Postoperative Discharge to Acute Rehabilitation or Skilled Nursing Facility Compared With Home Does Not Reduce Hospital Readmissions, Return to Surgery, or Improve Outcomes Following Adult Spine Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity (ASD) study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate 30-day readmissions, 90-day return to surgery, postoperative complications, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for matched ASD patients receiving nonhome discharge (NON), including acute rehabilitation (REHAB), and skilled nursing facility (SNF), or home (HOME) discharge following ASD surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Postoperative disposition following ASD surgery frequently involves nonhome discharge. Little data exists for longer term outcomes for ASD patients receiving nonhome discharge versus patients discharged to home. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surgically treated ASD patients prospectively enrolled into a multicenter study were assessed for NON or HOME disposition following hospital discharge. NON was further divided into REHAB or SNF. Propensity score matching was used to match for patient age, frailty, spine deformity, levels fused, and osteotomies performed at surgery. Thirty-day hospital readmissions, 90-day return to surgery, postoperative complications, and 1-year and minimum 2-year postoperative PROs were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 241 of 374 patients were eligible for the study. NON patients were identified and matched to HOME patients. Following matching, 158 patients remained for evaluation; NON and HOME had similar preoperative age, frailty, spine deformity magnitude, surgery performed, and duration of hospital stay ( P >0.05). Thirty-day readmissions, 90-day return to surgery, and postoperative complications were similar for NON versus HOME and similar for REHAB (N=64) versus SNF (N=42) versus HOME ( P >0.05). At 1-year and minimum 2-year follow-up, HOME demonstrated similar to better PRO scores including Oswestry Disability Index, Short-Form 36v2 questionnaire Mental Component Score and Physical Component Score, and Scoliosis Research Society scores versus NON, REHAB, and SNF ( P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Acute needs must be considered following ASD surgery, however, matched analysis comparing 30-day hospital readmissions, 90-day return to surgery, postoperative complications, and PROs demonstrated minimal benefit for NON, REHAB, or SNF versus HOME at 1- and 2-year follow-up, questioning the risk and cost/benefits of routine use of nonhome discharge. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-prognostic.

The Case for Operative Efficiency in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Impact of Operative Time on Complications, Length of Stay, Alignment, Fusion Rates, and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of operative room (OR) time in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery on patient outcomes. BACKGROUND: It is currently unknown if OR time in ASD patients matched for deformity severity and surgical invasiveness is associated with patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients with baseline and two-year postoperative radiographic and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) data, undergoing a posterior-only approach for long fusion (>L1-Ilium) were included. Patients were grouped into short OR time (<40th percentile: <359 min) and long OR time (>60th percentile: >421 min). Groups were matched by age, baseline deformity severity, and surgical invasiveness. Demographics, radiographic, PROM data, fusion rate, and complications were compared between groups at baseline and two years follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 270 patients were included for analysis: the mean OR time was 286 minutes in the short OR group versus 510 minutes in the long OR group ( P <0.001). Age, gender, percent of revision cases, surgical invasiveness, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis, sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic tilt were comparable between groups ( P >0.05). Short OR had a slightly lower body mass index than the short OR group ( P <0.001) and decompression was more prevalent in the long OR time ( P =0.042). Patients in the long group had greater hospital length of stay ( P =0.02); blood loss ( P <0.001); proportion requiring intensive care unit ( P =0.003); higher minor complication rate ( P =0.001); with no significant differences for major complications or revision procedures ( P >0.5). Both groups had comparable radiographic fusion rates ( P =0.152) and achieved improvement in sagittal alignment measures, Oswestry disability index, and Short Form-36 ( P <0.001). CONCLUSION: Shorter OR time for ASD correction is associated with a lower minor complication rate, a lower estimated blood loss, fewer intensive care unit admissions, and a shorter hospital length of stay without sacrificing alignment correction or PROMs. Maximizing operative efficiency by minimizing OR time in ASD surgery has the potential to benefit patients, surgeons, and hospital systems.

