Using Multimodal Assessments to Reevaluate Depression Designations for Spine Surgery Candidates.

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in spine surgery candidates and may influence postoperative outcomes. Ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) can overcome limitations of existing depression screening methods (e.g., recall bias, inaccuracy of historical diagnoses) by longitudinally monitoring depression symptoms in daily life. In this study, we compared EMA-based depression assessment with retrospective self-report (a 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]) and chart-based depression diagnosis in lumbar spine surgery candidates. We further examined the associations of each depression assessment method with surgical outcomes. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery (n = 122) completed EMAs quantifying depressive symptoms up to 5 times daily for 3 weeks preoperatively. Correlations (rank-biserial or Spearman) among EMA means, a chart-based depression history, and 1-time preoperative depression surveys (PHQ-9 and Psychache Scale) were analyzed. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to categorize PHQ-9 questions as somatic or non-somatic; subscores were compared with a propensity score-matched general population cohort. The associations of each screening modality with 6-month surgical outcomes (pain, disability, physical function, pain interference) were analyzed with multivariable regression. RESULTS: The association between EMA Depression scores and a depression history was weak (rrb = 0.34 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.14 to 0.52]). Moderate correlations with EMA-measured depression symptoms were observed for the PHQ-9 (rs = 0.51 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.63]) and the Psychache Scale (rs = 0.68 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.76]). Compared with the matched general population cohort, spine surgery candidates endorsed similar non-somatic symptoms but significantly greater somatic symptoms on the PHQ-9. EMA Depression scores had a stronger association with 6-month surgical outcomes than the other depression screening modalities did. CONCLUSIONS: A history of depression in the medical record is not a reliable indication of preoperative depression symptom severity. Cross-sectional depression assessments such as PHQ-9 have stronger associations with daily depression symptoms but may conflate somatic depression symptoms with spine-related disability. As an alternative to these methods, mobile health technology and EMAs provide an opportunity to collect real-time, longitudinal data on depression symptom severity, potentially improving prognostic accuracy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Preoperative Mobile Health Data Improve Predictions of Recovery From Lumbar Spine Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neurosurgeons and hospitals devote tremendous resources to improving recovery from lumbar spine surgery. Current efforts to predict surgical recovery rely on one-time patient report and health record information. However, longitudinal mobile health (mHealth) assessments integrating symptom dynamics from ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and wearable biometric data may capture important influences on recovery. Our objective was to evaluate whether a preoperative mHealth assessment integrating EMA with Fitbit monitoring improved predictions of spine surgery recovery. METHODS: Patients age 21-85 years undergoing lumbar surgery for degenerative disease between 2021 and 2023 were recruited. For up to 3 weeks preoperatively, participants completed EMAs up to 5 times daily asking about momentary pain, disability, depression, and catastrophizing. At the same time, they were passively monitored using Fitbit trackers. Study outcomes were good/excellent recovery on the Quality of Recovery-15 (QOR-15) and a clinically important change in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference 1 month postoperatively. After feature engineering, several machine learning prediction models were tested. Prediction performance was measured using the c-statistic. RESULTS: A total of 133 participants were included, with a median (IQR) age of 62 (53, 68) years, and 56% were female. The median (IQR) number of preoperative EMAs completed was 78 (61, 95), and the median (IQR) number of days with usable Fitbit data was 17 (12, 21). 63 patients (48%) achieved a clinically meaningful improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference. Compared with traditional evaluations alone, mHealth evaluations led to a 34% improvement in predictions for pain interference (c = 0.82 vs c = 0.61). 49 patients (40%) had a good or excellent recovery based on the QOR-15. Including preoperative mHealth data led to a 30% improvement in predictions of QOR-15 (c = 0.70 vs c = 0.54). CONCLUSION: Multimodal mHealth evaluations improve predictions of lumbar surgery outcomes. These methods may be useful for informing patient selection and perioperative recovery strategies.

