The Relationship Between Disc Herniation Morphology and Patient-Reported Outcomes after Microdiscectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Determine if herniation morphology based on the Michigan State University Classification is associated with differences in (1) patient-reported outcome measures (or (2) surgical outcomes after a microdiscectomy. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing single-level microdiscectomy between 2014 and 2021 were identified. Demographics and surgical characteristics were collected through a query search and manual chart review. The Michigan State University classification, which assesses disc herniation laterality (zone A was central, zone B/C was lateral) and degree of extrusion into the central canal (grade 1 was up to 50% of the distance to the intra-facet line, grade >1 was beyond this line), was identified on preoperative MRIs. patient-reported outcome measures were collected at preoperative, 3-month, and 1-year postoperative time points. RESULTS: Of 233 patients, 84 had zone A versus 149 zone B/C herniations while 76 had grade 1 disc extrusion and 157 had >1 grade. There was no difference in surgical outcomes between groups (P > 0.05). Patients with extrusion grade >1 were found to have lower Physical Component Score at baseline. On bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis, extrusion grade >1 was a significant independent predictor of greater improvement in Physical Component Score at three months (estimate = 7.957; CI: 4.443-11.471, P < 0.001), but not at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Although all patients were found to improve after microdiscectomy, patients with disc herniations extending further posteriorly reported lower preoperative physical function but experienced significantly greater improvement three months after surgery. However, improvement in Visual Analog Scale Leg and back, ODI, and MCS at three and twelve months was unrelated to laterality or depth of disc herniation.

A Longitudinal Evaluation of Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Its Effects on Spinal Decompressions With or Without Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: The objectives were to (1) compare the safety of spine surgery before and after the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and (2) determine whether patients with a history of COVID-19 were at increased risk of adverse events. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: The COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on several health care services. In spine surgery, elective cases were canceled and patients received delayed care due to the uncertainty of disease transmission and surgical outcomes. As new coronavirus variants arise, health care systems require guidance on how to provide optimal patient care to all those in need of our services. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing spine surgery between January 1, 2019 and June 30, 2021 was performed. Patients were split into pre-COVID or post-COVID cohorts based on local government guidelines. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and 90-day mortality were compared between groups. Secondary analysis included multiple logistic regression to determine independent predictors of each outcome. RESULTS: A total of 2976 patients were included for analysis with 1701 patients designated as pre-COVID and 1275 as post-COVID. The pre-COVID cohort had fewer patients undergoing revision surgery (16.8% vs 21.9%, P < 0.001) and a lower home discharge rate (84.5% vs 88.2%, P = 0.008). Inpatient complication (9.9% vs 9.2%, P = 0.562), inpatient mortality (0.1% vs 0.2%, P = 0.193), 90-day readmission (3.4% vs 3.2%, P = 0.828), and 90-day mortality rates (0.8% vs 0.8%, P = 0.902) were similar between groups. Patients with positive COVID-19 tests before surgery had similar complication rates (7.7% vs 6.1%, P = 1.000) as those without a positive test documented. CONCLUSIONS: After the emergence of COVID-19, patients undergoing spine surgery had a greater number of medical comorbidities, but similar rates of inpatient complications, readmission, and mortality. Prior COVID-19 infection was not associated with an increased risk of postsurgical complications or mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Reimbursement of Lumbar Fusion at an Orthopaedic Specialty Hospital Versus Tertiary Referral Center.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: To explore the differences in Medicare reimbursement for lumbar fusion performed at an orthopaedic specialty hospital (OSH) and a tertiary referral center and to elucidate drivers of Medicare reimbursement differences. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: To provide more cost-efficient care, appropriately selected patients are increasingly being transitioned to OSHs for lumbar fusion procedures. There are no studies directly comparing reimbursement of lumbar fusion between tertiary referral centers (TRC) and OSHs. METHODS: Reimbursement data for a tertiary referral center and an orthopaedic specialty hospital were compiled through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Any patient with lumbar fusions between January 2014 and December 2018 were identified. OSH patients were matched to TRC patients by demographic and surgical variables. Outcomes analyzed were reimbursement data, procedure data, 90-day complications and readmissions, operating room times, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were included in the final cohort. The tertiary referral center had higher post-trigger ($13,554 vs. $8,541, P<0.001) and total episode ($49,973 vs. $43,512, P<0.010) reimbursements. Lumbar fusion performed at an OSH was predictive of shorter OR time (ß=0.77, P<0.001), shorter procedure time (ß=0.71, P<0.001), and shorter LOS (ß=0.53, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in complications (9.21% vs. 15.8%, P=0.353) or readmission rates (3.95% vs. 7.89%, P=0.374) between the 2 hospitals; however, our study is underpowered for complications and readmissions. CONCLUSION: Lumbar fusion performed at an OSH, compared with a tertiary referral center, is associated with significant Medicare cost savings, shorter perioperative times, decreased LOS, and decreased utilization of post-acute resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Techniques for Improving Electronic Survey Response Rate.

Electronic surveys are readily utilized for the conduction of orthopedic research and are commonly plagued by decreased response rates as compared with more conventional telephone and paper surveys. Given the rise of electronic survey usage and technological implementation into medical research, this paper aims to summarize factors both intrinsic and extrinsic which can increase survey completion in the clinical setting.

The Impact of Physical Therapy After Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort. OBJECTIVE: To determine if outcomes varied between patients based on physical therapy (PT) attendance after lumbar fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The literature has been mixed regarding the efficacy of postoperative PT to improve disability and back pain, as measured by patient-reported outcome measures. Given the prevalence of PT referrals and lack of high-quality evidence, there is a need for additional studies investigating the efficacy of PT after lumbar fusion surgery to aid in developing robust clinical guidelines. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients receiving lumbar fusion surgery by current procedural terminology codes and separated them into 2 groups based on whether PT was prescribed. Electronic medical records were reviewed for patient and surgical characteristics, PT utilization, and surgical outcomes. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were identified and compared preoperatively, at 90 days postoperatively and one year postoperatively. RESULTS: The two groups had similar patient characteristics and comorbidities and demonstrated no significant differences between readmission, complication, and revision rates after surgery. Patients that attended PT had significantly more fused levels (1.41 ± 0.64 vs. 1.32 ± 0.54, P =0.027), longer operative durations (234 ± 96.4 vs. 215 ± 86.1 min, P =0.012), and longer postoperative hospital stays (3.35 ± 1.68 vs. 3.00 ± 1.49 days, P =0.004). All groups improved similarly by Oswestry Disability Index, short form-12 physical and mental health subsets, and back and leg pain by Visual Analog Scale at 90-day and 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that physical therapy does not significantly impact PROMs after lumbar fusion surgery. Given the lack of data suggesting clear benefit of PT after lumbar fusion, surgeons should consider more strict criteria when recommending physical therapy to their patients after lumbar fusion surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-Ⅲ.

Patient-specific Risk Factors Increase Episode of Care Costs After Lumbar Decompression.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. OBJECTIVE: To determine, which patient-specific risk factors increase total episode of care (EOC) costs in a population of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiaries undergoing lumbar decompression. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar decompression is an effective option for the treatment of central canal stenosis or radiculopathy in patients unresponsive to nonoperative management. Given that elderly Americans are more likely to have one or more chronic medical conditions, there is a need to determine, which, if any, patient-specific risk factors increase health care costs after lumbar decompression. METHODS: Care episodes limited to lumbar decompression surgeries were retrospectively reviewed on a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service reimbursement database at our academic institution between 2014 and 2019. The 90-day total EOC reimbursement payments were collected. Patient electronic medical records were then matched to the selected care episodes for the collection of patient demographics, medical comorbidities, surgical characteristics, and clinical outcomes. A stepwise multivariate linear regression model was developed to predict patient-specific risk factors that increased total EOC costs after lumbar decompression. Significance was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: A total of 226 patients were included for analysis. Risk factors associated with increased total EOC cost included increased age (per year) (ß = $324.70, P < 0.001), comorbid depression (ß = $4368.30, P = 0.037), revision procedures (ß = $6538.43, P =0.012), increased hospital length of stay (per day) (ß = $2995.43, P < 0.001), discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (ß = $14,417.42, P = 0.001), incidence of a complication (ß = $8178.07, P < 0.001), and readmission (ß = $18,734.24, P < 0.001) within 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Increased age, comorbid depression, revision decompression procedures, increased hospital length of stay, discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility, and incidence of a complication and readmission within 90 days were all associated with increased total episodes of care costs.

Clinical Improvements in Myelopathy Result in Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine if myelopathy severity predicted the magnitude of improvement in health-related quality of life metrics following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgery for myelopathy is primarily performed to halt disease progression. However, it is still controversial if these patients can expect significant health-related quality-of life improvements following ACDF. We explore the relationship between modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) improvements and its effect on other health-related quality-of life metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing ACDF for myelopathy were grouped based on preoperative mJOA scores into mild (15-17), moderate (12-14), and severe (<12) groups. Patients were subsequently categorized based on if they attained the minimum clinically detectable improvement (MCID) threshold for mJOA. Multivariate linear regression was performed to determine the magnitude of improvement in ∆patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 374 patients were identified for inclusion. Of those, 169 (45.2%) had mild myelopathy, 125 (33.4%) had moderate, and 80 (21.4%) had severe myelopathy. Only the moderate and severe groups had significant improvements in mJOA following surgery (mild: P =0.073, moderate: P <0.001, severe: P <0.001). There were no significant differences in the magnitude of improvement for any patient-reported outcome measure based on myelopathy severity, except for mJOA (mild: 0.27, moderate: 1.88, severe: 3.91; P <0.001). Patients meeting the MCID for mJOA had better ∆Short-Form 12 Mental Component Score (3.29 vs. -0.21, P =0.007), ∆Short-Form 12 Physical Component Score (6.82 vs. 1.96, P <0.001), ∆Visual Analog Scale Neck (-3.11 vs. -2.17, P =0.001), ∆Visual Analog Scale Arm (-2.92 vs. -1.48, P <0.001), ∆Neck Disability Index (-18.35 vs. -7.86, P <0.001), and ∆mJOA (3.38 vs. -0.56, P <0.001) compared with patients who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Worse baseline myelopathy severity predicts worse postoperative outcomes. However, baseline myelopathy severity is not predictive of the magnitude of postoperative improvement with the exception of mJOA. Patients who attain MCID improvement in mJOA had greater postoperative improvement for other health-related quality of life metrics.

Trends in Short Construct Lumbar Fusions Over the Past Decade at a Single Institution.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: (1) To compare the rates of fusion techniques over the last decade; (2) to identify whether surgeon experience affects a surgeon's preferred fusion technique; (3) to evaluate differences in complications, readmissions, mortality, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) based on fusion technique. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Database studies indicate the number of lumbar fusions have been steadily increasing over the last two decades; however, insufficient granularity exists to detect if surgeons' preferences are altered based on additive surgical experience. METHODS: A retrospective review of continuously collected patients undergoing lumbar fusion at a single urban academic center was performed. Rates of lumbar fusion technique: posterolateral decompression fusion (PLDF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (ALIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (LLIF) were recorded. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and inpatient mortality were compared with χ 2 test and Bonferroni correction. The Δ 1-year PROMs were compared with the analysis of variance. RESULTS: Of 3938 lumbar fusions, 1647 (41.8%) were PLDFs, 1356 (34.4%) were TLIFs, 885 (21.7%) were ALIFs, and 80 (2.0%) were lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Lumbar fusion rates increased but interbody fusion rates (2012: 57.3%; 2019: 57.6%) were stable across the study period. Surgeons with <10 years of experience performed more PLDFs and less ALIFs, whereas surgeons with >10 years' experience used ALIFs, TLIFs, and PLDFs at similar rates. Patients were more likely to be discharged home over the course of the decade (2012: 78.4%; 2019: 83.8%, P <0.001). No differences were observed between the techniques in regard to inpatient mortality ( P =0.441) or Δ (postoperative minus preoperative) PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Preferred lumbar fusion technique varies by surgeon preference, but typically remains stable over the course of a decade. The preferred fusion technique did not correlate with differences in PROMs, inpatient mortality, and patient complication rates. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 3-treatment.

Readmission and Resource Utilization in Patients From Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Following Lumbar Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether: (1) patients from communities of socioeconomic distress have higher readmission rates or postoperative healthcare resource utilization and (2) there are differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) based on socioeconomic distress. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Socioeconomic disparities affect health outcomes, but little evidence exists demonstrating the impact of socioeconomic distress on postoperative resource utilization or PROMs. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent lumbar fusion at a single tertiary academic center from January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2021. Patients were classified according to the distressed communities index. Hospital readmission, postoperative prescriptions, patient telephone calls, follow-up office visits, and PROMs were recorded. Multivariate analysis with logistic, negative binomial regression or Poisson regression were used to investigate the effects of distressed communities index on postoperative resource utilization. Alpha was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: A total of 4472 patients were included for analysis. Readmission risk was higher in distressed communities (odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.87; P =0.028). Patients from distressed communities (odds ratio, 3.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.60-9.72; P =0.003) were also more likely to be readmitted for medical, but not surgical causes ( P =0.514), and distressed patients had worse preoperative (visual analog-scale Back, P <0.001) and postoperative (Oswestry disability index, P =0.048; visual analog-scale Leg, P =0.013) PROMs, while maintaining similar magnitudes of clinical improvement. Patients from distressed communities were more likely to be discharged to a nursing facility and inpatient rehabilitation unit (25.5%, P =0.032). The race was not independently associated with readmissions ( P =0.228). CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic distress is associated with increased postoperative health resource utilization. Patients from distressed communities have worse preoperative PROMs, but the overall magnitude of improvement is similar across all classes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

MRSA Prophylaxis in Spine Surgery Decreases Postoperative Infections.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare infection rates before and after the implementation of a quality improvement protocol focused on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) screening and decolonization in patients undergoing lumbar fusion and/or decompression. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies have demonstrated MRSA infections comprise a sizable portion of SSIs. Additional studies are required to improve our understanding of the risks and benefits of MRSA decolonization with vancomycin prophylaxis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients who underwent spinal fusion or laminectomy before (2008-2011) and after (2013-2016) the implementation of an MRSA screening and treatment protocol. Odds ratios for MRSA, methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), and Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infection before and after screening was calculated. Multivariate analysis assessed demographic characteristics as potential independent predictors of infection. RESULTS: A total of 8425 lumbar fusion and 2558 lumbar decompression cases met inclusion criteria resulting in a total cohort of 10,983 patients. There was a significant decrease in the overall rate of infections ( P <0.001), MRSA infections ( P <0.001), and MSSA infections ( P <0.001) after protocol implementation. Although VRE infections after protocol implementation were not significantly different ( P =0.066), VRE rates as a percentage of all postoperative infections were substantially increased (0 vs. 3.36%, P =0.007). On multivariate analysis, significant predictors of the infection included younger age (OR=0.94[0.92-0.95]), shorter length of procedure (OR=1.00[0.99-1.00]), spinal fusion (OR=18.56[8.22-53.28]), higher ASA class (OR=5.49[4.08-7.44]), male sex (OR=1.61[1.18-2.20]), and history of diabetes (OR=1.58[1.08-2.29]). CONCLUSION: The implemented quality improvement protocol demonstrated that preoperative prophylactically treating MRSA colonized patients decreased the rate of overall infections, MSSA infections, and MRSA infections. In addition, younger age, male sex, diabetic status, greater ASA scores, and spinal fusions were risk factors for postoperative infection.

Impact of Heart Disease History on Safety of Telemedicine Cardiac Clearance Appointments.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare complication, readmission, mortality, and cancellation rates between patients who had either an in-person or telemedicine preoperative cardiac clearance visit before spine surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients who underwent a spine procedure at a single tertiary academic center from February 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021. Cancellations, inpatient complications, 90-day readmissions, and inpatient and 90-day mortality rates were compared between in-person and telemedicine cardiac clearance visits. Secondary analysis included multiple logistic regression to determine independent predictors of case cancellations and complications. Alpha was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1,331 consecutive patients were included, with 775 patients (58.2%) having an in-person cardiac clearance visit and 556 (41.8%) having telemedicine clearance. Overall, the telemedicine cohort did not have more cancellations, complications, or readmissions. Regardless of the type of clearance, patients with a history of cardiac disease had more inpatient complications (15.8% versus 6.9%, P < 0.001) and higher 90-day mortality rates (2.3% versus 0.4%, P = 0.005). Subgroup analysis of patients with a history of cardiac disease showed that patients who had telemedicine visits had more cancellations (4.6% versus 10.9%, P = 0.036) and higher 90-day mortality rates (1.4% versus 4.4%, P = 0.045). On regression analysis, telemedicine visits were not independent predictors of preoperative cancellation rates (P = 0.173) but did predict greater preoperative cancellations among patients with cardiac history (odds ratio 2.73, P = 0.036). DISCUSSION: Patients with cardiac disease who undergo preoperative telemedicine visits have greater preoperative surgical cancellation rates and postoperative 90-day mortality rates. Although preoperative telemedicine visits may be appropriate for most patients, a history of cardiac disease should be a contraindication.

Demographics and Medical Comorbidities as Risk Factors for Increased Episode of Care Costs Following Lumbar Fusion in Medicare Patients.

The objective was to evaluate medical comorbidities and surgical variables as independent risk factors for increased health care costs in Medicare patients undergoing lumbar fusion. Care episodes limited to lumbar fusions were retrospectively reviewed on the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) reimbursement database at a single academic institution. Total episode of care cost was also collected. A multivariable linear regression model was developed to identify independent risk factors for increased total episode of care cost, and logistic models for surgical complications and readmission. A total of 500 Medicare patients were included. Risk factors associated with increased total episode of care cost included transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) (ß = $5,399, P < 0.001) and ALIF+PLF (AP) fusions (ß = $24,488, P < 0.001), levels fused (ß = $3,989, P < 0.001), congestive heart failure (ß = $6,161, P = 0.022), hypertension with end-organ damage (ß = $10,138, P < 0.001), liver disease (ß = $16,682, P < 0.001), inpatient complications (ß = $4,548, P = 0.001), 90-day complications (ß = $10,012, P = 0.001), and 90-day readmissions (ß = $15,677, P < 0.001). The most common surgical complication was postoperative anemia, which was associated with significantly increased costs (ß = $18,478, P < 0.001). Female sex (OR = 2.27, P = 0.001), AP fusion (OR = 2.59, P = 0.002), levels fused (OR = 1.45, P = 0.005), cerebrovascular disease (OR = 4.19, P = 0.003), cardiac arrhythmias (OR = 2.32, P = 0.002), and fluid electrolyte disorders (OR = 4.24, P = 0.002) were independent predictors of surgical complications. Body mass index (OR = 1.07, P = 0.029) and AP fusions (OR = 2.87, P = 0.049) were independent predictors of surgical readmission. Among medical comorbidities, congestive heart failure, hypertension with end-organ damage, and liver disease were independently associated with a significant increase in total episode of care cost. Interbody devices were associated with increased admission cost.

Patients From Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Experience Similar Clinical Improvements Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) when categorizing patients based on socioeconomic status. Secondarily, we sought to compare PROMs based on race. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Social determinants of health are believed to affect outcomes following spine surgery, but there is limited literature on how combined socioeconomic status metrics affect PROMs following ACDF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors identified patients who underwent primary elective one-level to four-level ACDF from 2014 to 2020. Patients were grouped based on their distressed community index (DCI) quintile (Distressed, At-Risk, Mid-tier, Comfortable, and Prosperous) and then race (White or Black). Multivariate regression for ∆PROMs was performed based on DCI group and race while controlling for baseline demographics and surgical characteristics. RESULTS: Of 1204 patients included in the study, all DCI groups improved across all PROMs, except mental health component score (MCS-12) for the Mid-tier group ( P =0.091). Patients in the Distressed/At-Risk group had worse baseline MCS-12, visual analog scale (VAS) Neck, and neck disability index (NDI). There were no differences in magnitude of improvement between DCI groups. Black patients had significantly worse baseline VAS Neck ( P =0.002) and Arm ( P =0.012) as well as worse postoperative MCS-12 ( P =0.016), PCS-12 ( P =0.03), VAS Neck ( P <0.001), VAS Arm ( P =0.004), and NDI ( P <0.001). Multivariable regression analysis did not identify any of the DCI groupings to be significant independent predictors of ∆PROMs, but being White was an independent predictor of greater improvement in ∆PCS-12 (ß=3.09, P =0.036) and ∆NDI (ß=-7.32, P =0.003). CONCLUSIONS: All patients experienced clinical improvements regardless of DCI or race despite patients in Distressed communities and Black patients having worse preoperative PROMs. Being from a distressed community was not an independent predictor of worse improvement in any PROMs, but Black patients had worse improvement in NDI compared with White patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Is Patient Geography a Risk Factor for Chronic Opioid Use After ACDF?

The social and medical implications intrinsic to patient zip codes with high opioid fatality may reveal residence in these locations to be a risk factor predicting chronic opioid use after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The purpose of this study is to determine if residence in Pennsylvania zip codes with high incidence of opioid overdose deaths is a risk factor for chronic postoperative opioid use after ACDF. Preoperative opioid usage did not vary meaningfully between high- and low-risk zip code groups. Patients in high-risk opioid overdose zip codes were significantly more likely to exhibit chronic postoperative opioid use. The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated that opioid discontinuation was less probable at any postoperative time for patients residing in high opioid fatality zip codes. Logistic regression found opioid tolerance, smoking, and depression to predict extended opioid use.

The Effect of Online Prescription Drug Monitoring on Opioid Prescription Habits After Elective Single-level Lumbar Fusion.

INTRODUCTION: The United States opioid epidemic is a well-documented crisis stemming from increased prescriptions of narcotics. Online prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are a potential resource to mitigate narcotic misuse by tracking controlled substance prescriptions. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate opioid prescription trends after implementation of an online PDMP in patients who underwent single-level lumbar fusion. METHODS: Patients who underwent a single-level lumbar fusion between August 27, 2017, and August 31, 2020, were identified and placed categorically into one of two cohorts: an "early adoption" cohort, September 1, 2017, to August 31, 2018, and a "late adoption" cohort, September 1, 2019, to August 31, 2020. This allowed for a 1-year washout period after Pennsylvania PDMP implementation on August 26, 2016. Opioid use data were obtained by searching for each patient in the state government's online PDMP and recording data from the year before and the year after the patient's procedure. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in preoperative opioid prescriptions between the early and late adoption cohorts. The late adoption group independently predicted decreased postoperative opioid prescriptions (ß, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.93; P = 0.007), opioid prescribers (ß, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.90; P < 0.001), pharmacies used (ß, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97; P = 0.006), opioid pills (ß, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74; P < 0.001), days of opioid prescription (ß, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.72; P < 0.001), and morphine milligram equivalents prescribed (ß, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.66; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PDMP implementation was associated with decreased postoperative opioid prescription patterns but not preoperative opioid prescribing behaviors. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Does Postoperative Spine Infection Bacterial Gram Type Affect Surgical Debridement or Antibiotic Duration?

STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate differences in readmission rates, number of debridements, and length of antibiotic therapy when comparing bacterial gram type following lumbar spinal fusion infections. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgical site infections (SSIs) after spinal fusion serve as a significant source of patient morbidity. It remains to be elucidated how bacterial classification of the infecting organism affects the management of postoperative spinal SSI. METHODS: Patients who underwent spinal fusion with a subsequent diagnosis of SSI between 2013 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients were grouped based on bacterial infection type (gram-positive, gram-negative, or mixed infections). Poisson regressions analyzed the relationship between the type of bacterial infection and the number of irrigation and debridement (I&D) reoperations, and the duration of intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. Significance was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: Of 190 patients, 92 had gram-positive (G+) infections, 57 had gram-negative (G-) infections, and 33 had mixed (M) infections. There was no difference in 30 or 90-day readmissions for infection between groups (both P =0.051). Patients in the M group had longer durations of IV antibiotic treatment (G+: 46.4 vs. G-: 41.0 vs. M: 55.9 d, P =0.002). Regression analysis demonstrated mixed infections were 46% more likely to require a greater number of debridements ( P =0.001) and 18% more likely to require an increased duration of IV antibiotic therapy ( P <0.001), while gram-negative infections were 10% less likely to require an increased duration of IV antibiotic therapy ( P <0.001) when compared with G- infections. CONCLUSION: Spinal SSI due to a mixed bacterial gram type results in an increased number of debridements and a longer duration of IV antibiotics required to resolve the infection compared with gram-negative or gram-positive infections. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

A Short-Term Assessment of Lumbar Sagittal Alignment Parameters in Patients Undergoing Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To determine if intraoperative on-table lumbar lordosis (LL) and segmental lordosis (SL) coincide with perioperative change in lordosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Improvements in sagittal alignment are believed to correlate with improvements in clinical outcomes. Thus, it is important to establish whether intraoperative radiographs predict postoperative improvements in LL or SL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic medical records were reviewed for patients ≥18 years old who underwent single-level and two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior instrumentation between 2016 and 2020. LL, SL, and the lordosis distribution index were compared between preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative radiographs using paired t tests. A linear regression determined the effect of subsidence on SL and LL. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients met inclusion criteria. Of those, 75 patients had one-level fusions and 43 had a two-level fusion. LL significantly increased following on-table positioning [delta (Δ): 5.7°, P <0.001]. However, LL significantly decreased between the intraoperative to postoperative radiographs at two to six weeks (Δ: -3.4°, P =0.001), while no change was identified between the intraoperative and more than three-month postoperative radiographs (Δ: -1.6°, P =0.143). SL was found to significantly increase from the preoperative to intraoperative radiographs (Δ: 10.9°, P <0.001), but it subsequently decreased at the two to six weeks follow up (Δ: -2.7, P <0.001) and at the final follow up (Δ: -4.1, P <0.001). On linear regression, cage subsidence/allograft resorption was predictive of the Δ SL (ß=0.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.16-0.94; P =0.006), but not LL (ß=0.10; 95% confidence interval: -0.44 to 0.65; P =0.708). CONCLUSION: Early postoperative radiographs may not accurately reflect the improvement in LL seen on intraoperative radiographic imaging, but they are predictive of long-term lumbar sagittal alignment. Each millimeter of cage subsidence or allograft resorption reduces SL by 0.55°, but subsidence does not significantly affect LL. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Marijuana Use and its Effect on Clinical Outcomes and Revision Rates in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine if (1) preoperative marijuana use increased complications, readmission, or reoperation rates following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), (2) identify if preoperative marijuana use resulted in worse patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and (3) investigate if preoperative marijuana use affects the quantity of opioid prescriptions in the perioperative period. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A growing number of states have legalized recreational and/or medical marijuana, thus increasing the number of patients who report preoperative marijuana use. The effects of marijuana on clinical outcomes and PROMs in the postoperative period are unknown. METHODS: All patients 18 years of age and older who underwent primary one- to four-level ACDF with preoperative marijuana use at our academic institution were retrospectively identified. A 3:1 propensity match was conducted to compare patients who used marijuana versus those who did not. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, clinical outcomes, and PROMs were compared between groups. Multivariate regression models measured the effect of marijuana use on the likelihood of requiring a reoperation and whether marijuana use predicted inferior PROM improvements at the one-year postoperative period. RESULTS: Of the 240 patients included, 60 (25.0%) used marijuana preoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified marijuana use (odds ratio=5.62, P <0.001) as a predictor of a cervical spine reoperation after ACDF. Patients who used marijuana preoperatively had worse one-year postoperative Physical Component Scores of the Short-Form 12 (PCS-12) ( P =0.001), Neck Disability Index ( P =0.003), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Arm ( P =0.044) and VAS Neck ( P =0.012). Multivariate linear regression found preoperative marijuana use did not independently predict improvement in PCS-12 (ß=-4.62, P =0.096), Neck Disability Index (ß=9.51, P =0.062), Mental Component Scores of the Short-Form 12 (MCS-12) (ß=-1.16, P =0.694), VAS Arm (ß=0.06, P =0.944), or VAS Neck (ß=-0.44, P =0.617). CONCLUSION: Preoperative marijuana use increased the risk of a cervical spine reoperation after ACDF, but it did not significantly change the amount of postoperative opioids used or the magnitude of improvement in PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Levwl III.

Clinical Outcomes at One-year Follow-up for Patients With Surgical Site Infection After Spinal Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. OBJECTIVE: To compare health-related quality of life outcomes at one-year follow-up between patients who did and did not develop surgical site infection (SSI) after thoracolumbar spinal fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: SSI is among the most common healthcare-associated complications. As healthcare systems increasingly emphasize the value of delivered care, there is an increased need to understand the clinical impact of SSIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective 3:1 (control:SSI) propensity-matched case-control study was conducted for adult patients who underwent thoracolumbar fusion from March 2014 to January 2020 at a single academic institution. Exclusion criteria included less than 18 years of age, incomplete preoperative and one-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, and revision surgery. Continuous and categorical data were compared via independent t tests and χ 2 tests, respectively. Intragroup analysis was performed using paired t tests. Regression analysis for ∆ patient-reported outcome measures (postoperative minus preoperative scores) controlled for demographics. The α was set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients (105 control, 35 SSI) were included in final analysis. The infections group had a higher rate of readmission (100% vs. 0.95%, P <0.001) and revision surgery (28.6% vs. 12.4%, P =0.048). Both groups improved significantly in Physical Component Score (control: P =0.013, SSI: P =0.039), Oswestry Disability Index (control: P <0.001, SSI: P =0.001), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Back (both, P <0.001), and VAS Leg (control: P <0.001, SSI: P =0.030). Only the control group improved in Mental Component Score ( P <0.001 vs. SSI: P =0.228), but history of a SSI did not affect one-year improvement in ∆MCS-12 ( P =0.455) on regression analysis. VAS Leg improved significantly less in the infection group (-1.87 vs. -3.59, P =0.039), which was not significant after regression analysis (ß=1.75, P =0.050). CONCLUSION: Development of SSI after thoracolumbar fusion resulted in increased revision rates but did not influence patient improvement in one-year pain, functional disability, or physical and mental health status.

Depression Increases Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Revision Rates and Diminishes Neck Disability Index Improvement.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine if depression and/or anxiety significantly affect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Mental health diagnoses are receiving increased recognition for their influence of outcomes after spine surgery. The magnitude that mental health disorders contribute to patient-reported outcomes following PCDF requires increased awareness and understanding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of electronic medical records identified patients who underwent a PCDF at a single institution during the years 2013-2020. Patients were placed into either depression/anxiety or nondepression/anxiety group based on their medical history. A delta score (∆) was calculated for all PROMs by subtracting postoperative from preoperative scores. χ 2 tests and t tests were utilized to analyze categorical and continuous data, respectively. Regression analysis determined independent predictors of change in PROMs. Alpha was set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 195 patients met inclusion criteria, with 60 (30.8%) having a prior diagnosis of depression/anxiety. The depression/anxiety group was younger (58.8 vs . 63.0, P =0.012), predominantly female (53.3% vs . 31.9%, P =0.007), and more frequently required revision surgery (11.7% vs . 0.74%, P =0.001). In addition, they had worse baseline mental component (MCS-12) (42.2 vs . 48.6, P <0.001), postoperative MCS-12 (46.5 vs . 52.9, P =0.002), postoperative neck disability index (NDI) (40.7 vs . 28.5, P =0.001), ∆NDI (-1.80 vs . -8.93, P =0.010), NDI minimum clinically important difference improvement (15.0% vs . 29.6%, P =0.046), and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Neck scores (3.63 vs . 2.48, P =0.018). Only the nondepression/anxiety group improved in MCS-12 ( P =0.002) and NDI ( P <0.001) postoperatively. Depression and/or anxiety was an independent predictor of decreased magnitude of NDI improvement on regression analysis (ß=7.14, P =0.038). CONCLUSION: Patients with history of depression or anxiety demonstrate less improvement in patient-reported outcomes and a higher revision rate after posterior cervical fusion, highlighting the importance of mental health on clinical outcomes after spine surgery.