The Incremental Clinical Benefit of Adding Layers of Complexity to the Planning and Execution of Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For patients with surgical adult spinal deformity (ASD), our understanding of alignment has evolved, especially in the last 20 years. Determination of optimal restoration of alignment and spinal shape has been increasingly studied, yet the assessment of how these alignment schematics have incrementally added benefit to outcomes remains to be evaluated. METHODS: Patients with ASD with baseline and 2-year were included, classified by 4 alignment measures: Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab, Age-Adjusted, Roussouly, and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP). The incremental benefits of alignment schemas were assessed in chronological order as our understanding of optimal alignment progressed. Alignment was considered improved from baseline based on SRS-Schwab 0 or decrease in severity, Age-Adjusted ideal match, Roussouly current (based on sacral slope) matching theoretical (pelvic incidence-based), and decrease in proportion. Patients separated into 4 first improving in SRS-Schwab at 2-year, second Schwab improvement and matching Age-Adjusted, third two prior with Roussouly, and fourth improvement in all four. Comparison was accomplished with means comparison tests and χ2 analyses. RESULTS: Sevenhundredthirty-two. patients met inclusion. SRS-Schwab BL: pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (++:32.9%), sagittal vertical axis (++: 23%), pelvic tilt (++:24.6%). 640 (87.4%) met criteria for first, 517 (70.6%) second, 176 (24%) third, and 55 (7.5%) fourth. The addition of Roussouly (third) resulted in lower rates of mechanical complications and proximal junctional kyphosis (48.3%) and higher rates of meeting minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for physical component summary and SRS-Mental (P < .05) compared with the second. Fourth compared with the third had higher rates of MCID for ODI (44.2% vs third: 28.3%, P = .011) and SRS-Appearance (70.6% vs 44.8%, P < .001). Mechanical complications and proximal junctional kyphosis were lower with the addition of Roussouly (P = .024), while the addition of GAP had higher rates of meeting MCID for SRS-22 Appearance (P = .002) and Oswestry Disability Index (P = .085). CONCLUSION: Our evaluation of the incremental benefit that alignment schemas have provided in ASD corrective surgery suggests that the addition of Roussouly provided the greatest reduction in mechanical complications, while the incorporation of GAP provided the most significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes.

The Evolution of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Assessing the Clinical Benefits of Developments Within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols in Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of evolving Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols on outcomes after cervical deformity (CD) surgery. BACKGROUND: ERAS can help accelerate patient recovery and assist hospitals in maximizing the incentives of bundled payment models while maintaining high-quality patient care. However, there remains a paucity of literature assessing how developments have impacted outcomes after adult CD surgery. METHODS: Patients with operative CD 18 years or older with pre-baseline and 2 years (2Y) postoperative data, who underwent ERAS protocols, were stratified by increasing implantation of ERAS components: (1) early (multimodal pain program), (2) intermediate (early protocol + paraspinal blocks, early ambulation), and (3) late (early/intermediate protocols + comprehensive prehabilitation). Differences in demographics, clinical outcomes, radiographic alignment targets, perioperative factors, and complication rates were assessed through Bonferroni-adjusted means comparison analysis. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients were included (59.4 ± 11.7 y, 45% females, 28.8 ± 6.0 kg/m 2 ). Of these patients, 38.9% were considered "early," 36.6% were "intermediate," and 24.4% were "late." Perioperatively, rates of intraoperative complications were lower in the late group ( P = 0.036). Postoperatively, discharge disposition differed significantly between cohorts, with late patients more likely to be discharged to home versus early or intermediate cohorts [χ 2 (2) = 37.973, P < 0.001]. In terms of postoperative disability recovery, intermediate and late patients demonstrated incrementally improved 6 W modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scores ( P = 0.004), and late patients maintained significantly higher mean Euro-QOL 5-Dimension Questionnaire and modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scores by 1 year ( P < 0.001, P = 0.026). By 2Y, cohorts demonstrated incrementally increasing SWAL-QOL scores (all domains P < 0.028) domain scores versus early or intermediate cohorts. By 2Y, incrementally decreasing reoperation was observed in early versus intermediate versus late cohorts ( P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that patients enrolled in an evolving ERAS program demonstrate incremental improvement in preoperative optimization and candidate selection, greater likelihood of discharge to home, decreased postoperative disability and dysphasia burden, and decreased likelihood of intraoperative complications and reoperation rates.