AM-PAC Mobility Score <13 Predicts Development of Ileus Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) "6-Clicks" score is associated with the development of postoperative ileus. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery has a high complication rate. One common complication is postoperative ileus, and poor postoperative mobility has been implicated as a modifiable risk factor for this condition. METHODS: Eighty-five ASD surgeries in which ≥5 levels were fused were identified in a single institution database. A physical therapist/physiatrist collected patients' daily postoperative AM-PAC scores, for which we assessed first, last, and daily changes. We used multivariable linear regression to determine the marginal effect of ileus on continuous AM-PAC scores; threshold linear regression with Bayesian information criterion to identify a threshold AM-PAC score associated with ileus; and multivariable logistic regression to determine the utility of the score thresholds when controlling for confounding variables. RESULTS: Ten of 85 patients (12%) developed ileus. The mean day of developing ileus was postoperative day 3.3±2.35. The mean first and last AM-PAC scores were 16 and 18, respectively. On bivariate analysis, the mean first AM-PAC score was lower in patients with ileus than in those without (13 vs. 16; P<0.01). Ileus was associated with a first AM-PAC score of 3 points lower (Coef. -2.96; P<0.01) than that of patients without ileus. Patients with an AM-PAC score<13 had 8 times greater odds of developing ileus (P=0.023). Neither the last AM-PAC score nor the daily change in AM-PAC score was associated with ileus. CONCLUSIONS: In our institutional cohort, a first AM-PAC score of <13, corresponding to an inability to walk or stand for more than 1 minute, was associated with the development of ileus. Early identification of patients who cannot walk or stand after surgery can help determine which patients would benefit from prophylactic management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-III.

Impact of Controlled Versus Uncontrolled mFI-5 Frailty on Perioperative Complications After Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVES: We substratified the mFI-5 frailty index to reflect controlled and uncontrolled conditions and assess their relationship to perioperative complications. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Risk assessment before adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is critical because the surgery is highly invasive with a high complication rate. Although frailty is associated with risk of surgical complications, current frailty measures do not differentiate between controlled and uncontrolled conditions. METHODS: Frailty was calculated using the mFI-5 index for 170 ASD patients with fusion of ≥5 levels. Uncontrolled frailty was defined as blood pressure >140/90 mm Hg, HbA1C >7% or postprandial glucose >180 mg/dL, or recent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation, while on medication. Patients were divided into nonfrailty, controlled frailty, and uncontrolled frailty cohorts. The primary outcome measure was perioperative major and wound complications. Bivariate analysis was performed. Multivariable analysis assessed the relationship between frailty and perioperative complications. RESULTS: The cohorts included 97 nonfrail, 54 controlled frail, and 19 uncontrolled frail patients. Compared with nonfrail patients, patients with uncontrolled frailty were more likely to have age older than 60 years (84% vs. 24%), hyperlipidemia (42% vs. 20%), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score >42 (84% vs. 52%) (P<0.05 for all). Controlled frailty was associated with those older than 60 years (41% vs. 24%) and hyperlipidemia (52% vs. 20%) (P<0.05 for all). On multivariable regression analysis controlling for hyperlipidemia, functional independence, motor weakness, ODI>42, and age older than 60 years, patients with uncontrolled frailty had greater odds of major complications (OR 4.24, P=0.03) and wound complications (OR 9.47, P=0.046) compared with nonfrail patients. Controlled frailty was not associated with increased risk of perioperative complications (P>0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with uncontrolled frailty had higher risk of perioperative complications compared with nonfrail patients, patients with controlled frailty did not, suggesting the importance of controlling modifiable risk factors before surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Are insufficient corrections a major factor in distal junctional kyphosis? A simulated analysis of cervical deformity correction using in-construct measurements.

OBJECTIVE: The present study utilized recently developed in-construct measurements in simulations of cervical deformity surgery in order to assess undercorrection and predict distal junctional kyphosis (DJK). METHODS: A retrospective review of a database of operative cervical deformity patients was analyzed for severe DJK and mild DJK. C2-lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) sagittal angle (SA) was measured postoperatively, and the correction was simulated in the preoperative radiograph in order to match the C2-LIV by using the planning software. Linear regression analysis that used C2 pelvic angle (CPA) and pelvic tilt (PT) determined the simulated PT that matched the virtual CPA. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the C2-T1 SA, C2-T4 SA, and C2-T10 SA that corresponded to DJK of 20° and cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) of 40 mm. RESULTS: Sixty-nine cervical deformity patients were included. Severe and mild DJK occurred in 11 (16%) and 22 (32%) patients, respectively; 3 (4%) required DJK revision. Simulated corrections demonstrated that severe and mild DJK patients had worse alignment compared to non-DJK patients in terms of cSVA (42.5 mm vs 33.0 mm vs 23.4 mm, p < 0.001) and C2-LIV SVA (68.9 mm vs 57.3 mm vs 36.8 mm, p < 0.001). Linear regression revealed the relationships between in-construct measures (C2-T1 SA, C2-T4 SA, and C2-T10 SA), cSVA, and change in DJK (all R > 0.57, p < 0.001). A cSVA of 40 mm corresponded to C2-T4 SA of 10.4° and C2-T10 SA of 28.0°. A DJK angle change of 10° corresponded to C2-T4 SA of 5.8° and C2-T10 SA of 20.1°. CONCLUSIONS: Simulated cervical deformity corrections demonstrated that severe DJK patients have insufficient corrections compared to patients without DJK. In-construct measures assess sagittal alignment within the fusion separate from DJK and subjacent compensation. They can be useful as intraoperative tools to gauge the adequacy of cervical deformity correction.

