Browse

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 20 items for

  • All content x
  • By Author: Hart, Robert A. x
  • By Author: Lafage, Virginie x
Clear All
Restricted access

Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Nicholas Stekas, Justin S. Smith, Alexandra Soroceanu, Renaud Lafage, Alan H. Daniels, Han Jo Kim, Peter G. Passias, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Eric O. Klineberg, D. Kojo Hamilton, Munish Gupta, Virginie Lafage, Robert A. Hart, Frank Schwab, Douglas C. Burton, Shay Bess, Christopher I. Shaffrey, and Christopher P. Ames

OBJECTIVE

Cervical deformity (CD) patients have severe disability and poor health status. However, little is known about how patients with rigid CD compare with those with flexible CD. The main objectives of this study were to 1) assess whether patients with rigid CD have worse baseline alignment and therefore require more aggressive surgical corrections and 2) determine whether patients with rigid CD have similar postoperative outcomes as those with flexible CD.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter CD database. Rigid CD was defined as cervical lordosis (CL) change < 10° between flexion and extension radiographs, and flexible CD was defined as a CL change ≥ 10°. Patients with rigid CD were compared with those with flexible CD in terms of cervical alignment and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at baseline and at multiple postoperative time points. The patients were also compared in terms of surgical and intraoperative factors such as operative time, blood loss, and number of levels fused.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients met inclusion criteria (32 with rigid and 95 with flexible CD, 63.4% of whom were females; mean age 60.8 years; mean BMI 27.4); 47.2% of cases were revisions. Rigid CD was associated with worse preoperative alignment in terms of T1 slope minus CL, T1 slope, C2–7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), and C2 slope (C2S; all p < 0.05). Postoperatively, patients with rigid CD had an increased mean C2S (29.1° vs 22.2°) at 3 months and increased cSVA (47.1 mm vs 37.5 mm) at 1 year (p < 0.05) compared with those with flexible CD. Patients with rigid CD had more posterior levels fused (9.5 vs 6.3), fewer anterior levels fused (1 vs 2.0), greater blood loss (1036.7 mL vs 698.5 mL), more 3-column osteotomies (40.6% vs 12.6%), greater total osteotomy grade (6.5 vs 4.5), and mean osteotomy grade per level (3.3 vs 2.1) (p < 0.05 for all). There were no significant differences in baseline HRQOL scores, the rate of distal junctional kyphosis, or major/minor complications between patients with rigid and flexible CD. Both rigid and flexible CD patients reported significant improvements from baseline to 1 year according to the numeric rating scale for the neck (−2.4 and −2.7, respectively), Neck Disability Index (−8.4 and −13.3, respectively), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (0.1 and 0.6), and EQ-5D (0.01 and 0.05) (p < 0.05). However, HRQOL changes from baseline to 1 year did not differ between rigid and flexible CD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with rigid CD have worse baseline cervical malalignment compared with those with flexible CD but do not significantly differ in terms of baseline disability. Rigid CD was associated with more invasive surgery and more aggressive corrections, resulting in increased operative time and blood loss. Despite more extensive surgeries, rigid CD patients had equivalent improvements in HRQOL compared with flexible CD patients. This study quantifies the importance of analyzing flexion-extension images, creating a prognostic tool for surgeons planning CD correction, and counseling patients who are considering CD surgery.

Restricted access

Thomas J. Buell, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Han Jo Kim, Eric O. Klineberg, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Peter G. Passias, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Robert K. Eastlack, Vedat Deviren, Michael P. Kelly, Alan H. Daniels, Jeffrey L. Gum, Alex Soroceanu, D. Kojo Hamilton, Munish C. Gupta, Douglas C. Burton, Richard A. Hostin, Khaled M. Kebaish, Robert A. Hart, Frank J. Schwab, Shay Bess, Christopher P. Ames, and the International Spine Study Group (ISSG)

