Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 12 items for

  • Author or Editor: Raphaele Charest-Morin x
  • Refine by Access: all x
Clear All Modify Search
Free access

Philippe Beauchamp-Chalifour, Alana M. Flexman, John T. Street, Charles G. Fisher, Tamir Ailon, Marcel F. Dvorak, Brian K. Kwon, Scott J. Paquette, Nicolas Dea, and Raphaële Charest-Morin

OBJECTIVE

Frailty has been shown to be a risk factor of perioperative adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing various types of spine surgery. However, the relationship between frailty and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of frailty on PROs of patients who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar degenerative conditions. The secondary objective was to determine the associations among frailty, baseline PROs, and perioperative AEs.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of a prospective cohort of patients older than 55 years who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2018. Data and PROs (collected with EQ-5D, Physical Component Summary [PCS] and Mental Component Summary [MCS] of SF-12, Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], and numeric rating scales [NRS] for back pain and leg pain) of patients treated at a single academic center were extracted from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry. Frailty was calculated using the modified frailty index (mFI), and patients were classified as frail, prefrail, and nonfrail. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression model was used to assess the association between baseline frailty status and PRO measures at 3 and 12 months.

RESULTS

In total, 293 patients with a mean ± SD age of 67 ± 7 years were included. Of these, 22% (n = 65) were frail, 59% (n = 172) were prefrail, and 19% (n = 56) were nonfrail. At baseline, the three frailty groups had similar PROs, except PCS (p = 0.003) and ODI (p = 0.02) were worse in the frail group. A greater proportion of frail patients experienced major AEs than nonfrail patients (p < 0.0001). However, despite the increased incidence of AEs, there was no association between frailty and postoperative PROs (scores on EQ-5D, PCS and MCS, ODI, and back-pain and leg-pain NRS) at 3 and 12 months (p ≥ 0.05). In general, PROs improved at 3 and 12 months (with most patients reaching the minimum clinically important difference for all PROs).

CONCLUSIONS

Although frailty predicted postoperative AEs, mFI did not predict PROs of patients older than 55 years with degenerative thoracolumbar spine after spine surgery.

Free access

Philippe Beauchamp-Chalifour, Alana M. Flexman, John T. Street, Charles G. Fisher, Tamir Ailon, Marcel F. Dvorak, Brian K. Kwon, Scott J. Paquette, Nicolas Dea, and Raphaële Charest-Morin

OBJECTIVE

Frailty has been shown to be a risk factor of perioperative adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing various types of spine surgery. However, the relationship between frailty and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of frailty on PROs of patients who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar degenerative conditions. The secondary objective was to determine the associations among frailty, baseline PROs, and perioperative AEs.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of a prospective cohort of patients older than 55 years who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2018. Data and PROs (collected with EQ-5D, Physical Component Summary [PCS] and Mental Component Summary [MCS] of SF-12, Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], and numeric rating scales [NRS] for back pain and leg pain) of patients treated at a single academic center were extracted from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry. Frailty was calculated using the modified frailty index (mFI), and patients were classified as frail, prefrail, and nonfrail. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression model was used to assess the association between baseline frailty status and PRO measures at 3 and 12 months.

RESULTS

In total, 293 patients with a mean ± SD age of 67 ± 7 years were included. Of these, 22% (n = 65) were frail, 59% (n = 172) were prefrail, and 19% (n = 56) were nonfrail. At baseline, the three frailty groups had similar PROs, except PCS (p = 0.003) and ODI (p = 0.02) were worse in the frail group. A greater proportion of frail patients experienced major AEs than nonfrail patients (p < 0.0001). However, despite the increased incidence of AEs, there was no association between frailty and postoperative PROs (scores on EQ-5D, PCS and MCS, ODI, and back-pain and leg-pain NRS) at 3 and 12 months (p ≥ 0.05). In general, PROs improved at 3 and 12 months (with most patients reaching the minimum clinically important difference for all PROs).

CONCLUSIONS

Although frailty predicted postoperative AEs, mFI did not predict PROs of patients older than 55 years with degenerative thoracolumbar spine after spine surgery.