Assessing the Economic Benefits of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocols in Adult Cervical Deformity Patients: Is the Initial Additive Cost of Protocols Offset by Clinical Gains?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the financial impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols and cost-effectiveness in cervical deformity corrective surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospective CD database. BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) can help accelerate patient recovery and assist hospitals in maximizing the incentives of bundled payment models while maintaining high-quality patient care. However, the economic benefit of ERAS protocols, nor the heterogeneous components that make up such protocols, has not been established. METHODS: Operative CD patients ≥18 y with complete pre-(BL) and up to 2-year(2Y) postop radiographic/HRQL data were stratified by enrollment in Standard-of-Care ERAS beginning in 2020. Differences in demographics, clinical outcomes, radiographic alignment targets, perioperative factors, and complication rates were assessed through means comparison analysis. Costs were calculated using PearlDiver database estimates from Medicare pay scales. QALY was calculated using NDI mapped to SF6D using validated methodology with a 3% discount rate to account for a residual decline in life expectancy. RESULTS: In all, 127 patients were included (59.07±11.16 y, 54% female, 29.08±6.43 kg/m 2 ) in the analysis. Of these patients, 54 (20.0%) received the ERAS protocol. Per cost analysis, ERAS+ patients reported a lower mean total 2Y cost of 35049 USD compared with ERAS- patients at 37553 ( P <0.001). Furthermore, ERAS+ patients demonstrated lower cost of reoperation by 2Y ( P <0.001). Controlling for age, surgical invasiveness, and deformity per BL TS-CL, ERAS+ patients below 70 years old were significantly more likely to achieve a cost-effective outcome by 2Y compared with their ERAS- counterparts (OR: 1.011 [1.001-1.999, P =0.048]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing ERAS protocols experience improved cost-effectiveness and reduced total cost by 2Y post-operatively. Due to the potential economic benefit of ERAS for patients incorporation of ERAS into practice for eligible patients should be considered.

Comparison of multilevel low-grade techniques versus three-column osteotomies in adult spinal deformity surgery: does harmonious correction matter?

OBJECTIVE: Recent debate has arisen between whether to use a three-column osteotomy (3CO) or multilevel low-grade (MLG) techniques to treat severe sagittal malalignment in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes of 3CO and MLG techniques performed in corrective surgeries for ASD. METHODS: ASD patients who had a baseline PI-LL > 30° and 2-year follow-up data were included. Patients underwent either 3CO or MLG (thoracolumbar posterior column osteotomies at ≥ 3 levels or anterior lumbar interbody fusion at ≥ 3 levels with no 3CO). The segmental utility ratio was used to assess relative segmental correction (segmental correction divided by overall correction in lordosis divided by the number of thoracolumbar interventions [interbody fusion, thoracolumbar posterior column osteotomies, and 3CO]). The paired t-test was used to assess lordotic distribution by differences in lordosis between adjacent lumbar disc spaces (e.g., L1-2 to L2-3). Multivariate analysis, controlling for age, sex, BMI, osteoporosis, baseline pelvic incidence, and T1 pelvic angle, was used to evaluate the complication rates and radiographic and patient-reported outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were included, 53% of whom underwent MLG and 47% of whom underwent 3CO. The MLG group had a lower BMI (p < 0.05). MLG patients received fewer previous fusions than 3CO patients (31% vs 80%, p < 0.001). MLG patients had 24% less blood loss but a 22% longer operative time (565 vs 419 minutes, p = 0.008). Using adjusted analysis, the 3CO group had greater segmental and relative correction at each level (segmental utility ratio mean 69% for 3CO vs 23% for MLG, p < 0.001). However, the 3CO group had lordotic differences between two adjacent lumbar disc pairs (range -0.5° to 9.0°, p = 0.009), while MLG was more harmonious (range 2.2°-6.5°, p > 0.4). MLG patients were more likely to undergo realignment to age-adjusted standards (OR 5.6, 95% CI 1.2-46.4; p = 0.033). MLG patients were less likely to develop neurological complications or undergo reoperation (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-0.9; p = 0.041). Adjusted analysis revealed that MLG patients more often met a substantial clinical benefit in the Oswestry Disability Index score (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.1-26.8; p = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: MLG techniques showed better utility in lumbar distribution and age-adjusted global correction while minimizing neurological complications and reoperation rates by 2 years postoperatively. In selected instances, these techniques may offer the spine deformity surgeon a safer alternative when correcting severe adult spinal deformity.

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.

Assessing the effects of prehabilitation protocols on post-operative outcomes in adult cervical deformity surgery: does early optimization lead to optimal clinical outcomes?

