Literature DB >> 17268274

Reoperation rates following lumbar spine surgery and the influence of spinal fusion procedures.

Brook I Martin1, Sohail K Mirza, Bryan A Comstock, Darryl T Gray, William Kreuter, Richard A Deyo.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using a hospital discharge registry of all nonfederal acute care hospitals in Washington state.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the cumulative incidence of reoperation following lumbar surgery for degenerative disease and, for specific diagnoses, to compare the frequency of reoperation following fusion with that following decompression alone. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Repeat lumbar spine operations are generally undesirable, implying persistent symptoms, progression of degenerative changes, or treatment complications. Compared to decompression alone, spine fusion is commonly viewed as a stabilizing treatment that may reduce the need for additional surgery. However, indications for fusion surgery in degenerative spine disorders remain controversial, and the effects of fusion on reoperation rates are unclear.
METHODS: Adults who underwent inpatient lumbar surgery for degenerative spine disorders in 1990-1993 (n = 24,882) were identified from International Classification of Diseases ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes and then categorized as having either a lumbar decompression surgery or lumbar fusion surgery. We then compared the subsequent incidence of lumbar spine surgery between these groups.
RESULTS: Patients who had surgery in 1990-93 had a 19% cumulative incidence of reoperation during the subsequent 11 years. Patients with spondylolisthesis had a lower cumulative incidence of reoperation after fusion surgery than after decompression alone (17.1% vs. 28.0%, P = 0.002). For other diagnoses combined, the cumulative incidence of reoperation was higher following fusion than following decompression alone (21.5% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.008). After fusion surgery, 62.5% of reoperations were associated with a diagnosis suggesting device complication or pseudarthrosis.
CONCLUSION: Patients should be informed that the likelihood of reoperation following a lumbar spine operation is substantial. For spondylolisthesis, reoperation is less likely following fusion than following decompression alone. For other degenerative spine conditions, the cumulative incidence of reoperation is higher or unimproved after a fusion procedure compared to decompression alone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17268274     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000254104.55716.46

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  116 in total

1.  Survivorship analysis of 150 consecutive patients with DIAM™ implantation for surgery of lumbar spinal stenosis and disc herniation.

Authors:  Yoo-Joon Sur; Chae-Gwan Kong; Jong-Beom Park
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-10-17       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  The catastrophization effects of an MRI report on the patient and surgeon and the benefits of 'clinical reporting': results from an RCT and blinded trials.

Authors:  S Rajasekaran; S Dilip Chand Raja; Bhari Thippeswamy Pushpa; Kumar Behera Ananda; Shetty Ajoy Prasad; Mugesh Kanna Rishi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-03-21       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Effect of fusion following decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Lin Liang; Wei-Min Jiang; Xue-Feng Li; Heng Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

4.  Risk Factors for Reoperation in Patients Treated Surgically for Lumbar Stenosis: A Subanalysis of the 8-year Data From the SPORT Trial.

Authors:  Michael C Gerling; Dante Leven; Peter G Passias; Virginie Lafage; Kristina Bianco; Alexandra Lee; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Wenyan Zhao; Kevin F Spratt; Kristen Radcliff; Thomas J Errico
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  The who, what and when of surgery for the degenerative lumbar spine: a population-based study of surgeon factors, surgical procedures, recent trends and reoperation rates.

Authors:  S Samuel Bederman; Hans J Kreder; Iris Weller; Joel A Finkelstein; Michael H Ford; Albert J M Yee
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Patient characteristics associated with increased postoperative length of stay and readmission after elective laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Bryce A Basques; Arya G Varthi; Nicholas S Golinvaux; Daniel D Bohl; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  How do coverage policies influence practice patterns, safety, and cost of initial lumbar fusion surgery? A population-based comparison of workers' compensation systems.

Authors:  Brook I Martin; Gary M Franklin; Richard A Deyo; Thomas M Wickizer; Jonathan D Lurie; Sohail K Mirza
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 4.166

8.  Hydroxyapatite coating on PEEK implants: Biomechanical and histological study in a rabbit model.

Authors:  John W Durham; Sergio A Montelongo; Joo L Ong; Teja Guda; Matthew J Allen; Afsaneh Rabiei
Journal:  Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 7.328

9.  Classification of patients with incident non-specific low back pain: implications for research.

Authors:  Giulia Norton; Christine M McDonough; Howard J Cabral; Michael Shwartz; James F Burgess
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  Preparation, characterization and in vitro response of bioactive coatings on polyether ether ketone.

Authors:  John W Durham; Matthew J Allen; Afsaneh Rabiei
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 3.368

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.