Spinal fusion surgery use among adults with low back pain enrolled in a digital musculoskeletal program: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare 12-month spinal fusion surgery rates in the setting of low back pain among digital musculoskeletal (MSK) program participants versus a comparison cohort who only received usual care. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with propensity score matched comparison cohort using commercial medical claims data representing over 100 million commercially insured lives. METHODS: All study subjects experienced low back pain between January 2020 and December 2021. Digital MSK participants enrolled in the digital MSK low back program between January 2020 and December 2021. Non-participants had low back pain related physical therapy (PT) between January 2020 and December 2021. Digital MSK participants were matched to non-participants with similar demographics, comorbidities and baseline MSK-related medical care use. Spinal fusion surgery rates at 12 months post participation were compared. RESULTS: Compared to non-participants, digital MSK participants had lower rates of spinal fusion surgery in the post-period (0.7% versus 1.6%; p < 0.001). Additionally, in the augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) model, digital MSK participants were found to have decreased odds of undergoing spinal fusion surgery (adjusted odds ratio: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that participation in a digital MSK program is associated with a lower rate of spinal fusion surgery.

Trends in the surgical treatment for metastatic spinal tumor in Japanese administrative data between 2012 and 2020.

BACKGROUND: Both cancer diagnosis/treatment modality and surgical technique for the spine have been developed recently. Nationwide trends in the surgical treatment for metastatic spinal tumors have not been reported in the last decades. This study aimed to examine recent trends in the surgical treatment for spinal metastasis and in-hospital patient outcomes using nationwide administrative hospital discharge data. METHODS: The Diagnosis Procedure Combination database from 2012 to 2020 was used to extract data from patients who underwent surgical procedures for spinal metastasis with the number of non-metastatic spinal surgery at the institutions that have performed metastatic spine surgeries at least one case in the same year. Trends in the surgical treatment for spinal metastasis, patients' demographics, and in-hospital mortality/outcomes were investigated. RESULTS: This study analyzed 10,321 eligible patients with spinal metastasis. The surgical treatment for spinal metastasis increased 1.68 times from 2012 to 2020, especially in fusion surgery, whereas the proportion of metastatic spinal surgery retained with a slight increase in the 2%s. Distributions of the primary site did not change, whereas age was getting older. In-hospital mortality and length of stay decreased over time (9.9-6.8%, p < 0.001; 37-30 days, p < 0.001). Postoperative complication and unfavorable ambulatory retained stable and slightly decreased, respectively. CONCLUSION: During the last decade, surgical treatment for spinal metastasis, especially fusion surgery, has increased in Japan. In-hospital mortality and length of stay decreased. Recent advances in cancer treatment and surgical techniques might influence this trend.

Long-term reoperation rates following spinal fusion for neuromuscular scoliosis in nonambulatory patients with cerebral palsy.

PURPOSE: To describe the incidence of reoperation and factors contributing to surgical revision within a minimum of 10 years after spinal fusion for scoliosis in patients with nonambulatory cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive nonambulatory patients with CP who underwent primary spinal fusion at a single specialty care center with a minimum of 10 years from their index surgery (surgery dates 2001-2011). Causes of reoperation were classified as implant failure/pseudoarthrosis, surgical site infection (SSI), proximal junctional kyphosis, prominent/symptomatic implants, and implant removal. Reoperation rates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each time interval, and an actuarial survival curve was generated. RESULTS: 144 patients met inclusion criteria (mean age = 14.3 ± 2.6 years, 62.5% male); 85.4% had 5 years follow-up data; and 66.0% had 10 years follow-up data. Estimates from the actuarial analysis suggest that 14.9% (95% CI: 10.0-22.0) underwent reoperation by 5 years postsurgery, and 21.7% (95% CI: 15.4-30.1) underwent reoperation by 10 years postsurgery. The most common causes for reoperation were implant failure/pseudoarthrosis, SSI, and prominent/symptomatic implants. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this study is the largest long-term follow-up of nonambulatory patients with CP and neuromuscular scoliosis who underwent spinal fusion. Approximately 22% of these patients required reoperation 10 years after their index surgery, primarily due to implant failure/pseudoarthrosis, SSI, and prominent/symptomatic implants. Complications and reoperations continued throughout the 10 years period after index surgery, reinforcing the need for long-term follow-up as these patients transition into adulthood. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A 10-year perspective on the question of whether surgeries for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis are "one and done"?