Lumbar Lordosis Redistribution and Segmental Correction in Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD): Does it Matter?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the impact of correcting to normative segmental lordosis values on post-operative outcomes. BACKGROUND: Restoring lumbar lordosis magnitude is crucial in adult spinal deformity surgery, but the optimal location and segmental distribution remains unclear. METHODS: Patients were grouped based on offset to normative segmental lordosis values, extracted from recent publications. Matched patients were within 10% of the cohort's mean offset, less than or over 10% were under- and over-corrected. Surgical technique, PROMs, and surgical complications were compared across groups at baseline and 2-year. RESULTS: 510 patients with an average age of 64.6, mean CCI 2.08, and average follow-up of 25 months. L4-5 was least likely to be matched (19.1%), while L4-S1 was the most likely (24.3%). More patients were overcorrected at proximal levels (T10-L2; Undercorrected, U: 32.2% vs. Matched, M: 21.7% vs. Overcorrected, O: 46.1%) and undercorrected at distal levels (L4-S1: U: 39.0% vs. M: 24.3% vs. O: 36.8%). Postoperative ODI was comparable across correction groups at all spinal levels except at L4-S1 and T10-L2/L4-S1, where overcorrected patients and matched were better than undercorrected (U: 32.1 vs. M: 25.4 vs. O: 26.5, P=0.005; U: 36.2 vs. M: 24.2 vs. O: 26.8, P=0.001; respectively). Patients overcorrected at T10-L2 experienced higher rates of proximal junctional failure (PJF) (U: 16.0% vs. M: 15.6% vs. O: 32.8%, P<0.001) and had greater posterior inclination of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) (U: -9.2±9.4° vs. M: -9.6±9.1° vs. O: -12.2±10.0°, P<0.001), whereas undercorrection at these levels led to higher rates of revision for implant failure (U: 14.2% vs. M: 7.3% vs. O: 6.4%, P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing fusion for adult spinal deformity suffer higher rates of PJF with overcorrection and increased rates of implant failure with undercorrection based on normative segmental lordosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Hip Osteoarthritis in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Severe Adult Spinal Deformity: Prevalence and Impact on Spine Surgery Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is common in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Limited data exist on the prevalence of hip OA in patients with ASD, or on its impact on baseline and postoperative alignment and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Therefore, this paper will assess the prevalence and impact of hip OA on alignment and PROMs. METHODS: Patients with ASD who underwent L1-pelvis or longer fusions were included. Two independent reviewers graded hip OA with the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification and stratified it by severity into non-severe (KL grade 1 or 2) and severe (KL grade 3 or 4). Radiographic parameters and PROMs were compared among 3 patient groups: Hip-Spine (hip KL grade 3 or 4 bilaterally), Unilateral (UL)-Hip (hip KL grade 3 or 4 unilaterally), or Spine (hip KL grade 1 or 2 bilaterally). RESULTS: Of 520 patients with ASD who met inclusion criteria for an OA prevalence analysis, 34% (177 of 520) had severe bilateral hip OA and unilateral or bilateral hip arthroplasty had been performed in 8.7% (45 of 520). A subset of 165 patients had all data components and were examined: 68 Hip-Spine, 32 UL-Hip, and 65 Spine. Hip-Spine patients were older (67.9 ± 9.5 years, versus 59.6 ± 10.1 years for Spine and 65.8 ± 7.5 years for UL-Hip; p < 0.001) and had a higher frailty index (4.3 ± 2.6, versus 2.7 ± 2.0 for UL-Hip and 2.9 ± 2.0 for Spine; p < 0.001). At 1 year, the groups had similar lumbar lordosis, yet the Hip-Spine patients had a worse sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) measurement (45.9 ± 45.5 mm, versus 25.1 ± 37.1 mm for UL-Hip and 19.0 ± 39.3 mm for Spine; p = 0.001). Hip-Spine patients also had worse Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Summary scores at baseline (25.7 ± 9.3, versus 28.7 ± 9.8 for UL-Hip and 31.3 ± 10.5 for Spine; p = 0.005) and 1 year postoperatively (34.5 ± 11.4, versus 40.3 ± 10.4 for UL-Hip and 40.1 ± 10.9 for Spine; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: This study of operatively treated ASD revealed that 1 in 3 patients had severe hip OA bilaterally. Such patients with severe bilateral hip OA had worse baseline SVA and PROMs that persisted 1 year following ASD surgery, despite correction of lordosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Restoring L4-S1 Lordosis Shape in Severe Sagittal Deformity: Impact of Correction Techniques on Alignment and Complication Profile.

BACKGROUND: Severe sagittal plane deformity with loss of L4-S1 lordosis is disabling and can be improved through various surgical techniques. However, data are limited on the differing ability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to achieve alignment goals in severely malaligned patients. METHODS: Severe adult spinal deformity patients with preoperative PI-LL >20°, L4-S1 lordosis <30°, and full body radiographs and PROMs at baseline and 6-week postoperative visit were included. Patients were grouped into ALIF (1-2 level ALIF at L4-S1), PSO (L4/L5 PSO), and TLIF (1-2 level TLIF at L4-S1). Comparative analyses were performed on demographics, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs. RESULTS: Among the 96 included patients, 40 underwent ALIF, 27 underwent PSO, and 29 underwent TLIF. At baseline, cohorts had comparable age, sex, race, Edmonton frailty scores, and radiographic spinopelvic parameters (P > 0.05). However, PSO was performed more often in revision cases (P < 0.001). Following surgery, L4-S1 lordosis correction (P = 0.001) was comparable among ALIF and PSO patients and caudal lordotic apex migration (P = 0.044) was highest among ALIF patients. PSO patients had higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (P < 0.001) and motor deficits (P = 0.049), and in-hospital ICU admission (P = 0.022) and blood products given (P = 0.004), but were otherwise comparable in terms of length of stay, blood transfusion given, and postoperative admission to rehab. Likewise, 90-day postoperative complication profiles and 6-week PROMs were comparable as well. CONCLUSIONS: ALIF can restore L4-S1 sagittal alignment as powerfully as PSO, with fewer intraoperative and in-hospital complications. When feasible, ALIF is a suitable alternative to PSO and likely superior to TLIF for correcting L4-S1 lordosis among patients with severe sagittal malalignment.

