Faculty Bibliography

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to investigate associations between time to surgical intervention and outcomes for central cord syndrome (CCS) patients. BACKGROUND:As surgery is increasingly recommended for patients with neurological deterioration CCS, it is important to investigate the relationship between time to surgery and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:CCS patients were isolated in Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2005-2013. Patients were grouped by time to surgery: same-day, 1-day delay, 2, 3, 4-7, 8-14, and >14 days. Means comparison tests compared patient factors, perioperative complications, and charges across patient groups. Controlling for age, comorbidities, length of stay, and concurrent traumatic fractures, binary logistic regression assessed surgical timing associated with increased odds of perioperative complication, using same-day as reference group. RESULTS:Included: 6734 CSS patients (64% underwent surgery). The most common injury mechanisms were falls (30%) and pedestrian accidents (7%). Of patients that underwent surgery, 52% underwent fusion, 30% discectomy, and 14% other decompression of the spinal canal. Breakdown by time to procedure was: 39% same-day, 16% 1-day, 10% 2 days, 8% 3 days, 16% 4-7 days, 8% 8-14 days, and 3% >14 days. Timing groups did not differ in trauma status at admission, although age varied: [minimum: 1 d (58±15 y), maximum: >14 d (63±13 y)]. Relative to other groups, same-day patients had the lowest hospital charges, highest rates of home discharge, and second lowest postoperative length of stay behind 2-day delay patients. Patients delayed >14 days to surgery had increased odds of perioperative cardiac and infection complications. Timing groups beyond 3 days showed increased odds of VTE and nonhome discharge. CONCLUSIONS:CCS patients undergoing surgery on the same day as admission had lower odds of complication, hospital charges, and higher rates of home discharge than patients that experienced a delay to operation. Patients delayed >14 days to surgery were associated with inferior outcomes, including increased odds of cardiac complication and infection.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the modified frailty index (mFI-5) in a population of patients undergoing spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:The original modified frailty index (mFI-11) published as an American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 11-factor index was modified to mFI-5 after variables were removed from recent renditions. METHODS:Surgical spine patients were isolated using current procedural terminology codes. mFI-11 (11) and mFI-5 (5) were calculated from 2005 to 2012. mFI was determined by dividing the factors present by available factors. To assess correlation, Spearman rho was used. Predictive values of indices were generated by binary logistic regression. Patients were stratified into groups by mFI-5: not frail (NF, <0.3), mildly frail (MF, 0.3-0.5), severely frail (SF, >0.5). Means comparison tests analyzed frailty and clinical outcomes. RESULTS:After calculating the mFI-5 and the mFI-11, Spearman rho between the two indices was 0.926(P < 0.001). Each index established significant (all P < 0.001) predictive values for unplanned readmission (11 = odds ratio [OR]: 5.65 [2.92-10.94]; 5 = OR: 3.68 [1.85-2.32]), post-op complications (11 = OR: 8.56 [7.12-10.31]; 5 = OR: 13.32 [10.89-16.29]), and mortality (11 = OR: 41.29 [21.92-77.76]; 5 = OR: 114.82 [54.64-241.28]). Frailty categories by mFI-5 were: 83.2% NF, 15.2% MF, and 1.6% SF. From 2005 to 2016, rates of NF decreased (88.8% to 82.2%, P < 0.001), whereas MF increased (9.2% to 16.2%, P < 0.001), and SF remained constant (2% to 1.6%, P > 0.05). With increase in severity, postoperative rates of morbidities and complications increased. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The five-factor National Surgical Quality Improvement Program modified frailty index is an effective predictor of postoperative events following spine surgery. Severity of frailty score by the mFI-5 was associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The mFI-5 within a surgical spine population can reliably predict post-op complications. This tool is less cumbersome than mFI-11 and relies on readily accessible variables at the time of surgical decision-making.Level of Evidence: 3.