PURPOSE: Posterior scoliosis fusion (PSF) for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is considered a highly successful surgery with excellent outcomes. However, especially as many patients "graduate" from their pediatric surgeons, there is the need to quantify the long-term outcomes of such surgeries. METHODS: The 2010-2022 Pearldiver M161 dataset was queried for those who were 10 to 18 years old with AIS undergoing PSF with at least 10 years follow-up. Patient characteristics were abstracted. Reoperations were identified based on coding for any subsequent thoracic/lumbar surgery/revision. The 10-year reoperation rate and reasons for reoperation were determined, and multivariate regression was performed to determine risk factors. RESULTS: In total, 3,373 AIS PSF patients were identified. Of the study cohort, 324 (9.6%) underwent reoperation within 10-years with an interquartile range for timing of surgery of 81-658 days, of which 29.6% were done for infection. Reoperations were done within the first three months for 152 (46.9% of reoperations), three months to 2 years for 97 (29.9%), and 2 years to 10 years for 74 (22.8%). Based on multivariate regression, need for reoperation was associated with male sex (OR: 1.70), asthma (OR: 1.36) and greater than thirteen segments of instrumentation (OR: 1.48) (p < 0.05 for each) but not age, other comorbidities, or insurance. CONCLUSIONS: The current study of a large national AIS PSF population found 9.6% to undergo reoperation in the 10 years following their index operation. Although specifics about the curve pattern could not be determined, the reoperation incidence and correlation with specific risk factors are notable and important for patient counselling.

Urgent versus elective surgical disparities among American Indian and Alaska Native patients.

BACKGROUND: American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) health issues are understudied despite documentation of lower-than-average life expectancy. Urgent surgery is associated with higher rates of postsurgical complications and postoperative death. We assess whether American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) patients in Washington State are at greater risk of requiring urgent rather than elective surgery compared with non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). METHODS: We accessed data for the period 2009-2014 from the Washington State Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Reporting System (CHARS) database, which captures all statewide hospital admissions, to examine three common surgeries that are performed both urgently and electively: hip replacements, aortic valve replacements, and spinal fusions. We extracted patient race, age, insurance status, comorbidity, admission type, and procedures performed. We then constructed multivariable logistic regression models to identify factors associated with use of urgent surgical care. RESULTS: AIAN patients had lower mean age at surgery for all three surgeries compared with NHW patients. AIAN patients were at higher risk for urgent surgery for hip replacements (OR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.19-1.88), spinal fusions (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.04-1.87), and aortic valve replacements (OR = 2.06, 95% CI 1.12-3.80). CONCLUSION: AIAN patients were more likely to undergo urgent hip replacement, spinal fusion, and aortic valve replacement than NHW patients. AIAN patients underwent urgent surgery at younger ages. Medicaid insurance conferred higher risks for urgent surgery across all surgeries studied. Further research is warranted to more clearly identify the factors contributing to disparities among AIAN patients undergoing urgent surgery.

Lumbar fusion surgery in the era of an aging society: analysis of a nationwide population cohort with minimum 8-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Fusions for lumbar spine diseases are widely performed and have a growing incidence, especially in elderly population. PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to assess national trends of lumbar spinal fusions and examine the risk for reoperations after a lumbar fusion with a focus on 'epidemiologic transition' relating to age. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: The prospectively collected Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) nationwide cohort database was retrospectively reviewed. PATIENT SAMPLE: The total 278,815 patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusions for degenerative spine diseases between 2010 and 2018 were reviewed and used to assess trends in operative incidence. The 37,050 patients who underwent lumbar fusions between 1/2010 and 12/2011 were enrolled to determine 8-year reoperation rates. OUTCOME MEASURES: The overall number of lumbar spinal fusions were analyzed for the national annual trend. Demographic data, reoperation rates, and confounding clinical factors were evaluated. METHODS: The overall number of lumbar spinal fusions was analyzed to determine the national annual trend of operative incidence. For the reoperation rate analysis, the primary outcome measured was the cumulative incidence of revision operations within a minimum 8-year follow-up period. Additional outcomes included comparative analyses of the reoperation rate with respect to age, sex, or other underlying comorbidities. RESULTS: Over time, elderly patients comprised a larger portion of the cohort (2010:24.2%; 2018:37.6%), while operations in younger patients decreased over time (2010:40.3%; 2018:27.0%). In the cohort of patients with a minimum 8-year follow-up (n=37,050), rates of reoperation peaked in patients aged 60-69 years (17.6 per 1000 person-years [HR 2.20 compared to <40years]) and decreased for more elderly patients (14.3 per 1000 person-years [HR 1.80 compared to <40years]). Age was the most significant risk factor for reoperation. Osteoporosis was also a risk factor for reoperation in postmenopausal females. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing incidence of lumbar fusions in elderly patients was seen however the risk of reoperation decreased in patients aged 70 or more. Lumbar fusion for elderly patients should not be hesitated in the decision-making process because of concerns about reoperation.