Impact of Self-Reported Loss of Balance and Gait Disturbance on Outcomes following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate if imbalance influences complication rates, radiological outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Methods: ASD patients with baseline and 2-year radiographic and PROMs were included. Patients were grouped according to whether they answered yes or no to a recent history of pre-operative loss of balance. The groups were propensity-matched by age, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and surgical invasiveness score. Results: In total, 212 patients were examined (106 in each group). Patients with gait imbalance had worse baseline PROM measures, including Oswestry disability index (45.2 vs. 36.6), SF-36 mental component score (44 vs. 51.8), and SF-36 physical component score (p < 0.001 for all). After 2 years, patients with gait imbalance had less pelvic tilt correction (-1.2 vs. -3.6°, p = 0.039) for a comparable PI-LL correction (-11.9 vs. -15.1°, p = 0.144). Gait imbalance patients had higher rates of radiographic proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) (26.4% vs. 14.2%) and implant-related complications (47.2% vs. 34.0%). After controlling for age, baseline sagittal parameters, PI-LL correction, and comorbidities, patients with imbalance had 2.2-times-increased odds of PJK after 2 years. Conclusions: Patients with a self-reported loss of balance/unsteady gait have significantly worse PROMs and higher risk of PJK.

Factors Associated with the Maintenance of Cost-Effectiveness at 5 Years in Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate factors associated with the long-term durability of cost-effectiveness (CE) in ASD patients. BACKGROUND: A substantial increase in costs associated with the surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD) has given precedence to scrutinize the value and utility it provides. METHODS: We included 327 operative ASD patients with 5-year (5 Y) follow-up. Published methods were used to determine costs based on CMS.gov definitions and were based on the average DRG reimbursement rates. Utility was calculated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) utilizing the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) converted to Short-Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D), with a 3% discount applied for its decline with life expectancy. The CE threshold of $150,000 was used for primary analysis. RESULTS: Major and minor complication rates were 11% and 47% respectively, with 26% undergoing reoperation by 5 Y. The mean cost associated with surgery was $91,095±$47,003, with a utility gain of 0.091±0.086 at 1Y, QALY gained at 2 Y of 0.171±0.183, and at 5 Y of 0.42±0.43. The cost per QALY at 2 Y was $414,885, which decreased to $142,058 at 5 Y.With the threshold of $150,000 for CE, 19% met CE at 2 Y and 56% at 5 Y. In those in which revision was avoided, 87% met cumulative CE till life expectancy. Controlling analysis depicted higher baseline CCI and pelvic tilt (PT) to be the strongest predictors for not maintaining durable CE to 5 Y (CCI OR: 1.821 [1.159-2.862], P=0.009) (PT OR: 1.079 [1.007-1.155], P=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients achieved cost-effectiveness after four years postoperatively, with 56% meeting at five years postoperatively. When revision was avoided, 87% of patients met cumulative cost-effectiveness till life expectancy. Mechanical complications were predictive of failure to achieve cost-effectiveness at 2 Y, while comorbidity burden and medical complications were at 5 Y.

Predictors of pelvic tilt normalization: a multicenter study on the impact of regional and lower-extremity compensation on pelvic alignment after complex adult spinal deformity surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine the degree of regional decompensation to pelvic tilt (PT) normalization after complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: Operative ASD patients with 1 year of PT measurements were included. Patients with normalized PT at baseline were excluded. Predicted PT was compared to actual PT, tested for change from baseline, and then compared against age-adjusted, Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab, and global alignment and proportion (GAP) scores. Lower-extremity (LE) parameters included the cranial-hip-sacrum angle, cranial-knee-sacrum angle, and cranial-ankle-sacrum angle. LE compensation was set as the 1-year upper tertile compared with intraoperative baseline. Univariate analyses were used to compare normalized and nonnormalized data against alignment outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to develop a model consisting of significant predictors for normalization related to regional compensation. RESULTS: In total, 156 patients met the inclusion criteria (mean ± SD age 64.6 ± 9.1 years, BMI 27.9 ± 5.6 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index 1.9 ± 1.6). Patients with normalized PT were more likely to have overcorrected pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis and sagittal vertical axis at 6 weeks (p < 0.05). GAP score at 6 weeks was greater for patients with nonnormalized PT (0.6 vs 1.3, p = 0.08). At baseline, 58.5% of patients had compensation in the thoracic and cervical regions. Postoperatively, compensation was maintained by 42% with no change after matching in age-adjusted or GAP score. The patients with nonnormalized PT had increased rates of thoracic and cervical compensation (p < 0.05). Compensation in thoracic kyphosis differed between patients with normalized PT at 6 weeks and those with normalized PT at 1 year (69% vs 35%, p < 0.05). Those who compensated had increased rates of implant complications by 1 year (OR [95% CI] 2.08 [1.32-6.56], p < 0.05). Cervical compensation was maintained at 6 weeks and 1 year (56% vs 43%, p = 0.12), with no difference in implant complications (OR 1.31 [95% CI -2.34 to 1.03], p = 0.09). For the lower extremities at baseline, 61% were compensating. Matching age-adjusted alignment did not eliminate compensation at any joint (all p > 0.05). Patients with nonnormalized PT had higher rates of LE compensation across joints (all p < 0.01). Overall, patients with normalized PT at 1 year had the greatest odds of resolving LE compensation (OR 9.6, p < 0.001). Patients with normalized PT at 1 year had lower rates of implant failure (8.9% vs 19.5%, p < 0.05), rod breakage (1.3% vs 13.8%, p < 0.05), and pseudarthrosis (0% vs 4.6%, p < 0.05) compared with patients with nonnormalized PT. The complication rate was significantly lower for patients with normalized PT at 1 year (56.7% vs 66.1%, p = 0.02), despite comparable health-related quality of life scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PT normalization had greater rates of resolution in thoracic and LE compensation, leading to lower rates of complications by 1 year. Thus, consideration of both the lower extremities and thoracic regions in surgical planning is vital to preventing adverse outcomes and maintaining pelvic alignment.