OBJECTIVE

The impact of global coronal malalignment (GCM; C7 plumb line–midsacral offset) on adult spinal deformity (ASD) treatment outcomes is unclear. Here, the authors’ primary objective was to assess surgical outcomes and complications in patients with severe GCM, with a secondary aim of investigating potential surgical target coronal thresholds for optimal outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter database. Operative patients with severe GCM (≥ 1 SD above the mean) and a minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. Demographic, surgical, radiographic, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and complications data were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 691 potentially eligible operative patients (mean GCM 4 ± 3 cm), 80 met the criteria for severe GCM ≥ 7 cm. Of these, 62 (78%; mean age 63.7 ± 10.7 years, 81% women) had a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean follow-up 3.3 ± 1.1 years). The mean ASD–Frailty Index was 3.9 ± 1.5 (frail), 50% had undergone prior fusion, and 81% had concurrent severe sagittal spinopelvic deformity with GCM and C7–S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) positively correlated (r = 0.313, p = 0.015). Surgical characteristics included posterior-only (58%) versus anterior-posterior (42%) approach, mean fusion of 13.2 ± 3.8 levels, iliac fixation (90%), 3-column osteotomy (36%), operative duration of 8.3 ± 3.0 hours, and estimated blood loss of 2.3 ± 1.7 L. Final alignment and HRQOL significantly improved (p < 0.01): GCM, 11 to 4 cm; maximum coronal Cobb angle, 43° to 20°; SVA, 13 to 4 cm; pelvic tilt, 29° to 23°; pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch, 31° to 5°; Oswestry Disability Index, 51 to 37; physical component summary of SF-36 (PCS), 29 to 37; 22-Item Scoliosis Research Society Patient Questionnaire (SRS-22r) Total, 2.6 to 3.5; and numeric rating scale score for back and leg pain, 7 to 4 and 5 to 3, respectively. Residual GCM ≥ 3 cm was associated with worse SRS-22r Appearance (p = 0.04) and SRS-22r Satisfaction (p = 0.02). The minimal clinically important difference and/or substantial clinical benefit (MCID/SCB) was met in 43%–83% (highest for SRS-22r Appearance [MCID 83%] and PCS [SCB 53%]). The severity of baseline GCM (≥ 2 SD above the mean) significantly impacted postoperative SRS-22r Satisfaction and MCID/SCB improvement for PCS. No significant partial correlations were demonstrated between GCM or SVA correction and HRQOL improvement. There were 89 total complications (34 minor and 55 major), 45 (73%) patients with ≥ 1 complication (most commonly rod fracture [19%] and proximal junctional kyphosis [PJK; 18%]), and 34 reoperations in 22 (35%) patients (most commonly for rod fracture and PJK).

CONCLUSIONS

Study results demonstrated that ASD surgery in patients with substantial GCM was associated with significant radiographic and HRQOL improvement despite high complication rates. MCID improvement was highest for SRS-22r Appearance/Self-Image. A residual GCM ≥ 3 cm was associated with a worse outcome, suggesting a potential coronal realignment target threshold to assist surgical planning.

Free access

Alan H. Daniels, Daniel B. C. Reid, Wesley M. Durand, D. Kojo Hamilton, Peter G. Passias, Han Jo Kim, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Virginie Lafage, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Munish Gupta, Eric Klineberg, Frank Schwab, Douglas Burton, Shay Bess, Christopher P. Ames, Robert A. Hart, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Optimal patient selection for upper-thoracic (UT) versus lower-thoracic (LT) fusion during adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction is challenging. Radiographic and clinical outcomes following UT versus LT fusion remain incompletely understood. The purposes of this study were: 1) to evaluate demographic, radiographic, and surgical characteristics associated with choice of UT versus LT fusion endpoint; and 2) to evaluate differences in radiographic, clinical, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes following UT versus LT fusion for ASD.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter ASD database was performed. Patients with ASD who underwent fusion from the sacrum/ilium to the LT (T9–L1) or UT (T1–6) spine were compared for demographic, radiographic, and surgical characteristics. Outcomes including proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), reoperation, rod fracture, pseudarthrosis, overall complications, 2-year change in alignment parameters, and 2-year HRQOL metrics (Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index, Scoliosis Research Society-22r questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index) were compared after controlling for confounding factors via multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Three hundred three patients (169 LT, 134 UT) were evaluated. Independent predictors of UT fusion included greater thoracic kyphosis (odds ratio [OR] 0.97 per degree, p = 0.0098), greater coronal Cobb angle (OR 1.06 per degree, p < 0.0001), and performance of a 3-column osteotomy (3-CO; OR 2.39, p = 0.0351). While associated with longer operative times (ratio 1.13, p < 0.0001) and greater estimated blood loss (ratio 1.31, p = 0.0018), UT fusions resulted in greater sagittal vertical axis improvement (−59.5 vs −41.0 mm, p = 0.0035) and lower PJK rates (OR 0.49, p = 0.0457). No significant differences in postoperative HRQOL measures, reoperation, or overall complication rates were detected between groups (all p > 0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater deformity and need for 3-CO increased the likelihood of UT fusion. Despite longer operative times and greater blood loss, UT fusions resulted in better sagittal correction and lower 2-year PJK rates following surgery for ASD. While continued surveillance is necessary, this information may inform patient counseling and surgical decision-making.

