with ASC [4.45% vs 4.80%, p=0.33], but the BMP group tended toward a higher cost of total care [103.5% vs 87.6%, p=0.1].
CONCLUSION(S): ASC and BMP are both acceptable adjuvants in LLIF that demonstrate comparable fusion rates at 1 year with comparable cost in the setting of similar groups of patients. The radiographic fusion rate seen in our study compares to previous reports in the literature using ASC. Cost considerations are becoming ever more cogent in spine surgery; the results of this study can inform decision making regarding which biologic adjuvant to use in lumbar interbody fusion. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: Osteocel (Approved for this indication), rhBMP (Infuse) (Not approved for this indication)
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) is a common spinal pathology often treated by microscopic lumbar discectomy (MLD), though prior reports have not demonstrated which preoperative MRI factors may contribute to significant clinical improvement after MLD. PURPOSE: To analyze the MRI characteristics in patients with HNP that predict meaningful clinical improvement in Health Related Quality of Life scores (HRQL) after MLD. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective clinical and radiological study of patients undergoing MLD for HNP at a single institution over a two year period of time. PATIENT SAMPLE: Eighty-eight patients receiving MLD treatment for HNP. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cephalocaudal canal migration; canal & HNP anterior-posterior (AP) lengths and ratio; canal & HNP axial areas and ratio; hemi-canal & hemi-HNP axial areas and ratio; disc appearance (black, grey or mixed), baseline (BL) and 3-month (3M) postoperative HRQL scores.
METHOD(S): Patients >18 years old who received MLD for HNP with BL and 3M HRQL scores of PROMIS (Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity), ODI, VAS Back, and VAS Leg scores were included. HNP and spinal canal measurements of cephalocaudal migration, AP length, area, hemi-area, and disc appearance were performed using T2 axial and sagittal MRI. HNP measurements were divided by corresponding canal measurements to calculate AP, Area, and Hemi-Area ratios. Using known minimal clinically importance differences (MCID) for each DELTAHRQoL score, patients were separated into two groups based on whether they reached MCID (+) or did not reach MCID (-). The MCID for Pain Intensity was calculated using a decision tree. A linear regression illustrated correlations between PROMIS vs ODI and VAS Back/Leg scores. Independent t-tests and chi-square tests were utilized to investigate significant differences in HNP measurements between the (+) and (-) MCID groups.
RESULT(S): Eighty-eight MLD patients were included (age=44.6+/-14.9, 38.6% female). Pain Interference and pain intensity were strongly correlated with ODI and VAS Back/Leg (R>=.505), and physical function was significantly correlated with ODI and VAS Back/Leg (R=-.349) (all p<.01). The strongest MRI predictors of meeting HRQL MCID were grey disc appearance, HNP area (>116.6 mm²), hemi-HNP Area (>84.6 mm²), and Hemi-Area Ratio (>51.8%); (+) patients were 2.7 times more likely to have a grey HNP than (-) patients in 5 out of 6 HRQL score comparisons (p<.025). Also, (+) patients had larger HNP areas than (-) patients had in 5 out of 6 HRQoL score comparisons (116.6 mm² +/- 46.4 vs 90.0 mm² +/- 43.2, p<.04), and had larger hemi-HNP areas than (-) patients had in 4 out of 6 HRQL score comparisons (84.6 mm² +/- 38.8 vs 66.3 mm² +/- 29.7, p<.04). (+) patients had a greater hemi-area ratio than (-) patients had in 4 out of 6 HRQL score comparisons (51.8% +/- 14.7 vs 43.9% +/- 14.9, p<.05).