Impact of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis on Full Body Sagittal Alignment and Compensation for Sagittal Spinal Deformity.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of lower extremity osteoarthritis on sagittal alignment and compensatory mechanisms in adult spinal deformity (ASD). BACKGROUND: Spine, hip, and knee pathologies often overlap in ASD patients. Limited data exists on how lower extremity osteoarthritis impacts sagittal alignment and compensatory mechanisms in ASD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 527 preoperative ASD patients with full body radiographs were included. Patients were grouped by Kellgren-Lawrence grade of bilateral hips and knees and stratified by quartile of T1-Pelvic Angle (T1PA) severity into low-, mid-, high-, and severe-T1PA. Full-body alignment and compensation were compared across quartiles. Regression analysis examined the incremental impact of hip and knee osteoarthritis severity on compensation. RESULTS: The mean T1PA for low-, mid-, high-, and severe-T1PA groups was 7.3°, 19.5°, 27.8°, and 41.6°, respectively. Mid-T1PA patients with severe hip osteoarthritis had an increased sagittal vertical axis and global sagittal alignment ( P <0.001). Increasing hip osteoarthritis severity resulted in decreased pelvic tilt ( P =0.001) and sacrofemoral angle ( P <0.001), but increased knee flexion ( P =0.012). Regression analysis revealed that with increasing T1PA, pelvic tilt correlated inversely with hip osteoarthritis and positively with knee osteoarthritis ( r2 =0.812). Hip osteoarthritis decreased compensation through sacrofemoral angle (ß-coefficient=-0.206). Knee and hip osteoarthritis contributed to greater knee flexion (ß-coefficients=0.215, 0.101; respectively). For pelvic shift, only hip osteoarthritis significantly contributed to the model (ß-coefficient=0.100). CONCLUSIONS: For the same magnitude of spinal deformity, increased hip osteoarthritis severity was associated with worse truncal and full body alignment with posterior translation of the pelvis. Patients with severe hip and knee osteoarthritis exhibited decreased hip extension and pelvic tilt but increased knee flexion. This examines sagittal alignment and compensation in ASD patients with hip and knee arthritis and may help delineate whether hip and knee flexion is due to spinal deformity compensation or lower extremity osteoarthritis.

Patient and procedural risk factors for decline in lower-extremity motor scores following adult spinal deformity surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to discern factors that differentiate patients who experience postoperative lower-extremity motor function decline in the early postoperative period. METHODS: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients who were enrolled in a multicenter, observational, and prospectively collected study from 2018 to 2021 at 18 spinal deformity centers in North America were queried. Eligible participants met at least one of the following radiographic and/or procedural inclusion criteria: pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) ≥ 25°, T1 pelvic angle (T1PA) ≥ 30°, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) ≥ 15 cm, thoracic scoliosis ≥ 70°, thoracolumbar scoliosis ≥ 50°, global coronal malalignment ≥ 7 cm, 3-column osteotomy, spinal fusion ≥ 12 levels, and/or age ≥ 65 years with ≥ 7 levels of instrumentation. Patients with an inflammatory or autoimmune disease and those who were incarcerated or pregnant were excluded, as were non-English speakers. Only patients with baseline and 6-week postoperative lower-extremity motor score (LEMS) were analyzed. Patient information, including demographic data, operative data, patient-reported outcomes, and radiographic parameters, were collected. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were built to quantify the degree to which a patient's postoperative LEMS decline was related to demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 205 patients (mean age 61.5 years, mean total instrumented levels 12.6, 67.3% female, 54.2% primary cases, 79.5% with pelvic fixation) were evaluated. Of these 205 patients, 32 (15.5%) experienced LEMS decline in the perioperative period. These patients were older (p = 0.0014) and had greater BMI (p = 0.0176), higher frailty scores (p = 0.047), longer operating room times (p = 0.033), and greater estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001), and they were more frequently observed to have intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) changes (p = 0.018). The deteriorated cohort had greater C7SVA at baseline (p = 0.0028) but were comparable in terms of all other radiographic parameters. No radiographic differences were seen between the groups at the 6-week visit; however, the deteriorated cohort experienced greater change in PI-LL (p < 0.0001), lumbar lordosis (p = 0.0461), C7SVA (p = 0.0004), and T1PA (p < 0.0001). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the presence of IONM changes and each degree of negative change in T1PA conferred 3.71 (95% CI 1.01-13.42) and 1.09 (1.01-1.19) greater odds of postoperative LEMS deterioration, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, 15.6% of ASD patients incurred LEMS decline in the perioperative period. The magnitude of change in global sagittal alignment, specifically T1PA, was the strongest independent predictor of LEMS decline, which has implications for surgical planning, patient counseling, and clinical research.