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of a prehabilitation program on peri- and post-operative outcomes in adult cervical deformity (CD) surgery. METHODS: Operative CD patients ≥ 18 years with complete baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) data were stratified by enrollment in a prehabilitation program beginning in 2019. Patients were stratified as having undergone prehabilitation (Prehab+) or not (Prehab-). Differences in pre and post-op factors were assessed via means comparison analysis. Costs were calculated using PearlDiver database estimates from Medicare pay-scales. RESULTS: 115 patients were included (age: 61 years, 70% female, BMI: 28 kg/m2). Of these patients, 57 (49%) were classified as Prehab+. At baseline, groups were comparable in age, gender, BMI, CCI, and frailty. Surgically, Prehab+ were able to undergo longer procedures (p = 0.017) with equivalent EBL (p = 0.627), and shorter SICU stay (p < 0.001). Post-operatively, Prehab+ patients reported greater reduction in pain scores and greater improvement in quality of life metrics at both 1Y and 2Y than Prehab- patients (all p < 0.05). Prehab+ patients reported significantly less complications overall, as well as less need for reoperation (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Introducing prehabilitation protocols in adult cervical deformity surgery may aid in improving patient physiological status, enabling patients to undergo longer surgeries with lessened risk of peri- and post-operative complications.

Current concepts in adult cervical spine deformity surgery.

Cervical spine deformity surgery has significantly evolved over recent decades. There has been substantial work performed, which has furthered the true understanding of alignment and advancements in surgical technique and instrumentation. Concomitantly, understanding of cervical spine pathology and the contributing drivers have also improved, which have influenced the development of classification systems for cervical spine deformity and the development of treatment-guiding algorithms. This article aims to provide a synopsis of the current knowledge surrounding cervical spine deformity to date, with particular focus on preoperative expected alignment targets, perioperative optimization, and the whole operative strategy.

Persistent Lower Extremity Compensation for Sagittal Imbalance After Surgical Correction of Complex Adult Spinal Deformity: A Radiographic Analysis of Early Impact.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Achieving spinopelvic realignment during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery does not always produce ideal outcomes. Little is known whether compensation in lower extremities (LEs) plays a role in this disassociation. The objective is to analyze lower extremity compensation after complex ASD surgery, its effect on outcomes, and whether correction can alleviate these mechanisms. METHODS: We included patients with complex ASD with 6-week data. LE parameters were as follows: sacrofemoral angle, knee flexion angle, and ankle flexion angle. Each parameter was ranked, and upper tertile was deemed compensation. Patients compensating and not compensating postoperatively were propensity score matched for body mass index, frailty, and T1 pelvic angle. Linear regression assessed correlation between LE parameters and baseline deformity, demographics, and surgical details. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity and history of total knee/hip arthroplasty evaluated outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten patients (age: 61.3 ± 14.1 years, body mass index: 27.4 ± 5.8 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.1 ± 1.6, 72% female, 22% previous total joint arthroplasty, 24% osteoporosis, levels fused: 13.1 ± 3.8) were included. At baseline, 59% were compensating in LE: 32% at hips, 39% knees, and 36% ankles. After correction, 61% were compensating at least one joint. Patients undercorrected postoperatively were less likely to relieve LE compensation (odds ratio: 0.2, P = .037). Patients compensating in LE were more often undercorrected in age-adjusted pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, and T1 pelvic angle and disproportioned in Global Alignment and Proportion (P < .05). Patients matched in sagittal age-adjusted score at 6 weeks but compensating in LE were more likely to develop proximal junctional kyphosis (odds ratio: 4.1, P = .009) and proximal junctional failure (8% vs 0%, P = .035) than those sagittal age-adjusted score-matched and not compensating in LE. CONCLUSION: Perioperative lower extremity compensation was a product of undercorrecting complex ASD. Even in age-adjusted realignment, compensation was associated with global undercorrection and junctional failure. Consideration of lower extremities during planning is vital to avoid adverse outcomes in perioperative course after complex ASD surgery.

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.

Costs of Surgery in Adult Spinal Deformity: Do Higher Cost Surgeries Lead to Better Outcomes?