Implications of Preoperative Depression for Lumbar Spine Surgery Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Comorbid depression is common among patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease. Although a well-researched topic, the evidence of the role of depression in spine surgery outcomes remains inconclusive. Objective: To investigate the association between preoperative depression and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after lumbar spine surgery. Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Scopus, PsychInfo, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed from database inception to September 14, 2023. Study Selection: Included studies involved adults undergoing lumbar spine surgery and compared PROMs in patients with vs those without depression. Studies evaluating the correlation between preoperative depression and disease severity were also included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: All data were independently extracted by 2 authors and independently verified by a third author. Study quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize data, and I2 was used to assess heterogeneity. Metaregression was performed to identify factors explaining the heterogeneity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the standardized mean difference (SMD) of change from preoperative baseline to postoperative follow-up in PROMs of disability, pain, and physical function for patients with vs without depression. Secondary outcomes were preoperative and postoperative differences in absolute disease severity for these 2 patient populations. Results: Of the 8459 articles identified, 44 were included in the analysis. These studies involved 21 452 patients with a mean (SD) age of 57 (8) years and included 11 747 females (55%). Among these studies, the median (range) follow-up duration was 12 (6-120) months. The pooled estimates of disability, pain, and physical function showed that patients with depression experienced a greater magnitude of improvement compared with patients without depression, but this difference was not significant (SMD, 0.04 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.10]; I2 = 75%; P = .21). Nonetheless, patients with depression presented with worse preoperative disease severity in disability, pain, and physical function (SMD, -0.52 [95% CI, -0.62 to -0.41]; I2 = 89%; P < .001), which remained worse postoperatively (SMD, -0.52 [95% CI, -0.75 to -0.28]; I2 = 98%; P < .001). There was no significant correlation between depression severity and the primary outcome. A multivariable metaregression analysis suggested that age, sex (male to female ratio), percentage of comorbidities, and follow-up attrition were significant sources of variance. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that, although patients with depression had worse disease severity both before and after surgery compared with patients without depression, they had significant potential for recovery in disability, pain, and physical function. Further investigations are needed to examine the association between spine-related disability and depression as well as the role of perioperative mental health treatments.

Predicting major complications and discharge disposition after adult spinal deformity surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Several spine-specific comorbidity indices are available to help risk-stratify patients before they undergo invasive spine procedures. Studies of patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) typically use the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), which is not specific to spine patients. PURPOSE: To compare the CCI with the Seattle Spine Score (SSS), the Adult Spinal Deformity-Comorbidity Score (ASD-CS), and the Modified 5-Item Frailty Index (mFI-5) and identify which tool more accurately predicted major perioperative complications and discharge disposition after ASD surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with ASD who underwent spinal arthrodesis of at least four levels at a single institution. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported measures include SSS, ASD-CS, and mFI-5. Functional measures include the CCI. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of 164 patients with ASD who underwent spinal arthrodesis of ≥ four levels from January 2008 to February 2018 at our U.S. academic tertiary care center and who had available Oswestry Disability Index values. To assess the predictive ability of the comorbidity indices, we created five multivariable logistic regression models, with the presence of major complications and discharge disposition (home or inpatient rehabilitation) as the primary outcome variables. The base model used validated demographic and surgical factors that were predictors of complications and outcomes in those with ASD and within the broader spinal literature. The other four models used the base model along with one of the four indices. The predictive ability of each model was compared using goodness-of-fit testing, with higher pseudo-R2 values and lower Akaike information criteria (AIC) values indicating better model fit. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients (19%) experienced major perioperative complications, and 68 (42%) were discharged to inpatient rehabilitation facilities (vs home). The model using the SSS had the highest pseudo-R2 value and lowest AIC value for both major complications and discharge disposition. The mFI-5 had a similar predictive ability. The models using the CCI and ASD-CS were weaker predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the CCI and the ASD-CS, the SSS and the mFI-5 were strong predictors of major complications and discharge disposition after ASD surgery. These results suggest that the SSS and the mFI-5 are preferable to the CCI for clinical risk stratification and outcomes research in patients undergoing ASD surgery.

