RESUMEN
Introduction Lumbar spine interbody fusions have been performed to relieve back pain and improve stability due to various underlying pathologies. Anterior interbody fusion and posterior interbody fusion approaches are two main approaches that are classically compared. In an attempt to compare these two approaches to the spine, large retrospective national database reviews have been performed to compare and predict 30-day postoperative outcomes; however, they have conflicting findings. Obesity, defined as having a body mass index (BMI) over 30 kg/m2, may also contribute to the extent of spine pathology and is associated with increased rates of postoperative complications. Complication rates in patients who are obese have yet to be thoroughly investigated using a large national database. Our present investigation aims to make this comparison using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. The goal of the present study is to utilize a nationwide prospective database to determine short-term differences in postoperative outcomes between posterior and anterior lumbar fusion in patients with obesity and relate these findings to previous studies in the general population. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 9,021 patient data from the ACS-NSQIP database from 2015 to 2019 who underwent an elective, single-level fusion via anterior or posterior surgical approach. This database captures over 150 clinical variables on individual patient cases, including demographic data, preoperative risk factors and laboratory values, intraoperative data, and significant events up to postoperative day 30. All outcome measures were included in this analysis with special attention to rates of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), prolonged length of stay (LOS), reoperation, and operation time. Results Multivariable analysis controlling for age, BMI, sex, race, functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and selected comorbidities with P < 0.05 demonstrated that the anterior approach was an independent predictor for all significant outcomes except prolonged length of stay. Compared to the posterior approach, the anterior approach had a shorter total operation time (B = -13.257, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-17.522, -8.992], P < 0.001), higher odds of deep vein thrombosis (odds ratio (OR) = 2.210, 95% CI [1.211, 4.033], P= 0.010), and higher odds of pulmonary embolism (OR = 2.679, 95% CI [1.311, 5.477], P = 0.007) and was protective against unplanned reoperation (OR = 0.702, 95% CI [0.548, 0.898], P = 0.005). Conclusions The obese population makes up a large and growing demographic of those undergoing spine surgery, and as such, it is pertinent to investigate the differences, advantages, and disadvantages of lumbar fusion approaches in this group. While anterior approaches may be protective of longer operation time and unplanned reoperation, this benefit may not be clinically significant when considering an increased risk of DVT and PE. Given the short-term nature of this dataset and the limitations inherent in large de-identified retrospective database studies, these findings are interpreted with caution. Longer-term follow-up studies accounting for confounding variables with spine-centered outcomes will be necessary to further elucidate these nuances.
RESUMEN
Introduction Parkinson's disease (PD) is one of the most common neurodegenerative diseases worldwide. Though there are many pharmacological therapeutics approved today for PD, surgical interventions such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) have shown convincing symptom mitigation and minimal complication rates in aggregate. Recently, the concept of frailty - defined as reduced physiologic reserve and function affecting multiple systems throughout the patient - has gained traction as a predictor of short-term postoperative morbidity and mortality. As such, the Modified Frailty Index-5 (mFI-5) is a postoperative morbidity predictor based on five factors and has been used in neurosurgical subspecialties such as tumor, vascular, and spine. Yet, there is minimal literature assessing frailty in the field of functional neurosurgery. With the prevalence of DBS in PD, this study evaluated the mFI-5 as a predictor of postoperative complications in a selected patient population. Methods The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2010-2019 Database was queried for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, as well as the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes pertaining to DBS procedures in PD patients. Each patient was scored by the mFI-5 protocol and stratified into groups of No Frailty (mFI-5=0), Moderate Frailty (mFI-5=1), and Significant Frailty (mFI-5≥2). The No Frailty group was used as a reference in multivariate and univariate analyses of the groups. Results A total of 1,645 subjects were included in the study and were subcategorized into groups of No Frailty (N=877), Moderate Frailty (N=561), and Significant Frailty (N=207) based on their frailty scores. The subjects' mean age was 65.8±9.4 years. Overall, 1,161 (70.6%) were male, while 484 (29.4%) were female. With reference to the No Frailty group in multivariate analysis, patients with moderate frailty experienced greater unplanned readmission (OR 2.613, 95% CI 1.143-5.973, p=0.023), while those with significant frailty experienced greater unplanned readmission (OR 3.723, 95% CI 1.376-10.073, p=0.010), any readmission (OR 2.396, 95% CI 1.098-5.230, p=0.028), non-home discharge (OR 4.317, 95% CI 1.765-10.562, p<0.001), and complications in aggregate (OR 2.211, 95% CI 1.285-3.806, p=0.004). Conclusions Until now, the available clinical tools were limited in providing accurate predictions with minimal information for postoperative outcomes in DBS for PD patients. Our data give clinicians insight into the relationship between frailty and surgical outcomes and will assist physicians in preparing for postoperative care by predicting outcomes of significantly frail PD patients receiving DBS therapy.