Physical Therapy Utilization After Single-level Posterior Lumbar Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Characterize physical therapy (PT) utilization following single-level posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PLF is a common procedure that is increasing in frequency. After such surgeries, PT may be considered to facilitate mobilization and return to activities. However, the usage of such therapy has not been well-characterized in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing single-level PLF were identified from the 2010 to 2021 PearlDiver administrative database. These patients were stratified based on usage of therapy, home versus outpatient therapy, and timing of therapy within the year after surgery. To determine predictors of therapy, patient characteristics were determined and multivariable regressions were performed. RESULTS: A total of 213,240 patients undergoing single-level PLF were identified, of which therapy was done in the year after surgery for 63,231 (29.0%, of which home therapy accounted for 16.5% of therapy visits). Of those who utilized PT, the average number of visits was 10.6±10.6. Home therapy peaked within the first month after surgery and outpatient therapy peaked at month two. Factors associated with any PT following PLF in decreasing odds ratio (OR) were having commercial insurance (OR: 1.68), being from the Northeast (OR: 1.41), age (OR: 1.13 for 70+ of age) female sex (OR: 1.09), and ECI (OR: 1.04 per point) ( P <0.001 for all). Of those who received therapy, factors associated with home PT utilization were being from the Northeast (OR: 2.55), age (OR: 1.91 for 70+ of age), Medicaid insurance (OR: 1.48), female sex (OR: 1.39), and interbody fusion (OR:1.07) ( P <0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: After single-level PLF, the minority of patients received home or outpatient PT. Of those who did, there was significant variation in the number of visits, with nonmedical factors such as insurance plan and geographic region being strongly associated suggesting room for more consistent practice patterns. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

Postoperative racial disparities following spine surgery are less pronounced in the outpatient setting.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Racial disparities in spine surgery have been thoroughly documented in the inpatient (IP) setting. However, despite an increasing proportion of procedures being performed as same-day surgeries, whether similar differences have developed in the outpatient (OP) setting remains to be elucidated. PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate racial differences in postoperative outcomes between Black and White patients following OP and IP lumbar and cervical spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent IP or OP microdiscectomy, laminectomy, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), or cervical disc replacement (CDR) between 2017 and 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES: Thirty-day rates of serious and minor adverse events, readmission, reoperation, nonhome discharge, and mortality. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent IP or OP microdiscectomy, laminectomy, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), or cervical disc replacement (CDR) between 2017 and 2021 was conducted using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Disparities between Black and White patients in (1) adverse event rates, (2) readmission rates, (3) reoperation rates, (4) nonhome discharge rates, (5) mortality rates, (6) operative times, and (7) hospital LOS between Black and White patients were measured and compared between IP and OP surgical settings. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for potential effects of baseline demographic and clinical differences. RESULTS: Of 81,696 total surgeries, 49,351 (60.4%) were performed as IP and 32,345 (39.6%) were performed as OP procedures. White patients accounted for a greater proportion of IP (88.2% vs 11.8%) and OP (92.7% vs 7.3%) procedures than Black patients. Following IP surgery, Black patients experienced greater odds of serious (OR 1.214, 95% CI 1.077-1.370, p=.002) and minor adverse events (OR 1.377, 95% CI 1.113-1.705, p=.003), readmission (OR 1.284, 95% CI 1.130-1.459, p<.001), reoperation (OR 1.194, 95% CI 1.013-1.407, p=.035), and nonhome discharge (OR 2.304, 95% CI 2.101-2.528, p<.001) after baseline adjustment. Disparities were less prominent in the OP setting, as Black patients exhibited greater odds of readmission (OR 1.341, 95% CI 1.036-1.735, p=.026) but were no more likely than White patients to experience adverse events, reoperation, individual complications, nonhome discharge, or death (p>.050 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Racial inequality in postoperative complications following spine surgery is evident, however disparities in complication rates are relatively less following OP compared to IP procedures. Further work may be beneficial in elucidating the causes of these differences to better understand and mitigate overall racial disparities within the inpatient setting. These decreased differences may also provide promising indication that progress towards reducing inequality is possible as spine care transitions to the OP setting.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty: an epidemiological review of 433,660 surgical patients from 2011 to 2021.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) are commonly performed operations to address cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Trends in utilization and revision surgery rates warrant investigation. PURPOSE: To explore the epidemiology, postoperative complications, and reoperation rates of ACDF and CDA. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 433,660 patients who underwent ACDF or CDA between 2011 and 2021 were included in this study. OUTCOME MEASURES: The following data were observed for all cases: patient demographics, complications, and revisions. METHODS: The PearlDiver database was queried to identify patients who underwent ACDF and CDA between 2011 and 2021. Epidemiological analyses were performed to examine trends in cervical procedure utilization by age group and year. After matching by age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), levels of operation, and reason for surgery, the early postoperative (2-week), short-term (2-year), and long-term (5-year) complications of both cervical procedures were examined. RESULTS: In total, 404,195 ACDF and 29,465 CDA patients were included. ACDF utilization rose by 25.25% between 2011 and 2014 while CDA utilization rose by 654.24% between 2011-2019 followed by relative plateauing in both procedures. Mann-Kendall trend test confirmed a significant but small rise in ACDF and large rise in CDA procedures from 2011 to 2021 (p<.001). After matching, ACDF and CDA had an overall complication rate of 12.20% and 8.77%, respectively, with the most common complications being subsequent anterior revision (4.96% and 3.35%) and dysphagia (3.70% and 2.98%). The ACDF cohort, especially multilevel ACDF patients, generally had more complications and higher revision rates than the CDA cohort (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: While ACDF utilization has plateaued since 2014, CDA rates have risen by a staggering 654.24% over the past decade. ACDF and CDA complication and revision rates were relatively low in comparison to previously published values, with significantly lower rates in CDA. Although a lack of radiographic data in this study limits its power to recommend either procedure for individual patients with cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy, CDA may be associated with minor improvement in the complication and revision profile.