Measuring Value in Spine Care Using the PROMIS-Preference Scoring System.

BACKGROUND: A transition to value-based care requires a thorough understanding of the costs and impacts of various interventions on patients' overall health utility. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has gained popularity and is frequently used to assess physical, mental, and social health domains in clinical and research settings. To assess health utility, the PROMIS-Preference (PROPr) score, a societal preference-based measure, has been proposed to produce a single estimate of health utility. We determined the psychometric properties (validity and responsiveness) of the PROPr score as a health state utility measure in patients undergoing spine surgery. We hypothesized that PROPr score would be lower in the presence of comorbid conditions and lower socioeconomic status and in those with more severe pain-related disability and would be responsive to changes in health status following spine surgery. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 904 adults presented for cervical (n = 359) and/or lumbar (n = 622) conditions, and 624 underwent surgery, from August 2019 through January 2022. To assess concurrent validity, we correlated the PROPr score with Neck Disability Index (NDI)/Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) values. To assess known-groups validity, we regressed the PROPr score on participant age, sex, pain-related disability, and social determinants of health. To assess responsiveness, we used an anchor-based approach, evaluating change from preoperatively to 6 and 12 months postoperatively anchored by the Patient Global Impression of Change. A p level of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The median overall preoperative PROPr score was 0.20 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.10 to 0.32; range, -0.02 to 0.95). The PROPr score was associated with higher educational attainment (p = 0.01), higher household income (p < 0.001), and a greater number of comorbid conditions (p = 0.04). The median PROPr score decreased (worse health utility) with greater disability (NDI, 0.44 [none] to 0.09 [severe/complete], p < 0.001; ODI, 0.57 [none] to 0.08 [severe/complete], p < 0.001). The change in the median PROPr score differed in participants who rated their postoperative health as improved (0.17) compared with little or no change (0.04; p < 0.001) or worse (-0.06; p = 0.025) at 6 months and in those who rated their health as improved (0.15) compared with little or no change (0.02; p < 0.001) or worse (-0.05; p = 0.043) at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The PROPr score is a valid and responsive preference-based assessment of health utility for patients undergoing spine surgery. It can be calculated from PROMIS outcome data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Inflation-adjusted medicare physician reimbursement for adult spinal deformity surgery substantially declined from 2002 to 2020.

PURPOSE: Physician fees for orthopaedic surgeons by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) are increasingly scrutinized. The present retrospective review aims to assess whether adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries are properly valued for Medicare reimbursement. METHODS: Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes related to posterior fusion of spinal deformity of ≤ 6, 7-12, and ≥ 13 vertebral levels, as well as additional arthrodesis and osteotomy levels, were assessed for (1) Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) from 2002 to 2020, calculated using physician fee data from the CMS Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool; and (2) work relative value units (RVUs) per operative minute, using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. RESULTS: From 2002 to 2020, all CPT codes for ASD surgery had negative inflation-adjusted CAGRs (range, - 18.49% to - 27.66%). Mean physician fees for spinal fusion declined by 26.02% (CAGR, - 1.66%) in ≤ 6-level fusion, 27.91% (CAGR, - 1.80%) in 7- to 12-level fusion, and 28.25% (CAGR, - 1.83%) ≥ 13-level fusion. Fees for both 7-12 (P < 0.00001) and ≥ 13 levels (P < 0.00001) declined more than those for fusion of ≤ 6 vertebral levels. RVU per minute was lower for 7- to 12-level and ≥ 13-level (P < 0.00001 for both) ASD surgeries than for ≤ 6-level. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement for ASD surgery declined overall. CAGR for fusions of ≥ 7 levels were lower than those for fusions of ≤ 6 levels. For 2012-2018, ≥ 7-level fusions had lower RVU per minute than ≤ 6-level fusions. Revaluation of Medicare reimbursement for longer-level ASD surgeries may be warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Avoiding Pitfalls in Adult Spinal Deformity.