Economic burden of nonoperative treatment of adult spinal deformity.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the cost utility of nonoperative treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD). METHODS: Nonoperatively and operatively treated patients who met database criteria for ASD and in whom complete radiographic and health-related quality of life data at baseline and at 2 years were available were included. A cost analysis was completed on the PearlDiver database assessing the average cost of nonoperative treatment prior to surgical intervention based on previously published treatments (NSAIDs, narcotics, muscle relaxants, epidural steroid injections, physical therapy, and chiropractor). Utility data were calculated using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) converted to SF-6D with published conversion methods. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) used a 3% discount rate to account for residual decline in life expectancy (78.7 years). Minor and major comorbidities and complications were assessed according to the CMS.gov manual's definitions. Successful nonoperative treatment was defined as a gain in the minimum clinically importance difference (MCID) in both ODI and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-pain scores, and failure was defined as a loss in MCID or conversion to operative treatment. Patients with baseline ODI ≤ 20 and continued ODI of ≤ 20 at 2 years were considered nonoperative successful maintenance. The average utilization of nonoperative treatment and cost were applied to the ASD cohort. RESULTS: A total of 824 patients were included (mean age 58.24 years, 81% female, mean body mass index 27.2 kg/m2). Overall, 75.5% of patients were in the operative and 24.5% were in the nonoperative cohort. At baseline patients in the operative cohort were significantly older, had a greater body mass index, increased pelvic tilt, and increased pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (all p < 0.05). With respect to deformity, patients in the operative group had higher rates of severe (i.e., ++) sagittal deformity according to SRS-Schwab modifiers for pelvic tilt, sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (p < 0.05). At 2 years, patients in the operative cohort showed significantly increased rates of a gain in MCID for physical component summary of SF-36, ODI, and SRS-activity, SRS-pain, SRS-appearance, and SRS-mental scores. Cost analysis showed the average cost of nonoperative treatment 2 years prior to surgical intervention to be $2041. Overall, at 2 years patients in the nonoperative cohort had again in ODI of 0.36, did not show a gain in QALYs, and nonoperative treatment was determined to be cost-ineffective. However, a subset of patients in this cohort underwent successful maintenance treatment and had a decrease in ODI of 1.1 and a gain in utility of 0.006 at 2 years. If utility gained for this cohort was sustained to full life expectancy, patients' cost per QALY was $18,934 compared to a cost per QALY gained of $70,690.79 for posterior-only and $48,273.49 for combined approach in patients in the operative cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ASD undergoing operative treatment at baseline had greater sagittal deformity and greater improvement in health-related quality of life postoperatively compared to patients treated nonoperatively. Additionally, patients in the nonoperative cohort overall had an increase in ODI and did not show improvement in utility gained. Patients in the nonoperative cohort who had low disability and sagittal deformity underwent successful maintenance and cost-effective treatment.

Height Gain Following Correction of Adult Spinal Deformity.

