Characteristics of the Patients with Poor Clinical Outcomes After Symptomatic Postoperative Lumbar Epidural Hematoma.

OBJECTIVE: Symptomatic postoperative lumbar epidural hematoma (PLEH) may lead to poor outcomes even after evacuation. This study aimed to verify the short-term clinical outcomes after the evacuation of PLEH and to clarify the characteristics of the patients with poor postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Twenty-five patients (average age; 70.4 years) underwent PLEH evacuation after lumbar spine surgery. The mean follow-up period was 12.0 (range 3-37) months. Pre and postoperative Japanese Orthopedic Association scores and visual analog scale (VAS) of low back pain (LBP), leg pain, and leg numbness were retrospectively collected. The dural sac cross-sectional area at the most compressed level was measured on magnetic resonance imaging. The patients were classified into 2 groups: poor outcome group (P group) had less than 50% of Japanese Orthopedic Associationrecovery rate and good group (G group) with 50% or more recovery rate. RESULTS: The rate of delayed evacuation (over 24 hours of onset) was significantly higher in P group than in G group (P = 0.027). There was no significant difference in dural sac cross-sectional areabetween the 2 groups (P = 0.438). VAS of LBP, leg pain, and leg numbness in G group significantly improved postoperatively. Although VAS of LBP and leg pain in P group significantly improved postoperatively, there was no significant difference between the pre and postoperative VAS of leg numbness. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed evacuation of PLEH can lead to poor postoperative outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. Moreover, patients with poor outcomes remained with postoperative leg numbness. Early evacuation of symptomatic PLEH is key to avoid poor outcomes and persistent leg numbness.

Clinical outcomes of short-segment lumbar fusion in patients older than 85 years with a minimum 2-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Although the number of elderly patients requiring lumbar fusion for lumbar degenerative disorders has increased over time, the postoperative outcomes of lumbar fusion in very elderly patients (> 85 years) remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the comprehensive outcomes of lumbar fusion in elderly patients older than 85 years with mid-term follow-up. METHODS: The authors retrospectively researched patients older than 85 years who underwent single- or double-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion from 2012 to 2019. Twenty-nine patients who had at least 2 years of follow-up were included in this study. The average age was 86.4 years, and the average follow-up period was 42.2 months. Each patient was matched with 60- to 75-year-old controls. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score; Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score; Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score; JOA recovery rate; and low-back pain (LBP), leg pain, and leg numbness visual analog scale (VAS) scores were obtained. The spinopelvic parameters were measured using lateral standing radiographs of the whole spine. RESULTS: Although there were no significant differences in the ODI, RMDQ, JOA recovery rate, and leg pain and leg numbness VAS scores at 2 years postoperatively between the very elderly and control groups, the VAS LBP score was significantly lower in the very elderly group than in the control group. Preoperative and postoperative sagittal vertical axes were significantly higher and sacral slopes were significantly lower in the very elderly group than in the control group. The incidences of postoperative delirium and new lumbar vertebral fracture were significantly higher in the very elderly group (17.2%) than in the control group (4.6%). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that lumbar fusion could be performed in patients older than 85 years with satisfactory postoperative outcomes at the 2-year follow-up. In contrast, progressive spinopelvic sagittal imbalance, the incidence of lumbar vertebral fracture up to the final follow-up, and postoperative delirium were greater in the very elderly group than in the control group.