To avoid the high rate of complications associated with the surgical management of adult spinal deformity, it is important to recognize and avoid three major pitfalls. The first is patient selection and determining which cases are appropriately indicated. The second is optimizing modifiable medical issues that can lead to a poor outcome, such as smoking, vitamin D deficiency, nutritional status, and poor bone quality. The third is optimizing surgical factors such as defining clinically appropriate, patient-specific target alignment goals as well as using techniques to avoid proximal junctional kyphosis and proximal junctional failure. It is important to describe these three key pitfalls that are commonly seen in the treatment of patients with adult spinal deformity and to describe methods to avoid them.

Trends in usage of navigation and robotic assistance in elective spine surgeries: a study of 105,212 cases from 2007 to 2015.

OBJECTIVE: Identify trends of navigation and robotic-assisted elective spine surgeries. METHODS: Elective spine surgery patients between 2007 and 2015 in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) were isolated by ICD-9 codes for Navigation [Nav] or Robotic [Rob]-Assisted surgery. Basic demographics and surgical variables were identified via chi-squared and t tests. Each system was analyzed from 2007 to 2015 for trends in usage. RESULTS: Included 3,759,751 patients: 100,488 Nav; 4724 Rob. Nav were younger (56.7 vs 62.7 years), had lower comorbidity index (1.8 vs 6.2, all p < 0.05), more decompressions (79.5 vs 42.6%) and more fusions (60.3 vs 52.6%) than Rob. From 2007 to 2015, incidence of complication increased for Nav (from 5.8 to 21.7%) and Rob (from 3.3 to 18.4%) as well as 2-3 level fusions (from 50.4 to 52.5%) and (from 1.3 to 3.2%); respectively. Invasiveness increased for both (Rob: from 1.7 to 2.2; Nav: from 3.7 to 4.6). Posterior approaches (from 27.4 to 41.3%), osteotomies (from 4 to 7%), and fusions (from 40.9 to 54.2%) increased in Rob. Anterior approach for Rob decreased from 14.9 to 14.4%. Nav increased posterior (from 51.5% to 63.9%) and anterior approaches (from 16.4 to 19.2%) with an increase in osteotomies (from 2.1 to 2.7%) and decreased decompressions (from 73.6 to 63.2%). CONCLUSIONS: From 2007 to 2015, robotic and navigation systems have been performed on increasingly invasive spine procedures. Robotic systems have shifted from anterior to posterior approaches, whereas navigation computer-assisted procedures have decreased in rates of usage for decompression procedures.