Rates, Predictive Factors, and Adverse Outcomes of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Disorders in Ontario, Canada, Between 2006 and 2015: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The addition of fusion surgery to the decompression for lumbar degenerative disorders remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the rate and outcome of decompression and fusion versus decompression alone. METHODS: This population-based retrospective cohort study used several linked administrative databases to identify patients who underwent spinal decompression surgery in Ontario, Canada, from 2006 to 2015. Patients who had previous spine surgery, concurrent lumbar disc replacement, or a diagnosis other than degenerative disc disease were excluded. Adjusted logistic regression was used to assess our outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 33,912 patients, of whom 9748 (28.74%) underwent fusion. Overall, fusion rates increased from 27.66% to 31.33% over the study period (P = 0.025). Factors associated with fusion included: older age, female sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3, previous total joint replacement, and surgery by an orthopedic surgeon. Fusion surgery was associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-3.09; P = 0.046), 30-day (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.53-2.46; P < 0.0001) and 90-day reoperation (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.35-2.05; P < 0.0001), and 30-day readmission (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.49; P = 0.027) when adjusting for confounding variables. The odds of suffering a complication after fusion and decompression surgery vs. decompression surgery alone were 4.3-fold greater (95% CI 3.78-5.09; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with decompression alone, spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar disorders is associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes. These findings highlight the need for spine surgeons to consider carefully their indications for fusion procedures in the setting of degenerative spinal disorders.

Clinical outcomes, complications and fusion rates in endoscopic assisted intraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF): systematic review and meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis aims to determine the clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates in endoscopic assisted intra-foraminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The inclusion criteria were: five or more consecutive patients who underwent iLIF or MI-TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases; description of the surgical technique; clinical outcome measures, complications and imaging assessment; minimum follow-up of 12 months. Surgical time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were extracted. Mean outcome improvements were pooled and compared with minimal clinically important differences (MCID). Pooled and direct meta-analysis were evaluated. We identified 42 eligible studies. The iLIF group had significantly lower mean intra-operative blood loss, unstandardized mean difference (UMD) 110.61 mL (95%CI 70.43; 150.80; p value < 0.0001), and significantly decreased length of hospital stay (UMD 2.36; 95%CI 1.77; 2.94; p value < 0.0001). Visual analogue scale (VAS) back, VAS leg and Oswestry disability index (ODI) baseline to last follow-up mean improvements were statistically significant (p value < 0.0001), and clinically important for both groups (MCID VAS back > 1.16; MCID VAS leg > 1.36; MCID > 12.40). There was no significant difference in complication nor fusion rates between both cohorts. Interbody fusion using either iLIF or MI-TLIF leads to significant and clinically important improvements in clinical outcomes for lumbar degenerative diseases. Both procedures provide high rates of fusion at 12 months or later, without significant difference in complication rates. iLIF is associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay. Study registration: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews: Registration No. CRD42020180980, accessible at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ April 2020.