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Multidisciplinary patient-reported outcomes are a critical part of assessing patients to better understand their well-being during treatment. The use of multidisciplinary patient-reported outcomes is recommended in many areas of medicine. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) has been utilized as a common measurement language across universally relevant domains, including pain, mood, sleep, social participation, and function. METHODS:Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. Subjects were identified and consecutively enrolled upon entry into chronic pain centers across 24 sites in the United States. The PROMIS-29 v2.1 and the numerical rating scale (NRS) were recorded. The pain impact score and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI-3) were calculated. Statistical differences were assessed between genders and among age groups comprising subjects less than 40, 41-60, 61-80, and over 80 years of age. RESULTS:A total of 19,546 patients were assessed over the enrollment period from 2018 to 2020. The PROMIS-29 v2.1 was evaluated across the seven domains, along with the numerical rating sale (NRS). The mean scores of the population for PROMIS SF v1.0 Pain Interference 4a, PROMIS SF v1.0 Sleep Disturbance 4a, PROMIS SF v1.0 Fatigue 4a, PROMIS SF v1.0 Anxiety 4a, PROMIS SF V1.0 Depression 4a, PROMIS SF v2.0 Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities 4a, and PROMIS SF v1.0 Physical Function 4a, measuring pain interference, sleep disturbance, fatigue, anxiety, depression, social participation, and physical function, were 64.61, 57.19, 58.50, 53.94, 54.45, 40.06, and 36.23, respectively. Pain intensity was 6.38 on an 11-point NRS scale. The pain impact score (PIS) and health utilities index mark 3 (HUI-3) scores, calculated across the designated age groups, were 33.19 and 0.67, respectively. Statistical differences were observed for the domains of sleep disturbance and physical function for age groups less than 40 and greater than 80 years of age. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This data set is the first published normative data set describing the PROMIS-29 assessment in the chronic pain population. The patient population is more homogeneous than expected, and females were found to have higher levels of dysfunction.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) represents one of the most commonly performed spine surgeries. Dysphagia secondary to esophageal injury during retraction is one of the most common complications, and usually leads to self-limiting dysphagia. However, actual perforation and violation of the esophageal tissue is much rarer and can lead to delayed deep infections. Prevertebral abscess' are one of the most feared complications after ACDF, as they can lead to severe tissue swelling, osteomyelitis, hardware failure, and even death. Due to their rarity, a gold standard of workup and treatment is still unknown. A healthy 47-year-old female presents 9 months after a C4-C7 ACDF done at an outside institution with a large prevertebral abscess, osteomyelitis, hardware failure, and pseudoarthrosis secondary to esophagopharyngeal defect and prominent hardware. Overall, the patient underwent eight surgeries, and required an extended course of intravenous (IV) antibiotics, multiple diagnostic procedures, and complex soft tissue coverage using an anterolateral thigh free flap. Currently, the patient is doing well 6 months from her last procedure without any complications or plan for future surgery. This was an extremely rare case of a late occurring prevertebral abscess after ACDF. Dysphagia in the late postoperative setting should be evaluated carefully and thoroughly for any esophageal perforation and deep infection. As exemplified in this case, even partial thickness injuries to the esophageal-pharyngeal anatomy due to hardware irrigation can lead to catastrophic complications over time. Safe removal of all hardware anteriorly to avoid continued irritation of the esophagopharyngeal mucosa should be prioritized. If anterior hardware is necessary for stability, implants with the smallest footprint should be utilized. Early collaboration with ENT colleagues should be a priority and can provide crucial diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Complex closure with a free flap was shown to be an effective way to provide successful definitive soft tissue coverage.

