Literature DB >> 36164388

Impact of age within younger populations on outcomes following cervical surgery in the ambulatory setting.

Timothy J Hartman1, James W Nie1, Hanna Pawlowski1, Michael C Prabhu1, Nisheka N Vanjani1, Kern Singh1.   

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effect of age within the younger population seen at ambulatory surgical centers on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after cervical spine surgery.
Methods: Patients of age <65 years undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disc replacement (CDR) were included. Patients were divided by mean age of initial population (46 years). PROMs included Patient-reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Survey (SF-12 PCS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) neck, VAS arm, Neck Disability Index (NDI) collected preoperatively and at postoperative time points up to 2 years.
Results: 138 patients were included, with 66 patients <46 years. Both cohorts demonstrated improvement from preoperative baseline with regard to all studied PROMs at multiple time points postoperatively (p ≤ 0.042, all). Between groups, the older cohort demonstrated greater mean PROMIS-PF scores preoperatively and at 6 weeks (p ≤ 0.011, both), while VAS arm scores were lower in the older group at 1 year (p = 0.002), and NDI scores were lower in the older group at 6 weeks and 1 year (p < 0.027, both). Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) achievement rates were greater in the younger group in PROMIS PF at 2 years (p = 0.002), and in the older group in VAS arm score at 1 year (p = 0.007).
Conclusion: Both cohorts showed significant improvement at multiple postoperative time points for all PROMs. Between groups, the older group reported more favorable physical function, VAS arm, and NDI scores at several time points. However, MCID achievement rates only significantly differed in two PROMs at singular time points. Difference in age in patients <65 years likely does not significantly affect long-term outcomes after cervical spine surgery.
© 2022 Delhi Orthopedic Association. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACDF; ACDF, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; Age; CDR; CDR, cervical disc replacement; MCID; MCID, minimum clinically important difference; PROM; PROM, patient-reported outcome measure

Year:  2022        PMID: 36164388      PMCID: PMC9508464          DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2022.102016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0976-5662


  31 in total

Review 1.  Cervical and lumbar spinal arthroplasty: clinical review.

Authors:  T D Uschold; D Fusco; R Germain; L M Tumialan; S W Chang
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 2.  Total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review with meta-analysis of data from a total of 3160 patients across 14 randomized controlled trials with both short- and medium- to long-term outcomes.

Authors:  C Findlay; S Ayis; A K Demetriades
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 5.082

3.  Population-based trends in volumes and rates of ambulatory lumbar spine surgery.

Authors:  Darryl T Gray; Richard A Deyo; William Kreuter; Sohail K Mirza; Patrick J Heagerty; Bryan A Comstock; Leighton Chan
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance.

Authors:  Scott L Parker; Stephen K Mendenhall; David N Shau; Owoicho Adogwa; William N Anderson; Clinton J Devin; Matthew J McGirt
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2012-02-10

5.  National trends in spinal fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Shivanand P Lad; Chirag G Patil; Scott Berta; Justin G Santarelli; Christopher Ho; Maxwell Boakye
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  2008-06-02

6.  Comparison of BRYAN cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical decompression and fusion: clinical and radiographic results of a randomized, controlled, clinical trial.

Authors:  John G Heller; Rick C Sasso; Stephen M Papadopoulos; Paul A Anderson; Richard G Fessler; Robert J Hacker; Domagoj Coric; Joseph C Cauthen; Daniel K Riew
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the outpatient ambulatory surgery setting compared with the inpatient hospital setting: analysis of 1000 consecutive cases.

Authors:  Tim Adamson; Saniya S Godil; Melissa Mehrlich; Stephen Mendenhall; Anthony L Asher; Matthew J McGirt
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2016-02-05

Review 8.  Outpatient surgery in the cervical spine: is it safe?

Authors:  Michael J Lee; Iain Kalfas; Haley Holmer; Andrea Skelly
Journal:  Evid Based Spine Care J       Date:  2014-10

9.  Does age affect surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy? Results from the prospective multicenter AOSpine International study on 479 patients.

Authors:  Hiroaki Nakashima; Lindsay A Tetreault; Narihito Nagoshi; Aria Nouri; Branko Kopjar; Paul M Arnold; Ronald Bartels; Helton Defino; Shashank Kale; Qiang Zhou; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 10.154

10.  Radiological and Clinical Outcomes of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Older Patients: A Comparative Analysis of Young-Old Patients (Ages 65-74 Years) and Middle-Old Patients (Over 75 Years).

Authors:  Chi Hyung Lee; Dong Wuk Son; Su Hun Lee; Jun Seok Lee; Soon Ki Sung; Sang Weon Lee; Geun Sung Song
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2019-07-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.