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of surgical costs on patient-reported outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: With increased focus on delivering cost-effective health care, interventions with high-resource utilization, such as ASD surgery, have received greater scrutiny. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients aged 18 years and older with BL and 2-year data were included. Surgical costs were calculated using the 2021 average Medicare reimbursement by Current Procedural Terminology code. Costs of complications and reoperations were intentionally excluded. Patients were ranked into tertiles by surgical cost: highest surgical costs (HC) and lowest surgical costs (LC). They were propensity score matched to account for differences in baseline age and deformity. Bivariate logistic regressions assessed odds of achieving outcomes. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty-one patients met inclusion (60.7 yr, 81.8% female, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.6, 27.1 kg/m 2 ), 139 LC and 127 HC patients. After propensity score matching, 102 patients remained in each cost group with an average reimbursement of LC: $12,494 versus HC: $29,248. Matched cohorts had similar demographics and baseline health-related quality of life. Matched groups had similar baseline sagittal vertical axis (HC: 59.0 vs. LC: 56.7 mm), pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (HC: 13.1 vs. LC: 13.4°), and pelvic tilt (HC: 25.3 vs. LC: 22.4°). Rates of complications were not significantly different between the cost groups. Compared with the LC group, by 2 years, HC patients had higher odds of reaching substantial clinical benefit in Oswestry Disability Index [odds ratio (OR): 2.356 (1.220, 4.551), P =0.011], in Scoliosis Research Society-Total [OR: 2.988 (1.515, 5.895), P =0.002], and in Numerical Rating Scale Back [OR: 2.739 (1.105, 6.788), P =0.030]. Similar findings were appreciated for HC patients in the setting of Schwab deformity outcome criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Although added cost did not guarantee an ideal outcome, HC patients experienced superior patient-reported outcomes compared with LC patients. Although cost efficiency remains an important priority for health policy, isolating cost reduction may compromise outcomes and add to future costs of reintervention, particularly with more severe baseline deformity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Can Baseline Disability Predict Outcomes in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery?

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: To assess if there is a threshold of baseline disability beyond which the patient-reported outcomes after surgical correction of adult spinal deformity (ASD) are adversely impacted. BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes vary after correction of adult spinal deformity, even when patients are optimally realigned. There is a paucity of literature examining the impact of baseline disability on patient-reported outcomes in ASD. METHODS: Patients with baseline (BL) and two-year data were included. Disability was ranked according to BL Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) into quintiles: Q1 (lowest ODI score) to Q5 (highest ODI score). Adjusted logistic regression analyses evaluated the likelihood of reaching ≥1 MCID in Scoliosis Research Society Outcomes Questionnaire (SRS-22) Pain, SRS-22 Activity, and Short Form-36 physical component summary at two years across disability groups Q1-Q4 with respect to Q5. Sensitivity tests were performed, excluding patients with any "0" Schwab modifiers at BL. RESULTS: Compared with patients in Q5, the odds of reaching MCID in SRS-22 Pain at 2Y were significantly higher for those in Q1 (OR: 3.771), Q2 (OR: 3.006), and Q3 (OR: 2.897), all P <0.021. Similarly, compared with patients in Q5, the odds of reaching MCID in SRS-22 Activity at two years were significantly higher for those in Q2 (OR: 3.454) and Q3 (OR: 2.801), both P <0.02. Lastly, compared with patients in Q5, odds of reaching MCID in Short Form-36 physical component summary at two years were significantly higher for patients in Q1 (OR: 5.350), Q2 (OR: 4.795), and Q3 (OR: 6.229), all P <0.004. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that patients presenting with moderate disability at BL (ODI<40) consistently surpassed health-related quality of life outcomes as compared with those presenting with greater levels of disability. We propose that a baseline ODI of 40 represents a disability threshold within which operative inte rvention maximizes patient-reported outcomes. Furthermore, delaying the intervention until patients progress to severe disability may limit the benefits of surgical correction in ASD patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

The Impact of Lumbopelvic Realignment Versus Prevention Strategies at the Upper-instrumented Vertebra on the Rates of Junctional Failure Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the surgical technique that has the greatest influence on the rate of junctional failure following ASD surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Differing presentations of adult spinal deformity(ASD) may influence the extent of surgical intervention and the use of prophylaxis at the base or the summit of a fusion construct to influence junctional failure rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients with two-year(2Y) data and at least 5-level fusion to the pelvis were included. Patients were divided based on UIV: [Longer Construct: T1-T4; Shorter Construct: T8-T12]. Parameters assessed included matching in age-adjusted PI-LL or PT, aligning in GAP-relative pelvic version or Lordosis Distribution Index. After assessing all lumbopelvic radiographic parameters, the combination of realigning the two parameters with the greatest minimizing effect of PJF constituted a good base. Good s was defined as having: (1) prophylaxis at UIV (tethers, hooks, cement), (2) no lordotic change(under-contouring) greater than 10° of the UIV, (3) preoperative UIV inclination angle<30°. Multivariable regression analysis assessed the effects of junction characteristics and radiographic correction individually and collectively on the development of PJK and PJF in differing construct lengths, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: In all, 261 patients were included. The cohort had lower odds of PJK(OR: 0.5,[0.2-0.9]; P =0.044) and PJF was less likely (OR: 0.1,[0.0-0.7]; P =0.014) in the presence of a good summit. Normalizing pelvic compensation had the greatest radiographic effect on preventing PJF overall (OR: 0.6,[0.3-1.0]; P =0.044). In shorter constructs, realignment had a greater effect on decreasing the odds of PJF(OR: 0.2,[0.02-0.9]; P =0.036). With longer constructs, a good summit lowered the likelihood of PJK(OR: 0.3,[0.1-0.9]; P =0.027). A good base led to zero occurrences of PJF. In patients with severe frailty/osteoporosis, a good summit lowered the incidence of PJK(OR: 0.4,[0.2-0.9]; P =0.041) and PJF (OR: 0.1,[0.01-0.99]; P =0.049). CONCLUSION: To mitigate junctional failure, our study demonstrated the utility of individualizing surgical approaches to emphasize an optimal basal construct. Achievement of tailored goals at the cranial end of the surgical construct may be equally important, especially for higher-risk patients with longer fusions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