CONCLUSION(S): Patients who met MCID after MLD had larger HNP areas by 26.6 mm² and larger hemi-HNP areas by 18.3 mm² than those who did not meet MCID. These patients were also 2.7x more likely to have a grey HNP compared to patients who did not meet MCID. When accounting for HNP area relative to canal area, patients who met MCID had a 7.9% greater Hemi-HNP canal occupation than patients who did not meet MCID. The results of this study suggest that preoperative MRI parameters can be useful in predicting patient reported improvement after MLD. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: T1 slope (T1S) is a parameter typically discussed in the context of cervical deformity and is correlated with health-related quality of life outcomes. Although prior research has suggested that T1S is related to global alignment, a definition for "high" T1S has not been established. Most patients undergoing cervical surgery do not receive full spine imaging. Therefore, it would be beneficial to have a parameter obtained from cervical radiographs that is associated with thoracolumbar malalignment. PURPOSE: To define a threshold for T1S that is associated with thoracolumbar malalignment STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective adult spinal deformity(ASD) database PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 226 preoperative ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline sagittal alignment: T1S, thoracic kyphosis(TK), C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), T1 pelvic angle (TPA), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL).
METHOD(S): A database of preoperative ASD patients was analyzed. Patients without preoperative full-spine images were excluded. Measures obtained from standing lateral radiographs included: T1S, TK, SVA, TPA, PT, and PI-LL. T1S was correlated to each of these parameters. Decision tree analysis was then used to determine the T1S corresponding to published thresholds for high TK (40degree), SVA (40mm), TPA (25degree), and PT (25.degree). Alignment between high and normal T1S patients was compared via t-tests and chi-square tests.
RESULT(S): A total of 226 preoperative ASD patients were included (mean 58+/-16y 62% F). At baseline, 30% had high TK, 54% had high SVA, 46% had high TPA, and 46% had high PT. Larger T1S was significantly correlated with greater SVA (R=.365) TPA (R=.302), TK (R=.606), and PT (R=.230)(all p<.001). Decision tree analysis yielded a threshold of 30degree for high T1S, which 50% of patients had. Compared to patients with T1S<30degree, those with T1S>30degree had higher TK (41.5degree vs 25.8degree), SVA (78.7mm vs 33.7mm), TPA (27.6degree vs 18.3degree), and PT (26.3degree vs 20.8degree), and PI-LL (18.2degree vs 11.7degree)(all p<0.05). Seventy-nine percent of patients with high T1S had high TK (T1S<30= 13%), 69% had high SVA (T1S<30=38%), 66% had high TPA (T1S<30= 37%), 60% had PT>25degree (T1S<30= 42%), and 47% had PI-LL>20degree (T1S<30= 34%) (all p<.05). T1S was not associated with PI.
CONCLUSION(S): Similar to previous studies higher T1S was associated with worse global alignment. T1S was most strongly associated with TK. A T1S=30degree corresponds to thresholds for high TK, SVA, TPA, and PT. Therefore, surgeons should consider obtaining full-spine radiographs if a T1S>30degree is present on cervical imaging. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Sagittal malalignment has been discussed extensively in adult spinal deformity (ASD) literature, while coronal malalignment (CM) and fractional curve (FC) have received less attention. As a result, little guidance currently exists for surgical indications in managing CM, despite it being a relatively common occurrence that can considerably impact patient wellbeing. Patients with CM significantly affected by FC are at particular risk for continued CM postoperatively, along with its complications. PURPOSE: Assess types of approach to fusion of the fractional curve in ASD surgery and their relation to coronal alignment and sagittal alignment. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review at single institution. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 82 ASD patients undergoing primary spinal fusion of 4 or more levels to sacrum or pelvis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline (BL), 1-year (Y1) postoperatively and BL-Y1 difference (DELTABL-Y1) in magnitudes of FC, coronal alignment (CA) and sagittal alignment (SA) parameters: pelvic incidence-LL (PI-LL), cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), T1 pelvic angle (TPA).
METHOD(S): Patients >=18 years old undergoing primary >=4-level fusion to sacrum/pelvis between October 2011 and January 2018 with minimum 6-month follow-up included. Chart review performed for operative dates and details and patient follow-up information. Coronal and sagittal parameters measured using deformity measuring software program. FC measured as segmental angle between L4 and S1. CA measured as distance between C7 plumb line and central sacral vertical line. CA>=20mm designated as CM, per guidelines in literature. Chi-squared test used to compare percentages and ANOVA used to compare means, with significance set at p<0.05.
RESULT(S): A total of 82 patients studied (68.3%F, age 62.6+/-13.3, BMI 28.1+/-6.6, Charlson comorbidity index 0.80+/-1.16). Nine patients (10.98%) had anterior-posterior fusion (AP), 41 (50%) posterior-only fusion with interbody device (PIB), 32 (39.02%) PSF without interbody (PSF). Twenty-three patients (28.04%) had FC>=15degree at BL, 7 (8.54%) at Y1. Forty-one patients (50%) had CM at BL, 35 (42.68%) at Y1. AP fusion patients had least levels fused (6.4 AP, 11.4 PIB, 11.8 PSF, p<0.001). No difference in revision by approach (55.56% AP, 24.39% PIB, 28.13% PSF, p=0.179). Approach type was not associated with different BL, Y1 or DELTABL-Y1 alignment parameters for FC, CA or SA. Mean FC 9.89degree at BL, 6.91degree at Y1 and DELTABL-Y1 difference 5.77degree, no difference between approach groups (p=0.361, 0.127, 0.550, respectively). Mean value for CA 33.62mm at BL, 21.15mm at Y1 and DELTABL-Y1 difference 23.23mm, no difference between approach groups (p=0.087, 0.153, 0.206, respectively). Mean PI-LL 25.21degree at BL, 11.1degree at Y1 and DELTABL-Y1 difference -13.7degree, no difference between approach groups (p=0.503, 0.600, 0.356, respectively). Mean cSVA 27.53degree at BL, 28.85degree at Y1 and DELTABL-Y1 difference 1.29degree, no difference between approach groups (p=0.364, 0.099, 0.141, respectively). Mean TPA 28.37degree at BL, 21.12degree at Y1 and DELTABL-Y1 difference -6.63degree, no difference between approach groups (p=0.066, 0.248, 0.138, respectively).
CONCLUSION(S): Fusion to the sacrum/pelvis improves sagittal alignment, fractional curve and coronal alignment in most patients. However, while fractional curve and sagittal alignment are better corrected, coronal malalignment, particularly more severe malalignment at baseline, tends to persist postoperatively. Type of approach and use of interbody device does not appear to significantly impact these results. This should be considered in preoperative planning for patients with coronal deformity. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Existing health outcome (HRQL) metrics do not adequately capture disability from cervical deformity (CD) and do not correlate with cervical malalignment. In the novel Patient Generated Index (PGI) patients report their greatest difficulties related to their CD. These results were used to determine items that should be included in a CD-specific HRQL. PURPOSE: To utilize the PGI to reveal the aspects of CD disability not captured by existing HRQLs. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective CD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 45 CD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: HRQL metrics: PGI, NDI, mJOA, EQ-5D.
METHOD(S): CD patients completed the PGI by describing aspects of their disability that bother them the most. The responses were weighted and scored. PGI responses were categorized into domains: Sagittal discomfort/range of motion (ROM), Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and Social Life/Hobbies. PGI scores and legacy HRQL metrics were correlated with alignment, pain, age, sex, BMI, and medical comorbidities. R2 values are reported for linear regression models that include the drivers significantly associated with each HRQL metric.
RESULT(S): Forty-five CD patients (mean cSVA: 51mm) including 12 PGI patients (mean cSVA: 62mm) were included for analysis. PGI scores were found to be driven significantly by age and C2 Slope (r2=0.50). NDI was driven significantly by neck pain, back pain, and BMI (r2=0.32). mJOA was driven significantly by Charlson Comorbidity Score, back pain and weight (r2=0.33). EQ5D was significantly driven by CBVA, age and T1 Slope (r2=0.78). When examining PGI domains, Sagittal Discomfort/ROM score was driven significantly by cSVA and age (r2=0.54). ADL score was driven by CBVA and a medical history of neuromuscular disease (r2=0.87). Social Life/Hobbies score was driven by Charlson Comorbidity Scores, a medical history of ankylosing spondylitis, and a medical history of connective tissue disease (r2=1.0). Horizontal Gaze/Walking Safety, Pain, and Neurologic Complaints did not correlate significantly with alignment, pain, demographic info or past medical history.
CONCLUSION(S): Legacy HRQLs do not adequately capture CD disability and do not correlate with cervical malalignment. In a CD cohort, PGI scores and EQ5D scores were driven significantly by sagittal alignment. However, mJOA and NDI were driven by pain and medical comorbidities. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The Roussouly Classification system of sagittal spinal shape and the SRS-Schwab adult spinal deformity (ASD) classification system have become important indicators of spine deformity. No prior studies have examined the outcomes of matching both Roussouly type and improving in Schwab modifiers postoperatively. PURPOSE: Evaluate outcomes of matching Roussouly Type and improving in Schwab modifier following ASD surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of single-center ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 103 ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Roussouly types, Schwab modifiers, Health Related Quality of Life scores(HRQLs): Minimal Clinical Important Difference for ODI, EQ5D, VAS Leg &Back Pain.
METHOD(S): Surgical ASD patients (SVA>=5cm, PT>=25degree, or TK >=60degree, >3 levels fused) >=18 years old with available baseline (BL) radiographic data at baseline (BL) and 1-year (1Y) were isolated in the single-center Comprehensive Spine Quality Database (Quality). Patients were grouped by two Roussouly types: (1)"theoretical" Roussouly type(Type 1: PI<45degree, LL apex below L4; Type 2: PI<45degree, LL apex above L4 L4-L5 space; Type 3: 45degree60degree); (2) "current" Roussouly type (1: SS<35degree, LL apex below L4; 2: PI<35degree, LL apex above L4-L5 space; 3: 35degree45degree), as previously published. One year (1Y) matched Roussouly: preoperative mismatched (Between 'actual' and 'theoretical' patients that matched at 1Y. Schwab modifiers at BL were identified: non-, moderate and severe deformity (0, +, ++) for PT, SVA, and PI-LL. Schwab improvement was defined as a decrease in a modifier at one year.
RESULT(S): A total of 103 ASD patients (61.8yrs, 63.1%F, 30kg/m2). By surgical approach, 79.6% posterior, 10.7% combined, 2.9% anterior). Average levels fused: 4.6. BL breakdown of 'current; Roussouly type: 28% Type 1, 25.3% Type 2, 32.0% Type 3, 14.7% Type 4. BL Roussouly mismatch: 65.3%. Breakdown BL Schwab modifiers: PT (0: 8.7%, +: 41.7%, ++: 49.5%), SVA (0: 29.7%, +: 20.3%, ++: 50%), PI-LL mismatch (0: 28.2%, +: 25.2%, ++: 46.6%). At one year, 19.2% of patients matched Roussouly target type, while according to Schwab modifiers, 12.6% improved in SVA, 42.7% in PI-LL, and 45.6% in PT. Patients who both met Roussouly type and improved in a Schwab by the modifiers: 9 PT (8.7%), 8 PI-LL (7.8%), 2 SVA (1.9%). There were 2 patients (1.9%) who met their Roussouly type and improved in all 3 Schwab modifiers. One year (1Y) matched Roussouly patients improved more in HRQLs (MCID for ODI, EQ5D, VAS Leg/Back Pain), when compared to mismatched Roussouly, but was not significant(P>0.05). Match Roussouly and improvement in PT Schwab met MCID for EQ5D significantly more (33.3% vs 10.6%, p=0.050). Matched Roussouly and PI-LL Schwab had more patients meet MCID for all HRQLs, yet none were significant, p>0.05. Matched Roussouly and improvement in SVA Schwab met MCID for ODI significantly more (p=0.024).
CONCLUSION(S): Patients who both matched Roussouly sagittal spinal type and improved in SRS-Schwab modifiers had superior patient-reported outcomes at 1-year. Utilizing both classification systems in surgical decision making can optimize postop patient outcomes. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In the current value-based health care climate where spinal surgery is shifting to the ambulatory setting, factors influencing postoperative patient length of stay (LOS) have significance to both surgeons and hospital administrators. Underlying patient factors including the diagnosis of radiculopathy and myelopathy have not been investigated in this context. PURPOSE: Identify predictors extended LOS(E-LOS) between myelopathy(M), radiculopathy(R), and patients with both (MR). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a single-center stereographic database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 718 surgical cervical spine patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative LOS, patient factors, preoperative HRQL, complications, predictors of E-LOS.
METHOD(S): Surgical cervical spine patients >=18yrs diagnosed with M or R primary diagnoses were isolated in the single-center Comprehensive Spine Quality Database (Quality). Patients were stratified by surgical approach: Anterior, Posterior or Combined. Top-quartile LOS values were labeled as extended. M and R patients were compared using chi-squared and independent samples t-tests, as appropriate. Univariate tests assessed differences in baseline patient-related and surgical data between M and R, and extended/non-extended LOS. Univariate/multivariate analyses were run to assess predictive factors of E-LOS in each diagnosis group. Regression with stepwise model selection was employed to explore factors potentially significant in predicting LOS.
RESULT(S): A total of 718 patients (54.5 years, 41.1%F, 29.1kg/m2). Mean CCI score: 1.11. Within the cohort, 177 patients (24.7%) had a diagnosis of myelopathy, 383 (53.3%) radiculopathy, and 22% with a diagnosis of myeloradiculopathy. Patients with M primary diagnosis were significantly older (62.2 vs 49.8yrs, p<0.001) and had a greater CCI score (1.64 vs 0.82, p<0.001) when compared to R patients. By approach: 76.7% anterior (57.6% of M, 90.6%R, 64.6%MR; p<0.001), 16.4% (35%M, 6%R, 20.9%MR; p<0.001) posterior, 6.5% (6.8%M, 3.4%R, 13.9%MR; p<0.001) combined. Average LOS: M(3.8days), R(1.5 days), MR(2.9 days) p<0.001. LOS for anterior approach in each diagnosis was as follows, M: 2.21, R: 1.21, MR: 1.69 days, p<0.001. Meanwhile, posterior approach LOS, M:6.06, R:2.91, MR:5.0, p<0.001; combined approach M: 5.17, R: 6.23, MR: 5.59, P=0.881. A total of 195 patients were categorized as E-LOS (Avg: 5.87 days), 87 M, 43 R, 65 MR. Major surgical approach of E-LOS for M (60.9%) and MR (44.6%) was posterior; whereas R E-LOS patients majorly underwent anterior procedures (53.5%). Generalized linear regression modeling found that the following combination of factors predicted E-LOS in R patients (R2=0.736, p=0.003):BMI, durotomy, CCI, anterior and combined approaches, and cardiac complications. An additional model discovered the predictors of E-LOS in M patients (R2= 0.312, p<0.001): age, hypertension, CCI, anterior and combined approaches, intraoperative complications, neuro complications, ileus, and return to OR in 90 days. Lastly, the model for E-LOS in MR patients consisted of (R2 = 0.267, p=0.001): age, durotomy, BL EQ5D, hypertension, posterior and combined approaches and postoperative complications, specifically neuro.
CONCLUSION(S): Independent of surgical approach, patients with a primary diagnosis of myelopathy, though older aged and higher comorbidity profile, had consistently longer overall postop LOS when compared to radiculopathy or myeloradiculopathy patients. The heightened risk in myelopathy patients for extended LOS should be considered when determining admission status for patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cerebral palsy (CP) can be described as a "static encephalopathy with progressive musculoskeletal pathology." Nonambulant children (GMFCS IV&V) have high rates of both spastic hip disease and neuromuscular scoliosis. Adult sagittal spinal deformity correction is known to cause acetabular retroversion and reduced pelvic tilt, resulting in increased rates of prosthetic hip dislocation; however, the role of spinal alignment on hip status in CP remains unknown. PURPOSE: To identify surgical factors and postoperative spinal alignment parameters that are associated with worsening postoperative hip status (WHS) (ie, subluxation, dislocation or resection) after spinal fusion. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective multicenter outcomes study of nonambulant CP patients (GMFCS IV&V) requiring spinal fusion. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 142 operative CP patients with preoperative, 6-week, 1Y, 2Y and 5Y postoperative follow-up. OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative spinal alignment parameters associations with WHS up to 5Y postoperatively.
