Literature DB >> 30069508

Differences in primary and revision deformity surgeries: following 1,063 primary thoracolumbar adult spinal deformity fusions over time.

Gregory W Poorman1, Peter L Zhou1, Dennis Vasquez-Montes1, Samantha Horn1, Cole Bortz1, Frank Segreto1, Joshua Auerbach2, John Y Moon1, Jared C Tishelman1, Michael C Gerling1, Bassel G Diebo1, Rafael De La Garza-Ramos1, Justin C Paul1, Peter G Passias1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aims to describe properties of adult spinal deformity (ASD) revisions relative to primary surgeries and determine clinical variables that can predict revision. ASD is a common pathology that can lead to decreased quality of life, pain, physical limitations, and dissatisfaction with self-image. Durability of interventions for deformity treatment is of paramount concern to surgeons, as revision rates remain high.
METHODS: Patients undergoing thoracolumbar fusion, five or more levels, for scoliosis (primary diagnosis ICD-9 737.x) were identified on a state-wide database. Primary and revision (returning for re-fusion procedure) surgeries were compared based on demographic, hospital stay, and clinical characteristics. Differences between primary and revision surgeries, and predictors of primary surgeries requiring revision, utilized binary logistic regression controlling for age, comorbidity burden, and levels fused.
RESULTS: A total of 1,063 patients (average 7.4 levels fused, mean age: 47.6 years, 69.0% female) undergoing operative treatment for ASD were identified, of which 123 (average 7.1 levels fused, 11.6%, mean age 61.43, 80.5% female) had surgical revision. Primary surgeries were ~0.3 levels longer (P=0.013), used interbody ~11% more frequently (P=0.020), and used BMP ~12% less frequently (P=0.008). Revisions occurred 176.4 days after the primary on average. The most frequent causes of revisions were: 43.09% implant failure, 24.39% acquired kyphosis, and 14.63% enduring scoliosis. After controlling for age, comorbidities, and levels fused older, more comorbid, female, and white-race patients were more likely to be revised. Upon multivariate regression, after controlling for age and levels fused, overall complications remained non-different (OR: 0.8, 95% CI: 0.6-1.2). However, revision remained an independent predictor for infection (OR: 5.5, 95% CI: 2.8-10.5).
CONCLUSIONS: In a statewide database with individual patient follow up of up to 4 years 10% of ASD patients undergoing scoliosis correction required revision. Revision surgeries had higher infection incidence.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Spine surgery; adult spinal deformity (ASD); primary surgery; revision

Year:  2018        PMID: 30069508      PMCID: PMC6046343          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2018.05.06

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  35 in total

1.  Likelihood of reaching minimal clinically important difference in adult spinal deformity: a comparison of operative and nonoperative treatment.

Authors:  Shian Liu; Frank Schwab; Justin S Smith; Eric Klineberg; Christopher P Ames; Gregory Mundis; Richard Hostin; Khaled Kebaish; Vedat Deviren; Munish Gupta; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Robert A Hart; Shay Bess; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

2.  Complication rates are reduced for revision adult spine deformity surgery among high-volume hospitals and surgeons.

Authors:  Justin C Paul; Baron S Lonner; Vadim Goz; Jeffery Weinreb; Raj Karia; Courtney S Toombs; Thomas J Errico
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 4.166

3.  Radiographic Predictors for Mechanical Failure After Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study in 138 Patients.

Authors:  Dennis W Hallager; Sven Karstensen; Naeem Bukhari; Martin Gehrchen; Benny Dahl
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2017-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Risk factors for revision surgery following primary adult spinal deformity surgery in patients 65 years and older.

Authors:  Varun Puvanesarajah; Francis H Shen; Jourdan M Cancienne; Wendy M Novicoff; Amit Jain; Adam L Shimer; Hamid Hassanzadeh
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2016-05-06

Review 5.  Junctional spinal disorders in operated adult spinal deformities: present understanding and future perspectives.

Authors:  V Arlet; M Aebi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  Complications of revision spinal surgery.

Authors:  Kurt M Eichholz; Timothy C Ryken
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2003-09-15       Impact factor: 4.047

Review 7.  Complications and outcomes of lumbar spine surgery in elderly people: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Jordan M Cloyd; Frank L Acosta; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2008-05-22       Impact factor: 5.562

8.  Neurological symptoms and deficits in adults with scoliosis who present to a surgical clinic: incidence and association with the choice of operative versus nonoperative management.

Authors:  Justin S Smith; Kai-Ming Fu; Peter Urban; Christopher I Shaffrey
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2008-10

9.  Maintenance of radiographic correction at 2 years following lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy is superior with upper thoracic compared with thoracolumbar junction upper instrumented vertebra.

Authors:  Justin K Scheer; Virginie Lafage; Justin S Smith; Vedat Deviren; Richard Hostin; Ian M McCarthy; Gregory M Mundis; Douglas C Burton; Eric Klineberg; Munish Gupta; Khaled Kebaish; Christopher I Shaffrey; Shay Bess; Frank Schwab; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-01       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The Health Impact of Symptomatic Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Deformity Types to United States Population Norms and Chronic Diseases.

Authors:  Shay Bess; Breton Line; Kai-Ming Fu; Ian McCarthy; Virgine Lafage; Frank Schwab; Christopher Shaffrey; Christopher Ames; Behrooz Akbarnia; Han Jo; Michael Kelly; Douglas Burton; Robert Hart; Eric Klineberg; Khaled Kebaish; Richard Hostin; Gregory Mundis; Praveen Mummaneni; Justin S Smith
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  1 in total

1.  True Differences in Poor Outcome Risks Between Revision and Primary Lumbar Spine Surgeries.

Authors:  Chad E Cook; Alessandra N Garcia; Christine Park; Oren Gottfried
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2021-03-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.