Restricted access

Dana L. Cruz, Ethan W. Ayres, Matthew A. Spiegel, Louis M. Day, Robert A. Hart, Christopher P. Ames, Douglas C. Burton, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Frank J. Schwab, Thomas J. Errico, Shay Bess, Virginie Lafage, and Themistocles S. Protopsaltis

OBJECTIVE

Neck and back pain are highly prevalent conditions that account for major disability. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) are the two most common functional status measures for neck and back pain. However, no single instrument exists to evaluate patients with concurrent neck and back pain. The recently developed Total Disability Index (TDI) combines overlapping elements from the ODI and NDI with the unique items from each. This study aimed to prospectively validate the TDI in patients with spinal deformity, back pain, and/or neck pain.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a single center. The 14-item TDI, derived from ODI and NDI domains, was administered to consecutive patients presenting to a spine practice. Patients were assessed using the ODI, NDI, and EQ-5D. Validation of internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and validity of reconstructed NDI and ODI scores derived from TDI were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 252 patients (mean age 55 years, 56% female) completed initial assessments (back pain, n = 115; neck pain, n = 52; back and neck pain, n = 55; spinal deformity, n = 55; and no pain/deformity, n = 29). Of these patients, 155 completed retests within 14 days. Patients represented a wide range of disability (mean ODI score: 36.3 ± 21.6; NDI score: 30.8 ± 21.8; and TDI score: 34.1 ± 20.0). TDI demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.922) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96). Differences between actual and reconstructed scores were not clinically significant. Subanalyses demonstrated TDI’s ability to quantify the degree of disability due to back or neck pain in patients complaining of pain in both regions.

CONCLUSIONS

The TDI is a valid and reliable disability measure in patients with back and/or neck pain and can capture each spine region’s contribution to total disability. The TDI could be a valuable method for total spine assessment in a clinical setting, and its completion is less time consuming than that for both the ODI and NDI.

Free access

Samantha R. Horn, Peter G. Passias, Cheongeun Oh, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Justin S. Smith, Breton Line, Neel Anand, Frank A. Segreto, Cole A. Bortz, Justin K. Scheer, Robert K. Eastlack, Vedat Deviren, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Alan H. Daniels, Paul Park, Pierce D. Nunley, Han Jo Kim, Eric O. Klineberg, Douglas C. Burton, Robert A. Hart, Frank J. Schwab, Shay Bess, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Christopher P. Ames, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Cervical deformity (CD) correction is clinically challenging. There is a high risk of developing complications with these highly complex procedures. The aim of this study was to use baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical factors to predict a poor outcome following CD surgery.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective review of a multicenter prospective CD database. CD was defined as at least one of the following: cervical kyphosis (C2–7 Cobb angle > 10°), cervical scoliosis (coronal Cobb angle > 10°), C2–7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) > 4 cm, or chin-brow vertical angle (CBVA) > 25°. Patients were categorized based on having an overall poor outcome or not. Health-related quality of life measures consisted of Neck Disability Index (NDI), EQ-5D, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scale scores. A poor outcome was defined as having all 3 of the following categories met: 1) radiographic poor outcome: deterioration or severe radiographic malalignment 1 year postoperatively for cSVA or T1 slope–cervical lordosis mismatch (TS-CL); 2) clinical poor outcome: failing to meet the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for NDI or having a severe mJOA Ames modifier; and 3) complications/reoperation poor outcome: major complication, death, or reoperation for a complication other than infection. Univariate logistic regression followed by multivariate regression models was performed, and internal validation was performed by calculating the area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