The Predictive Potential of Nutritional and Metabolic Burden: Development of a Novel Validated Metric Predicting Increased Postoperative Complications in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort review. OBJECTIVE: To develop a scoring system for predicting increased risk of postoperative complications in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery based on baseline nutritional and metabolic factors. BACKGROUND: Endocrine and metabolic conditions have been shown to adversely influence patient outcomes and may increase the likelihood of postoperative complications. The impact of these conditions has not been effectively evaluated in patients undergoing ASD surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients 18 years or above with baseline and two-year data were included. An internally cross-validated weighted equation using preoperative laboratory and comorbidity data correlating to increased perioperative complications was developed via Poisson regression. Body mass index (BMI) categorization (normal, over/underweight, and obese) and diabetes classification (normal, prediabetic, and diabetic) were used per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Diabetes Associates parameters. A novel ASD-specific nutritional and metabolic burden score (ASD-NMBS) was calculated via Beta-Sullivan adjustment, and Conditional Inference Tree determined the score threshold for experiencing ≥1 complication. Cohorts were stratified into low-risk and high-risk groups for comparison. Logistic regression assessed correlations between increasing burden score and complications. RESULTS: Two hundred one ASD patients were included (mean age: 58.60±15.4, sex: 48% female, BMI: 29.95±14.31, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 3.75±2.40). Significant factors were determined to be age (+1/yr), hypertension (+18), peripheral vascular disease (+37), smoking status (+21), anemia (+1), VitD hydroxyl (+1/ng/mL), BMI (+13/cat), and diabetes (+4/cat) (model: P <0.001, area under the curve: 92.9%). Conditional Inference Tree determined scores above 175 correlated with ≥1 post-op complication ( P <0.001). Furthermore, HIGH patients reported higher rates of postoperative cardiac complications ( P =0.045) and were more likely to require reoperation ( P =0.024) compared with low patients. CONCLUSIONS: The development of a validated novel nutritional and metabolic burden score (ASD-NMBS) demonstrated that patients with higher scores are at greater risk of increased postoperative complications and course. As such, surgeons should consider the reduction of nutritional and metabolic burden preoperatively to enhance outcomes and reduce complications in ASD patients.

The Importance of Incorporating Proportional Alignment in Adult Cervical Deformity Corrections Relative to Regional and Global Alignment: Steps Toward Development of a Cervical-Specific Score.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective single-center study. BACKGROUND: The global alignment and proportion score is widely used in adult spinal deformity surgery. However, it is not specific to the parameters used in adult cervical deformity (ACD). PURPOSE: Create a cervicothoracic alignment and proportion (CAP) score in patients with operative ACD. METHODS: Patients with ACD with 2-year data were included. Parameters consisted of relative McGregor's Slope [RMGS = (MGS × 1.5)/0.9], relative cervical lordosis [RCL = CL - thoracic kyphosis (TK)], Cervical Lordosis Distribution Index (CLDI = C2 - Apex × 100/C2 - T2), relative pelvic version (RPV = sacral slope - pelvic incidence × 0.59 + 9), and a frailty factor (greater than 0.33). Cutoff points were chosen where the cross-tabulation of parameter subgroups reached a maximal rate of meeting the Optimal Outcome. The optimal outcome was defined as meeting Good Clinical Outcome criteria without the occurrence of distal junctional failure (DJF) or reoperation. CAP was scored between 0 and 13 and categorized accordingly: ≤3 (proportioned), 4-6 (moderately disproportioned), >6 (severely disproportioned). Multivariable logistic regression analysis determined the relationship between CAP categories, overall score, and development of distal junctional kyphosis (DJK), DJF, reoperation, and Optimal Outcome by 2 years. RESULTS: One hundred five patients with operative ACD were included. Assessment of the 3-month CAP score found a mean of 5.2/13 possible points. 22.7% of patients were proportioned, 49.5% moderately disproportioned, and 27.8% severely disproportioned. DJK occurred in 34.5% and DJF in 8.7%, 20.0% underwent reoperation, and 55.7% achieved Optimal Outcome. Patients severely disproportioned in CAP had higher odds of DJK [OR: 6.0 (2.1-17.7); P =0.001], DJF [OR: 9.7 (1.8-51.8); P =0.008], reoperation [OR: 3.3 (1.9-10.6); P =0.011], and lower odds of meeting the optimal outcome [OR: 0.3 (0.1-0.7); P =0.007] by 2 years, while proportioned patients suffered zero occurrences of DJK or DJF. CONCLUSION: The regional alignment and proportion score is a method of analyzing the cervical spine relative to global alignment and demonstrates the importance of maintaining horizontal gaze, while also matching overall cervical and thoracolumbar alignment to limit complications and maximize clinical improvement.