BACKGROUND:Spinal surgery is associated with an inherently elevated risk profile, and thus far there has been limited discussion about how these outpatient spine patients are benefiting from these same-day procedures against other typical outpatient orthopedic surgeries. METHODS:Orthopedic patients who received either inpatient or outpatient surgery were isolated in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality of Improvement Program (2005-2016). Patients were stratified by type of orthopedic surgery received (spine, knee, ankle, shoulder, or hip). Mean comparisons and chi-squared tests assessed basic demographics. Perioperative complications were analyzed via regression analyses in regard to their principal inpatient or outpatient orthopedic surgery received. RESULTS:< .05) with complications decreasing for IN and OUT patients by 2016. CONCLUSIONS:Over the past decade, spine surgery has decreased in complications for IN and OUT procedures along with IN/OUT knee, ankle, hip, and shoulder procedures, reflecting greater tolerance for risk in an outpatient setting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:Despite the increase in riskier spine procedures, complications have decreased over the years. Surgeons should aim to continue to decrease inpatient spine complications to the level of other orthopedic surgeries.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common cause of spinal deformity in adolescents. AIS can be associated with certain intraspinal anomalies such as syringomyelia (SM). This study assessed the rate o f SM in AIS patients and compared trends in surgical approach and postoperative outcomes in AIS patients with and without SM. Methods/UNASSIGNED:-tests and Chi-squared tests for categorical and discrete variables, respectively. Results/UNASSIGNED:< 0.001). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:These results indicate that patients concordant with AIS and SM may be treated more cautiously (lower invasiveness score and less fusions) than those without SM.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:Numerous advances have been made in the field of spine fusion, such as minimally invasive (MIS) or robotic-assisted spine surgery. However, it is unknown how these advances have impacted the cost of care. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Compare the economic outcomes of lumbar spine fusion between open, MIS, and robot-assisted surgery patients. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING/METHODS:Retrospective review of a single center spine surgery database. PATIENT SAMPLE/METHODS:360 propensity matched patients. OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Costs, EuroQol-5D (EQ5D), cost per quality adjusted life years (QALY). METHODS:Inclusion criteria: surgical patients >18 years undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. Patients were categorized into 3 groups based on procedure type: open, MIS, or robotic. Open patients undergoing poster spinal fusion were considered as the control group. MIS patients included those undergoing transforaminal or lateral lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous screws. Robotic patients were those undergoing robot-assisted fusion. Propensity score matching was performed between all groups for the number of levels fused. Costs were calculated using the PearlDiver database, which reflects both private insurance and Medicare reimbursement claims for ICD-9 codes. For robotic cases, costs were reflective of operational fees and initial purchase cost. Complications and comorbidities (CC) and major complications and comorbidities (MCC) were assessed according to CMS.gov manual definitions. QALYs and cost per QALY were calculated using a 3% discount rate to account for residual decline to life expectancy (78.7 years). Costs per QALY were calculated for both 1 year and life expectancy, assuming no loss of benefit. A 10,000 trial Monte Carlo simulation with probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) assessed our model parameters and costs. RESULTS:360 propensity matched patients (120 open, 120 MIS, 120 robotic) met inclusion criteria. Descriptive statistics for the cohort were: age 58.8 ± 13.5, 50% women, BMI 29.4 ± 6.3, operative time 294.4 ± 119.0, LOS 4.56 ± 3.31 days, EBL 515.9 ± 670.0 cc, and 2.3 ± 2.2 average levels fused. Rates of post-op complications were significantly higher in robotic cases versus open and MIS (43% vs. 21% and 22% for open and MIS, p<0.05). However, revision rates were comparable between all groups (3% open, 3% MIS, 5% robotic, p>0.05). After factoring in complications, revisions, and purchasing and operating fees, the costs of robotic cases was significantly higher than both open and MIS surgery ($60,047.01 vs. $42,538.98 open and $41,471.21 MIS). In a subanalysis of 42 patients with baseline (BL) and 1Y EQ5D data, the cost per QALY at 1Y for open, MIS, and robot-assisted cases was $296,624.48, $115,911.69, and $592,734.30. If utility gained was sustained to life expectancy, the cost per QALY was $14,905.75, $5,824.71, $29,785.64 for open, MIS, and robot-assisted cases. Results of the PSA were consistent with MIS surgery having the most incremental cost effectiveness when compared to open and robotic surgery. CONCLUSIONS:Numerous advances have been made in the field of spine surgery, however, there has been limited discussion of the effect these advances have on economic outcomes. When matched for levels fused, robot-assisted surgery patients had significantly higher rates of complications and 30% higher costs of surgery compared to minimally invasive and open spine surgery patients. While 1 year economic outcomes weren't optimal for robotic surgery cases, the projected costs per quality adjusted life years at life expectancy were well below established acceptable thresholds. The above findings may be reflective of an educational learning curve and emerging surgical technologies undergoing progressive refinement.

