Temporal analysis of complication rates of cervical spine surgery for degenerative spine disease between younger and older cohorts using the CSORN registry: Is age just a number?

STUDY DESIGN: An ambispective review of consecutive cervical spine surgery patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) between January 2015 and September 2019. PURPOSE: To compare complication rates of degenerative cervical spine surgery over time between older (> 65) and younger age groups (< 65). More elderly people are having spinal surgery. Few studies have examined the temporal nature of complications of cervical spine surgery by patient age groups. METHODS: Adverse events were collected prospectively using adverse event forms. Binary logistic regression analysis was utilized to assess associations between risk modifiers and adverse events at the intra-, peri-operative and 3 months post-surgery. RESULTS: Of the 761 patients studied (age < 65, n = 581 (76.3%) and 65 + n = 180 (23.7%), the intra-op adverse events were not significantly different; < 65 = 19 (3.3%) vs 65 + = 11 (6.1%), p < 0.087. Peri-operatively, the < 65 group had significantly lower percentage of adverse events (65yrs (11.2%) vs. 65 + = (26.1%), p < 0.001). There were no differences in rates of adverse events at 3 months post-surgery (< 65 = 39 (6.7%) vs. 65 + = 12 (6.7%), p < 0.983). Less blood loss (OR = 0.99, p < 0.010) and shorter length of hospital stay (OR = 0.97, p < 0.025) were associated with not having intra-op adverse events. Peri-operatively, > 1 operated level (OR = 1.77, p < 0.041), shorter length of hospital stay (OR = 0.86, p < 0.001) and being younger than 65 years (OR = 2.11, p < 0.006) were associated with not having adverse events. CONCLUSION: Following degenerative cervical spine surgery, the older and younger age groups had significantly different complication rates at peri-operative time points, and the intra-operative and 3-month post-operative complication rates were similar in the groups.

L5-S1 Pseudoarthrosis Rate with ALIF Versus TLIF in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgeries: A Retrospective Analysis of 100 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbosacral pseudoarthrosis is a common complication following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery. This study assessed the reoperation rate for L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis in the ASD population. Compared with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIFs), we hypothesized that anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) would result in lower rates of L5-S1 pseudarthrosis. METHODS: This is a single center study with patient data retrieved from a prospective ASD database. The patients had a long-segment fusion, ALIF or TLIF at the L5-S1 level with a 2-year follow-up and were divided into 2 groups (TLIF and ALIF). The study's primary outcome was to assess the difference in the reoperation rate for clinical pseudoarthrosis between the TLIF and the ALIF groups. The secondary outcomes measured the radiological pseudoarthrosis rate and identified risks for L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis development. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included; 49 patients (mean age, 62.9 years; 77.5% females) were in TLIF and 51 patients (mean age, 64.4 years; 70.6% females) were in the ALIF group. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. Thirteen (13%) patients with L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis required reoperation. Clinical pseudoarthrosis was higher in the TLIF group than in the ALIF group (12/49 vs. 1/51; P < 0.001). Univariate analysis demonstrated a higher risk of L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis with TLIF than ALIF (risk ratio, 12.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.68-92.4; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed 4.86 times the risk of L5-S1 clinical pseudoarthrosis with TLIF than with ALIF (risk ratio, 4.86; 95% confidence interval 0.57-47; P = 0.17), but this ratio did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in reoperation risk for L5-S1 pseudarthrosis was observed based on the method of IF. rhBMP-2 was noted as a significant predictor.

Cost consequence analysis of waiting for lumbar disc herniation surgery.

The economic repercussions of waiting for lumbar disc surgery have not been well studied. The primary goal of this study was to perform a cost-consequence analysis of patients receiving early vs late surgery for symptomatic disc herniation from a societal perspective. Secondarily, we compared patient factors and patient-reported outcomes. This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the CSORN registry. A cost-consequence analysis was performed where direct and indirect costs were compared, and different outcomes were listed separately. Comparisons were made on an observational cohort of patients receiving surgery less than 60 days after consent (short wait) or 60 days or more after consent (long wait). This study included 493 patients with surgery between January 2015 and October 2021 with 272 patients (55.2%) in the short wait group and 221 patients (44.8%) classified as long wait. There was no difference in proportions of patients who returned to work at 3 and 12-months. Time from surgery to return to work was similar between both groups (34.0 vs 34.9 days, p = 0.804). Time from consent to return to work was longer in the longer wait group corresponding to an additional $11,753.10 mean indirect cost per patient. The short wait group showed increased healthcare usage at 3 months with more emergency department visits (52.6% vs 25.0%, p < 0.032), more physiotherapy (84.6% vs 72.0%, p < 0.001) and more MRI (65.2% vs 41.4%, p < 0.043). This corresponded to an additional direct cost of $518.21 per patient. Secondarily, the short wait group had higher baseline NRS leg, ODI, and lower EQ5D and PCS. The long wait group had more patients with symptoms over 2 years duration (57.6% vs 34.1%, p < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients reached MCID in terms of NRS leg pain at 3-month follow up in the short wait group (84.0% vs 75.9%, p < 0.040). This cost-consequence analysis of an observational cohort showed decreased costs associated with early surgery of $11,234.89 per patient when compared to late surgery for lumbar disc herniation. The early surgery group had more severe symptoms with higher healthcare utilization. This is counterbalanced by the additional productivity loss in the long wait group, which likely have a more chronic disease. From a societal economic perspective, early surgery seems beneficial and should be promoted.

Practice Variation between Salaried and Fee-for-Service Surgeons for Lumbar Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in surgical practices between salaried and fee-for-service (FFS) surgeons for two common degenerative spine conditions. Surgeons may offer different treatments for similar conditions on the basis of their compensation mechanism. METHODS: The study assessed the practices of 63 spine surgeons across eight Canadian provinces (39 FFS surgeons and 24 salaried) who performed surgery for two lumbar conditions: stable spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. The study included a multicenter, ambispective review of consecutive spine surgery patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry between October 2012 and July 2018. The primary outcome was the difference in type of procedures performed between the two groups. Secondary study variables included surgical characteristics, baseline patient factors, and patient-reported outcome. RESULTS: For stable spinal stenosis (n = 2234), salaried surgeons performed statistically fewer uninstrumented fusion (p < 0.05) than FFS surgeons. For degenerative spondylolisthesis (n = 1292), salaried surgeons performed significantly more instrumentation plus interbody fusions (p < 0.05). There were no statistical differences in patient-reported outcomes between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon compensation was associated with different approaches to stable lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Salaried surgeons chose a more conservative approach to spinal stenosis and a more aggressive approach to degenerative spondylolisthesis, which highlights that remuneration is likely a minor determinant in the differences in practice of spinal surgery in Canada. Further research is needed to further elucidate which variables, other than patient demographics and financial incentives, influence surgical decision-making.

Effects of Workload on Return to Work After Elective Lumbar Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis was performed of a multi-center Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) surgical database. OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate and time to return to work (RTW) based on workload intensity after elective degenerative lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: Patients working pre-operatively, aged greater than 18, who underwent a primary one- or two-level elective lumbar spine surgery for degenerative conditions between January 2015 and October 2020 were evaluated. The percentage of patients who returned to work at 1 year and the time to RTW post-operatively were analyzed based on workload intensity. RESULTS: Of the 1290 patients included in the analysis, the overall rate of RTW was 82% at 1 year. Based on workload there was no significant difference in time to RTW after a fusion procedure, with median time to RTW being 10 weeks. For non-fusion procedure, the sedentary group had a statistically significantly quicker time to RTW than the light-moderate (P < .005) and heavy-very heavy (<.027) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of RTW ranged between 84% for patients with sedentary work to 77% for patient with a heavy-very heavy workload. Median time to resumption of work was about 10 weeks following a fusion regardless of work intensity. There was more variability following non-fusion surgeries such as laminectomy and discectomy reflecting the patient's job demands.

Preoperative Patient-reported Outcomes are not Associated With Sagittal and Spinopelvic Alignment in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether sagittal and spinopelvic alignment correlate with preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) with spinal stenosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Positive global sagittal balance and spinopelvic malalignment are strongly correlated with symptom severity in adult spinal deformity, but this correlation has not been evaluated in DLS. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) prospective DLS study at seven centers between January 2015 and May 2018. Correlation was assessed between the following preoperative PROs: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) leg pain, and NRS back pain and the following preoperative sagittal radiographic parameters SS, PT, PI, SVA, LL, TK, T1SPI, T9SPI, and PI-LL. Patients were further divided into groups based on spinopelvic alignment: Group 1 PI-LL<10°; Group 2 PI-LL ≥10° with PT <30°; and Group 3 PI-LL ≥10° with PT ≥30°. Preoperative PROs were compared among these three groups and were further stratified by those with SVA <50 mm and SVA ≥50 mm. RESULTS: A total of 320 patients (61% female) with mean age of 66.1 years were included. Mean (SD) preoperative PROs were: NRS leg pain 7.4 (2.1), NRS back pain 7.1 (2.0), and ODI 45.5 (14.5). Preoperative radiographic parameters included: SVA 27.1 (33.4) mm, LL 45.7 (13.4°), PI 57.6 (11.9), and PI-LL 11.8 (14.0°). Weak but statistically significant correlations were observed between leg pain and PT (r = -0.114) and PI (ρ = -0.130), and T9SPI with back pain ( r  = 0.130). No significant differences were observed among the three groups stratified by PI-LL and PT. No significant differences in PROs were observed between patients with SVA <50 mm compared to those with SVA ≥50 mm. CONCLUSION: Sagittal and spinopelvic malalignment do not appear to significantly influence baseline PROs in patients with DLS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic level II.

Cervical Sagittal Alignment in Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Among patients with CSM, we aimed to evaluate the extent to which: (1) Preoperative cervical sagittal alignment is associated with health-related quality of life, function, and symptoms; (2) Surgery leads to changes in cervical sagittal alignment; and (3) Postoperative cervical sagittal alignment is associated with health-related quality of life, function, and symptoms at 12 months of follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The importance of maintaining or improving cervical sagittal alignment in the surgical management of patients with CSM has not been established. METHODS: We measured C2-C7 Cobb angle, T1 slope, and C2-C7 cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA). We tested for associations with Neck Disability Index, Pain Scales for neck and arm pain, EuroQol 5D, Short Form 12 Physical and Mental Component Summaries, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores. We adjusted for potential confounders using multiple linear regression, and we performed various prespecified subgroup (cSVA > 40 mm, surgical approach) and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Among 250 patients, adjusted analyses yielded significant inverse associations prior to surgery between each of cSVA and T1 slope with SF12 Physical Component Summaries (T1 slope: -0.14, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.01, P = 0.03; C2-C7 cSVA: -0.13, 95% CI --0.21 to -0.05 P < 0.01). Surgery was associated with a small but statistically significant increase in cSVA across the cohort (+5.8 mm [SD 11.7], P < 0.01) but no change in Cobb angle or T1 slope. At 12-months after surgery, there were no significant associations between alignment parameters or change in alignment and any measures of health-related quality of life, function, or symptoms. Results were consistent across subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Increased cSVA and T1 slope were associated with inferior health-related quality of life at presentation among patients with CSM, but no significant associations were observed following surgical treatment.Level of Evidence: 3.

Low-back pain after lumbar discectomy for disc herniation: what can you tell your patient?

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar discectomy (LD) is frequently performed to alleviate radicular pain resulting from disc herniation. While this goal is achieved in most patients, improvement in low-back pain (LBP) has been reported inconsistently. The goal of this study was to characterize how LBP evolves following discectomy. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected patient data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) registry. Patients who underwent surgery for lumbar disc herniation were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was a clinically significant reduction in the back pain numerical rating scale (BPNRS) assessed at 12 months. Binary logistic regression was used to model the relationship between the primary outcome and potential predictors. RESULTS: There were 557 patients included in the analysis. The chief complaint was radiculopathy in 85%; 55% of patients underwent a minimally invasive procedure. BPNRS improved at 3 months by 48% and this improvement was sustained at all follow-ups. LBP and leg pain improvement were correlated. Clinically significant improvement in BPNRS at 12 months was reported by 64% of patients. Six factors predicted a lack of LBP improvement: female sex, low education level, marriage, not working, low expectations with regard to LBP improvement, and a low BPNRS preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically significant improvement in LBP is observed in the majority of patients after LD. These data should be used to better counsel patients and provide accurate expectations about back pain improvement.

Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: factors associated with the decision to fuse.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The indication to perform a fusion and decompression surgery as opposed to decompression alone for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) remains controversial. A variety of factors are considered when deciding on whether to fuse, including patient demographics, radiographic parameters, and symptom presentation. Likely surgeon preference has an important influence as well. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess factors associated with the decision of a Canadian academic spine surgeon to perform a fusion for LDS. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This study is a retrospective analysis of patients prospectively enrolled in a multicenter Canadian study that was designed to evaluate the assessment and surgical management of LDS. PATIENT SAMPLE: Inclusion criteria were patients with: radiographic evidence of LDS and neurogenic claudication or radicular pain, undergoing posterior decompression alone or posterior decompression and fusion, performed in one of seven, participating academic centers from 2015 to 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient demographics, patient-rated outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], numberical rating scale back pain and leg pain, SF-12), and imaging parameters were recorded in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) database. Surgeon factors were retrieved by survey of each participating surgeon and then linked to their specific patients within the database. METHODS: Univariate analysis was used to compare patient characteristics, imaging measures, and surgeon variables between those that had a fusion and those that had decompression alone. Multivariate backward logistic regression was used to identify the best combination of factors associated with the decision to perform a fusion. RESULTS: This study includes 241 consecutively enrolled patients receiving surgery from 11 surgeons at 7 sites. Patients that had a fusion were younger (65.3±8.3 vs. 68.6±9.7 years, p=.012), had worse ODI scores (45.9±14.7 vs. 40.2±13.5, p=.007), a smaller average disc height (6.1±2.7 vs. 8.0±7.3 mm, p=.005), were more likely to have grade II spondylolisthesis (31% vs. 14%, p=.008), facet distraction (34% vs. 60%, p=.034), and a nonlordotic disc angle (26% vs. 17%, p=.038). The rate of fusion varied by individual surgeon and practice location (p<.001, respectively). Surgeons that were fellowship trained in Canada more frequently fused than those who fellowship trained outside of Canada (76% vs. 57%, p=.027). Surgeons on salary fused more frequently than surgeons remunerated by fee-for-service (80% vs. 64%, p=.004). In the multivariate analysis the clinical factors associated with an increased odds of fusion were decreasing age, decreasing disc height, and increasing ODI score; the radiographic factors were grade II spondylolisthesis and neutral or kyphotic standing disc type; and the surgeon factors were fellowship location, renumeration type and practice region. The odds of having a fusion surgery was more than two times greater for patients with a grade II spondylolisthesis or neutral and/or kyphotic standing disc type (opposed to lordotic standing disc type). Patients whose surgeon completed their fellowship in Canada, or whose surgeon was salaried (opposed to fee-for-service), or whose surgeon practiced in western Canada had twice the odds of having fusion surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to perform a fusion in addition to decompression for LDS is multifactorial. Although patient and radiographic parameters are important in the decision-making process, multiple surgeon factors are associated with the preference of a Canadian spine surgeon to perform a fusion for LDS. Future work is necessary to decrease treatment variability between surgeons and help facilitate the implementation of evidence-based decision making.

Back pain in surgically treated degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: what can we tell our patients?

OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) has traditionally been indicated for patients with neurogenic claudication. Surgery improves patients' disability and lower extremity symptoms, but less is known about the impact on back pain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in back pain after surgery and identify factors associated with these changes in surgically-treated DLS. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. METHODS: There were 486 consecutive patients with surgically-treated DLS who were enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network prospective registry and identified for this study. Patients had demographic data, clinical information, disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and back pain rating scores collected prospectively at baseline, and 12 months follow-up RESULTS: Of the 486 DLS patients, 376 (77.3%) were successfully followed at 12 months. Mean age at baseline was 66.7 (standard deviation [SD] 9.2) years old, and 63% were female. Back pain improved significantly at 12 months, compared with baseline (p<.001). Improvement in Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-back pain ratings was on average 2.97 (SD 2.5) points at one year and clinically significant improvement in back pain was observed in 75% of patients (minimal clinically important difference (MCID) NRS-Pain 1.2 points). Multivariable logistic regression revealed five factors associated with meeting MCID NRS-back pain at 12 month follow up: higher baseline back pain, better baseline physical function (higher SF-12 Physical Component Score), symptoms duration less than 1 to 2 years, and having no intraoperative adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Back pain improved significantly for patients treated surgically for DLS at 1-year follow-up.

Evidence-Based Recommendations for Spine Surgery.

: This next issue of Evidence-Based Recommendations for Spine Surgery examines six articles that seek to address pressing and relevant issues in contemporary spine surgery. These articles explore the safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid during lumbar surgery, the utility of post-operative MRI after spinal decompression surgery, the role of teriparatide for fusion support in osteoporotic patients, sagittal spinopelvic alignment in adults, the comparative effectiveness of lumbar disk arthroplasty and prognostic factors for satisfaction after lumbar decompression surgery. These important publications are examined rigorously - both clinically and methodologically - and recommendations regarding impact on clinical practice are provided.Level of Evidence: N/A.

Predicting recovery after lumbar spinal stenosis surgery: A protocol for a historical cohort study using data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN).

Background: Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (SLSS) is a condition in which narrowing of the spinal canal results in entrapment and compression of neurovascular structures. Decompressive surgery, with or without spinal fusion, is recommended for those with severe symptoms for whom conservative management has failed. However, significant persistent pain, functional limitations, and narcotic use can affect up to one third of patients postsurgery. Aims: The aim of this study will be to identify predictors of outcomes 1-year post SLSS surgery with a focus on modifiable predictors. Methods: The Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) is a large database of prospectively collected data on pre- and postsurgical outcomes among surgical patients. We include participants with a primary diagnosis of SLSS undergoing their first spine surgery. Outcomes are measured at 12 months after surgery and include back and leg pain, disability (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI), walking capacity (ODI item 4), health-related quality of life, and an overall recovery composite outcome (clinically important changes in pain, disability, and quality of life). Predictors include demographics (education level, work status, marital status, age, sex, body mass index), physical activity level, smoking status, previous conservative treatments, medication intake, depression, patient expectations, and other comorbidities. A multivariate partial least squares model is used to identify predictors of outcomes. Conclusion: Study results will inform targeted SLSS interventions, either for the selection of best candidates for surgery or the identification of targets for presurgical rehabilitation programs.

Contexte: La sténose spinale lombaire symptomatique (SSL) est une affection dans laquelle le rétrécissement du canal rachidien entraîne le piégeage et la compression des structures neurovasculaires. La chirurgie décompressive, avec ou sans fusion vertébrale, est recommandée pour les personnes présentant des symptômes graves et pour lesquelles la prise en charge conservatrice a échoué. Cependant, une douleur persistante importante, des limitations fonctionnelles et l'usage de narcotiques peuvent affecter jusqu'à un tiers des patients après l'opération.Objectifs: Cette étude aura pour but d'identifier les prédicteurs de résultats un an après l'intervention chirurgicale de la sténose spinale lombaire symptomatique, en mettant l'accent sur les prédicteurs modifiables.Méthodes: Le Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) est une vaste base de données de patients chirurgicaux collectées de manière prospective comprenant des données sur les résultats pré et postopératoires. Nous inclurons les participants ayant un diagnostic primaire de sténose spinale lombaire symptomatique, qui subissent leur première opération de la colonne vertébrale. Les résultats sont mesurés 12 mois après l'opération et comprennent les douleurs dorsales et aux jambes, le handicap (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI), la capacité de marche (ODI, point 4), la qualité de vie liée à la santé et un résultat composite de récupération globale (changements cliniquement importants dans la douleur, le handicap et la qualité de vie). Les prédicteurs comprendront des données démographiques (niveau d'éducation, situation professionnelle, état civil, âge, sexe, indice de masse corporelle), le niveau d'activité physique, le tabagisme, les traitements conservateurs antérieurs, la prise de médicaments, la dépression, les attentes des patients et d'autres comorbidités. Un modèle multivarié des moindres carrés partiels sera utilisé pour identifier les prédicteurs de résultats.Conclusion: Les résultats de l'étude serviront de base à des interventions ciblées en matière de sténose spinale lombaire symptomatique, soit pour la sélection des meilleurs candidats à la chirurgie, soit pour déterminer des cibles pour les programmes de réadaptation pré-chirurgicale.

The cost effectiveness of minimally invasive spine surgery in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis: a comparison of transpsoas and open techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment improves quality of life in patients with adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). However, open ADS surgeries are complex, large magnitude operations associated with a high rate of complications. The lateral transpsoas interbody fusion technique is a less invasive alternative to open ADS surgery, but less invasive techniques tend to be more expensive. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the transpsoas technique for patients with ADS over a 12-month time horizon from a public payer perspective. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed based on a consecutive case series of patients who underwent ADS surgeries between 2006 and 2012. Effectiveness was expressed as the difference in patient reported preoperative and 12-month postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL), which was measured in quality-adjusted life years. Health-care resource use was tabulated based on a clinical chart review on an item-by-item basis. Unit cost data were obtained from published provincial costs in Alberta, Canada. All costs were adjusted to 2015 Canadian dollars. The base case analysis included costs for the surgery, initial hospitalization, and treatment for complications over a 12-month follow-up period. The uncomplicated case analysis included costs for the surgery and initial hospitalization only. The joint uncertainty surrounding the cost and HRQOL differences was estimated using bootstrapping with 10,000 replicates. RESULTS: A total of 10 open technique and 12 transpsoas technique T11-pelvis fusions were included in the analysis. In the base case analysis, the transpsoas technique was less costly compared with the open technique, total cost of $83,513 (95% CI: $72,772-$94,253) versus $111,381 (95% CI: $36,340-$186,423), respectively (incremental cost $27,869), and was associated with 0.06 more quality-adjusted life years and/or patient. However, in the uncomplicated case, the open technique was less costly compared with the transpsoas technique ($47,795 [95% CI: $39,003-$56,586] vs $76,510 [95% CI: $72,273-$80,746]), respectively, with an incremental cost of $28,715. Based on the probabilistic analysis of 10,000 bootstrap iterations for the base case analysis, the transpsoas technique was more effective and less costly compared with the open technique 57% of time. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis by adjusting bone-morphogenetic protein-2 dosage further improved cost effectiveness of the transpsoas technique by lowering overall costs. CONCLUSIONS: Transpsoas surgeries were associated with better outcomes in terms of HRQOL and lower costs over 1-year follow-up period compared with more invasive open technique. This study should be viewed as a pilot evaluation and should be replicated in a larger prospective multicenter controlled study.

Patient-reported outcomes following surgery for degenerative spondylolitshtesis: comparison of a universal and multitier health care system.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of results from a prospectively collected Canadian cohort in comparison to published literature. OBJECTIVES: (1) To investigate whether patients in a universal health care system have different outcomes than those in a multitier health care system in surgical management of degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). (2) To identify independent factors predictive of outcome in surgical DS patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Canada has a national health insurance program with unique properties. It is a single-payer system, coverage is universal, and access to specialist care requires referral by the primary care physician. The United States on the other hand is a multitier public/private payer system with more rapid access for insured patients to specialist care. METHODS: Surgical DS patients treated between 2013 and 2016 in Canada were identified through the Canadian Spine Outcome Research Network (CSORN) database, a national registry that prospectively enrolls consecutive patients with spinal pathology from 16 tertiary care academic hospitals. This population was compared with the surgical DS arm of patients treated in the Spine Patients Outcome Research Trial (SPORT) study. We compared baseline demographics, spine-related, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes at 3 months and 1 year. Multivariate analysis was used to identify factors predictive of outcome in surgical DS patients. RESULTS: The CSORN cohort of 213 patients was compared with the SPORT cohort of 248 patients. Patients in the CSORN cohort were younger (mean age 60.1 vs. 65.2; p<.001), comprised fewer females (60.1% vs. 67.7%; p=.09), and had a higher proportion of smokers (23.3% vs. 8.9%; p<.001). The SPORT cohort had more patients receiving compensation (14.6% vs. 7.7%; p<.001). The CSORN cohort consisted of patients with slightly greater baseline disability (Oswestry disability index scores: 47.7 vs. 44.0; p=.008) and had more patients with symptom duration of greater than 6 months (93.7% vs. 62.1%; p<.001). The CSORN cohort showed greater satisfaction with surgical results at 3 months (91.1% vs. 66.1% somewhat or very satisfied; p<.01) and 1 year (88.2% vs. 71.0%, p<.01). Improvements in back and leg pain were similar comparing the two cohorts. On multivariate analysis, duration of symptoms, treatment group (CSORN vs. SPORT) or insurance type (public/Medicare/Medicaid vs. Private/Employer) predicted higher level of postoperative satisfaction. Baseline depression was also associated with worse Oswestry disability index at 1-year postoperative follow-up in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical DS patients treated in Canada (CSORN cohort) reported higher levels of satisfaction than those treated in the United States (SPORT cohort) despite similar to slightly worse baseline HRQOL measures. Symptom duration and insurance type appeared to impact satisfaction levels. Improvements in other patient-reported health-related quality of life measures were similar between the cohorts.

Performance Indicators in Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate how performance indicators are currently used in spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has given significant traction to the idea that healthcare must provide value to the patient through the introduction of hospital value-based purchasing. The key to implementing this new paradigm is to measure this value notably through performance indicators. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting the use of performance indicators specific to spine surgery. We followed the Prisma-P methodology for a systematic review for entries from January 1980 to July 2016. All full text articles were then reviewed to identify any measure of performance published within the article. This measure was then examined as per the three criteria of established standard, exclusion/risk adjustment, and benchmarking to determine if it constituted a performance indicator. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 85 results among which two relevant studies were identified. The extended search gave a total of 865 citations across databases among which 15 new articles were identified. The grey literature search provided five additional reports which in turn led to six additional articles. A total of 27 full text articles and reports were retrieved and reviewed. We were unable to identify performance indicators. The articles presenting a measure of performance were organized based on how many criteria they lacked. We further examined the next steps to be taken to craft the first performance indicator in spine surgery. CONCLUSION: The science of performance measurement applied to spine surgery is still in its infancy. Current outcome metrics used in clinical settings require refinement to become performance indicators. Current registry work is providing the necessary foundation, but requires benchmarking to truly measure performance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Predictors of Blood Transfusion in Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Canadian Spine Outcome and Research Network Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To identify patient or procedure related predictors of postoperative blood transfusions in posterior lumbar fusion (PSF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The rate of PSF surgery has increased significantly. It remains the most common surgical procedure used to stabilize the spine; however, the impact of blood loss requiring blood transfusions remains a significant concern. METHODS: Analysis of data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network. Patients who underwent PSF between 2008 and 2015 were identified. Multivariate analysis was used to identify predictors of blood transfusion from the collected information. RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy two patients have undergone PSF, 18% required blood transfusion, 54.8% were females and the mean age was 60 years. The analysis revealed five significant predictors: American Society of Anesthesiologist class (ASA), operative time, multilevel fusion, sacrum involvement, and open posterior approach. The odds of transfusion for those with ASA >1 were 6 times those with ASA1 (odds ratio [OR] 6.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-27.1, P < 0.018). For each 60-minute increase in operative time, the odds of transfusion increased by 4.2% (OR 1.007, 95% CI 1.004-1.009, P < 0.001). The odds of transfusion were 6 times higher for multilevel fusion (OR 5.8, 95% CI 2.6-13.2, P < 0.001). Extending fusion to the sacrum showed 3 times higher odds for blood transfusion (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.8-5.8, P < 0.001). The odds of transfusion for patients undergoing open approach were 12 times those who had minimal invasive surgery (OR 12.5, 95% CI 1.6-97.4, P < 0.016). Finally, patients receiving transfusions were more likely to have extended hospital stay. CONCLUSION: ASA >1, prolonged operative time, multilevel fusion, sacrum involvement, and open posterior approach were significant predictors of blood transfusion in PSF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Validation of the Calgary Spine Severity Score.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The Calgary Spine Severity Score (CSSS) is a published triage score reported in the Spine Journal in 2010. It separates spine referrals into four time categories of urgency. It stratifies patients according to clinical, radiologic, and pathologic findings. The CSSS however still requires external validation at another institution and in an unselected sample of patients. PURPOSE: The aim was to validate the CSSS. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This was a validation study. PATIENT SAMPLE: The sample included a total of 316 consecutive patients undergoing spinal surgery between April 2014 and September 2014 at a tertiary care hospital in Canada. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome was validity of the CSSS via its predicted time to operating room (OR) to predict actual time to OR. METHODS: We applied the CSSS to an unselected sample of consecutive patients from a tertiary care hospital between April 2014 and September 2014. Demographic and clinical data were collected. The CSSS was determined. We compared the time with OR predicted by the CSSS in one of four categories (routine>6 months=CSSS 3-5, priority<6 months=CSSS 6-8, urgent<1 month=CSSS 9-11, and emergent<1 week=CSSS 12-15) with the actual time to OR. We used Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to assess the CSSS predictive ability. Cox proportional hazard models were built and compared via analysis of variance to determine whether the models differed in their ability to fit the data. RESULTS: Three hundred sixteen patients were eligible. Two hundred eighty-nine had sufficient data. One hundred eighteen were a mismatch with the actual time to OR yielding an accuracy of 63%. The CSSS overestimated the urgency in 68 cases and underestimated it in 50 cases. Notably, seven cauda equina syndrome cases were classified as priority (<6 months) instead of emergent. The concordance was 0.70 and the R-square 0.33. We proposed several adjustments to the CSSS to increase its accuracy. The modified CSSS had an accuracy of 96%, overestimating nine cases and underestimating one case. The concordance was 0.77, and the R-square 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: The modified CSSS is an easy-to-use triage score, which represents a substantial improvement as compared with the original CSSS. It now requires further external validation.

Orthosis versus no orthosis for the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurologic injury: a multicenter prospective randomized equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Thoracolumbar burst fractures have good outcomes when treated with early ambulation and orthosis (TLSO). If equally good outcomes could be achieved with early ambulation and no brace, resource utilization would be decreased, especially in developing countries where prolonged bed rest is the default option because bracing is not available or affordable. PURPOSE: To determine whether TLSO is equivalent to no orthosis (NO) in the treatment of acute AO Type A3 thoracolumbar burst fractures with respect to their functional outcome at 3 months. STUDY DESIGN: A multicentre, randomized, nonblinded equivalence trial involving three Canadian tertiary spine centers. Enrollment began in 2002 and 2-year follow-up was completed in 2011. PATIENT SAMPLE: Inclusion criteria included AO-A3 burst fractures between T11 and L3, skeletally mature and older than 60 years, 72 hours from their injury, kyphotic deformity lower than 35°, no neurologic deficit. One hundred ten patients were assessed for eligibility for the study; 14 patients were not recruited because they resided outside the country (3), refused participation (8), or were not consented before independent ambulation (3). OUTCOME MEASURES: Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire score (RMDQ) assessed at 3 months postinjury. The equivalence margin was set at δ=5 points. METHODS: The NO group was encouraged to ambulate immediately with bending restrictions for 8 weeks. The TLSO group ambulated when the brace was available and weaned from the brace after 8 to 10 weeks. The following competitive grants supported this work: VHHSC Interdisciplinary Research Grant, Zimmer/University of British Columbia Research Fund, and Hip Hip Hooray Research Grant. Aspen Medical provided the TLSOs used in this study. The authors have no financial or personal relationships that could inappropriately influence this work. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were enrolled into the TLSO group and 49 patients into the NO group. Forty-six participants per group were available for the primary outcome. The RMDQ score at 3 months postinjury was 6.8 ± 5.4 (standard deviation [SD]) for the TLSO group and 7.7 ± 6.0 (SD) in the NO group. The 95% confidence interval (-1.5 to 3.2) was within the predetermined margin of equivalence. Six patients required surgical stabilization, five of them before initial discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Treating these fractures using early ambulation without a brace avoids the cost and patient deconditioning associated with a brace and complications and costs associated with long-term bed rest if a TLSO or body cast is not available.