Focused versus conventional radiotherapy in spinal oncology: is there any difference in fusion rates and pseudoarthrosis?

INTRODUCTION: Radiotherapy is considered standard of care for adjuvant peri-operative treatment of many spinal tumors, including those with instrumented fusion. Unfortunately, radiation treatment has been linked to increased risk of pseudoarthrosis. Newer focused radiotherapy strategies with enhanced conformality could offer improved fusion rates for these patients, but this has not been confirmed. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients at three tertiary care academic institutions with primary and secondary spinal malignancies that underwent resection, instrumented fusion, and peri-operative radiotherapy. Two board certified neuro-radiologists used the Lenke fusion score to grade fusion status at 6 and 12-months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included clinical pseudoarthrosis, wound complications, the effect of radiation timing and radiobiological dose delivered, the use of photons versus protons, tumor type, tumor location, and use of autograft on fusion outcomes. RESULTS: After review of 1252 spinal tumor patients, there were 60 patients with at least 6 months follow-up that were included in our analyses. Twenty-five of these patients received focused radiotherapy, 20 patients received conventional radiotherapy, and 15 patients were treated with protons. There was no significant difference between the groups for covariates such as smoking status, obesity, diabetes, intraoperative use of autograft, and use of peri-operative chemotherapy. There was a significantly higher rate of fusion for patients treated with focused radiotherapy compared to those treated with conventional radiotherapy at 6-months (64.0% versus 30.0%, Odds ratio: 4.15, p = 0.036) and 12-months (80.0% versus 42.1%, OR: 5.50, p = 0.022). There was a significantly higher rate of clinical pseudoarthrosis in the conventional radiotherapy cohort compared to patients in the focused radiotherapy cohort (19.1% versus 0%, p = 0.037). There was no difference in fusion outcomes for any of the secondary outcomes except for use of autograft. The use of intra-operative autograft was associated with an improved fusion at 12-months (66.7% versus 37.5%, OR: 3.33, p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: Focused radiotherapy may be associated with an improved rate of fusion and clinical pseudoarthrosis when compared to conventional radiation delivery strategies in patients with spinal tumors. Use of autograft at the time of surgery may be associated with improved 12-month fusion rates. Further large-scale prospective and randomized controlled studies are needed to better stratify the effects of radiation delivery modality in these patients.

How old is too old?: Matched analysis of geriatric patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Review INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to utilize a national database to identify how age affects patient outcomes following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). There are no established age guidelines for the geriatric population within the spine specialty, which makes patient selection challenging. Furthermore, there are conflicting studies for the risks of performing spine surgeries in the elderly. METHODS: A retrospective review of the Mariner Claims Database was conducted on patients who underwent a single level ALIF (CPT 22558) between 2010 and 2018. Patients were separated into three groups by age: 50-64, 65-74, and 75-84 and matched with respect to gender, smoking, and comorbidity burden. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the independent effect of outpatient surgery on the postoperative outcomes after adjusting for demographic factors and pertinent comorbidities. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The study identified 8459 matched patients (3350 50-64; 3350 65-74; and 1759 75-84). Compared with patients aged 50-64, patients aged 65-74 and 75-84 had significantly increased risks of pneumonia (65-74: OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.06-2.24, p = 0.025; 75-84: OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07-2.42, p = 0.022), sepsis (65-74: OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.36-3.76, p = 0.002; 75-84: OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.43-4.13, p = 0.001), and major complications (65-74: OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.74, p = 0.021; 75-84: OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.95, p = 0.006) (Table 2). There were no significant differences between patients aged 65-74 and 75-84 for risks of postoperative pneumonia, sepsis, and major complications (p > 0.05). There were no differences between any groups in terms of long-term outcomes such as pseudoarthrosis, implant related complications, or reoperation (p > 0.05) (Table 3). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The study showed that those older than 65 had a significant increase in risk of pneumonia, sepsis, and major complications following ALIF. In the two cohorts above the age of 65 (65-74 and 75-84) there was no significant differences in postoperative outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Outcomes of anterior vs. posterior approach to single-level lumbar spinal fusion with interbody device: An analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample.

