The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for adverse events following the surgical correction of cervical spinal deformities in adults. We identified adult patients who underwent corrective cervical spinal surgery between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2015 from the MarketScan database. The baseline comorbidities and characteristics of the operation were recorded. Adverse events were defined as the development of a complication, an unanticipated deleterious postoperative event, or further surgery. Patients aged < 18 years and those with a previous history of tumour or trauma were excluded from the study.Aims
Methods
The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the
clinical relevance of increased facet joint distraction as a result
of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for trauma. A total of 155 patients (130 men, 25 women. Mean age 42.7 years;
16 to 87) who had undergone ACDF between 1 January 2001 and 1 January
2016 were included in the study. Outcome measures included the Neck
Disability Index (NDI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain.
Lateral cervical spine radiographs taken in the immediate postoperative
period were reviewed to compare the interfacet distance of the operated
segment with those of the facet joints above and below.Aims
Patients and Methods
The demand for spinal surgery and its costs have
both risen over the past decade. In 2008 the aggregate hospital
bill for surgical care of all spinal procedures was reported to
be $33.9 billion. One key driver of rising costs is spinal implants.
In 2011 our institution implemented a cost containment programme
for spinal implants which was designed to reduce the prices of individual
spinal implants and to reduce the inter-surgeon variation in implant costs.
Between February 2012 and January 2013, our spinal surgeons performed
1493 spinal procedures using implants from eight different vendors.
By applying market analysis and implant cost data from the previous
year, we established references prices for each individual type
of spinal implant, regardless of vendor, who were required to meet
these unit prices. We found that despite the complexity of spinal
surgery and the initial reluctance of vendors to reduce prices,
significant savings were made to the medical centre. Cite this article: 2015; 97-B:1102–5.
Using the United States Nationwide Inpatient
Sample, we identified national trends in revision spinal fusion
along with a comprehensive comparison of comorbidities, inpatient
complications and surgical factors of revision spinal fusion compared
to primary spinal fusion. In 2009, there were 410 158 primary spinal fusion discharges
and 22 128 revision spinal fusion discharges. Between 2002 and 2009,
primary fusion increased at a higher rate compared with revision
fusion (56.4% In the multivariable logistic regression model for all spinal
fusions, depression (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, p <
0.001), psychotic
disorders (OR 1.49, p <
0.001), deficiency anaemias (OR 1.35,
p <
0.001) and smoking (OR 1.10, p = 0.006) had a greater chance
of occurrence in revision spinal fusion discharges than in primary
fusion discharges, adjusting for other variables. In terms of complications,
after adjusting for all significant comorbidities, this study found
that dural tears (OR 1.41; p <
0.001) and surgical site infections
(OR 3.40; p <
0.001) had a greater chance of occurrence in revision
spinal fusion discharges than in primary fusion discharges (p <
0.001). A p-value <
0.01 was considered significant in all final
analyses. Cite this article:
Whether to combine spinal decompression with
fusion in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis remains
controversial. We performed a cohort study to determine the effect
of the addition of fusion in terms of patient satisfaction after
decompressive spinal surgery in patients with and without a degenerative spondylolisthesis. The National Swedish Register for Spine Surgery (Swespine) was
used for the study. Data were obtained for all patients in the register
who underwent surgery for stenosis on one or two adjacent lumbar
levels. A total of 5390 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria
and completed a two-year follow-up. Using multivariable models the
results of 4259 patients who underwent decompression alone were
compared with those of 1131 who underwent decompression and fusion.
The consequence of having an associated spondylolisthesis in the
operated segments pre-operatively was also considered. At two years there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction
between the two treatment groups for any of the outcome measures,
regardless of the presence of a pre-operative spondylolisthesis.
Moreover, the proportion of patients who required subsequent further
lumbar surgery was also similar in the two groups. In this large cohort the addition of fusion to decompression
was not associated with an improved outcome. Cite this article:
