Faculty Bibliography

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate factors associated with the long-term durability of cost-effectiveness (CE) in ASD patients. BACKGROUND:A substantial increase in costs associated with the surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD) has given precedence to scrutinize the value and utility it provides. METHODS:We included 327 operative ASD patients with five-year (5 yr) follow-up. Published methods were used to determine costs based on CMS.gov definitions and were based on the average DRG reimbursement rates. The utility was calculated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) utilizing the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) converted to Short-Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D), with a 3% discount applied for its decline in life expectancy. The CE threshold of $150,000 was used for primary analysis. RESULTS:Major and minor complication rates were 11% and 47%, respectively, with 26% undergoing reoperation by five years. The mean cost associated with surgery was $91,095±$47,003, with a utility gain of 0.091±0.086 at one years, QALY gained at 2 years of 0.171±0.183, and at five years of 0.42±0.43. The cost per QALY at two years was $414,885, which decreased to $142,058 at five years.With the threshold of $150,000 for CE, 19% met CE at two years and 56% at five years. In those in which revision was avoided, 87% met cumulative CE till life expectancy. Controlling analysis depicted higher baseline CCI and pelvic tilt (PT) to be the strongest predictors for not maintaining durable CE to five years [CCI OR: 1.821 (1.159-2.862), P =0.009] [PT OR: 1.079 (1.007-1.155), P =0.030]. CONCLUSIONS:Most patients achieved cost-effectiveness after four years postoperatively, with 56% meeting at five years postoperatively. When revision was avoided, 87% of patients met cumulative cost-effectiveness till life expectancy. Mechanical complications were predictive of failure to achieve cost-effectiveness at two years, while comorbidity burden and medical complications were at five years.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Previous work comparing ASD to a normative population demonstrated that a large proportion of lumbar lordosis is lost proximally (L1-L4). The current study expands on these findings by collectively investigating regional angles and spinal contours. METHODS:119 asymptomatic volunteers with full-body free-standing radiographs were used to identify age-and-PI models of each Vertebra Pelvic Angle (VPA) from L5 to T10. These formulas were then applied to a cohort of primary surgical ASD patients without coronal malalignment. Loss of lumbar lordosis (LL) was defined as the offset between age-and-PI normative value and pre-operative alignment. Spine shapes defined by VPAs were compared and analyzed using paired t-tests. RESULTS:362 ASD patients were identified (age = 64.4 ± 13, 57.1% females). Compared to their age-and-PI normative values, patients demonstrated a significant loss in LL of 17 ± 19° in the following distribution: 14.1% had "No loss" (mean = 0.1 ± 2.3), 22.9% with 10°-loss (mean = 9.9 ± 2.9), 22.1% with 20°-loss (mean = 20.0 ± 2.8), and 29.3% with 30°-loss (mean = 33.8 ± 6.0). "No loss" patients' spine was slightly posterior to the normative shape from L4 to T10 (VPA difference of 2°), while superimposed on the normative one from S1 to L2 and became anterior at L1 in the "10°-loss" group. As LL loss increased, ASD and normative shapes offset extended caudally to L3 for the "20°-loss" group and L4 for the "30°-loss" group. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:As LL loss increases, the difference between ASD and normative shapes first occurs proximally and then progresses incrementally caudally. Understanding spinal contour and LL loss location may be key to achieving sustainable correction by identifying optimal and personalized postoperative shapes.

STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:To determine the incidence and success of three-column osteotomies (3COs) performed in primary and revision adult spine deformity (ASD) corrective surgeries. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE/UNASSIGNED:3COs are often required to correct severe, rigid ASD presentations. However, controversy remains on the utility of 3COs, particularly in primary surgery. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Patients ASD having 2-year data were included and divided into 3CO and non-3CO (remaining ASD cohort) groups. For the subanalysis, patients were stratified based on whether they were undergoing primary (P3CO) or revision (R3CO) surgery. Multivariate analysis controlling for age, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, baseline pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis, and fused levels evaluated the complication rates and radiographic and patient-reported outcomes between the 3CO and non-3CO groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Of the 436 patients included, 20% had 3COs. 3COs were performed in 16% of P3COs and 51% of R3COs. Both 3CO groups had greater severity in deformity and disability at baseline; however, only R3COs improved more than non-3COs. Despite greater segmental correction, 3COs had much lower rates of aligning in the lumbar distribution index (LDI), higher mechanical complications, and more reoperations when performed below L3. When comparing P3COs and R3COs, baseline lumbopelvic and global alignments, as well as disability, were different. The R3CO group had greater clinical improvements and global correction (both p<0.04), although the P3CO group achieved alignment in LDI more often (odds ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-6.2; p=0.006). The P3CO group had more neurological complications (30% vs. 13%, p=0.042), whereas the R3CO tended to have higher mechanical complication rates (25% vs. 15%, p=0.2). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:3COs showed greater improvements in realignment while failing to demonstrate the same clinical improvement as primaries without a 3CO. Overall, when suitably indicated, a 3CO offers superior utility for achieving optimal realignment across primary and revision surgeries for ASD correction.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective single-center study. OBJECTIVE:To assess the influence of frailty on optimal outcome following ASD corrective surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Frailty is a determining factor in outcomes after ASD surgery and may exert a ceiling effect on the best possible outcome. METHODS:ASD patients with frailty measures, baseline, and 2-year ODI included. Frailty was classified as Not Frail (NF), Frail (F) and Severely Frail (SF) based on the modified Frailty Index, then stratified into quartiles based on two-year ODI improvement (most improved designated "Highest"). Logistic regression analyzed relationships between frailty and ODI score and improvement, maintenance, or deterioration. A Kaplan-Meier survival curve was used to analyze differences in time to complication or reoperation. RESULTS:A total of 393 ASD patients were isolated (55.2% NF, 31.0% F, and 13.7% SF), then classified as 12.5% NF-Highest, 17.8% F-Highest, and 3.1% SF-Highest. The SF group had the highest rate of deterioration (16.7%, P =0.025) in the second postoperative year, but the groups were similar in improvement (NF: 10.1%, F: 11.5%, SF: 9.3%, P =0.886). Improvement of SF patients was greatest at six months (ΔODI of -22.6±18.0, P <0.001), but NF and F patients reached maximal ODI at 2 years (ΔODI of -15.7±17.9 and -20.5±18.4, respectively). SF patients initially showed the greatest improvement in ODI (NF: -4.8±19.0, F: -12.4±19.3, SF: -22.6±18.0 at six months, P <0.001). A Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed a trend of less time to major complication or reoperation by 2 years with increasing frailty (NF: 7.5±0.381 yr, F: 6.7±0.511 yr, SF: 5.8±0.757 yr; P =0.113). CONCLUSIONS:Increasing frailty had a negative effect on maximal improvement, where severely frail patients exhibited a parabolic effect with greater initial improvement due to higher baseline disability, but reached a ceiling effect with less overall maximal improvement. Severe frailty may exert a ceiling effect on improvement and impair maintenance of improvement following surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to assess how various realignment strategies affect mechanical failure and clinical outcomes in pelvic incidence (PI)-stratified cohorts following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS:Median and interquartile range statistics were calculated for demographics and surgical details. Further statistical analysis was used to define subsets within PI generating significantly different rates of mechanical failure. These subsets of PI were further analyzed as subcohorts for the outcomes and effects of realignment within each subcohort. Multivariate logistic regression analysis controlling for baseline frailty and lumbar lordosis (LL; L1-S1) analyzed the association of age-adjusted realignment and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) strategies with the incidence of mechanical failure and clinical improvement within PI-stratified groups. RESULTS:A parabolic relationship between PI and mechanical failure was noted, whereas patients with either < 51° (n = 174, 39.1% of cohort) or > 63° (n = 114, 25.6% of cohort) of PI generated higher rates of mechanical failure (18.0% and 20.0%, respectively) and lower rates of good outcome (80.3% and 77.6%, respectively) than those with moderate PI (51°-63°). Patients with lower PI more often met good outcome criteria when undercorrected in age-adjusted PI-LL mismatch and sagittal age-adjusted score, and those not meeting good outcome criteria were more likely to deteriorate in GAP relative LL from first to final follow-up (OR 13.4, 95% CI 1.3-139.2). In those with moderate PI, patients were more likely to meet good outcome when aligned on the GAP lordosis distribution index (LDI; OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.9-3.3). Patients with higher PI meeting good outcome were more likely to be overcorrected in sagittal vertical axis (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.2) at first follow-up and less likely to be undercorrected in T1 pelvic angle (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9) by final follow-up. When assessing GAP alignment, patients were more likely to meet good outcome when aligned on GAP LDI (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.4-8.9). CONCLUSIONS:There was a parabolic relationship between PI and both mechanical failure and clinical improvement following deformity correction in this study. Understanding the associations between this fixed parameter and poor outcomes can aid the surgeon in strategical planning when seeking to realign ASD.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE:Evaluate the impact of correcting to normative segmental lordosis values on post-operative outcomes. BACKGROUND:Restoring lumbar lordosis magnitude is crucial in adult spinal deformity surgery, but the optimal location and segmental distribution remains unclear. METHODS:Patients were grouped based on offset to normative segmental lordosis values, extracted from recent publications. Matched patients were within 10% of the cohort's mean offset, less than or over 10% were under- and over-corrected. Surgical technique, PROMs, and surgical complications were compared across groups at baseline and 2-year. RESULTS:510 patients with an average age of 64.6, mean CCI 2.08, and average follow-up of 25 months. L4-5 was least likely to be matched (19.1%), while L4-S1 was the most likely (24.3%). More patients were overcorrected at proximal levels (T10-L2; Undercorrected, U: 32.2% vs. Matched, M: 21.7% vs. Overcorrected, O: 46.1%) and undercorrected at distal levels (L4-S1: U: 39.0% vs. M: 24.3% vs. O: 36.8%). Postoperative ODI was comparable across correction groups at all spinal levels except at L4-S1 and T10-L2/L4-S1, where overcorrected patients and matched were better than undercorrected (U: 32.1 vs. M: 25.4 vs. O: 26.5, P=0.005; U: 36.2 vs. M: 24.2 vs. O: 26.8, P=0.001; respectively). Patients overcorrected at T10-L2 experienced higher rates of proximal junctional failure (PJF) (U: 16.0% vs. M: 15.6% vs. O: 32.8%, P<0.001) and had greater posterior inclination of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) (U: -9.2±9.4° vs. M: -9.6±9.1° vs. O: -12.2±10.0°, P<0.001), whereas undercorrection at these levels led to higher rates of revision for implant failure (U: 14.2% vs. M: 7.3% vs. O: 6.4%, P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing fusion for adult spinal deformity suffer higher rates of PJF with overcorrection and increased rates of implant failure with undercorrection based on normative segmental lordosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:IV.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To assess impact of baseline disability on HRQL outcomes. METHODS:CD patients with baseline (BL) and 2 year (2Y) data included, and ranked into quartiles by baseline NDI, from lowest/best score (Q1) to highest/worst score (Q4). Means comparison tests analyzed differences between quartiles. ANCOVA and logistic regressions assessed differences in outcomes while accounting for covariates (BL deformity, comorbidities, HRQLs, surgical details and complications). RESULTS:, CCI: 0.94 ± 1.31). The cohort mean cSVA was 38.54 ± 19.43 mm and TS-CL: 37.34 ± 19.73. Mean BL NDI by quartile was: Q1: 25.04 ± 8.19, Q2: 41.61 ± 2.77, Q3: 53.31 ± 4.32, and Q4: 69.52 ± 8.35. Q2 demonstrated greatest improvement in NRS Neck at 2Y (-3.93), compared to Q3 (-1.61, p = .032) and Q4 (-1.41, p = .015). Q2 demonstrated greater improvement in NRS Back (-1.71), compared to Q4 (+ 0.84, p = .010). Q2 met MCID in NRS Neck at the highest rates (69.9%), especially compared to Q4 (30.3%), p = .039. Q2 had the greatest improvement in EQ-5D (+ 0.082), compared to Q1 (+ 0.073), Q3 (+ 0.022), and Q4 (+ 0.014), p = .034. Q2 also had the greatest mJOA improvement (+ 1.517), p = .042. CONCLUSIONS:Patients in Q2, with mean BL NDI of 42, consistently demonstrated the greatest improvement in HRQLs whereas those in Q4, (NDI 70), saw the least. BL NDI between 39 and 44 may represent a disability "Sweet Spot," within which operative intervention maximizes patient-reported outcomes. Furthermore, delaying intervention until patients are severely disabled, beyond an NDI of 61, may limit the benefits of surgery.