Abnormal Postoperative PROMIS Scores are Associated with Patient Satisfaction in Adult Spinal Deformity and Degenerative Spine Patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 1) patient satisfaction after adult spine surgery; 2) associations between number of abnormal PROMIS domain scores and postoperative satisfaction; and 3) associations between normalization of a patient's worst preoperative PROMIS domain score and postoperative satisfaction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although "legacy" patient-reported outcome measures correlate with patient satisfaction after adult spine surgery, it is unclear whether PROMIS scores do. METHODS: We included 1119 patients treated operatively for degenerative spine disease (DSD) or adult spinal deformity (ASD) from 2014-2019 at our tertiary hospital who completed questionnaires preoperatively and at ≥1 postoperative timepoints up to 2 years. Postoperative satisfaction was measured in ASD patients using items 21 and 22 from the SRS 22-revised questionnaire and in DSD patients using the NASS Patient Satisfaction Index. "Worst" preoperative PROMIS domain was that with the greatest clinically negative deviation from the mean. "Normalization" was a postoperative score within 1 standard deviation of the general population mean. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with satisfaction. RESULTS: Satisfaction was reported by 88% of DSD and 86% of ASD patients at initial postoperative follow-up; this proportion did not change during the first year after surgery. We observed an inverse relationship between postoperative satisfaction and number of abnormal PROMIS domains at all postoperative timepoints beyond 6 weeks. Only among ASD patients was normalization of the worst preoperative PROMIS domain associated with greater odds of satisfaction at all timepoints up to 1 year. CONCLUSION: The proportion of DSD and ASD patients satisfied postoperatively did not change from 6 weeks to 1 year. Normalizing the worst preoperative PROMIS domain and minimizing the number of abnormal postoperative PROMIS scores may reduce the number of dissatisfied patients. PROMIS data can guide perioperative patient management to improve satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Sarcopenia as a Risk Factor for Complications Following Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine if sarcopenia is an independent risk factor for complications in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients undergoing pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) and define categories of complication risk by sarcopenia severity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Sarcopenia is linked to morbidity and mortality in several orthopedic procedures. Data concerning sarcopenia in ASD surgery is limited, particularly with respect to complex techniques performed such as PSO. With the high surgical burden of PSOs, appropriate patient selection is critical for minimizing complications. METHODS: We identified 73 ASD patients with lumbar CT/MRI scans who underwent PSO with spinal fusion ≥5 levels at a tertiary care center from 2005 to 2014. Sarcopenia was assessed by the psoas-lumbar vertebral index (PLVI). Using stratum-specific likelihood ratio analysis, patients were separated into 3 sarcopenia groups by complication risk. The primary outcome measure was any 2-year complication. Secondary outcome measures included intraoperative blood loss and length of stay. RESULTS: The mean PLVI was 0.84±0.28, with 47% of patients having complications. Patients with a complication had a 27% lower PLVI on average than those without complications (0.76 vs. 0.91, P=0.021). Stratum-specific likelihood ratio analysis produced 3 complication categories: 32% complication rate for PLVI ≥ 0.81; 61% for PLVI 0.60-0.80; and 69% for PLVI < 0.60. Relative to patients with PLVI ≥ 0.81, those with PLVI 0.60-0.80 and PLVI < 0.60 had 3.2× and 4.3× greater odds of developing a complication (P<0.05). For individual complications, patients with PLVI < 1.0 had a significantly higher risk of proximal junctional kyphosis (34% vs. 0%, P=0.022), while patients with PLVI < 0.8 had a significantly higher risk of wound infection (12% vs. 0%, P=0.028) and dural tear (14% vs. 0%, P=0.019). There were no significant associations between sarcopenia, intraoperative blood loss, and length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing severity of sarcopenia is associated with a significantly and incrementally increased risk of complications following ASD surgery that require PSO. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Does decompression adjacent to arthrodesis in the lumbar spine predispose patients to adjacent segment degeneration and disease: A retrospective analysis.

Background: The treatment for multi-level spinal stenosis in the setting of single-level instability is a common operative scenario for surgeons who treat degenerative lumbar spine pathology. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the inclusion of adjacent "stable" levels in the arthrodesis construct because of the potential for iatrogenic instability placed on those segments with decompressive laminectomy alone. This study aims to determine whether decompression adjacent to arthrodesis in the lumbar spine is a risk factor for adjacent segment disease (AS Disease). Methods: A retrospective analysis identified consecutive patients over a three-year period who underwent single-level posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in the setting of single or multi-level spinal stenosis. Patients were required to have a minimum of two-year follow-up. AS Disease was defined as the development of new radicular symptoms referable to a motion segment adjacent to the lumbar arthrodesis construct. The incidence of AS Disease and reoperation rates were compared between cohorts. Results: 133 patients met the inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 54 months. Fifty-four patients had a PLF with adjacent segment decompression, and 79 underwent a single-segment decompression and PLF. 24.1% (13/54) of patients who had a PLF with adjacent level decompression developed AS Disease resulting in a 5.5% (3/54) reoperation rate. 15.2% (12/79) of patients who did not receive an adjacent level decompression developed AS Disease resulting in a reoperation rate of 7.5% (6/79). There was neither a significantly higher rate of AS Disease (p = 0.26) nor reoperation (p = 0.74) between the cohorts. Conclusions: Decompression adjacent to single-level PLF was not associated with an increased rate of AS Disease relative to single-level decompression and PLF.