BACKGROUND: Height gain following a surgical procedure for patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) is incompletely understood, and it is unknown if height gain correlates with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing ASD surgery. Patients with baseline, 6-week, and subanalysis of 1-year postoperative full-body radiographic and PROM data were examined. Correlation analysis examined relationships between vertical height differences and PROMs. Regression analysis was utilized to preoperatively estimate T1-S1 and S1-ankle height changes. RESULTS: This study included 198 patients (mean age, 57 years; 69% female); 147 patients (74%) gained height. Patients with height loss, compared with those who gained height, experienced greater increases in thoracolumbar kyphosis (2.81° compared with -7.37°; p < 0.001) and thoracic kyphosis (12.96° compared with 4.42°; p = 0.003). For patients with height gain, sagittal and coronal alignment improved from baseline to postoperatively: 25° to 21° for pelvic tilt (PT), 14° to 3° for pelvic incidence - lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and 60 mm to 17 mm for sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (all p < 0.001). The full-body mean height gain was 7.6 cm, distributed as follows: sella turcica-C2, 2.9 mm; C2-T1, 2.8 mm; T1-S1 (trunk gain), 3.8 cm; and S1-ankle (lower-extremity gain), 3.3 cm (p < 0.001). T1-S1 height gain correlated with the thoracic Cobb angle correction and the maximum Cobb angle correction (p = 0.002). S1-ankle height gain correlated with the corrections in PT, PI-LL, and SVA (p < 0.001). T1-ankle height gain correlated with the corrections in PT (p < 0.001) and SVA (p = 0.03). Trunk height gain correlated with improved Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22r) Appearance scores (r = 0.20; p = 0.02). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression scores correlated with S1-ankle height gain (r = -0.19; p = 0.03) and C2-T1 height gain (r = -0.18; p = 0.04). A 1° correction in a thoracic scoliosis Cobb angle corresponded to a 0.2-mm height gain, and a 1° correction in a thoracolumbar scoliosis Cobb angle resulted in a 0.25-mm height gain. A 1° improvement in PI-LL resulted in a 0.2-mm height gain. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing ASD surgery experienced height gain following deformity correction, with a mean full-body height gain of 7.6 cm. Height gain can be estimated preoperatively with predictive ratios, and height gain was correlated with improvements in reported SRS-22r appearance and PROMIS scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Calibration of a comprehensive predictive model for the development of proximal junctional kyphosis and failure in adult spinal deformity patients with consideration of contemporary goals and techniques.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to calibrate an updated predictive model incorporating novel clinical, radiographic, and prophylactic measures to assess the risk of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF). METHODS: Operative patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) and baseline and 2-year postoperative data were included. PJK was defined as ≥ 10° in sagittal Cobb angle between the inferior uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) endplate and superior endplate of the UIV + 2 vertebrae. PJF was radiographically defined as a proximal junctional sagittal Cobb angle ≥ 15° with the presence of structural failure and/or mechanical instability, or PJK with reoperation. Backstep conditional binary supervised learning models assessed baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical information to predict the occurrence of PJK and PJF. Internal cross validation of the model was performed via a 70%/30% cohort split. Conditional inference tree analysis determined thresholds at an alpha level of 0.05. RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy-nine patients with ASD (mean 59.87 ± 14.24 years, 78% female, mean BMI 27.78 ± 6.02 kg/m2, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index 1.74 ± 1.71) were included. PJK developed in 50.2% of patients, and 10.5% developed PJF by their last recorded visit. The six most significant demographic, radiographic, surgical, and postoperative predictors of PJK/PJF were baseline age ≥ 74 years, baseline sagittal age-adjusted score (SAAS) T1 pelvic angle modifier > 1, baseline SAAS pelvic tilt modifier > 0, levels fused > 10, nonuse of prophylaxis measures, and 6-week SAAS pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis modifier > 1 (all p < 0.015). Overall, the model was deemed significant (p < 0.001), and internally validated receiver operating characteristic analysis returned an area under the curve of 0.923, indicating robust model fit. CONCLUSIONS: PJK and PJF remain critical concerns in ASD surgery, and efforts to reduce the occurrence of PJK and PJF have resulted in the development of novel prophylactic techniques and enhanced clinical and radiographic selection criteria. This study demonstrates a validated model incorporating such techniques that may allow for the prediction of clinically significant PJK and PJF, and thus assist in optimizing patient selection, enhancing intraoperative decision making, and reducing postoperative complications in ASD surgery.

Incremental benefits of circumferential minimally invasive surgery for increasingly frail patients with adult spinal deformity.

OBJECTIVE: Circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) may provide incremental benefits compared with open surgery for patients with increasing frailty status by decreasing peri- and postoperative complications. METHODS: Operative patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) ≥ 18 years old with baseline and 2-year postoperative data were assessed. With propensity score matching, patients who underwent cMIS (cMIS group) were matched with similar patients who underwent open surgery (open group) based on baseline BMI, C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis mismatch, and S1 pelvic tilt. The Passias modified ASD frailty index (mASD-FI) was used to determine patient frailty stratification as not frail, frail, or severely frail. Baseline and postoperative factors were assessed using two-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and multivariate ANCOVA while controlling for baseline age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score, and number of levels fused. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 170 ASD patients (mean age 62.71 ± 13.64 years, 75.0% female, mean BMI 29.25 ± 6.60 kg/m2) were included, split evenly between the cMIS and open groups. Surgically, patients in the open group had higher numbers of posterior levels fused (p = 0.021) and were more likely to undergo three-column osteotomies (p > 0.05). Perioperatively, cMIS patients had lower intraoperative blood loss and decreased use of cell saver across frailty groups (with adjustment for baseline age, CCI score, and levels fused), as well as fewer perioperative complications (p < 0.001). Adjusted analysis also revealed that compared to open patients, increasingly frail patients in the cMIS group were also more likely to demonstrate greater improvement in 1- and 2-year postoperative scores for the Oswestry Disability Index, SRS-36 (total), EQ-5D and SF-36 (all p < 0.05). With regard to postoperative complications, increasingly frail patients in the cMIS group were also noted to experience significantly fewer complications overall (p = 0.036) and fewer major intraoperative complications (p = 0.039). The cMIS patients were also less likely to need a reoperation than their open group counterparts (p = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery performed with a cMIS technique may offer acceptable outcomes, with diminishment of perioperative complications and mitigation of catastrophic outcomes, in increasingly frail patients who may not be candidates for surgery using traditional open techniques. However, further studies should be performed to investigate the long-term impact of less optimal alignment in this population.