BACKGROUND: Interbody devices have revolutionized lumbar spinal fusion surgery by improving mechanical stability and maximizing fusion potential. Several approaches for interbody fusion exist with two of the most common being anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). This study aims to compare patient data, hospital outcomes, and post-operative complications between an anterior vs. posterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) and International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition (ICD10) codes to identify patients (18 +) from 2016 to 2018 who underwent lumbar interbody fusion under an anterior or posterior approach. Patients missing identifiers were excluded from this study. Patients were further investigated by demographic data and the presence of comorbidities. Hospital outcome data was investigated by length of stay (LOS), total hospital charges, mortality, and post-operative complications. RESULTS: 373,585 patients were included in this study. 257,975 (69%) underwent fusion via a posterior approach, and 115,610 (31%) via an anterior approach. Patients undergoing posterior approach were found to have a greater number of comorbidities than anterior (3.5 vs. 2, respectively, p = <0.001). The posterior approach was associated with decreased LOS (3.59 vs 4.19 days, p = <0.0001) and decreased total hospital charges ($141,700 vs $211,015, p = <0.0001). A posterior approach was found to have lower rates of post-operative complications. For the anterior approach cohort, tobacco dependence (OR=1.31 [1.20-1.42, p = <0.001], diabetes (OR=2.41 [2.33-2.49, p = <0.001], and osteoporosis (OR=1.42 [1.30-1.54, p = <0.001] were found to be significant independent predictors of post-operative pseudoarthrosis. Obesity (OR=1.28 [1.14-1.42, p = <0.001], tobacco dependence (OR=1.48 [1.40-1.56, p = <0.001], diabetes (OR=2.21 [2.10-2.32, p = <0.001], congestive heart failure (OR=1.20 [1.01-1.39, p = 0.04], and osteoporosis (OR=1.65 [1.55-1.75, p = <0.001], were found to be independent predictors of post-operative pseudoarthrosis in the posterior cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent the anterior approach suffered from increased hospital charges, length of stay, and increased risk of post-operative complications including mortality, wound dehiscence, hematoma/seroma, and pseudoarthrosis. Comorbid disease plays a significant role in the outcome of successful fusion with variable effect depending on the surgical approach. Increasing due diligence in patient selection should be considered when choosing an approach in pre-operative planning.

A 24-month retrospective update: follow-up hospitalization charges and readmissions in US lumbar fusion surgeries using a cellular bone allograft (CBA) versus recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2).

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to build upon previously-reported 12-month findings by retrospectively comparing 24-month follow-up hospitalization charges and potentially-relevant readmissions in US lumbar fusion surgeries that employed either recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) or a cellular bone allograft comprised of viable lineage-committed bone cells (V-CBA) via a nationwide healthcare system database. METHODS: A total of 16,172 patients underwent lumbar fusion surgery using V-CBA or rhBMP-2 in the original study, of whom 3,792 patients (23.4%) were identified in the current study with all-cause readmissions during the 24-month follow-up period. Confounding baseline patient, procedure, and hospital characteristics found in the original study were used to adjust multivariate regression models comparing differences in 24-month follow-up hospitalization charges (in 2020 US dollars) and lengths of stay (LOS; in days) between the groups. Differences in potentially-relevant follow-up readmissions were also compared, and all analyses were repeated in the subset of patients who only received treatment at a single level of the spine. RESULTS: The adjusted cumulative mean 24-month follow-up hospitalization charges in the full cohort were significantly lower in the V-CBA group ($99,087) versus the rhBMP-2 group ($124,389; P < 0.0001), and this pattern remained in the single-level cohort (V-CBA = $104,906 vs rhBMP-2 = $125,311; P = 0.0006). There were no differences between groups in adjusted cumulative mean LOS in either cohort. Differences in the rates of follow-up readmissions aligned with baseline comorbidities originally reported for the initial procedure. Subsequent lumbar fusion rates were significantly lower for V-CBA patients in the full cohort (10.12% vs 12.00%; P = 0.0002) and similar between groups in the single-level cohort, in spite of V-CBA patients having significantly higher rates of baseline comorbidities that could negatively impact clinical outcomes, including bony fusion. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that use of V-CBA for lumbar fusion surgeries performed in the US is associated with substantially lower 24-month follow-up hospitalization charges versus rhBMP-2, with both exhibiting similar rates of subsequent lumbar fusion procedures and potentially-relevant readmissions.