ExoDx prostate test as a predictor of outcomes of high-grade prostate cancer - an interim analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient outcomes were assessed based on a pre-biopsy ExoDx Prostate (EPI) score at 2.5 years of the 5-year follow-up of ongoing prostate biopsy Decision Impact Trial of the ExoDx Prostate (IntelliScore). METHODS: Prospective, blinded, randomized, multisite clinical utility study was conducted from June 2017 to May 2018 (NCT03235687). Urine samples were collected from 1049 men (≥50 years old) with a PSA 2-10 ng/mL being considered for a prostate biopsy. Patients were randomized to EPI vs. standard of care (SOC). All had an EPI test, but only EPI arm received results during biopsy decision process. Clinical outcomes, time to biopsy and pathology were assessed among low (<15.6) or high (≥15.6) EPI scores. RESULTS: At 2.5 years, 833 patients had follow-up data. In the EPI arm, biopsy rates remained lower for low-risk EPI scores than high-risk EPI scores (44.6% vs 79.0%, p < 0.001), whereas biopsy rates were identical in SOC arm regardless of EPI score (59.6% vs 58.8%, p = 0.99). Also in the EPI arm, the average time from EPI testing to first biopsy was longer for low-risk EPI scores compared to high-risk EPI scores (216 vs. 69 days; p < 0.001). Similarly, the time to first biopsy was longer with EPI low-risk scores in EPI arm compared to EPI low-risk scores in SOC arm (216 vs 80 days; p < 0.001). At 2.5 years, patients with low-risk EPI scores from both arms had less HGPC than high-risk EPI score patients (7.9% vs 26.8%, p < 0.001) and the EPI arm found 21.8% more HGPC than the SOC arm. CONCLUSIONS: This follow-up analysis captures subsequent biopsy outcomes and demonstrates that men receiving EPI low-risk scores (<15.6) significantly defer the time to first biopsy and remain at a very low pathologic risk by 2.5-years after the initial study. The EPI test risk stratification identified low-risk patients that were not found with the SOC.

Predicting 30-day mortality after surgery for metastatic disease of the spine: the H2-FAILS score.

PURPOSE: Scoring systems for metastatic spine disease focus on predicting long- to medium-term mortality or a combination of perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, accurate prediction of perioperative mortality alone may be the most important factor when considering surgical intervention. We aimed to develop and evaluate a new tool, the H2-FAILS score, to predict 30-day mortality after surgery for metastatic spine disease. METHODS: Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, we identified 1195 adults who underwent surgery for metastatic spine disease from 2010 to 2018. Incidence of 30-day mortality was 8.7% (n = 104). Independent predictors of 30-day mortality were used to derive the H2-FAILS score. H2-FAILS is an acronym for: Heart failure (2 points), Functional dependence, Albumin deficiency, International normalized ratio elevation, Leukocytosis, and Smoking (1 point each). Discrimination was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The H2-FAILS score was compared with the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA Class), the 5-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-5), and the New England Spinal Metastasis Score (NESMS). Internal validation was performed using bootstrapping. Alpha = 0.05. RESULTS: Predicted 30-day mortality was 1.8% for an H2-FAILS score of 0 and 78% for a score of 6. AUC of the H2-FAILS was 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.72-0.81), which was higher than the mFI-5 (AUC 0.58, p < 0.001), ASA Class (AUC 0.63, p < 0.001), and NESMS (AUC 0.70, p = 0.004). Internal validation showed an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.76. CONCLUSIONS: The H2-FAILS score accurately predicts 30-day mortality after surgery for spinal metastasis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic level III.

Pain Self-Efficacy (PSEQ) score of <22 is associated with daily opioid use, back pain, disability, and PROMIS scores in patients presenting for spine surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Pain self-efficacy, or the belief that one can carry out activities despite pain, has been shown to be associated with back and neck pain severity. However, the literature correlating psychosocial factors to opioid use, barriers to proper opioid use, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores is sparse. PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to determine whether pain self-efficacy is associated with daily opioid use in patients presenting for spine surgery. The secondary aim was to determine whether there exists a threshold self-efficacy score that is predictive of daily preoperative opioid use and subsequently to correlate this threshold score with opioid beliefs, disability, resilience, patient activation, and PROMIS scores. PATIENT SAMPLE: Five hundred seventy-eight elective spine surgery patients (286 females; mean age of 55 years) from a single institution were included in this study. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OUTCOME MEASURES: PROMIS scores, daily opioid use, opioid beliefs, disability, patient activation, resilience. METHODS: Elective spine surgery patients at a single institution completed questionnaires preoperatively. Pain self-efficacy was measured by the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ). Threshold linear regression with Bayesian information criteria was utilized to identify the optimal threshold associated with daily opioid use. Multivariable analysis controlled for age, sex, education, income, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and PROMIS-29, version 2 scores. RESULTS: Of 578 patients, 100 (17.3%) reported daily opioid use. Threshold regression identified a PSEQ cutoff score of <22 as predictive of daily opioid use. On multivariable logistic regression, patients with a PSEQ score <22 had two times greater odds of being daily opioid users than those with a score ≥22. Further, PSEQ <22 was associated with lower patient activation; increased leg and back pain; higher ODI; higher PROMIS pain, fatigue, depression, and sleep scores; and lower PROMIS physical function and social satisfaction scores (p<.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting for elective spine surgery, a PSEQ score of <22 is associated with twice the odds of reporting daily opioid use. Further, this threshold is associated with greater pain, disability, fatigue, and depression. A PSEQ score <22 can identify patients at high risk for daily opioid use and can guide targeted rehabilitation to optimize postoperative quality of life.

