Literature DB >> 27664340

Independent predictors of a clinically significant improvement after lumbar fusion surgery.

Vincent J Alentado1, Stephanie Caldwell2, Heath P Gould2, Michael P Steinmetz3, Edward C Benzel3, Thomas E Mroz4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Multiple studies have determined minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds for EuroQOL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scores in lumbar fusion patients. However, a comprehensive understanding of predictors for a clinically significant improvement (CSI) postoperatively does not exist.
PURPOSE: To determine medical, radiographic, and surgical predictors for obtaining a CSI following lumbar fusion surgery. STUDY
DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent instrumented lumbar fusion. PATIENT SAMPLE: We included patients who underwent lumbar fusion for any indication between 2008 and 2013. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included preoperative and postoperative EQ-5D Index scores.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of patients who received a lumbar fusion for any indication were retrospectively reviewed to identify patient medical and surgical characteristics. A blinded reviewer assessed radiographs for each patient to examine sagittal alignment following fusion. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model the achievement of a CSI based on two commonly cited MCID values.
RESULTS: A total of 231 patients fit the inclusion criteria; 58% exceeded an MCID value for an EQ-5D score of 0.100, and 16% exceeded an MCID value of 0.390. Statistically significant independent predictors of not obtaining a CSI for an MCID threshold of 0.100 included a higher preoperative EQ-5D score (odds ratio [OR]=44.8) and L5-S1 fusion (OR=3.3). For an MCID value of 0.390, a higher preoperative EQ-5D score (OR=2,080.8) and a diagnosis of depression (OR=7.1) were predictive of not achieving a CSI, whereas spondylolisthesis (OR=4.1) was predictive of obtaining a CSI postoperatively. For both MCID values, patients who achieved a CSI had better postoperative quality of life (QOL) scores for all metrics measured, despite worse QOL scores preoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to use a combination of medical, surgical, and postoperative sagittal balance variables as determinants for the achievement of a CSI after lumbar fusion. The awareness of these predictors may allow for better patient selection and surgical approach to decrease the probability of acquiring a poor outcome postoperatively.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Depression; Lumbar fusion; Minimum clinically important difference; Outcomes; Quality of life; Spondylolisthesis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27664340     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.09.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  6 in total

1.  Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Pain and Functional Outcomes After Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Sara Khor; Danielle Lavallee; Amy M Cizik; Carlo Bellabarba; Jens R Chapman; Christopher R Howe; Dawei Lu; A Alex Mohit; Rod J Oskouian; Jeffrey R Roh; Neal Shonnard; Armagan Dagal; David R Flum
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 14.766

2.  A Prospective Study of Lumbar Facet Arthroplasty in the Treatment of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis and Stenosis: Early Cost-effective Assessment from the Total Posterior Spine System (TOPS™) IDE Study.

Authors:  Jared D Ament; Amir Vokshoor; Yaser Badr; Todd Lanman; Kee D Kim; J Patrick Johnson
Journal:  J Health Econ Outcomes Res       Date:  2022-03-25

3.  Association of Preoperative Physical Function and Changes in Mental Health After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Nathaniel W Jenkins; James M Parrish; Conor P Lynch; Elliot D K Cha; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Cara E Geoghegan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-12

4.  Correlating Psychological Comorbidities and Outcomes After Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Keith L Jackson; Jacob Rumley; Matthew Griffith; Uzondu Agochukwu; John DeVine
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-11-22

5.  A UK-based pilot study of current surgical practice and implant preferences in lumbar fusion surgery.

Authors:  Elena Provaggi; Claudio Capelli; Julian J H Leong; Deepak M Kalaskar
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  Lumbar Decompression Versus Spinal Fusion in a Private Outpatient Setting: A Retrospective Study with Three Years of Follow-up.

Authors:  Isadora Orlando de Oliveira; Mario Lenza; Eliane Antonioli; Mario Ferretti
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2021-09-11
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.