Significance of Hospital Size in Outcomes of Single-Level Elective Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Nationwide Readmissions Database Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate risk factors for 90-day readmission in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for small, medium, and large hospitals. To assess differences in length of stay, charges, and complication rates across hospitals of different size. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using elective, single-level ACDF data from 2016 to 2018 in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Readmissions Database. Elective single-level ACDF cases were stratified into 3 groups by hospital bed size (small, medium, and large). All-cause complication rates, mean charges, length of stay, and 90-day readmission rates were compared across hospital size. Frequencies of specific comorbidities were compared between readmitted and nonreadmitted patients for each hospital size. Comorbidities significant on univariate analysis were evaluated as independent risk factors for 90-day readmission for each hospital size using multivariate regression. RESULTS: The overall 90-day readmission rate was 6.43% in 36,794 patients, and the rates for small, medium, and large hospitals were 6.25%, 6.28%, and 6.56%, respectively (P = 0.537). Length of stay increased significantly with hospital size (P < 0.001), and small hospitals had the lowest charges (P < 0.001). Although different independent predictors of 90-day readmission were identified for each hospital size, cardiac arrhythmia, chronic pulmonary disease, neurologic disorders, and rheumatic disease were identified as risk factors for hospitals of all sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital size is a determining factor for charges and length of stay associated with elective single-level ACDF. Variation in risk factors for readmission exists across hospital size in context of similar 90-day readmission rates.

Cervical spine alignment and clinical outcomes after multilevel anterior cervical decompression and fusion with or without plate: A minimal 5-year follow-up of a CONSORT-compliant article.

ABSTRACT: It was reported imperative on cervical sagittal alignment reconstruction after anterior multilevel procedures with self-locked stand-alone cage (SSC) or anterior cage-with-plate (ACP) system multilevel while there was little knowledge about the relationship on cervical alignment and clinical outcomes.To identify the importance of cervical sagittal alignment after 3-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion on cervical spondylotic myelopathy with SSC and ACP system.Seventy-seven patients with SSC system (SSC group) and 52 cases with ACP system (ACP group) from February 2007 to September 2013 were enrolled with well-matched demographics. Cervical alignment included C2-7 lordosis (CL), operated-segment cervical lordosis (OPCL), upper and lower adjacent-segment cervical lordosis, range of motion of upper and lower adjacent segment at preoperation, immediate postoperation, and the final follow-up. Clinical outcomes contained the neck disability index (NDI), the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analogous scale (VAS) of arm and neck and adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Patients were then divided into CL improved subgroup (IM subgroup) and non-improved subgroup (NIM subgroup).There were improvements on CL and OPCL in both groups. The change of CL and OPCL larger in ACP group (P < .05) but upper adjacent-segment cervical lordosis/lower adjacent-segment cervical lordosis and range of motion of upper adjacent segment/range of motion of lower adjacent segment were of no significance. NDI, JOA, and VAS got improvement in both groups at immediate postoperation and the final follow-up while ASD was in no difference between SSC and ACP group. A total of 80 patients (39 vs 41) acquired CL improvement with a larger population in ACP group. There were no differences on the rate of ASD, NDI, JOA, VAS, and their change between IM and NIM subgroup. The changes of CL were not correlated to NDI, JOA, VAS, and their change.SSC and ACP group both provide improved OPCL and efficacy on 3-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy with little impact on adjacent segment. The change of CL is not correlated to clinical outcomes.

The Effect of Smoking on the Fusion Rate of Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the fusion rate after spinal fusion surgery between smokers and nonsmokers. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science electronic databases through March 10, 2021 for cohort and case-control studies assessing the effect of smoking on the fusion rate of spinal fusion surgery. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan, version 5.4. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies, including 4 case-control studies and 22 cohort studies, with 4409 patients, were included in the present meta-analysis. Follow-up was at least 6 months. Overall, the pooled results demonstrated that the fusion rate of smokers after spinal fusion was significantly lower than that of nonsmokers. The odds ratio (OR) was 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.67, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analyses by fusion level showed the adverse effect of smoking on the fusion rate at single level (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.91, P = 0.02) was more significant than that of multiple levels (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.80, P = 0.0010). Subgroup analysis according to the type of bone graft revealed an apparent association between smoking and fusion rate in the autograft subgroup (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.66, P < 0.0001) but not in the allograft subgroup (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47-1.01, P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: The fusion rate of smokers is significantly lower than that of nonsmokers in spinal fusion surgery. Smokers should be encouraged to quit smoking to improve the outcome of spinal fusion surgery.