METHOD(S): WHS was defined by permutations of baseline and 1Y, 2Y and 5Y hip status of left and right hips by a change from either a normal hip at baseline (BL) that became subluxated, dislocated or resected at postop intervals; or if a subluxated hip at BL became dislocated or resected at postop intervals. Hip status up to 5Y postop was analyzed according to age, sex, coronal spinal alignment (major curve Cobb, pelvic obliquity), sagittal spinal alignment (thoracic kyphosis, T12-S1 lumbar lordosis, C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis), Risser score, hip position at rest, upper and lower- instrumented vertebrae (UIV&LIV), levels fused and fusion to the sacrum. Potential cutoff values for alignment parameters at which the relationship with hip status was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios for predictors of WHS.
RESULT(S): Of 142 patients (mean age 13.7+/-2.5, 48.3% female), 36 (25.4%) had WHS postoperatively. 7 had reoperation of their spinal fusion, 3 for loose screws/bolts and 4 for prominent instrumentation. ROC curve analysis and multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the only spino-pelvic alignment parameter that significantly correlated with WHS was lumbar hyperlordosis (T12-L5) >60degree (p=.015), OR=2.61 (CI 1.19-5.75). Assessment of all patients demonstrated an increase in pre- to postop LL. Change in LL pre- to postoperative was no different between groups (p=.643), however the WHS group was more lordotic at baseline and postop (pre 44degree, post 58degree) compared to the no change group (pre 36degree, post 50degree). Age at surgery (p=0.214), sex (p=0.955), Risser score (p=0.205), major coronal cobb angle (p=0.907), thoracic kyphosis (p=0.717), global sagittal alignment (C7-S1 SVA p=0.320), levels fused (p=0.064), fusion to the sacrum (p=.548), coronal pelvic obliquity (p=0.652), or hip position at rest (adducted/abducted/neutral; p=.284) were not associated with WHS. Reoperation was not associated with WHS (p=.304).
CONCLUSION(S): Postoperative hyperlordosis (>60degree) is the only determined risk for WHS at 5Y after spinal fusion in nonambulant patients with cerebral palsy (GMFCS IV&V). WHS likely relates to anterior pelvic tilt and functional acetabular retroversion due to hyperlordosis, as well as loss of protective lumbo-pelvic motion causing anterior femoracetabular impingement. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a comprehensive self-report measurement tool with patient functions, symptoms, behaviors, and mental health outcomes. Little work has been done correlating PROMIS physical health domain metrics with established adult spinal deformity (ASD) classifications such as SRS-Schwab. PURPOSE: To correlate sagittal alignment components via the SRS-Schwab classification system with established PROMIS domains in a cohort of ASD patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a single-center stereoradiographic database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 41 ASD patients with complete baseline radiographic and PROMIS data. OUTCOME MEASURES: PROMIS physical health domain metrics (Pain Intensity [PI], Physical Function [PF], Pain Interference [Interference]), SRS-Schwab modifiers (SVA, PI-LL, PT) METHODS: Surgical ASD patients (SVA>=5cm, PT>=25degree or TK >=60degree) >=18 years old with available baseline (BL) radiographic and PROMIS data were isolated in the single-center comprehensive Spine Quality Database (Quality). Patients were classified according to SRS-Schwab deformity modifiers(0,+,++) for SVA, PI-LL and PT. Descriptives and univariate analyses compared population-weighted PROMIS scores for PI, PF and Interference across ASD deformity modifiers. Conditional Tree Analysis (CTA) with logistic regression sampling established cut-off points for PROMIS scores predicting severe malalignment (++) at BL compared to mild or moderate (0,+).