Restricted access

Raphaële Charest-Morin, Alana M. Flexman, Shreya Srinivas, Charles G. Fisher, John T. Street, Michael C. Boyd, Tamir Ailon, Marcel F. Dvorak, Brian K. Kwon, Scott J. Paquette, and Nicolas Dea

OBJECTIVE

Surgical treatment of primary bone tumors of the spine and en bloc resection for isolated metastases are complex and challenging. Operative care is fraught with complications, though the true incidence and predictors of adverse events (AEs), length of stay (LOS), and mortality in this population remain poorly understood. The primary objective of this study was to describe the incidence and predictors of perioperative AEs in these patients. Secondary objectives included the determination of the incidence and predictors of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), unanticipated reoperation during the same admission, hospital LOS, and mortality.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, the authors included consecutive patients at a single quaternary care referral center (January 1, 2009, to September 30, 2018) who underwent either surgery for a primary bone tumor of the spine or an en bloc resection for an isolated spinal metastasis. Information on perioperative AEs, demographic data, primary tumor histology, neurological status, surgical variables, pathological margins, Enneking appropriateness, LOS, ICU stay, reoperation during the same admission period, and in-hospital mortality was collected prospectively in the institutional database. The modified frailty score was extracted retrospectively.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen patients met the inclusion criteria: 98 with primary bone tumors and 15 with isolated metastases. The cohort was 59% male, and the mean age was 49 years (SD 19 years). Overall, 79% of the patients experienced at least 1 AE. The median number of AEs per patient was 2 (IQR 0–4 AEs), and the median LOS was 16 days (IQR 9–32 days). No in-hospital deaths occurred in the cohort. Thirty-two patients (28%) required an ICU stay and 19% underwent an unanticipated second surgery during their admission. A longer surgical duration was associated with a higher likelihood of AEs (OR 1.21/hour, 95% CI 1.06–1.37, p = 0.005), longer ICU stay (OR 1.35/hour, 95% CI 1 1.20–1.52, p < 0.001), and reoperation (OR 1.001/hour, 95% CI 1.0003–1.003, p = 0.012). Longer hospital LOS was independently predicted by older age, female sex, upper cervical and sacral location of the tumor, surgical duration, preoperative neurological deficit, presence of AEs, and higher modified frailty index score.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeries for primary bone tumors and en bloc resection for metastatic tumors are associated with a high incidence of perioperative AEs. Surgical duration predicts complications, reoperation, LOS, and ICU stay.

Restricted access

Raphaële Charest-Morin, Christopher S. Bailey, Greg McIntosh, Y. Raja Rampersaud, W. Bradley Jacobs, David W. Cadotte, Jérome Paquet, Hamilton Hall, Michael H. Weber, Michael G. Johnson, Andrew Nataraj, Najmedden Attabib, Neil Manson, Philippe Phan, Sean D. Christie, Kenneth C. Thomas, Charles G. Fisher, and Nicolas Dea

OBJECTIVE

In multilevel posterior cervical instrumented fusion, extension of fusion across the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) at T1 or T2 has been associated with decreased rates of reoperation and pseudarthrosis but with longer surgical time and increased blood loss. The impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective was to determine whether extension of fusion through the CTJ influenced PROs at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The secondary objective was to compare the number of patients who reached the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for the PROs, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of stay, discharge disposition, adverse events (AEs), reoperation within 24 months of surgery, and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational cohort study of prospectively collected multicenter data of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Patients who underwent posterior instrumented fusion of 4 levels or greater (between C2 and T2) between January 2015 and October 2020 and received 24 months of follow-up were included. PROs (scores on the Neck Disability Index [NDI], EQ-5D, physical component summary and mental component summary of SF-12, and numeric rating scale for arm and neck pain) and mJOA scores were compared using ANCOVA and adjusted for baseline differences. Patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and surgical details were abstracted. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for these outcomes were compared with the chi-square test. Operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, AEs, reoperation, discharge disposition, length of stay, and satisfaction was compared by using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the independent-samples t-test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 198 patients were included in this study (101 patients with fusion not crossing the CTJ and 97 with fusion crossing the CTJ). Patients with a construct extending through the CTJ were more likely to be female and have worse baseline NDI scores (p > 0.05). When adjusted for baseline differences, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the PROs and mJOA scores at 3, 12, and 24 months. Surgical duration was longer (p < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss was greater in the group with fusion extending to the upper thoracic spine (p = 0.013). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of AEs (p > 0.05). Fusion with a construct crossing the CTJ was associated with reoperation (p = 0.04). Satisfaction with surgery was not significantly different between groups. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for the PROs were not statistically different at any time point.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistically significant differences in PROs between patients with a posterior construct extending to the upper thoracic spine and those without such extension for as long as 24 months after surgery. The AE profiles were not significantly different, but longer surgical time and increased blood loss were associated with constructs extending across the CTJ.

