Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for

  • Author or Editor: Gregory Poorman x
  • User-accessible content x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Peter G. Passias, Bassel G. Diebo, Bryan J. Marascalchi, Cyrus M. Jalai, Samantha R. Horn, Peter L. Zhou, Karen Paltoo, Olivia J. Bono, Nancy Worley, Gregory W. Poorman, Vincent Challier, Anant Dixit, Carl Paulino and Virginie Lafage

OBJECTIVE

It is becoming increasingly necessary for surgeons to provide evidence supporting cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment for cervical spine pathology. Anticipating surgical risk is critical in accurately evaluating the risk/benefit balance of such treatment. Determining the risk and cost-effectiveness of surgery, complications, revision procedures, and mortality rates are the most significant limitations. The purpose of this study was to determine independent risk factors for medical complications (MCs), surgical complications (SCs), revisions, and mortality rates following surgery for patients with cervical spine pathology. The most relevant risk factors were used to structure an index that will help quantify risk and anticipate failure for such procedures.

METHODS

The authors of this study performed a retrospective review of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database for patients treated surgically for cervical spine pathology between 2001 and 2010. Multivariate models were performed to calculate the odds ratio (OR) of the independent risk factors that led to MCs and repeated for SCs, revisions, and mortality. The models controlled for age (< and > 65 years old), sex, race, revision status (except for revision analysis), surgical approach, number of levels fused/re-fused (2–3, 4–8, ≥ 9), and osteotomy utilization. ORs were weighted based on their predictive category: 2 times for revision surgery predictors and 4 times for mortality predictors. Fifty points were distributed among the predictors based on their cumulative OR to establish a risk index.

RESULTS

Discharges for 362,989 patients with cervical spine pathology were identified. The mean age was 52.65 years, and 49.47% of patients were women. Independent risk factors included medical comorbidities, surgical parameters, and demographic factors. Medical comorbidities included the following: pulmonary circulation disorder, coagulopathy, metastatic cancer, renal failure, congestive heart failure, alcohol abuse, neurological disorder, nonmetastatic cancer, liver disease, rheumatoid arthritis/collagen vascular diseases, and chronic blood loss/anemia. Surgical parameters included posterior approach to fusion/re-fusion, ≥ 9 levels fused/re-fused, corpectomy, 4–8 levels fused/re-fused, and osteotomy; demographic variables included age ≥ 65 years. These factors increased the risk of at least 1 of MC, SC, revision, or mortality (risk of death). A total of 50 points were distributed among the factors based on the cumulative risk ratio of every factor in proportion to the total risk ratios.

CONCLUSIONS

This study proposed an index to quantify the potential risk of morbidity and mortality prior to surgical intervention for patients with cervical spine pathology. This index may be useful for surgeons in patient counseling efforts as well as for health insurance companies and future socioeconomics studies in assessing surgical risks and benefits for patients undergoing surgical treatment of the cervical spine.

Free access

Kseniya Slobodyanyuk, Caroline E. Poorman, Justin S. Smith, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Richard Hostin, Shay Bess, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Frank J. Schwab and Virginie Lafage

Object

The goal of this study was to determine the outcome and risk factors in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) who elected to receive nonoperative care.

Methods

In this retrospective study the authors reviewed a nonoperative branch of the International Spine Study Group database, derived from 10 sites across the US. Specific inclusion criteria included nonoperative treatment for ASD and the availability of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 scores and radiographic data at baseline (BL) and at 1-year (1Y) follow-up. Health-related quality of life measures were assessed using the SRS-22 and radiographic data. Changes in SRS-22 scores were evaluated by domain and expressed in number of minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) gained or lost; BL and 1Y scores were also compared with age- and sex-matched normative references.

Results

One hundred eighty-nine patients (mean age 53 years, 86% female) met inclusion criteria. Pain was the domain with the largest offset for 43% of patients, followed by the Appearance (23%), Activity (18%), and Mental (15%) domains. On average, patients improved 0.3 MCID in Pain over 1Y, without changes in Activity or Appearance. Baseline scores significantly impacted 1Y outcomes, with up to 85% of patients in the mildest category of deformity being classified as < 1 MCID of normative reference at 1Y, versus 0% of patients with the most severe initial deformity. Baseline radiographic parameters did not correlate with outcome.