In total, 89 patients with CD were included (mean age 61.9 years, female sex 65.2%, BMI 29.2 kg/m2). By 1 year postoperatively, 18 (20.2%) patients were characterized as having an overall poor outcome. For radiographic poor outcomes, patients’ conditions either deteriorated or remained severe for TS-CL (73% of patients), cSVA (8%), horizontal gaze (34%), and global SVA (28%). For clinical poor outcomes, 80% and 60% of patients did not reach MCID for EQ-5D and NDI, respectively, and 24% of patients had severe symptoms (mJOA score 0–11). For the complications/reoperation poor outcome, 28 patients experienced a major complication, 11 underwent a reoperation, and 1 had a complication-related death. Of patients with a poor clinical outcome, 75% had a poor radiographic outcome; 35% of poor radiographic and 37% of poor clinical outcome patients had a major complication. A poor outcome was predicted by the following combination of factors: osteoporosis, baseline neurological status, use of a transition rod, number of posterior decompressions, baseline pelvic tilt, T2–12 kyphosis, TS-CL, C2–T3 SVA, C2–T1 pelvic angle (C2 slope), global SVA, and number of levels in maximum thoracic kyphosis. The final model predicting a poor outcome (AUC 86%) included the following: osteoporosis (OR 5.9, 95% CI 0.9–39), worse baseline neurological status (OR 11.4, 95% CI 1.8–70.8), baseline pelvic tilt > 20° (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85–0.98), > 9 levels in maximum thoracic kyphosis (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.1–4.1), preoperative C2–T3 SVA > 5.4 cm (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.9–1.1), and global SVA > 4 cm (OR 3.2, 95% CI 0.09–10.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Of all CD patients in this study, 20.2% had a poor overall outcome, defined by deterioration in radiographic and clinical outcomes, and a major complication. Additionally, 75% of patients with a poor clinical outcome also had a poor radiographic outcome. A poor overall outcome was most strongly predicted by severe baseline neurological deficit, global SVA > 4 cm, and including more of the thoracic maximal kyphosis in the construct.

Free access

Justin K. Scheer, Taemin Oh, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Alan H. Daniels, Daniel M. Sciubba, D. Kojo Hamilton, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Peter G. Passias, Robert A. Hart, Douglas C. Burton, Shay Bess, Renaud Lafage, Virginie Lafage, Frank Schwab, Eric O. Klineberg, Christopher P. Ames, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Pseudarthrosis can occur following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery and can lead to instrumentation failure, recurrent pain, and ultimately revision surgery. In addition, it is one of the most expensive complications of ASD surgery. Risk factors contributing to pseudarthrosis in ASD have been described; however, a preoperative model predicting the development of pseudarthrosis does not exist. The goal of this study was to create a preoperative predictive model for pseudarthrosis based on demographic, radiographic, and surgical factors.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained, multicenter ASD database was conducted. Study inclusion criteria consisted of adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with spinal deformity and surgery for the ASD. From among 82 variables assessed, 21 were used for model building after applying collinearity testing, redundancy, and univariable predictor importance ≥ 0.90. Variables included demographic data along with comorbidities, modifiable surgical variables, baseline coronal and sagittal radiographic parameters, and baseline scores for health-related quality of life measures. Patients groups were determined according to their Lenke radiographic fusion type at the 2-year follow-up: bilateral or unilateral fusion (union) or pseudarthrosis (nonunion). A decision tree was constructed, and internal validation was accomplished via bootstrapped training and testing data sets. Accuracy and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the model.

RESULTS

A total of 336 patients were included in the study (nonunion: 105, union: 231). The model was 91.3% accurate with an AUC of 0.94. From 82 initial variables, the top 21 covered a wide range of areas including preoperative alignment, comorbidities, patient demographics, and surgical use of graft material.

CONCLUSIONS

A model for predicting the development of pseudarthrosis at the 2-year follow-up was successfully created. This model is the first of its kind for complex predictive analytics in the development of pseudarthrosis for patients with ASD undergoing surgical correction and can aid in clinical decision-making for potential preventative strategies.