Preoperative patient activation predicts minimum clinically important difference for PROMIS pain and physical function in patients undergoing elective spine surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Patient activation is a patient's willingness to take independent actions to manage their own health care. PURPOSE: The goal of this study is to determine whether preoperative patient activation measure (PAM) predicts minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain, physical function, depression, and anxiety for patients undergoing elective spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review. PATIENT SAMPLE: A single-institution, academic database of patients undergoing elective spine surgery. OUTCOME MEASURE: MCID at 1-year follow-up for PROMIS pain, physical function, depression and anxiety. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a single-institution, academic database of patients undergoing elective spine surgery. Preoperative patient activation was evaluated using the PAM-13 survey, which was used to stratify patients into four activation stages. Primary outcome variable was achieving MCID at 1-year follow-up for PROMIS pain and physical function. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine impact of patient activation on PROMIS pain and the physical function. RESULTS: Of the 430 patients, 220 (51%) were female with a mean age of 58.2±16.8. Preoperatively, 34 (8%) were in activation stage 1, 45 (10%) in stage 2, 98 (23%) in stage 3, and 253 (59%) in stage 4. At 1-year follow up, 248 (58%) achieved MCID for PROMIS physical function, 256 (60%) achieved MCID for PROMIS pain, 151 (35.28%) achieved MCID for PROMIS depression, and 197 (46%) achieved MCID for PROMIS anxiety. For PROMIS physical function, when compared to patients at stage 1 activation, patients at stage 2 (aOR:3.49, 95% CI:1.27, 9.59), stage 3 (aOR:3.54, 95% CI:1.40, 8.98) and stage 4 (aOR:7.88, 95% CI:3.29, 18.9) were more likely to achieve MCID. For PROMIS pain, when compared against patients at stage 1, patients at stage 3 (aOR:2.82, 95% CI:1.18, 6.76) and stage 4 (aOR:5.44, 95% CI:2.41, 12.3) were more likely to achieve MCID. For PROMIS depression, when compared against patients at stage 1, patients at stage 4 were more likely to achieve MCID (Adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR):2.59, 95% CI:1.08-6.19). For PROMIS anxiety, when compared against patients at stage 1, stage 3 (Adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR):3.21, 95% CI:1.20-8.57), and stage 4 (aOR:5.56, 95% CI:2.20-14.01) were more likely to achieve MCID. CONCLUSION: Patients at higher stages of activation were more likely to achieve MCID for PROMIS pain, physical function, depression, and anxiety at 1-year follow-up. Routine preoperative assessment of patient activation may help identify patients at risk of poor outcomes.

Return to work after adult spinal deformity surgery.

PURPOSE: To determine the proportions of patients returning to work at various points after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery and the associations between surgical invasiveness and time to return to work. METHODS: Using a multicenter database of patients treated surgically for ASD from 2008 to 2015, we identified 188 patients (mean age 51 ± 15 years) who self-reported as employed preoperatively and had 2-year follow-up. Per the ASD-Surgical and Radiographical Invasiveness Index (ASD-SR), 118 patients (63%) underwent high-invasiveness (HI) surgery (ASD-SR ≥ 100) and 70 (37%) had low-invasiveness (LI) surgery (ASD-SR < 100). Patients who self-reported ≥ 75% normal level of work/school activity were considered to be working full time. Chi-squared and Fisher exact tests were used to compare categorical variables (α = .05). RESULTS: Preoperatively, 69% of employed patients worked full time. Postoperatively, 15% of employed patients were full time at 6 weeks, 70% at 6 months, 83% at 1 year, and 84% at 2 years. Percentage of employed patients working full time at 2 years was greater than preoperatively (p < .001); percentage of patients returning to full time at 6 weeks was lower in the HI (5%) than in the LI group (19%) (p = .03), a difference not significant at later points. CONCLUSIONS: Most adults returned to full-time work after ASD surgery. A smaller percentage of patients in the HI group than in the LI group returned to full-time work at 6 weeks. Patients employed full time preoperatively will likely return to full-time employment after ASD surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.