Are Clinical or Surgical Outcomes Different Based on Whether the Same Surgeon or Hospital System Performs the Spine Revision?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of discontinuity in care by changing surgeons, health systems, or increased time to revision surgery on revision spine fusion surgical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Patients undergoing revision spine fusion experience worse outcomes than those undergoing primary lumbar surgery. Those requiring complex revisions are often transferred to tertiary or quaternary referral centers under the assumption that those institutions may be more accustomed at performing those procedures. However, there remains a paucity of literature assessing the impact of discontinuity of care in revision spinal fusions. METHODS: Patients who underwent revision 1-3 level lumbar spine fusion 2011-2021 were grouped based on (1) revision performed by the index surgeon versus a different surgeon, (2) revision performed within the same versus different hospital system as the index procedure, and (3) length of time from index procedure. Multivariate regression for outcomes controlled for confounding differences. RESULTS: A total of 776 revision surgeries were included. An increased time interval between the index procedure and the revision surgery was predictive of a lower risk for subsequent revision procedure (odds ratio: 0.57, P =0.022). Revision surgeries performed by the same surgeon predicted a reduced length of hospital stay (ß: -0.14, P =0.001). Neither time to revision nor undergoing by the same surgeon or same practice predicted 90-day readmission rates. Patients are less likely to report meaningful improvement in Mental Component Score-12 or Physical Component Score-12 if revision surgery was performed at a different hospital system. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have revision lumbar fusions have similar clinical outcomes regardless of whether their surgeon performed the index procedure. However, continuity of care with the same surgeon may reduce hospital length of stay and associated health care costs. The length of time between primary and revision surgery does not significantly impact patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Does Age and Medicare Status Affect Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if Medicare status and age affect clinical outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. METHODS: Patients who underwent cervical discectomy and fusion between 2014 and 2020 with complete preoperative and 1-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were grouped based on Medicare status and age: no Medicare under 65 years (NM < 65), Medicare under 65 years (M < 65), no Medicare 65 years or older (NM ≥ 65), and Medicare 65 years or older (M ≥ 65). Multivariate regression for ΔPROMs (Δ: postoperative minus preoperative) controlled for confounding differences between groups. Significant was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1288 patients were included, with each group improving in the visual analog score (VAS) Neck (all, P < 0.001), VAS Arm (M < 65: P = 0.003; remaining groups: P < 0.001), and Neck Disability Index (M < 65: P = 0.009; remaining groups: P < 0.001) following surgery. Only M < 65 did not significantly improve in the Physical Component Score (PCS-12) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score (P = 0.256 and P = 0.092, respectively). When comparing patients under 65 years, non-Medicare patients had better preoperative PCS-12 (P < 0.001), Neck Disability Index (P < 0.001), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (P < 0.001), as well as better postoperative values for all PROMs (P < 0.001), but there were no differences in ΔPROMs. Multivariate analysis identified M < 65 to be an independent predictor of decreased improvement in ΔPCS-12 (ß = -4.07, P = 0.015), ΔVAS Neck (ß = 1.17, P = 0.010), and ΔVAS Arm (ß = 1.15, P = 0.025) compared to NM < 65. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of age and Medicare status, all patients undergoing cervical discectomy and fusion had significant clinical improvement postoperatively. However, Medicare patients under age 65 have a smaller magnitude of improvement in PROMs.