Achievement and Maintenance of Optimal Alignment After Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery: A 5-Year Outcome Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess factors contributing to optimal radiographic outcomes. METHODS: Operative adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with baseline and 5-year (5Y) data were included. Optimal alignment (O) was defined as improving in at least 1 Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab modifier without worsening in any Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab modifier. A robust outcome was defined as having optimal alignment 2 years (2Y) post operation that was maintained at 5Y. Predictors of robust outcomes were identified using multivariate regression analysis, with a conditional inference tree for continuous variables. RESULTS: Two-hundred and ninety-seven ASD patients met inclusion criteria. Most patients (77.4%) met O at 6W, which decreased to 54.2% at 2Y. The majority of patients (89.4%) that met O at 2Y went on to meet radiographic durability at 5Y (48.5% of total cohort). Rates of junctional failure were higher in O2+5- compared with O2+5- (P = 0.013), with reoperation rates of 17.2% due to loss of alignment. Multivariable regression identified the following independent predictors of optimal alignment at 5Y in those that had O at 2Y: inadequate correction of pelvic tilt and overcorrection of the difference between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (P < 0.05). Increased age, body mass index, and invasiveness were the most significant nonradiographic predictors for not achieving 5Y durability (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The durability of optimal alignment after ASD corrective surgery was seen in about half of the patients at 5Y. While the majority of patients at 2Y maintained their radiographic outcomes at 5Y, major contributors to loss of alignment included junctional failure and adjacent region compensation, with only a minority of patients losing correction through the existing construct. The reoperation rate for loss of alignment was 17.2%. Loss of alignment requiring reoperation had a detrimental effect on 5Y clinical outcomes.

Should realignment goals vary based on patient frailty status in adult spinal deformity?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to adjust the sagittal age-adjusted score (SAAS) to accommodate frailty in alignment considerations and thereby increase the predictability of clinical outcomes and junctional failure. METHODS: Surgical adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with 2-year data were included. Frailty was assessed with the continuous ASD modified frailty index (ASD-mFI). Two-year outcomes were proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), proximal junctional failure (PJF), major mechanical complications, and best clinical outcome (BCO), defined as Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score < 15 and Scoliosis Research Society outcomes questionnaire total score > 4.5 by 2 years. Linear regression analysis established a 6-week score based on the component scores of SAAS, frailty, and US normal values for ODI score. Logistic regression analysis followed by conditional inference tree run forest analysis generated categorical thresholds. Multivariate analysis, controlling for age, baseline deformity, and history of revision, was used to compare outcome rates, and logistic regression generated odds ratios for the continuous score. Thirty percent of the cohort was used as a random sample for internal validation. RESULTS: In total, 412 patients were included (mean ± SD age 60.1 ± 14.2 years, 80% female, BMI 26.9 ± 5.4 kg/m2). Baseline frailty categories were as follows: 57% not frail, 30% frail, and 14% severely frail. Overall, by 2 years, 39% of patients had developed PJK, 8% PJF, and 21% mechanical complications; 22% had undergone a reoperation; and 15% met BCO. When the cohort as a whole was assessed, the 6-week SAAS had a correlation with the development of PJK and PJF, but not mechanical complications, reoperation, or BCO. Development of mechanical complications, PJF, reoperation, and BCO demonstrated correlations with ASD-mFI (all p < 0.05). Regression analysis modifying SAAS on the basis of ODI norms and frailty generated the following equation: frailty-adjusted SAAS (FAS) = 0.108 × T1 pelvic angle + 0.162 × pelvic tilt - 0.39 × pelvic incidence - lumbar lordosis - 0.03 × ASD-mFI - 1.6771. With conditional inference tree analysis, thresholds were derived for FAS: aligned < 1.7, offset 1.7-2.2, and severely offset > 2.2. Significance between FAS categories was found for PJK, PJF, mechanical complications, reoperation, and BCO by 2 years. Binary logistic regression, controlling for baseline deformity and revision status, demonstrated significance between FAS and all 5 outcome variables (all p < 0.01). Internal validation saw each outcome variable maintain significance between categories, with even greater odds for PJF (OR 13.4, 95% CI 4.7-38.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Consideration of physiological age, in addition to chronological age, may be beneficial in the management of operative goals to maximize clinical outcomes while minimizing junctional failure. This combination enables the spine surgeon to fortify a surgical plan for even the most challenging patients undergoing ASD corrective surgery.

