STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to (A) evaluate preoperative bone quality assessment and intervention practice over time and (B) review the current evidence for bone evaluation in spine fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Deformity spine surgery has demonstrated improved quality of life in patients; however, its cost has made it controversial. If preoperative bone quality can be optimized then potentially these treatments could be more durable; however, at present, no clinical practice guidelines have been published by professional spine surgical organizations. METHODS: A retrospective cohort review was performed on patients who underwent a minimum five-level primary or revision fusion. Preoperative bone quality metrics were evaluated over time from 2012 to 2017 to find potential trends. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and spine fusion region. RESULTS: Patient characteristics including preoperative rates of pseudarthrosis and junctional failure did not change. An increasing trend of physician bone health documentation was noted (P = 0.045) but changes in other metrics were not significant. A sex bias favored females who had higher rates of preoperative DXA studies (P = 0.001), Vitamin D 25-OH serum labs (P = 0.005), Vitamin D supplementation (P = 0.022), calcium supplementation (P < 0.001), antiresorptive therapy (P = 0.016), and surgeon clinical documentation of bone health (P = 0.008) compared with men. CONCLUSION: Our spine surgeons have increased documentation of bone health discussions but this has not affected bone quality interventions. A discrepancy exists favoring females over males in nearly all preoperative bone quality assessment metrics. Preoperative vitamin D level and BMD assessment should be considered in patients undergoing long fusion constructs; however, the data for bone anabolic and resorptive agents have less support. Clinical practice guidelines on preoperative bone quality assessment spine patients should be defined. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to (A) evaluate preoperative bone quality assessment and intervention practice over time and (B) review the current evidence for bone evaluation in spine fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Deformity spine surgery has demonstrated improved quality of life in patients; however, its cost has made it controversial. If preoperative bone quality can be optimized then potentially these treatments could be more durable; however, at present, no clinical practice guidelines have been published by professional spine surgical organizations. METHODS: A retrospective cohort review was performed on patients who underwent a minimum five-level primary or revision fusion. Preoperative bone quality metrics were evaluated over time from 2012 to 2017 to find potential trends. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and spine fusion region. RESULTS:Patient characteristics including preoperative rates of pseudarthrosis and junctional failure did not change. An increasing trend of physician bone health documentation was noted (P = 0.045) but changes in other metrics were not significant. A sex bias favored females who had higher rates of preoperative DXA studies (P = 0.001), Vitamin D 25-OH serum labs (P = 0.005), Vitamin D supplementation (P = 0.022), calcium supplementation (P < 0.001), antiresorptive therapy (P = 0.016), and surgeon clinical documentation of bone health (P = 0.008) compared with men. CONCLUSION: Our spine surgeons have increased documentation of bone health discussions but this has not affected bone quality interventions. A discrepancy exists favoring females over males in nearly all preoperative bone quality assessment metrics. Preoperative vitamin D level and BMD assessment should be considered in patients undergoing long fusion constructs; however, the data for bone anabolic and resorptive agents have less support. Clinical practice guidelines on preoperative bone quality assessment spine patients should be defined. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
Authors: James T Bernatz; Alec E Winzenried; Kristyn J Hare; Anthony L Mikula; Seth K Williams; Neil C Binkley; Paul A Anderson Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev Date: 2022-03-15