Predictors of serious, preventable, and costly medical complications in a population of adult spinal deformity patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In 2008, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) established a list of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) with significant deleterious effects on both patients and providers. Adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is complex and highly invasive, and as such may result in significant morbidity including these HACs. PURPOSE: Identify predictors for developing the most common HACs among adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients undergoing corrective surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: One thousand one hundred and seventy-one ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: HACs, Health-Related Quality of Life scores(HRQLs), Reoperation, Integrated Health State (IHS) METHODS: ASD pts undergoing surgery (>18 years, scoliosis ≥20°, SVA ≥5 cm, PT ≥25° and/or TK >60°) with complete data at BL and up to 2 years post-op were included. Patients were stratified by presence of >1 HAC, defined as at least one superficial/deep SSI, UTI, DVT, or PE within a 30-day post-op window. Random forest analysis generated 5,000 Conditional Inference Trees to compute a variable importance table for top predictors of HACs. An area-under-the-curve (AUC) methodology compared normalized HRQL scores between groups to determine an IHS with 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Total of 1,171 pts (59.8 years, 76.2%F, 28.1kg/m2) underwent corrective ASD surgery, with 1,053 pts in the non-HAC group and 118 in the HAC group. Of these pts, 25.4% had UTI, 15.4% DVT, 19.2% superficial SSI, 20.8% deep SSI, and 19.2% PE. HAC pts were on average older (63.5 vs 59.3, p=.004) and more often frail (51.3 vs 39.7%, p=.021) than non-HAC pts. Postop LOS and reoperation were most associated with HAC groups: [1] LOS >7 days [2] reoperation. Patient-related predictors of HACs were [3] age >50 yerr, [4] frailty, and [13] BMI >31. Procedure-related predictors of HACs were [5] operative-time >405 minutes, [6] levels fused >9, EBL >1450 mL, and [11] decompression. BL radiographic predictors were [7] PT >20°, [9] PI-LL>6°, [10] TL Cobb angle >15°, [12] SVA C7-S1 >29 mm. No differences were observed between groups with regards to IHS ODI (0.73 vs 0.74, p=.863), SRS (1.3 vs1.3, p=.374), NRS Back (0.6 vs 0.6, p=.158). HAC had higher rates of reoperation than non-HAC (0.08 vs 0.01, p=.066), and any HAC within 30-days of index was a significant predictor of reoperation (OR: 2.448 [1.94-3.09], p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a population of ASD patients, HACs were associated with length of stay, reoperation, age, and frailty. Radiographic parameters such as pelvic tilt >20°, PI-LL >6°, & SVA >29 mm also increased odds of HACs, and should raise postoperative awareness for HAC development.

Does Patient Frailty Status Influence Recovery Following Spinal Fusion for Adult Spinal Deformity?: An Analysis of Patients With 3-Year Follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospective database. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate postop clinical recovery among adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients between frailty states undergoing primary procedures SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Frailty severity may be an important determinant for impaired recovery after corrective surgery. METHODS: It included ASD patients with health-related quality of life (HRQLs) at baseline (BL), 1 year (1Y), and 3 years (3Y). Patients stratified by frailty by ASD-frailty index scale 0-1(no frailty: <0.3 [NF], mild: 0.3-0.5 [MF], severe: >0.5 [SF]). Demographics, alignment, and SRS-Schwab modifiers were assessed with χ/paired t tests to compare HRQLs: Scoliosis Research Society 22-question Questionnaire (SRS-22), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Back/Leg Pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Area-under-the-curve (AUC) method generated normalized HRQL scores at baseline (BL) and f/u intervals (1Y, 3Y). AUC was calculated for each f/u, and total area was divided by cumulative f/u, generating one number describing recovery (Integrated Health State [IHS]). RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were included (59 years, 80% females). Breakdown of patients by frailty status: 43.6% NF, 40.8% MF, 15.6% SF. SF patients were older (P = 0.003), >body mass index (P = 0.002). MF and SF were significantly (P < 0.001) more malaligned at BL: pelvic tilt (NF: 21.6°; MF: 27.3°; SF: 22.1°), pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (7.4°, 21.2°, 19.7°), sagittal vertical axis (31 mm, 87 mm, 82 mm). By SRS-Schwab, NF were mostly minor (40%), and MF and SF markedly deformed (64%, 57%). Frailty groups exhibited BL to 3Y improvement in SRS-22, ODI, NRS Back/Leg (P < 0.001). After HRQL normalization, SF had improvement in SRS-22 at year 1 and year 3 (P < 0.001), and NRS Back at 1Y. 3Y IHS showed a significant difference in SRS-22 (NF: 1.2 vs. MF: 1.32 vs. SF: 1.69, P < 0.001) and NRS Back Pain (NF: 0.52, MF: 0.66, SF: 0.6, P = 0.025) between frailty groups. SF had more complications (79%). SF/marked deformity had larger invasiveness score (112) compared to MF/moderate deformity (86.2). Controlling for baseline deformity and invasiveness, SF showed more improvement in SRS-22 IHS (NF: 1.21, MF: 1.32, SF: 1.66, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although all frailty groups exhibited improved postop disability/pain scores, SF patients recovered better in SRS-22 and NRS Back. Despite SF patients having more complications and larger invasiveness scores, they had overall better patient-reported outcomes, signifying that with frailty severity, patients have more room for improvement postop compared to BL quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Cell Saver for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery Reduces Cost.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: To determine if the use of cell saver reduces overall blood costs in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recent studies have questioned the clinical value of cell saver during spine procedures. METHODS: ASD patients enrolled in a prospective, multicenter surgical database who had complete preoperative and surgical data were identified. Patients were stratified into (1) cell saver available during surgery, but no intraoperative autologous infusion (No Infusion group), or (2) cell saver available and received autologous infusion (Infusion group). RESULTS: There were 427 patients in the Infusion group and 153 in the No infusion group. Patients in both groups had similar demographics. Mean autologous infusion volume was 698 mL. The Infusion group had a higher percentage of EBL relative to the estimated blood volume (42.2%) than the No Infusion group (19.6%, p < .000). Allogeneic transfusion was more common in the Infusion group (255/427, 60%) than the No Infusion group (67/153, 44%, p = .001). The number of allogeneic blood units transfused was also higher in the Infusion group (2.4) than the No Infusion group (1.7, p = .009). Total blood costs ranged from $396 to $2,146 in the No Infusion group and from $1,262 to $5,088 in the Infusion group. If the cost of cell saver blood was transformed into costs of allogeneic blood, total blood costs for the Infusion group would range from $840 to $5,418. Thus, cell saver use yielded a mean cost savings ranging from $330 to $422 (allogeneic blood averted). Linear regression showed that after an EBL of 614 mL, cell saver becomes cost-efficient. CONCLUSION: Compared to transfusing allogeneic blood, cell saver autologous infusion did not reduce the proportion or the volume of allogeneic transfusion for patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity. The use of cell saver becomes cost-efficient above an EBL of 614 mL, producing a cost savings of $330 to $422. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.