Conclusions

Patients who received nonoperative care are significantly more disabled than age- and sex-matched normative references. The likelihood for a patient to reach SRS scores similar to the normative reference at 1Y decreases with increased BL disability. Nonoperative treatment is a viable option for certain patients with ASD, and up to 24% of patients demonstrated significant improvement over 1Y with nonoperative care.

Free access

Gregory W. Poorman, Peter G. Passias, Samantha R. Horn, Nicholas J. Frangella, Alan H. Daniels, D. Kojo Hamilton, Hanjo Kim, Daniel Sciubba, Bassel G. Diebo, Cole A. Bortz, Frank A. Segreto, Michael P. Kelly, Justin S. Smith, Brian J. Neuman, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Virginie LaFage, Renaud LaFage, Christopher P. Ames, Robert Hart, Gregory M. Mundis Jr. and Robert Eastlack

OBJECTIVE

Depression and anxiety have been demonstrated to have negative impacts on outcomes after spine surgery. In patients with cervical deformity (CD), the psychological and physiological burdens of the disease may overlap without clear boundaries. While surgery has a proven record of bringing about significant pain relief and decreased disability, the impact of depression and anxiety on recovery from cervical deformity corrective surgery has not been previously reported on in the literature. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of depression and anxiety on patients’ recovery from and improvement after CD surgery.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter CD database. Patients with a history of clinical depression, in addition to those with current self-reported anxiety or depression, were defined as depressed (D group). The D group was compared with nondepressed patients (ND group) with a similar baseline deformity determined by propensity score matching of the cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA). Baseline demographic, comorbidity, clinical, and radiographic data were compared among patients using t-tests. Improvement of symptoms was recorded at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. All health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores collected at these follow-up time points were compared using t-tests.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were matched for baseline radiographic parameters: 33 with a history of depression and/or current depression, and 33 without. Depressed patients had similar age, sex, race, and radiographic alignment: cSVA, T-1 slope minus C2–7 lordosis, SVA, and T-1 pelvic angle (p > 0.05). Compared with nondepressed individuals, depressed patients had a higher incidence of osteoporosis (21.2% vs 3.2%, p = 0.028), rheumatoid arthritis (18.2% vs 3.2%, p = 0.012), and connective tissue disorders (18.2% vs 3.2%, p = 0.012). At baseline, the D group had greater neck pain (7.9 of 10 vs 6.6 on a Numeric Rating Scale [NRS], p = 0.015), lower mean EQ-5D scores (68.9 vs 74.7, p < 0.001), but similar Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (57.5 vs 49.9, p = 0.063) and myelopathy scores (13.4 vs 13.9, p = 0.546). Surgeries performed in either group were similar in terms of number of levels fused, osteotomies performed, and correction achieved (baseline to 3-month measurements) (p < 0.05). At 3 months, EQ-5D scores remained lower in the D group (74.0 vs 78.2, p = 0.044), and NDI scores were similar (48.5 vs 39.0, p = 0.053). However, neck pain improved in the D group (NRS score of 5.0 vs 4.3, p = 0.331), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores remained similar (14.2 vs 15.0, p = 0.211). At 6 months and 1 year, all HRQOL scores were similar between the 2 cohorts. One-year measurements were as follows: NDI 39.7 vs 40.7 (p = 0.878), NRS neck pain score of 4.1 vs 5.0 (p = 0.326), EQ-5D score of 77.1 vs 78.2 (p = 0.646), and mJOA score of 14.0 vs 14.2 (p = 0.835). Anxiety/depression levels reported on the EQ-5D scale were significantly higher in the depressed cohort at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months (all p < 0.05), but were similar between groups at 1 year postoperatively (1.72 vs 1.53, p = 0.416).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical depression was observed in many of the study patients with CD. After matching for baseline deformity, depression symptomology resulted in worse baseline EQ-5D and pain scores. Despite these baseline differences, both cohorts achieved similar results in all HRQOL assessments 6 months and 1 year postoperatively, demonstrating no clinical impact of depression on recovery up until 1 year after CD surgery. Thus, a history of depression does not appear to have an impact on recovery from CD surgery.