The ISSG-AO Complication Intervention Score, but Not Major/Minor Designation, is Correlated With Length of Stay Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVES: The International Spine Study Group-AO (ISSG-AO) Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) Complication Classification System was developed to improve classification, reporting, and study of complications among patients undergoing ASD surgery. The ISSG-AO system classifies interventions to address complications by level of invasiveness: grade zero (none); grade 1, mild (e.g., medication change); grade 2, moderate (e.g., ICU admission); grade 3, severe (e.g., reoperation related to surgery of interest). To evaluate the efficacy of the ISSG-AO ASD Complication Classification System, we aimed to compare correlations between postoperative length of stay (LOS) and complication severity as classified by the ISSG-AO ASD and traditional major/minor complication classification systems. METHODS: Patients age ≥18 in a multicenter ASD database who sustained in-hospital complications were identified. Complications were classified with the major/minor and ISSG-AO systems and correlated with LOS using an ensemble-based machine learning algorithm (conditional random forest) and a generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: 490 patients at 19 sites were included. 64.9% of complications were major, and 35.1% were minor. By ISSG-AO classification, 20.4%, 66.1%, 6.7%, and 6.7% were grades 0-3, respectively. ISSG-AO complication grading demonstrated significant correlation with LOS, whereas major/minor complication classification demonstrated inverse correlation with LOS. In conditional random forest analysis, ISSG-AO classification had the greatest relative importance when assessing correlations across multiple variables with LOS. CONCLUSIONS: The ISSG-AO system may help identify specific complications associated with prolonged LOS. Targeted interventions to avoid or reduce these complications may improve ASD surgical quality and resource utilization.

SRS-22r question 11 is a valid opioid screen and stratifies opioid consumption.

PURPOSE: To validate the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r) question 11 (Q11) response as a measure to assess and quantify opioid consumption. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of a prospective study regarding opioid use during ASD surgery was performed. Data were collected at enrollment and 2-year follow-up including the SRS-22r and a standardized data collection form (CRF) for self-reported opioid consumption. Responses to Q11 of the SS-22r were compared with responses to the opioid consumption CRF (as measured by morphine equivalent dose (MED)). Inter-rater agreement was calculated. Sensitivity and specificity for the Q11 (+) responses were calculated using MED reports as the "true" value. RESULTS: Cohen's kappa indicated almost perfect agreement between the MED CRF and Q11 (k = 0.878, p < 0.001). Mean daily MED consumption for patients reporting "Daily Narcotic" use was 62.0 (Median: 38.7, SD 87.5) mg; for patients reporting "Narcotics weekly or less", mean daily MED consumption was 21.6 (15.0, 29.0) mg. The positive Q11 responses were 96% sensitive and 92% specific for opioid users. CONCLUSION: SRS-22r Q11 exhibits almost perfect agreement with an independent questionnaire designed to assess opioid consumption in this cohort. "Daily narcotic" users report nearly three times the mean daily MED of "Weekly or less" users (62.0 ± 87.5 mg vs 21.6 ± 29 mg, p = 0.037). Q11 exhibited excellent sensitivity and specificity for determining opioid users and non-users. Given the need for opioid research in ASD, Q11 may be useful to use existing registries and observational cohorts to design more definitive studies regarding opioid consumption. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Is frailty responsive to surgical correction of adult spinal deformity? An investigation of sagittal re-alignment and frailty component drivers of postoperative frailty status.

PURPOSE: Frailty has been associated with adverse postoperative outcomes. Recently, a novel frailty index for preoperative risk stratification in patients with adult spinal deformity was developed. Components of the ASD-FI utilize patient comorbidity, clinical symptoms, and patient-reported-outcome-measures (PROMS). Our purpose was to investigate components of the Adult Spinal Deformity Frailty Index (ASD-FI) responsive to surgery and drivers of overall frailty. METHODS: Operative ASD patients ≥ 18 years, undergoing multilevel fusions, with complete baseline, 6 W, 1Y and 2Y ASD-FI scores. Descriptive analysis assessed demographics, radiographic parameters, and surgical details. Pearson bivariate correlations, independent and paired t tests assessed postoperative changes to ASD-FI components, total score, and radiographic parameters. Linear regression models determined the effect of successful surgery (achieving lowest level SRS-Schwab classification modifiers) on change in ASD-FI total scores. RESULTS: 409 6-week, 696 1-year, and 253 2-year operative ASD patients were included. 6-week and 1-year baseline frailty scores were 0.34, 2 years was 0.38. Following surgery, 6-week frailty was 0.36 (p = 0.033), 1 year was 0.25 (p < 0.001), and 2 years was 0.28 (p < 0.001). Of the ASD-FI variables, 17/40 improved at 6 weeks, 21/40 at 1 year, and 18/40 at 2 years. Successful surgery significantly predicted decreases in 1-year frailty scores (R = 0.27, p < 0.001), SRS-Schwab SVA modifier was the greatest predictor (Adjusted Beta: - 0.29, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in sagittal realignment and functional status correlated with improved postoperative frailty. Additional research and deformity sub-group analyses are needed to describe associations between specific functional activities that correlated with frailty improvement as well as evaluation of modifiable and non-modifiable indices.

