Laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion for treating multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy.

Background: Laminectomy with fusion (LF) and laminoplasty (LP) are common posterior decompression procedures used to treat multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). There is debate on their relative efficacy and safety for treatment of DCM. The goal of this study is to examine outcomes and costs of LF and LP procedures for DCM. Methods: This is a retrospective review of adult patients (<18) at a single center who underwent elective LP and LF of at least 3 levels from C3-C7. Outcome measures included operative characteristics, inpatient mobility status, length of stay, complications, revision surgery, VAS neck pain scores, and changes in radiographic alignment. Oral opioid analgesic needs and hospital cost comparison were also assessed. Results: LP cohort (n=76) and LF cohort (n=59) reported no difference in neck pain at baseline, 1, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively (p>.05). Patients were successfully weaned off opioids at similar rates (LF: 88%, LP: 86%). Fixed and variable costs respectively with LF cases hospital were higher, 15.7% and 25.7% compared to LP cases (p=.03 and p<.001). LF has a longer length of stay (4.2 vs. 3.1 days, p=.001). Wound-related complications were 5 times more likely after LF (13.6% vs. 5.9%, RR: 5.15) and C5 palsy rates were similar across the groups (LF: 11.9% LP: 5.6% RR: 1.8). Ground-level falls requiring an emergency department visit were more likely after LF (11.9% vs. 2.6%, p=.04). Conclusions: When treating multilevel DCM, LP has similar rates of new or increasing axial neck pain compared to LF. LF was associated with greater hospital costs, length of stay, and complications compared to LP. LP may in fact be a less morbid and more cost-effective alternative to LF for patients without cervical deformity.

Sociodemographic Characteristics of Patients Undergoing Surgery for Metastatic Disease of the Spine.

INTRODUCTION: Some patients, particularly those who are socioeconomically deprived, are diagnosed with primary and/or metastatic cancer only after presenting to the emergency department. Our objective was to determine sociodemographic characteristics of patients undergoing surgery for metastatic spine disease at our institution. METHODS: This retrospective case series included patients 18 years and older who presented to the emergency department with metastatic spine disease requiring surgery. Demographics and survival data were collected. Sociodemographic characteristics were estimated using the Social Deprivation Index (SDI) and Area Deprivation Index (ADI) for the state of California. Univariate log-rank tests and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess differences in survival for predictors of interest. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2021, 64 patients underwent surgery for metastatic disease of the spine. The mean age was 61.0 ± 12.5 years, with 60.9% being male (n = 39). In this cohort, 89.1% of patients were non-Hispanic (n = 57), 71.9% were White (n = 46), and 62.5% were insured by Medicare/Medicaid (n = 40). The mean SDI and ADI were 61.5 ± 28.0 and 7.7 ± 2.2, respectively. 28.1% of patients (n = 18) were diagnosed with primary cancer for the first time while 39.1% of patients (n = 25) were diagnosed with metastatic cancer for the first time. During index hospitalization, 37.5% of patients (n = 24) received palliative care consult. The 3-month, 6-month, and all-time mortality rates were 26.7% (n = 17), 39.5% (n = 23), and 50% (n = 32), respectively, with 10.9% of patients (n = 7) dying during their admission. Payor plan was significant at 3 months ( P = 0.02), and palliative consultation was significant at 3 months ( P = 0.007) and 6 months ( P = 0.03). No notable association was observed with SDI and ADI in quantiles or as continuous variables. DISCUSSION: In this study, 28.1% of patients were diagnosed with cancer for the first time. Three-month and 6-month mortality rates for patients undergoing surgery were 26.7% and 39.5%, respectively. Furthermore, mortality was markedly associated with palliative care consultation and insurance status, but not with SDI and ADI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case series, Level III evidence.

A Comparison of Prognostic Models to Facilitate Surgical Decision-Making for Patients With Spinal Metastatic Disease.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: Compare the performance of and provide cutoff values for commonly used prognostic models for spinal metastases, including Revised Tokuhashi, Tomita, Modified Bauer, New England Spinal Metastases Score (NESMS), and Skeletal Oncology Research Group model, at three- and six-month postoperative time points. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgery may be recommended for patients with spinal metastases causing fracture, instability, pain, and/or neurological compromise. However, patients with less than three to six months of projected survival are less likely to benefit from surgery. Prognostic models have been developed to help determine prognosis and surgical candidacy. Yet, there is a lack of data directly comparing the performance of these models at clinically relevant time points or providing clinically applicable cutoff values for the models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four patients undergoing surgery from 2015 to 2022 for spinal metastatic disease were identified. Revised Tokuhashi, Tomita, Modified Bauer, NESMS, and Skeletal Oncology Research Group were calculated for each patient. Model calibration and discrimination for predicting survival at three months, six months, and final follow-up were evaluated using the Brier score and Uno's C, respectively. Hazard ratios for survival were calculated for the models. The Contral and O'Quigley method was utilized to identify cutoff values for the models discriminating between survival and nonsurvival at three months, six months, and final follow-up. RESULTS: Each of the models demonstrated similar performance in predicting survival at three months, six months, and final follow-up. Cutoff scores that best differentiated patients likely to survive beyond three months included the Revised Tokuhashi score=10, Tomita score=four, Modified Bauer score=three, and NESMS=one. CONCLUSION: We found comparable efficacy among the models in predicting survival at clinically relevant time points. Cutoff values provided herein may assist surgeons and patients when deciding whether to pursue surgery for spinal metastatic disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Socioeconomic and geographic disparities in pediatric scoliosis surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the population of pediatric patients undergoing surgery for scoliosis in California by gender, race, and ethnicity and identify any underlying differences in social determinants of health as measured by the child opportunity index (COI), social deprivation index (SDI), and insurance category among them. METHODS: This project extracted demographic reports including patient sex, race, zip code, insurance type, and associated diagnosis and procedure codes from the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). These data were combined with COI and SDI data, which further describe the socioeconomic environment of each patient. Census data were referenced to compare the population of patients receiving scoliosis procedures to the general population by race and ethnicity. Chi-square tests were performed for categorical data. Independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were performed for continuous data, with significance set at 0.05. RESULTS: Unfavorable SDI and COI scores were observed among males, Hispanics, and Black patients, and these patients were more likely to be covered by Medi-Cal. Length of stay was significantly higher among males and Medi-Cal recipients. CONCLUSION: The data demonstrate significant differences in social determinants of health as measured by race, ethnicity, gender, insurance type, COI, and SDI among patients ≤ 20 years undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis in California. The noted differences in socioeconomic status (SES) and insurance are known and/or expected to have an impact on access to quality health care, exposing a need for future studies to determine whether COI and SDI influence patient-reported outcomes after scoliosis surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.