Aims

The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for adverse events following the surgical correction of cervical spinal deformities in adults.

Aims

As the population ages and the surgical complexity of lumbar spinal surgery increases, the preoperative stratification of risk becomes increasingly important. Understanding the risks is an important factor in decision-making and optimizing the preoperative condition of the patient. Our aim was to determine whether the modified five-item frailty index (mFI-5) and nutritional parameters could be used to predict postoperative complications in patients undergoing simple or complex lumbar spinal fusion.

Aims

Patients seeking cervical spine surgery are thought to be increasing in age, comorbidities and functional debilitation. The changing demographics of this population may significantly impact the outcomes of their care, specifically with regards to complications. In this study, our goals were to determine the rates of functionally dependent patients undergoing elective cervical spine procedures and to assess the effect of functional dependence on 30-day morbidity and mortality using a large, validated national cohort.

Pain catastrophising is an adverse coping mechanism, involving an exaggerated response to anticipated or actual pain.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of pain ‘catastrophising’, as measured using the pain catastrophising scale (PCS), on treatment outcomes after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

A total of 138 patients (47 men and 91 women, mean age 65.9; 45 to 78) were assigned to low (PCS score < 25, n = 68) and high (PCS score ≥ 25, n = 70) PCS groups. The primary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcome measures included the ODI and visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, which were recorded at each assessment conducted during the 12-month follow-up period

The overall changes in the ODI and VAS for back and leg pain over a 12-month period were significantly different between the groups (ODI, p < 0.001; VAS for back pain, p < 0.001; VAS for leg pain, p = 0.040). The ODI and VAS for back and leg pain significantly decreased over time after surgery in both groups (p < 0.001 for all three variables). The patterns of change in the ODI and VAS for back pain during the follow-up period significantly differed between the two groups, suggesting that the PCS group is a potential treatment moderator. However, there was no difference in the ODI and VAS for back and leg pain between the low and high PCS groups 12 months after surgery.

In terms of minimum clinically important differences in ODI scores (12.8), 22 patients (40.7%) had an unsatisfactory surgical outcome in the low PCS group and 16 (32.6%) in the high PCS group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.539).

Pre-operative catastrophising did not always result in a poor outcome 12 months after surgery, which indicates that this could moderate the efficacy of surgery for LSS.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1546–54.

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% vs 51.0%; p < 0.001). In 2009, the mean length of stay and hospital charges were higher for revision fusion discharges than for primary fusion discharges (4.2 days vs 3.8 days, p < 0.001; USD $91 909 vs. $87 161, p < 0.001). In 2009, recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) was used more in revision fusion than in primary fusion (39.6% vs 27.6%, p < 0.001), whereas interbody devices were used less in revision fusion (41.8% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001).

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: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:807–16.

Despite the increasing prevalence of sleep apnoea, little information is available regarding its impact on the peri-operative outcome of patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion. Using a national database, patients who underwent lumbar fusion between 2006 and 2010 were identified, sub-grouped by diagnosis of sleep apnoea and compared. The impact of sleep apnoea on various outcome measures was assessed by regression analysis. The records of 84 655 patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion were identified and 7.28% (n = 6163) also had a diagnostic code for sleep apnoea. Compared with patients without sleep apnoea, these patients were older, more frequently female, had a higher comorbidity burden and higher rates of peri-operative complications, post-operative mechanical ventilation, blood product transfusion and intensive care. Patients with sleep apnoea also had longer and more costly periods of hospitalisation.

In the regression analysis, sleep apnoea emerged as an independent risk factor for the development of peri-operative complications (odds ratio (OR) 1.50, confidence interval (CI) 1.38;1.62), blood product transfusions (OR 1.12, CI 1.03;1.23), mechanical ventilation (OR 6.97, CI 5.90;8.23), critical care services (OR 1.86, CI 1.71;2.03), prolonged hospitalisation and increased cost (OR 1.28, CI 1.19;1.37; OR 1.10, CI 1.03;1.18).

Patients with sleep apnoea who undergo posterior lumbar fusion pose significant challenges to clinicians.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:242–8.