BACKGROUND:The aim of the current study was to compare the incidence of postoperative complications among minimally invasive surgery (MIS) tubular, endoscopic, and robot-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) techniques. METHODS:We studied consecutive patients who underwent single-level or multilevel TLIF between 2020 and 2022. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (Visual Analog Scale leg score and Oswestry Disability Index), demographic, and intraoperative variables were recorded. One-way analysis of variance with Bartlett's equal-variance and Pearson chi-squared tests were used. RESULTS:The study included 170 TLIF patients: 107 (63%) tubular, 42 (25%) endoscopic, and 21 (12%) robot assisted. All 3 TLIF techniques had similar complication rates: tubular 6 (5.6%), endoscopic 2 (4.8%), and robot assisted 1 (4.8%) all occurring within the first 2 weeks. Tubular TLIF reported the lowest incidence of new-onset neurologic symptoms, primarily radiculitis or numbness/tingling, at 2 weeks postoperatively (P < 0.05) with 21 (20%) tubular, 17 (41%) endoscopic, and 9 (43%) robot-assisted patients. There were 2 revisions in the robot-assisted group, while tubular and endoscopic each had one within 1 year. There was no statistical difference in preoperative or postoperative patient-reported outcomes between the TLIF groups. CONCLUSIONS:The current study demonstrated that tubular, endoscopic, and robot-assisted TLIF procedures had similar complication rates. The tubular MIS TLIF reported fewer new neurologic symptoms compared with endoscopic and robot-assisted TLIF procedures at 2 weeks postoperative, with all groups declining in symptom persistency at later time intervals. Average Visual Analog Scale scores continuously improved up to 1 year postoperatively among all groups.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:Severe sagittal plane deformity with loss of L4-S1 lordosis is disabling and can be improved through various surgical techniques. However, data is limited on the differing ability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to achieve alignment goals in severely malaligned patients. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To examine surgical techniques aimed at restoring L4-S1 lordosis in severe adult spinal deformity (ASD). DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. PATIENT SAMPLE/METHODS:A total of 96 patients who underwent ALIF, PSO, and TLIF were included in this study. OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:The following data were observed for all cases: patient demographics, spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs. METHODS:Severe ASD patients with preoperative PI-LL >20°, L4-S1 lordosis <30°, and full body radiographs and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at baseline and six-week postoperative visit were included. Patients were grouped into ALIF (1-2 level ALIF at L4-S1), PSO (L4/L5 PSO), and TLIF (1-2 level TLIF at L4-S1). Comparative analyses were performed on demographics, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs. RESULTS:Among the 96 included patients, 40 underwent ALIF, 27 underwent PSO, and 29 underwent TLIF. At baseline, cohorts had comparable age, sex, race, Edmonton frailty scores and radiographic spinopelvic parameters (p>0.05). However, PSO was performed more often in revision cases (p<0.001). Following surgery, L4-S1 lordosis correction (p=0.001) was comparable among ALIF and PSO patients and caudal lordotic apex migration (p=0.044) was highest among ALIF patients. PSO patients had higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (p<0.001) and motor deficits (p=0.049), and in-hospital ICU admission (p=0.022) and blood products given (p=0.004) but were otherwise comparable in terms of length of stay, blood transfusion given, and postoperative admission to rehab. Likewise, 90-day postoperative complication profiles and six-week PROMs were comparable as well. CONCLUSIONS:ALIF can restore L4-S1 sagittal alignment as powerfully as PSO, with fewer intra-operative and in-hospital complications. When feasible, ALIF is a suitable alternative to PSO and likely superior to TLIF for correcting L4-S1 lordosis among patients with severe sagittal malalignment.

OBJECTIVE:The objective was to evaluate factors associated with the long-term durability of outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients. METHODS:Operative ASD patients fused from at least L1 to the sacrum with baseline (BL) to 5-year (5Y) follow-up were included. Substantial clinical benefit (SCB) in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS)-back, NRS-leg, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22r scores and physical component score were assessed on the basis of previously published values. Factors were evaluated on the basis of meeting optimal outcomes (OO) at 2 years (2+) and 5 years (5+). Furthermore, 2+ patients were isolated and evaluated on the basis of meeting OO at 5 years (2+5+) or not at 5 years (2+5-). OO were defined as follows: no reoperation, major mechanical failure, proximal junctional failure, and meeting either 1) SCB in terms of ODI score (decrease > 18.8) or 2) ODI < 15 and SRS-22r total > 4.5. RESULTS:In total, 330 ASD patients met the inclusion criteria, with 45.5% meeting SCB for ODI at 2 years, while 46.0% met SCB at 5 years; 79% of those who achieved 2-year (2Y) SCB went on to achieve 5Y SCB. This rate was lower for OO, with 41% achieving 2Y OO (2+), while 37% met 5Y OO (5+) and 80% of 2+ patients had durable outcomes until 5+ (32% of the total cohort). Of the patient factors, frailty was significantly different among groups at 2 years, while comorbidity burden was significantly different at 5 years and the combination thereof differed in those with durable outcomes. Those who regained their level of activity postoperatively had 4 times higher odds of maintaining OO from 2 years to 5 years (p < 0.05). Osteoporosis rates, although equivocal at BL, were higher at the last follow-up in those who met 2Y OO but failed to meet 5Y OO. The odds of achieving OO at 5 years in 2+ patients decreased by 47% for each additional comorbidity and decreased by 74% in those who had lower-extremity paresthesias at BL (both p < 0.05). Controlling for patient factors and BL disability found fewer levels fused, decreased correction of sagittal vertical axis, and increased correction of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch to be predictive of maintaining 2Y OO until 5 years (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:SCB was met in 46% of ASD patients at 5 years. The durability of OO was seen in a third of patients until 5 years postoperatively. Higher rates of medical complications were seen in those who failed to achieve and maintain OO until 5 years. Frailty and comorbidity burden were significant factors associated with the achievement and durability of OO until 5 years.