Literature DB >> 28341194

Outcomes of open staged corrective surgery in the setting of adult spinal deformity.

Peter G Passias1, Gregory W Poorman2, Cyrus M Jalai2, Breton Line3, Bassel Diebo4, Paul Park5, Robert Hart6, Douglas Burton7, Frank Schwab4, Virginie Lafage4, Shay Bess2, Thomas Errico2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) represents a constellation of complex malalignments affecting the spinal column. Corrective surgical procedures aimed at improving ASD can be equally challenging, and commonly require multiple index procedures and potential revisions before definitive management. There is a paucity of data comparing the outcomes of same-day(simultaneous [SIM]) and 2-day (staged [STA]) procedures for long spinal fusions for ASD. Using a large patient cohort with surgeon- and patient-reported outcomes will be particularly useful in determining the utility and effect of staging long spinal fusions for ASD.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare intraoperative, perioperative, and 2-year outcomes of STA and SIM procedures correcting ASD. STUDY
DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 142 patients (71 STA, 71 SIM) were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were intra- and perioperative (6 weeks) complication rates. Secondary outcome measures were 2-year thoracolumbar and spinopelvic radiographic parameters, 2-year health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] and Short Form-36 [SF-36]), and 2-year complication rates.
METHODS: Inclusion criteria included patients with ASD ≥18 years with 6-week and 2-year follow-up. Propensity score matching identified similar patients undergoing STA or SIM long spinal fusions based on surgical invasiveness, pelvic tilt, and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Complications, HRQoL scores (Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire [SRS-22r], SF-36, ODI), and patient characteristics were compared across and within treatment groups at follow-up with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and paired t tests at three surgical stages: intraoperatively, perioperatively (6 weeks), and postoperatively (>6 weeks).
RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were included (71 STA, 71 SIM). Matching STA and SIM groups based on degree of deformity and surgical invasiveness created two groups similar in overall correction of the surgery. Patients undergoing STA underwent more anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedures, whereas patients undergoing SIM had longer fusions. Charlson comorbidity index and revision status were similar between groups (p>.05). Staging procedures had significantly more complications causing reoperation (STA: 47% vs. SIM: 8%, p=.021), and had a greater number of perioperative complications requiring a return to the operating room (OR) (STA: 9.9% vs. SIM: 1.4%, p=.029). There was no difference in intraoperative complications, mortality, or perioperative infection or wound complications (p>.05) between the two procedures. At 2-year follow-up, incidence of revision surgery was higher in STA (STA: 21.1% vs. SIM: 8.5%, p=.033).
CONCLUSION: Staged spinal fusions, which add ALIFs and LLIFs to the procedure, compared with similar-correction SIM procedures, result in similar intraoperative complication incidence, but significantly higher rates of peri- and postoperative complications leading to revision. Functional outcomes, radiographic parameters, and mortality were similar. This will aid surgeons in their determination of the optimal treatment for such complex procedures.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adult spinal deformity; Complications; Lumbar fusion; Outcomes; Simultaneous; Staged

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28341194     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.03.012

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


  5 in total

1.  Planned two-stage surgery using lateral lumbar interbody fusion and posterior corrective fusion: a retrospective study of perioperative complications.

Authors:  Yu Yamato; Tomohiko Hasegawa; Go Yoshida; Tatsuya Yasuda; Tomohiro Banno; Shin Oe; Hideyuki Arima; Yuki Mihara; Hiroki Ushirozako; Tomohiro Yamada; Koichiro Ide; Yuh Watanabe; Yukihiro Matsuyama
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Practice Advisory for Perioperative Visual Loss Associated with Spine Surgery 2019: An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Visual Loss, the North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society, and the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 8.986

Review 3.  Recent Advances in Technique and Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in Adult Scoliosis.

Authors:  Gang Liu; Sen Liu; Yu-Zhi Zuo; Qi-Yi Li; Zhi-Hong Wu; Nan Wu; Ke-Yi Yu; Gui-Xing Qiu
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2017-11-05       Impact factor: 2.628

4.  Risk Factors and Prevention of Surgical Site Infections Following Spinal Procedures.

Authors:  Rani Nasser; Jennifer A Kosty; Sanjit Shah; Jeffrey Wang; Joseph Cheng
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2018-12-13

Review 5.  Update on Perioperative Ischemic Optic Neuropathy Associated With Non-ophthalmic Surgery.

Authors:  Steven Roth; Heather E Moss
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 4.003

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.