Psychiatric diagnoses (PD) present a significant burden on elective surgery patients and may have potentially dramatic impacts on outcomes. As ailments of the spine can be particularly debilitating, the effect of PD on outcomes was compared between elective spine surgery patients and other common elective orthopedic surgery procedures. This study included 412,777 elective orthopedic patients who were concurrently diagnosed with PD within the years 2005 to 2016. 30.2% of PD patients experienced a post-operative complication, compared to 25.1% for non-PD patients (p < 0.001). Mood Disorders (bipolar or depressive disorders) were the most commonly diagnosed PD for all elective Orthopedic procedures, followed by anxiety, then dementia (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis found PD to be a significant predictor of higher cost to charge ratio (CCR), length of stay (LOS), and death (all p < 0.001). Between, hand, elbow, and shoulder specialties, spine patients had the highest odds of increased CCR and unfavorable discharge, and the second highest odds of death (all p < 0.001).

BACKGROUND:The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and legacy outcome measures like the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) have not been compared for their sensitivity in reflecting the impact of perioperative complications and length of stay (LOS) in a surgical thoracolumbar population. The purpose of this study is to assess the strength of PROMIS and ODI scores as they correlate with LOS and complication outcomes of surgical thoracolumbar patients. METHODS:Retrospective cohort study. Included: patients ≥18 years undergoing thoracolumbar surgery with available preoperative and 3-month postoperative ODI and PROMIS scores. Pearson correlation assessed the linear relationships between LOS, complications, and scores for PROMIS (physical function, pain intensity, pain interference) and ODI. Linear regression predicted the relationship between complication incidence and scores for ODI and PROMIS. RESULTS:= .014) could predict complications; ODI could not. CONCLUSIONS:PROMIS domains of physical function and pain interference better reflected perioperative complications and LOS than the ODI. These results suggest PROMIS may offer more utility as an outcomes assessment instrument. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3.

BACKGROUND:The Miller et al adult spinal deformity frailty index (ASD-FI) correlates with complication risk; however, its development was not rooted in clinical outcomes, and the 40 factors needed for its calculation limit the index's clinical utility. The present study aimed to develop a simplified, weighted frailty index for ASD patients METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of a single-center database. Component ASD-FI parameters contributing to overall ASD-FI score were assessed via Pearson correlation. Top significant, clinically relevant factors were regressed against ASD-FI score to generate the modified ASD-FI (mASD-FI). Component mASD-FI factors were regressed against incidence of medical complications, and factor weights were calculated from regression of these coefficients. Total mASD-FI score ranged from 0 to 21, and was calculated by summing weights of expressed parameters. Linear regression and published ASD-FI cutoffs generated corresponding mASD-FI frailty cutoffs: not frail (NF, <7), frail (7-12), severely frail (SF, >12). Analysis of variance assessed the relationship between frailty category and validated baseline measures of pain and disability at baseline. RESULTS:= .001). CONCLUSIONS:This study modifies an existing ASD frailty index and proposes a weighted, shorter mASD-FI. The mASD-FI relies less on patient-reported variables, and it weights component factors by their contribution to adverse outcomes. Because increasing mASD-FI score is associated with inferior clinical measures of pain and disability, the mASD-FI may serve as a valuable tool for preoperative risk assessment.