Comparing and Contrasting the Clinical Utility of Sagittal Spine Alignment Classification Frameworks: Roussouly Versus SRS-Schwab.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected database. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical utility of two common classification systems for adult spinal deformity (ASD) and determine whether both should be considered in surgical planning to improve patient outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgical restoration of appropriate Roussouly classification shape or SRS-Schwab ASD classification may improve outcomes. METHODS: ASD patients with pre- and 2-year postop (2Y) radiographic/health-related quality of life (HRQL) data were grouped by "theoretical" and "current" Roussouly type. Univariate analyses assessed outcomes of patients who mismatched Roussouly types at both pre- and 2Y intervals (Mismatched) and those of preoperative mismatched patients who matched at 2-years (Matched). Subanalysis assessed outcomes of patients who improved in Schwab modifiers, and patients who both improved in both Schwab modifiers and matched Roussouly type by 2Y. RESULTS: Included: 515 ASD patients (59 ±â€Š14 yrs, 80% F). Preoperative breakdown of "current" Roussouly types: Type 1 (10%), 2 (54%), 3 (24%), and 4 (12%). Matched and Mismatched groups did not differ in rates of reaching MCID for any HRQL metrics by 2Y (all P > 0.10). Reoperation, PJK, and complications did not differ between Matched and Mismatched (all P > 0.10), but Roussouly Matched patients had toward lower rates of instrumentation failure (17.2% vs. 24.8%, P = 0.038). By 2Y, 28% of patients improved in PT Schwab modifier, 37% in SVA, and 46% in PI-LL. Patients who both Matched Roussouly at 2Y and improved in all Schwab modifiers met MCID for Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) activity at higher rates than patients who did not. CONCLUSION: Isolated restoration per the Roussouly system was not associated with superior outcomes. Patients who both matched Roussouly type and improved in Schwab modifiers had superior patient-reported outcomes at 2-years. Concurrent consideration of both systems may offer utility in establishing optimal realignment goals.Level of Evidence: 3.

Operative treatment outcomes for adult cervical deformity: a prospective multicenter assessment with mean 3-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Adult cervical deformity (ACD) has high complication rates due to surgical complexity and patient frailty. Very few studies have focused on longer-term outcomes of operative ACD treatment. The objective of this study was to assess minimum 2-year outcomes and complications of ACD surgery. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective observational study was performed at 13 centers across the United States to evaluate surgical outcomes for ACD. Demographics, complications, radiographic parameters, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; Neck Disability Index, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association, EuroQol-5D [EQ-5D], and numeric rating scale [NRS] for neck and back pain) were evaluated, and analyses focused on patients with ≥ 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Of 169 patients with ACD who were eligible for the study, 102 (60.4%) had a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 3.4 years, range 2-8.1 years). The mean age at surgery was 62 years (SD 11 years). Surgical approaches included anterior-only (22.8%), posterior-only (39.6%), and combined (37.6%). PROMs significantly improved from baseline to last follow-up, including Neck Disability Index (from 47.3 to 33.0) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (from 12.0 to 12.8; for patients with baseline score ≤ 14), neck pain NRS (from 6.8 to 3.8), back pain NRS (from 5.5 to 4.8), EQ-5D score (from 0.74 to 0.78), and EQ-5D visual analog scale score (from 59.5 to 66.6) (all p ≤ 0.04). More than half of the patients (n = 58, 56.9%) had at least one complication, with the most common complications including dysphagia, distal junctional kyphosis, instrumentation failure, and cardiopulmonary events. The patients who did not achieve 2-year follow-up (n = 67) were similar to study patients based on baseline demographics, comorbidities, and PROMs. Over the course of follow-up, 23 of the total 169 enrolled patients were reported to have died. Notably, these represent all-cause mortalities during the course of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter, prospective analysis demonstrates that operative treatment for ACD provides significant improvement of health-related quality of life at a mean 3.4-year follow-up, despite high complication rates and a high rate of all-cause mortality that is reflective of the overall frailty of this patient population. To the authors' knowledge, this study represents the largest and most comprehensive prospective effort to date designed to assess the intermediate-term outcomes and complications of operative treatment for ACD.

Risk-benefit assessment of major versus minor osteotomies for flexible and rigid cervical deformity correction.

INTRODUCTION: Osteotomies are commonly performed to correct sagittal malalignment in cervical deformity (CD). However, the risks and benefits of performing a major osteotomy for cervical deformity correction have been understudied. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate the risks and benefits of performing a major osteotomy for CD correction. METHODS: Patients stratified based on major osteotomy (MAJ) or minor (MIN). Independent t-tests and Chi-squared tests were used to assess differences between MAJ and MIN. A sub-analysis compared patients with flexible versus rigid CL. RESULTS: 137 CD patients were included (62 years, 65% F). 19.0% CD patients underwent a MAJ osteotomy. After propensity score matching for cSVA, 52 patients were included. About 19.0% CD patients underwent a MAJ osteotomy. MAJ patients had more minor complications (P = 0.045), despite similar surgical outcomes as MIN. At 3M, MAJ and MIN patients had similar NDI, mJOA, and EQ5D scores, however by 1 year, MAJ patients reached MCID for NDI less than MIN patients (P = 0.003). MAJ patients with rigid deformities had higher rates of complications (79% vs. 29%, P = 0.056) and were less likely to show improvement in NDI at 1 year (0.95 vs. 0.54, P = 0.027). Both groups had similar sagittal realignment at 1 year (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical deformity patients who underwent a major osteotomy had similar clinical outcomes at 3-months but worse outcomes at 1-year as compared to minor osteotomies, likely due to differences in baseline deformity. Patients with rigid deformities who underwent a major osteotomy had higher complication rates and worse clinical improvement despite similar realignment at 1 year.