PURPOSE: The ageing of the population will see a growing number of patients presenting for spine surgery with appropriate indications but numerous medical comorbidities. This complicates decision-making, requiring that the likely benefit of surgery (outcome) be carefully weighed up against the potential risk (complications). We assessed the influence of comorbidity on the risks and benefits of spine surgery. METHODS: 3,549/4,053 patients with degenerative lumbar disorders, undergoing surgery with the goal of pain relief, completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI; scored 0-10) before and 12 months after surgery. At 12 months postoperatively, they also rated the global treatment outcome and their satisfaction with care. Using the Eurospine Spine Tango Registry, surgeons documented surgical details, American Society of Anesthesiologists comorbidity (ASA) grades and perioperative surgical and general complications. RESULTS: 29.0% patients were rated as ASA1 (normal healthy), 45.7% as ASA2 (mild/moderate systemic disease), 24.9% as ASA3 (severe), and just 0.4% as ASA4 (life-threatening). In going from ASA1 to ASA3 (ASA4 group too small), surgical complications increased significantly from 5.0 to 14.5% and general complications increased from 2.9 to 15.7%; 12-month outcomes showed a corresponding decline, with a good global outcome being reported by 79% ASA1 patients, 76% ASA2, and 68% ASA3. Satisfaction with treatment was 87, 85, and 79%, respectively, and reduction in COMI was 4.2 ± 2.9, 3.7 ± 3.0, and 3.4 ± 3.0 points, respectively. Multiple regression analysis revealed a significant (p < 0.0001) independent effect of ASA grade on both complications and outcome. CONCLUSION: The negative impact of comorbidity on the outcome of spine surgery has not been well investigated/quantified to date. The ASA grade may be helpful in producing algorithms for decision-making and preoperative counselling regarding the corresponding risks and benefits of surgery.
PURPOSE: The ageing of the population will see a growing number of patients presenting for spine surgery with appropriate indications but numerous medical comorbidities. This complicates decision-making, requiring that the likely benefit of surgery (outcome) be carefully weighed up against the potential risk (complications). We assessed the influence of comorbidity on the risks and benefits of spine surgery. METHODS: 3,549/4,053 patients with degenerative lumbar disorders, undergoing surgery with the goal of pain relief, completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI; scored 0-10) before and 12 months after surgery. At 12 months postoperatively, they also rated the global treatment outcome and their satisfaction with care. Using the Eurospine Spine Tango Registry, surgeons documented surgical details, American Society of Anesthesiologists comorbidity (ASA) grades and perioperative surgical and general complications. RESULTS: 29.0% patients were rated as ASA1 (normal healthy), 45.7% as ASA2 (mild/moderate systemic disease), 24.9% as ASA3 (severe), and just 0.4% as ASA4 (life-threatening). In going from ASA1 to ASA3 (ASA4 group too small), surgical complications increased significantly from 5.0 to 14.5% and general complications increased from 2.9 to 15.7%; 12-month outcomes showed a corresponding decline, with a good global outcome being reported by 79% ASA1patients, 76% ASA2, and 68% ASA3. Satisfaction with treatment was 87, 85, and 79%, respectively, and reduction in COMI was 4.2 ± 2.9, 3.7 ± 3.0, and 3.4 ± 3.0 points, respectively. Multiple regression analysis revealed a significant (p < 0.0001) independent effect of ASA grade on both complications and outcome. CONCLUSION: The negative impact of comorbidity on the outcome of spine surgery has not been well investigated/quantified to date. The ASA grade may be helpful in producing algorithms for decision-making and preoperative counselling regarding the corresponding risks and benefits of surgery.
Authors: James Slover; William A Abdu; Brett Hanscom; Jon Lurie; James N Weinstein Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2006-05-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: A F Mannion; F Porchet; F S Kleinstück; F Lattig; D Jeszenszky; V Bartanusz; J Dvorak; D Grob Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-03-19 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Anne F Mannion; F Porchet; F S Kleinstück; F Lattig; D Jeszenszky; V Bartanusz; J Dvorak; D Grob Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Anne F Mannion; Astrid Junge; Achim Elfering; Jiri Dvorak; François Porchet; Dieter Grob Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2009-07-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Michael C Gerling; Steven D Hale; Claire White-Dzuro; Katherine E Pierce; Sara A Naessig; Waleed Ahmad; Peter G Passias Journal: J Spine Surg Date: 2019-09
Authors: Maximilian F Kasparek; Friedrich Boettner; Anna Rienmueller; Michael Weber; Philipp T Funovics; Petra Krepler; Reinhard Windhager; Josef Grohs Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2018-07-28 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Francesca Barile; Alberto Ruffilli; Michele Fiore; Marco Manzetti; Giuseppe Geraci; Giovanni Viroli; Cesare Faldini Journal: Int J Spine Surg Date: 2022-07-14
Authors: Pascal Zehnder; Emin Aghayev; Tamas F Fekete; Daniel Haschtmann; Tim Pigott; Anne F Mannion Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: S Hajibandeh; S Hajibandeh; R Deering; D McEleney; J Guirguis; S Dix; A Sreh; E Toner; A El Muntasar; A Kausar; G Sheikh; D OShea; A Shafiq; A Kelly; A Khan; D Arumugam; A Evans Journal: Hernia Date: 2017-12-14 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Ankur S Narain; Fady Y Hijji; Benjamin Khechen; Brittany E Haws; Dil V Patel; Daniel D Bohl; Kelly H Yom; Krishna T Kudaravalli; Kern Singh Journal: Int J Spine Surg Date: 2019-06-30