Free access

Taemin Oh, Justin K. Scheer, Justin S. Smith, Richard Hostin, Chessie Robinson, Jeffrey L. Gum, Frank Schwab, Robert A. Hart, Virginie Lafage, Douglas C. Burton, Shay Bess, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Eric O. Klineberg, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Christopher P. Ames, and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) experience significant quality of life improvements after surgery. Treatment, however, is expensive and complication rates are high. Predictive analytics has the potential to use many variables to make accurate predictions in large data sets. A validated minimum clinically important difference (MCID) model has the potential to assist in patient selection, thereby improving outcomes and, potentially, cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

The present study was a retrospective analysis of a multiinstitutional database of patients with ASD. Inclusion criteria were as follows: age ≥ 18 years, radiographic evidence of ASD, 2-year follow-up, and preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) > 15. Forty-six variables were used for model training: demographic data, radiographic parameters, surgical variables, and results on the health-related quality of life questionnaire. Patients were grouped as reaching a 2-year ODI MCID (+MCID) or not (−MCID). An ensemble of 5 different bootstrapped decision trees was constructed using the C5.0 algorithm. Internal validation was performed via 70:30 data split for training/testing. Model accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. The mean quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and QALYs gained at 2 years were calculated and discounted at 3.5% per year. The QALYs were compared between patients in the +MCID and –MCID groups.

RESULTS

A total of 234 patients met inclusion criteria (+MCID 129, −MCID 105). Sixty-nine patients (29.5%) were included for model testing. Predicted versus actual results were 50 versus 40 for +MCID and 19 versus 29 for −MCID (i.e., 10 patients were misclassified). Model accuracy was 85.5%, with 0.96 AUC. Predicted results showed that patients in the +MCID group had significantly greater 2-year mean QALYs (p = 0.0057) and QALYs gained (p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

A successful model with 85.5% accuracy and 0.96 AUC was constructed to predict which patients would reach ODI MCID. The patients in the +MCID group had significantly higher mean 2-year QALYs and QALYs gained. This study provides proof of concept for using predictive modeling techniques to optimize patient selection in complex spine surgery.

Full access

Emmanuelle Ferrero, Barthelemy Liabaud, Jensen K. Henry, Christopher P. Ames, Khaled Kebaish, Gregory M. Mundis, Richard Hostin, Munish C. Gupta, Oheneba Boachie-Adjei, Justin S. Smith, Robert A. Hart, Ibrahim Obeid, Bassel G. Diebo, Frank J. Schwab, and Virginie Lafage

OBJECTIVE

Three-column osteotomy (3CO) is a demanding technique that is performed to correct sagittal spinal malalignment. However, the impact of the 3CO level on pelvic or truncal sagittal correction remains unclear. In this study, the authors assessed the impact of 3CO level and postoperative apex of lumbar lordosis on sagittal alignment correction, complications, and revisions.

METHODS

In this retrospective study of a multicenter spinal deformity database, radiographic data were analyzed at baseline and at 1- and 2-year follow-up to quantify spinopelvic alignment, apex of lordosis, and resection angle. The impact of 3CO level and apex level of lumbar lordosis on the sagittal correction was assessed. Logistic regression analyses were performed, controlling for cofounders, to investigate the effects of 3CO level and apex level on intraoperative and postoperative complications as well as on the need for subsequent revision surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 468 patients were included (mean age 60.8 years, mean body mass index 28.1 kg/m2); 70% of patients were female. The average 3CO resection angle was 25.1° and did not significantly differ with regard to 3CO level. There were no significant correlations between the 3CO level and amount of sagittal vertical axis or pelvic tilt correction. The postoperative apex level significantly correlated with greater correction of pelvic tilt (2° per more caudal level, R = −0.2, p = 0.006). Lower-level 3CO significantly correlated with revisions for pseudarthrosis (OR = 3.88, p = 0.001) and postoperative motor deficits (OR = 2.02, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a more caudal lumbar 3CO level did not lead to greater sagittal vertical axis correction. The postoperative apex of lumbar lordosis significantly impacted pelvic tilt. 3CO levels that were more caudal were associated with more postoperative motor deficits and revisions.