Full access

Nicolas Dea, Charles G. Fisher, Jeremy J. Reynolds, Joseph H. Schwab, Laurence D. Rhines, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Chetan Bettegowda, Arjun Sahgal, Áron Lazáry, Alessandro Luzzati, Stefano Boriani, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Ilya Laufer, Raphaële Charest-Morin, Feng Wei, William Teixeira, Niccole M. Germscheid, Francis J. Hornicek, Thomas F. DeLaney, John H. Shin, and the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the spectrum of current treatment protocols for managing newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum.

METHODS

A survey on the treatment of spinal chordoma was distributed electronically to members of the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor, including neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and radiation oncologists from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Survey participants were pre-identified clinicians from centers with expertise in the treatment of spinal tumors. The suvey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine of 43 (91%) participants completed the survey. Most (80%) indicated that they favor en bloc resection without preoperative neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) when en bloc resection is feasible with acceptable morbidity. The main area of disagreement was with the role of postoperative RT, where 41% preferred giving RT only if positive margins were achieved and 38% preferred giving RT irrespective of margin status. When en bloc resection would result in significant morbidity, 33% preferred planned intralesional resection followed by RT, and 33% preferred giving neoadjuvant RT prior to surgery. In total, 8 treatment protocols were identified: 3 in which en bloc resection is feasible with acceptable morbidity and 5 in which en bloc resection would result in significant morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm that there is treatment variability across centers worldwide for managing newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum. This information will be used to design an international prospective cohort study to determine the most appropriate treatment strategy for patients with spinal chordoma.

Free access

Oliver G. S. Ayling, Raphaele Charest-Morin, Matthew E. Eagles, Tamir Ailon, John T. Street, Nicolas Dea, Greg McIntosh, Sean D. Christie, Edward Abraham, W. Bradley Jacobs, Christopher S. Bailey, Michael G. Johnson, Najmedden Attabib, Peter Jarzem, Michael Weber, Jerome Paquet, Joel Finkelstein, Alexandra Stratton, Hamilton Hall, Neil Manson, Y. Raja Rampersaud, Kenneth Thomas, and Charles G. Fisher

OBJECTIVE

Previous works investigating rates of adverse events (AEs) in spine surgery have been retrospective, with data collection from administrative databases, and often from single centers. To date, there have been no prospective reports capturing AEs in spine surgery on a national level, with comparison among centers.

METHODS

The Spine Adverse Events Severity system was used to define the incidence and severity of AEs after spine surgery by using data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective registry. Patient data were collected prospectively and during hospital admission for those undergoing elective spine surgery for degenerative conditions. The Spine Adverse Events Severity system defined minor and major AEs as grades 1–2 and 3–6, respectively.

RESULTS

There were 3533 patients enrolled in this cohort. There were 85 (2.4%) individual patients with at least one major AE and 680 (19.2%) individual patients with at least one minor AE. There were 25 individual patients with 28 major intraoperative AEs and 260 patients with 275 minor intraoperative AEs. Postoperatively there were 61 patients with a total of 80 major AEs. Of the 487 patients with minor AEs postoperatively there were 698 total AEs. The average enrollment was 321 patients (range 47–1237 patients) per site. The rate of major AEs was consistent among sites (mean 2.9% ± 2.4%, range 0%–9.1%). However, the rate of minor AEs varied widely among sites—from 7.9% to 42.5%, with a mean of 18.8% ± 9.7%. The rate of minor AEs varied depending on how they were reported, with surgeon reporting associated with the lowest rates (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of major AEs after lumbar spine surgery is consistent among different sites but the rate of minor AEs appears to vary substantially. The method by which AEs are reported impacts the rate of minor AEs. These data have implications for the detection and reporting of AEs and the design of strategies aimed at mitigating complications.