Does the presence of cervical deformity in patients with baseline mild myelopathy increase operative urgency in adult cervical spinal surgery? A retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess whether delaying surgical management of cervical deformity (CD) in patients with concomitant mild myelopathy increases the risk of suboptimal outcomes. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years who had a baseline diagnosis of mild myelopathy with baseline and up to 2 years of postoperative data were assessed. Patients were categorized as having CD (CD+) or not (CD-) at baseline. Patients with symptoms of myelopathy for more than 1 year after the initial visit prior to surgery were considered delayed. Clinical and radiographic data were assessed using means comparison analyses. Multivariate regression analysis assessed correlations between increasing time to surgery and peri- and postoperative outcomes adjusted for baseline age and frailty score. Backstep logistic regression analysis assessed the risk of complications or reoperation, while controlling for baseline T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (TS-CL). RESULTS: One hundred six patients were included (mean age 58.11 ± 11.97 years, 48% female, mean BMI 29.13 ± 6.89). Of the patients with baseline mild myelopathy, 22 (20.8%) were CD- while 84 (79.2%) were CD+. Overall, 9.5% of patients were considered to have delayed surgery. Linear regression revealed that both CD- and CD+ patients were more likely to require reoperation when there was more time between the initial visit and surgical admission (p < 0.001). Additionally, an adjusted logistic regression indicated that CD+ patients who had a greater length of time to surgery had a higher likelihood for major complications (p < 0.001). Conversely, CD+ patients who were operated on within 30 days of the initial visit had a significantly lower risk for a major complication (OR 0.901, 95% CI 0.889-1.105, p = 0.043), and a lower risk for reoperation (OR 0.954, 95% CI 0.877-1.090, p = 0.043), while controlling for the severity of deformity based on baseline TS-CL. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study demonstrate that a delay in surgery after the initial visit significantly increases the risk for major complications and reoperation in patients with CD with associated mild baseline myelopathy. Early operative treatment in this patient population may lower the risk of postoperative complications.

When not to Operate in Spinal Deformity: Identifying Subsets of Patients With Simultaneous Clinical Deterioration, Major Complications, and Reoperation.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospectively enrolled adult spinal deformity (ASD) database. OBJECTIVE: To investigate what patient factors elevate the risk of sub-optimal outcomes after deformity correction. BACKGROUND: Currently, it is unknown what factors predict a poor outcome after adult spinal deformity surgery, which may require increased preoperative consideration and counseling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients >18 yrs undergoing surgery for ASD(scoliosis≥20°, SVA≥5 cm, PT≥25°, or TK≥60°). An unsatisfactory outcome was defined by the following categories met at two years: (1) clinical: deteriorating in ODI at two years follow-up (2) complications/reoperation: having a reoperation and major complication were deemed high risk for poor outcomes postoperatively (HR). Multivariate analyses assessed predictive factors of HR patients in adult spinal deformity patients. RESULTS: In all, 633 adult spinal deformity (59.9 yrs, 79% F, 27.7 kg/m 2, CCI: 1.74) were included. Baseline severe Schwab modifier incidence (++): 39.2% pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis, 28.8% sagittal vertical axis, 28.9% PT. Overall, 15.5% of patients deteriorated in ODI by two years, while 7.6% underwent reoperation and had a major complication. This categorized 11 (1.7%) as HR. HR were more comorbid in terms of arthritis (73%), heart disease (36%), and kidney disease (18%), P <0.001. Surgically, HR had greater EBL (4431ccs) and underwent more osteotomies (91%), specifically Ponte(36%) and Three Column Osteotomies(55%), which occurred more at L2(91%). HR underwent more PLIFs (45%) and had more blood transfusion units (2641ccs), all P <0.050. The multivariate regression determined a combination of a baseline Distress and Risk Assessment Method score in the 75th percentile, having arthritis and kidney disease, a baseline right lower extremity motor score ≤3, cSVA >65 mm, C2 slope >30.2°, CTPA >5.5° for an R2 value of 0.535 ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When addressing adult spine deformities, poor outcomes tend to occur in severely comorbid patients with major baseline psychological distress scores, poor neurologic function, and concomitant cervical malalignment.

Surgical costs in adult cervical Deformity: Do higher cost surgeries lead to better Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: As our focus on delivering cost effective healthcare increases, interventions like cervical deformity surgery, which are associated with high resource utilization, have received greater scrutiny. The purpose of this study was to assess relationship between surgical costs, deformity correction, and patient reported outcomes in ACD surgery. METHODS: ACD Patients ≥ 18 years with baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) data were included. Cost of surgery was calculated by applying average Medicare reimbursement rates by CPT code to surgical details of each patient in the cohort. CPT codes for corpectomy, ACDF, osteotomy, decompression, levels fused, and instrumentation were considered in the analysis. Costs of complications and reoperations were intentionally excluded from the cost analysis. Patients were ranked into two groups by surgical cost: lowest cost (LC) and highest cost (HC). ANCOVA assessed differences in outcomes while accounting for covariates as appropriate. RESULTS: 113 met inclusion criteria. While mean age, frailty, BMI and gender composition were similar between cost groups, mean CCI was significantly higher in the HC group compared to that of the LC group (p=.014). At baseline, LC and HC groups had similar HRQLs and radiographic deformity (all p >.05). Logistic regression accounting for baseline age, deformity and CCI found that HC patients had significantly lower odds of undergoing reoperation within 2-years (OR: 0.309, 95 % CI: 0.193 - 0.493, p <.001). Furthermore, logistic regression accounting for baseline age, deformity and CCI found odds of DJF were significantly lower for those in the HC group (OR: 0.163, 95 % CI: 0.083 - 0.323, p <.001). At 2-years, logistic regression accounting for age and baseline TS-CL found HC patients still had significantly higher odds of reaching a "0″ TS-CL modifier at 2-years (OR: 3.353, 95 % CI: 1.081 - 10.402, p=.036). Logistic regression accounting for age and baseline NDI score found HC patients had significantly higher odds of reaching MCID in NDI at 2-years (OR: 4.477, 95 % CI: 1.507 - 13.297, p=.007). A similar logistic regression accounting for age and baseline mJOA score found odds of reaching MCID in mJOA significantly higher for high-cost patients (OR: 2.942, 95 % CI: 1.101 - 7.864, p=.031). CONCLUSIONS: While patient presentation influences surgical planning and costs, this study attempted to control for such variations to assess impact of surgical costs on outcomes. Despite continued scrutiny over healthcare costs, we found that more costly surgical interventions can produce superior radiographic alignment as well as patient reported outcomes for patients with cervical deformity.

Impact of Frailty on the Development of Proximal Junctional Failure: Does Frailty Supersede Achieving Optimal Realignment?

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) are often elderly, frail, and at elevated risk of adverse events perioperatively, with proximal junctional failure (PJF) occurring relatively frequently. Currently, the specific role of frailty in potentiating this outcome is poorly defined. PURPOSE: To determine if the benefits of optimal realignment in ASD, with respect to the development of PJF, can be offset by increasing frailty. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Operative ASD patients (scoliosis >20°, SVA>5 cm, pelvic tilt>25°, or TK>60°) fused to the pelvis or below with available baseline and 2-year (2Y) radiographic and HRQL data were included. The Miller Frailty Index (FI) was used to stratify patients into 2 categories: Not Frail (FI <3) and Frail (>3). Proximal Junctional Failure (PJF) was defined using the Lafage criteria. "Matched" and "unmatched" refers to ideal age-adjusted alignment postoperatively. Multivariable regression determined the impact of frailty on the development of PJF. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-four ASD patients met inclusion criteria [62.2yrs±9.9, 81%F, BMI: 27.5 kg/m 2 ±5.3, ASD-FI: 3.4±1.5, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI): 1.7±1.6]. Forty-three percent of patients were characterized as Not Frail (NF) and 57% were characterized as Frail (F). PJF development was lower in the NF group compared with the F group (7% vs . 18%; P =0.002). F patients had 3.2 × higher risk of PJF development compared to NF patients (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.3-7.3, P =0.009). Controlling for baseline factors, F unmatched patients had a higher degree of PJF (OR: 1.4, 95% CI:1.02-1.8, P =0.03); however, with prophylaxis, there was no increased risk. Adjusted analysis shows F patients, when matched postoperatively in PI-LL, had no significantly higher risk of PJF. CONCLUSIONS: An increasingly frail state is significantly associated with the development of PJF after corrective surgery for ASD. Optimal realignment may mitigate the impact of frailty on eventual PJF. Prophylaxis should be considered in frail patients who do not reach ideal alignment goals.