Full access

Justin K. Scheer, Justin S. Smith, Frank Schwab, Virginie Lafage, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Shay Bess, Alan H. Daniels, Robert A. Hart, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Daniel M. Sciubba, Tamir Ailon, Douglas C. Burton, Eric Klineberg, Christopher P. Ames, and The International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

The operative management of patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) has a high complication rate and it remains unknown whether baseline patient characteristics and surgical variables can predict early complications (intraoperative and perioperative [within 6 weeks]). The development of an accurate preoperative predictive model can aid in patient counseling, shared decision making, and improved surgical planning. The purpose of this study was to develop a model based on baseline demographic, radiographic, and surgical factors that can predict if patients will sustain an intraoperative or perioperative major complication.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of a prospective, multicenter ASD database. The inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years and the presence of ASD. In total, 45 variables were used in the initial training of the model including demographic data, comorbidities, modifiable surgical variables, baseline health-related quality of life, and coronal and sagittal radiographic parameters. Patients were grouped as either having at least 1 major intraoperative or perioperative complication (COMP group) or not (NOCOMP group). An ensemble of decision trees was constructed utilizing the C5.0 algorithm with 5 different bootstrapped models. Internal validation was accomplished via a 70/30 data split for training and testing each model, respectively. Overall accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, and predictor importance were calculated.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-seven patients were included: 409 (73.4%) in the NOCOMP group, and 148 (26.6%) in the COMP group. The overall model accuracy was 87.6% correct with an AUROC curve of 0.89 indicating a very good model fit. Twenty variables were determined to be the top predictors (importance ≥ 0.90 as determined by the model) and included (in decreasing importance): age, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, number of decompression levels, number of interbody fusion levels, Physical Component Summary of the SF-36, Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)–Schwab coronal curve type, Charlson Comorbidity Index, SRS activity, T-1 pelvic angle, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, presence of osteoporosis, pelvic tilt, sagittal vertical axis, primary versus revision surgery, SRS pain, SRS total, use of bone morphogenetic protein, use of iliac crest graft, and pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch.

CONCLUSIONS

A successful model (87% accuracy, 0.89 AUROC curve) was built predicting major intraoperative or perioperative complications following ASD surgery. This model can provide the foundation toward improved education and point-of-care decision making for patients undergoing ASD surgery.

Full access

Joshua Bakhsheshian, Justin K. Scheer, Jeffrey L. Gum, Richard Hostin, Virginie Lafage, Shay Bess, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Douglas C. Burton, Malla Kate Keefe, Robert A. Hart, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Christopher I. Shaffrey, Frank Schwab, Justin S. Smith, Christopher P. Ames, and The International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Mental disease burden can have a significant impact on levels of disability and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures. Therefore, the authors investigated the significance of mental health status in adults with spinal deformity and poor physical function.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter database of 365 adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients who had undergone surgical treatment was performed. Health-related QOL variables were examined preoperatively and at the 2-year postoperative follow-up. Patients were grouped by their 36-Item Short Form Health Survey mental component summary (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) scores. Both groups had PCS scores ≤ 25th percentile for matched norms; however, the low mental health (LMH) group consisted of patients with an MCS score ≤ 25th percentile, and the high mental health (HMH) group included patients with an MCS score ≥ 75th percentile.

RESULTS

Of the 264 patients (72.3%) with a 2-year follow-up, 104 (28.5%) met the inclusion criteria for LMH and 40 patients (11.0%) met those for HMH. The LMH group had a significantly higher overall rate of comorbidities, specifically leg weakness, depression, hypertension, and self-reported neurological and psychiatric disease processes, and were more likely to be unemployed as compared with the HMH group (p < 0.05 for all). The 2 groups had similar 2-year postoperative improvements in HRQOL (p > 0.05) except for the greater improvements in the MCS and the Scoliosis Research Society-22r questionnaire (SRS-22r) mental domain (p < 0.05) in the LMH group and greater improvements in PCS and SRS-22r satisfaction and back pain domains (p < 0.05) in the HMH group. The LMH group had a higher rate of reaching a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the SRS-22r mental domain (p < 0.01), and the HMH group had a higher rate of reaching an MCID on the PCS and SRS-22r activity domain (p < 0.05). On multivariable logistic regression, having LMH was a significant independent predictor of failure to reach an MCID on the PCS (p < 0.05). At the 2-year postoperative follow-up, 14 LMH patients (15.1%) were categorized as HMH. Two LMH patients (2.2%), and 3 HMH patients (7.7%) transitioned to a PCS score ≥ 75th percentile for age- and sex-matched US norms (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

While patients with poor mental and physical health, according to their MCS and PCS scores, have higher medical comorbidity and unemployment rates, they still demonstrate significant improvements in HRQOL measurements postoperatively. Both LMH and HMH patient groups demonstrated similar improvements in most HRQOL domains, except that the LMH patients had difficulties in obtaining improvements in the PCS domain.