Literature DB >> 28614279

Reoperation Rates Following Instrumented Lumbar Spine Fusion.

Tero Matti Irmola1, Arja Häkkinen2,3, Salme Järvenpää2,3, Ilkka Marttinen1, Kimmo Vihtonen1, Marko Neva1.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A prospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the cumulative reoperation rate and indications for reoperation following instrumented lumbar spine fusion (LSF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LSF reduces disability and improves health-related quality of life for patients with several spinal disorders. The rate of instrumented LSF has drastically increased over the last few decades. The increased incidence of LSF, however, has led to increased reoperation rates.
METHODS: The data are based on the prospective LSF database of Tampere University Hospital that includes all elective indications for LSF surgery. A total of 433 consecutive patients (64% women, mean age 62 years) who underwent LSF in Tampere University Hospital between 2008 and 2011 were evaluated and indications for reoperations were rechecked from patient records and radiographs. The most common diagnosis for the primary surgery was degenerative spondylolisthesis and the mean follow-up time was 3.9 years. The cumulative incidence of reoperations and the "time to event" survival rate was calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
RESULTS: By the end of 2013, 81 patients had undergone at least one reoperation. The cumulative reoperation rate at 2 years was 12.5% (95% confidence interval: 95% CI: 9.7-16.0) and at 4 years was 19.3% (95% CI: 15.6-23.8). The most common pathology leading to reoperation was adjacent segment pathology with a cumulative reoperation rate of 8.7% (95% CI: 6.1-12.5) at 4 years. The corresponding rates for early and late instrumentation failure were 4.4% (95% CI: 2.7-7.0) and 2.9% (95% CI: 1.9-7.1), respectively, and for acute complications, 2.5% (95% CI: 1.4-4.5).
CONCLUSION: Although previous studies reported that early results of spinal fusion are promising, one in five patients required reoperation within 4 years after surgery. Patients and surgeons should be aware of the reoperation rates when planning fusion surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28614279     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002291

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


  13 in total

1.  Reoperation of decompression alone or decompression plus fusion surgeries for degenerative lumbar diseases: a systematic review.

Authors:  Zhao Lang; Jing-Sheng Li; Felix Yang; Yan Yu; Kamran Khan; Louis G Jenis; Thomas D Cha; James D Kang; Guoan Li
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Therapeutics for enhancement of spinal fusion: A mini review.

Authors:  Yidan Zhang; Yu Jiang; Da Zou; Baozhi Yuan; Hua Zhu Ke; Weishi Li
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Should iterative spinal surgeries be performed? A case report.

Authors:  George Ampat; Samantha J Rhodes; Jonathan Mg Sims; Emily Wyman
Journal:  J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2022-07-05

4.  Early Reoperation Rates and Its Risk Factors after Instrumented Spinal Fusion Surgery for Degenerative Spinal Disease: A Nationwide Cohort Study of 65,355 Patients.

Authors:  Jihye Kim; Hwan Ryu; Tae-Hwan Kim
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 4.964

5.  Opportunistic Osteoporosis Screening Reveals Low Bone Density in Patients With Screw Loosening After Lumbar Semi-Rigid Instrumentation: A Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Maximilian T Löffler; Nico Sollmann; Egon Burian; Amirhossein Bayat; Kaywan Aftahy; Thomas Baum; Bernhard Meyer; Yu-Mi Ryang; Jan S Kirschke
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 5.555

6.  Comparison of MRI Visualization Following Minimally Invasive and Open TLIF: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.

Authors:  Vadim A Byvaltsev; Andrei A Kalinin; Morgan B Giers; Valerii V Shepelev; Yurii Ya Pestryakov; Mikhail Yu Biryuchkov
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-19

7.  Reoperations after fusion surgeries for degenerative spinal diseases depending on cervical and lumbar regions: a national database study.

Authors:  Moon Soo Park; Young-Su Ju; Seong-Hwan Moon; Young-Woo Kim; Jong Ho Jung; Jung Hyun Oh; Chi Heon Kim; Chun Kee Chung
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Increasing Fusion Rate Between 1 and 2 Years After Instrumented Posterolateral Spinal Fusion and the Role of Bone Grafting.

Authors:  A Mechteld Lehr; F Cumhur Oner; Diyar Delawi; Rebecca K Stellato; Eric A Hoebink; Diederik H R Kempen; Job L C van Susante; René M Castelein; Moyo C Kruyt
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 3.241

9.  Isthmic Spondylolisthesis is Associated with Less Revisions for Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Spine Fusion Than Degenerative Spinal Conditions: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study.

Authors:  Leevi A Toivonen; Heikki Mäntymäki; Arja Häkkinen; Hannu Kautiainen; Marko H Neva
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Comparison of Incidence of Adjacent Segment Pathology between Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Treatments for Lumbosacral Junction.

Authors:  Po-Kuan Wu; Meng-Huang Wu; Cheng-Min Shih; Yen-Kuang Lin; Kun-Hui Chen; Chien-Chou Pan; Tsung-Jen Huang; Ching-Yu Lee; Cheng-Hung Lee
Journal:  Tomography       Date:  2021-12-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.