Free access

Supriya Singh, Tamir Ailon, Greg McIntosh, Nicolas Dea, Jerome Paquet, Edward Abraham, Christopher S. Bailey, Michael H. Weber, Michael G. Johnson, Andrew Nataraj, R. Andrew Glennie, Najmedden Attabib, Adrienne Kelly, Hamilton Hall, Y. Raja Rampersaud, Neil Manson, Philippe Phan, Kenneth Thomas, Charles G. Fisher, and Raphaële Charest-Morin

OBJECTIVE

Time to return to work (RTW) after elective lumbar spine surgery is variable and dependent on many factors including patient, work-related, and surgical factors. The primary objective of this study was to describe the time and rate of RTW after elective lumbar spine surgery. Secondary objectives were to determine predictors of early RTW (< 90 days) and no RTW in this population.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the multicenter Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) surgical registry was performed to identify patients who were employed and underwent elective 1- or 2-level discectomy, laminectomy, and/or fusion procedures between January 2015 and December 2019. The percentage of patients who returned to work and the time to RTW postoperatively were calculated. Predictors of early RTW and not returning to work were determined using a multivariable Cox regression model and a multivariable logistic regression model, respectively.

RESULTS

Of the 1805 employed patients included in this analysis, 71% returned to work at a median of 61 days. The median RTW after a discectomy, laminectomy, or fusion procedure was 51, 46, and 90 days, respectively. Predictors of early RTW included male gender, higher education level (high school or above), higher preoperative Physical Component Summary score, working preoperatively, a nonfusion procedure, and surgery in a western Canadian province (p < 0.05). Patients who were working preoperatively were twice as likely to RTW within 90 days (HR 1.984, 95% CI 1.680–2.344, p < 0.001) than those who were employed but not working. Predictors of not returning to work included symptoms lasting more than 2 years, an increased number of comorbidities, an education level below high school, and an active workers’ compensation claim (p < 0.05). There were fourfold odds of not returning to work for patients who had not been working preoperatively (OR 4.076, 95% CI 3.087–5.383, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the Canadian population, 71% of a preoperatively employed segment returned to work after 1- or 2-level lumbar spine surgery. Most patients who undergo a nonfusion procedure RTW after 6 to 8 weeks, whereas patients undergoing a fusion procedure RTW at 12 weeks. Working preoperatively significantly increased the likelihood of early RTW.

Free access

Charlotte Dandurand, Charles G. Fisher, Laurence D. Rhines, Stefano Boriani, Raphaële Charest-Morin, Alessandro Gasbarrini, Alessandro Luzzati, Jeremy J. Reynolds, Feng Wei, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Chetan Bettegowda, Daniel M. Sciubba, Aron Lazary, Norio Kawahara, Michelle J. Clarke, Y. Raja Rampersaud, Alexander C. Disch, Dean Chou, John H. Shin, Francis J. Hornicek, IIya Laufer, Arjun Sahgal, and Nicolas Dea

OBJECTIVE

Oncological resection of primary spine tumors is associated with lower recurrence rates. However, even in the most experienced hands, the execution of a meticulously drafted plan sometimes fails. The objectives of this study were to determine how successful surgical teams are at achieving planned surgical margins and how successful surgeons are in intraoperatively assessing tumor margins. The secondary objective was to identify factors associated with successful execution of planned resection.

METHODS

The Primary Tumor Research and Outcomes Network (PTRON) is a multicenter international prospective registry for the management of primary tumors of the spine. Using this registry, the authors compared 1) the planned surgical margin and 2) the intraoperative assessment of the margin by the surgeon with the postoperative assessment of the margin by the pathologist. Univariate analysis was used to assess whether factors such as histology, size, location, previous radiotherapy, and revision surgery were associated with successful execution of the planned margins.

RESULTS

Three hundred patients were included. The surgical plan was successfully achieved in 224 (74.7%) patients. The surgeon correctly assessed the intraoperative margins, as reported in the final assessment by the pathologist, in 239 (79.7%) patients. On univariate analysis, no factor had a statistically significant influence on successful achievement of planned margins.

CONCLUSIONS

In high-volume cancer centers around the world, planned surgical margins can be achieved in approximately 75% of cases. The morbidity of the proposed intervention must be balanced with the expected success rate in order to optimize patient management and surgical decision-making.