Management and results of early-onset scoliosis with dual magnetically controlled growing rods: Additional preliminary results of spinal fusion surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications of dual magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs) in the treatment of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) and to investigate the results of patients with definitive spinal fusion following MCGR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 15 patients (7 males, 8 females; mean age: 8.7±1.7 years; range, 6 to 10 years) with EOS who underwent dual MCGR and were prospectively followed between February 2013 and March 2019 were included in this retrospective study. The Cobb angle, thoracic kyphosis, and the length of the spine between T1-T12 and T1-S1 were measured on preoperative, postoperative, and follow-up radiographs. The 24-Item Early-Onset Scoliosis Questionnaire (EOSQ-24) was used to assess the functional outcomes before and after the operation. All complications during the treatment were recorded. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 27.8±10.4 (range, 12 to 60) months. The mean curve correction immediately after the index surgery and latest follow-up was 47.6% and 42.4%, respectively (p>0.05). At the last follow-up, there were no significant changes in mean Cobb and kyphosis angles. The mean T1-T12 length increase was 26.2±7.1 (range, 16 to 40) mm, while the mean T1-S1 length increase was 43.3±15.0 (range, 24 to 70) mm. Complications developed in four (26.6%) of 15 patients. Definitive spinal fusion surgery was performed in seven patients. Total mean Cobb angle difference between the final follow-up and fusion surgery was 9.3° (p=0.016) and kyphosis angle difference was -2.1° (p=0.349). After fusion surgery, total lengthening in T1-T12 and T1-S1 distance was 10.5 mm (p=0.036) and 15.0 mm (p=0.022), respectively. A significant increase in all subdomain scores of the EOSQ-24 (p<0.05), except for financial impact, was recorded in all patients. CONCLUSION: Dual MCGR technique is an effective, reliable, and robust treatment alternative for primary EOS. However, surgeons should be aware of the relatively high rate of complications. In addition, residual deformity can be corrected successfully with definitive surgery.

The Influence of Body Mass Index in Obese and Morbidly Obese Patients on Complications and 30- and 90-day Readmissions Following Lumbar Spine Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the 2013-2017 National Readmission Database. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify the influence of body mass index (BMI) on complication and readmission rates following lumbar spine fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Compared to controls, patients with BMI ≥35 had greater odds of readmission, infection, and wound complications following lumbar spine fusion. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective lumbar spine fusion within the population-based sample were considered for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included nonelective lumbar spine fusions, malnourished, anorexic, or underweight patients, and surgical indications of trauma or neoplasm. Patients were grouped by BMI: 18.5 to 29.9 (controls), 30 to 34.9 (obesity I), 35 to 39.9 (obesity II), and ≥40 (obesity III). Multivariate regression was performed to analyze differences in complications and readmissions between groups. Predictive modeling was conducted to estimate the impact of BMI on 30- and 90-day infection, wound complication, and readmissions rates. RESULTS: A total of 86,697 patients were included for analysis, with an average age of 58.9 years and 58.9% being female. The obesity II group had significantly higher odds of infection (odds ratio [OR]: 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28-2.62, P = 0.001), wound dehiscence (OR: 3.08, 95% CI: 1.70-6.18, P = 0.0006), and 30-day readmission (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.11-1.58, P = 0.002), whereas the obesity III group had significantly higher odds of acute renal failure (OR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.20-4.06, P = 0.014), infection (OR: 2.43, 95% CI: 1.72-3.48, P < 0.0001), wound dehiscence (OR: 3.76, 95% CI: 2.08-7.51, P < 0.0001), 30-day readmission (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.36-1.93, P < 0.0001), and 90-day readmission (OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.31-1.79, P < 0.0001) compared with controls. Predictive modeling showed cumulative increases of 6.44% in infection, 3.69% in wound dehiscence, and 1.35% in readmission within 90-days for each successive BMI cohort. CONCLUSION: Progressively higher risks for infection, wound complications, and hospital readmission were found with each progressive BMI level.Level of Evidence: 3.