RESULT(S): A total of 41 patients (58.95 yrs,75.6%F,29.1kg/m2) met inclusion criteria. BL SRS modifiers were as follows: SVA 51.2%, 2.4%, 46.3% (0,+,++); PI-LL 27.3%, 12.1%, 60.6%(0,+,++); PT 18.2%, 36.4%, 45.5% (0,+,++). Mean cohort PI score was 94.2+/-6.0, mean PF score 8.95+/-10.1, mean Inter score 57.84+/-5.46. PF and Interference differed significantly across low and high SVA groups, with low SVA having significantly higher PF (13.50 vs 3.68,p<0.001) and lower Inter (59.62 vs 56.30, p=0.05). PI did not differ across SVA groups (p>0.05). Low PI-LL pts had significantly higher PF than pts with ++PI-LL (19.3 vs 4.15,p=0.001) and trended lower PI and Inter without significance. No significant differences in PI, PF or Inter were found across PT groups (all p>0.05). CTA found a PI score>98 or PF score <6 were independent predictors of Severe (++) SVA as opposed to Mild/Moderate SVA. For example, a PF score<6 increased odds of ++SVA by at least 2.7x compared to 0/+SVA. Similarly, significant thresholds for PI (>98) and PF (<8) scores were found for ++PI-LL, but not ++PT (p>0.05). Pain Interference did not predict SRS metrics to a significant degree (all p>0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): Inferior PROMIS scores of pain intensity and physical function predicted increasingly severe SRS sagittal modifiers at baseline, specifically severe sagittal vertical axis and lumbopelvic mismatch. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The Adult Spinal Deformity Frailty Index (ASD-FI), a validated modality for quantifying frailty, stratifies patients into categories not frail (NF), frail (F) and severely frail (SF). However, the cost of treating each frailty state is unknown. PURPOSE: Investigate the cost utility of treating not frail versus frail or severely frail ASD patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective single center adult spinal deformity database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 79 operative and non operative ASD patients >=18 years old, with baseline and 2Y ASD-FI and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. OUTCOME MEASURES: ODI, SF-6D, Cost per quality adjusted life years (QALY), Incremental Cost Effectiveness, Ratio (ICER).
METHOD(S): Inclusion criteria was surgical ASD (scoliosis>=20degree, SVA>=5cm, PT>=25degree, or thoracic kyphosis >=60degree) patients >18 years with available frailty and ODI data at BL and 2-years post op. Independent T-Tests assessed baseline radiographic differences in PT, PI-LL, and Schwab SVA modifier status between NF vs. F/SF patients. Utility data was calculated using the ODI converted to the SF-6D using published conversion methods. QALYs utilized a 3% discount rate to account for residual decline to life expectancy (78.7 years). Costs were calculated using the PearlDiver database. After accounting for complications, LOS, revisions, and death, cost per QALY at 2Y and life expectancy were calculated for NF, and F/SF patients. ICER was compared between non op and operative NF and F/SF patients at 2Y and life expectancy.
RESULT(S): Seventy-nine ASD patients met inclusion criteria. Descriptive statistics for the cohort were: age 51.0+/-6.8, 76% women, BMI 26.7+/-6.8, 54% osteotomy, 54% decompression, and 11.6+/-4.2 average levels fused. At BL, there were 48 NF, 26 F, and 4 SF pts. The average BL frailty for NF pts was 0.13+/-0.08, 0.39+/-0.06 for F, and 0.59+/-0.08 for SF pts. There were no differences in PT, PI-LL, or severe SVA Schwab modifier grades between NF or F/SF pts (all p>0.05). At 2-year follow up, there was no difference in the average cost of ASD surgery, $91,068.98 for NF patients and $90,888.53 for F/SF pts (p>0.05). The cost per QALY was higher for NF pts at 2 years vs F/SF pts ($464,239.62 vs. $321,107.89, p<0.05). If the utility gained was sustained to life expectancy, the cost per QALY was $70,796.43 for NF and $48,968.88 for F/SF (p<0.05). When compared to non op ASD pts, the ICER was $447,943.96 vs. $313,211.01 for NF and F/SF at 2 years, and $68,311.35 vs. $47,764.61 for NF and F/SF at life expectancy.
CONCLUSION(S): Frail and severely frail patients had lower cost per QALY compared to not frail patients at 3 years and life expectancy. In addition, when compared to a non operative cohort of ASD patients, frail and severely frail patients had lower ICER values. While these results support operative correction of frail and severely frail patients, it is important to note that these patients are often at worse baseline disability, which is closely related to frailty scores, and have more opportunity to improve postoperatively. In addition, there may be a threshold of frailty that is not operable due to the risk of severe complications that is not captured by this analysis. While future research should investigate economic outcomes at extended follow-up times, these findings support the cost effectiveness of ASD surgery at all frailty states. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright