Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

LONG TERM OUTCOME AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOLLOWING PYOGENIC SPINAL INFECTION



Abstract

There is little published data concerning long-term outcome in pyogenic spinal infection. Previous studies have used either neurological outcome in isolation, or non-validated quality of life measure instruments yielding data that is difficult to interpret.

To assess long-term outcome following pyogenic spinal infection through standardised outcome measures, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) were utilised.

All cases of pyogenic spinal infection presenting to a single institution over the period 1993–2003 were retrospectively identified. Inclusion in each case was based on consistent clinical, imaging and microbiology criteria. The follow-up was by clinical review, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) classification, ODI and SF-36. The outcome was compared to normative data for the Irish population.

Twenty-nine cases of pyogenic spinal infection were identified. Nineteen patients (66%) had an adverse outcome at a median follow-up of 61 months, despite only 5 patients (17%) who had persistent neurological deficit according to ASIA classification. A significant difference in SF-36 PF (physical function) scores was observed between patients with adverse outcome and those who recovered (p=0.003). SF-36 scores failed to reach those of a normative population, even after apparent full recovery. A strong correlation was observed between ODI and SF-36 Physical Function scores (rho=0.61, p< 0.05). Seventeen percent (n= 5) of admissions resulted in acute sepsis-related death. Delay in diagnosis of spinal infection (p= 0.025) and neurological impairment at diagnosis (p< 0.001) were associated with neurological deficit at follow-up examination. Previous spinal surgery was a significant predictor of adverse outcome in patients requiring readmission < 1 year (p= 0.018).

The finding of high rates of adverse outcome and using SF-36 and ODI suggests under-reporting of poor outcome in other series. We advocate use of validated standardised spinal outcome questionnaires to accurately assess long-term outcome and facilitate comparison between case series.



Correspondence should be addressed to Vasiliki Boukouvala at Department of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, University Hospital of Larissa, 110 Mezourlo, Larissa, GREECE. Tel: +30 2410 682722, Fax: +30 2410 670107, Email: malizos@med.uth.gr