Article

Risk factors for major peri-operative complications in adult spinal deformity surgery: a multi-center review of 953 consecutive patients

NYU-Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, NY, USA.
European Spine Journal (Impact Factor: 2.47). 05/2012; 21(12). DOI: 10.1007/s00586-012-2370-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT PURPOSE: Major peri-operative complications for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery remain common. However, risk factors have not been clearly defined. Our objective was to identify patient and surgical parameters that correlate with the development of major peri-operative complications with ASD surgery. METHODS: This is a multi-center, retrospective, consecutive, case-control series of surgically treated ASD patients. All patients undergoing surgical treatment for ASD at eight centers were retrospectively reviewed. Each center identified 10 patients with major peri-operative complications. Randomization tables were used to select a comparably sized control group of patients operated during the same time period that they did not suffer major complications. The two groups were analyzed for differences in clinical and surgical factors. Analysis was restricted to non-instrumentation related complications. RESULTS: At least one major complication occurred in 80 of 953 patients (8.4 %), including 72 patients with non-instrumentation related complications. There were no significant differences between the complications and control groups based on the demographics, ASA grade, co-morbidities, body mass index, prior surgeries, pre-operative anemia, smoking, operative time or ICU stay (p > 0.05). Hospital stay was significantly longer for the complications group (14.4 vs. 7.9 days, p = 0.001). The complications group had higher percentages of staged procedures (46 vs. 37 %, p = 0.011) and combined anterior-posterior approaches (56 vs. 32 %, p = 0.011) compared with the control group. CONCLUSION: The major peri-operative complication rate was 8.4 % for 953 surgically treated ASD patients. Significantly higher rates of complications were associated with staged and combined anterior-posterior surgeries. None of the patient factors assessed were significantly associated with the occurrence of major peri-operative complications. Improved understanding of risk profiles and procedure-related parameters may be useful for patient counseling and efforts to reduce complication rates.

Full-text

Available from: Virginie Lafage, Mar 31, 2015
0 Bookmarks
 · 
122 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Object Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is an alternative to open deformity surgery for the treatment of patients with adult spinal deformity. However, at this time MIS techniques are not as versatile as open deformity techniques, and MIS techniques have been reported to result in suboptimal sagittal plane correction or pseudarthrosis when used for severe deformities. The minimally invasive spinal deformity surgery (MISDEF) algorithm was created to provide a framework for rational decision making for surgeons who are considering MIS versus open spine surgery. Methods A team of experienced spinal deformity surgeons developed the MISDEF algorithm that incorporates a patient's preoperative radiographic parameters and leads to one of 3 general plans ranging from MIS direct or indirect decompression to open deformity surgery with osteotomies. The authors surveyed fellowship-trained spine surgeons experienced with spinal deformity surgery to validate the algorithm using a set of 20 cases to establish interobserver reliability. They then resurveyed the same surgeons 2 months later with the same cases presented in a different sequence to establish intraobserver reliability. Responses were collected and tabulated. Fleiss' analysis was performed using MATLAB software. Results Over a 3-month period, 11 surgeons completed the surveys. Responses for MISDEF algorithm case review demonstrated an interobserver kappa of 0.58 for the first round of surveys and an interobserver kappa of 0.69 for the second round of surveys, consistent with substantial agreement. In at least 10 cases there was perfect agreement between the reviewing surgeons. The mean intraobserver kappa for the 2 surveys was 0.86 ± 0.15 (± SD) and ranged from 0.62 to 1. Conclusions The use of the MISDEF algorithm provides consistent and straightforward guidance for surgeons who are considering either an MIS or an open approach for the treatment of patients with adult spinal deformity. The MISDEF algorithm was found to have substantial inter- and intraobserver agreement. Although further studies are needed, the application of this algorithm could provide a platform for surgeons to achieve the desired goals of surgery.
    Neurosurgical FOCUS 05/2014; 36(5):E6. DOI:10.3171/2014.3.FOCUS1413 · 2.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Object Various surgical approaches, including open, minimally invasive, and hybrid techniques, have gained momentum in the management of adult spinal deformity. However, few data exist on the radiographic outcomes of different surgical techniques. The objective of this study was to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of the surgical techniques used in the treatment of adult spinal deformity. Methods The authors conducted a retrospective review of two adult spinal deformity patient databases, a prospective open surgery database and a retrospective minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and hybrid surgery database. The time frame of enrollment in this study was from 2007 to 2012. Spinal deformity patients were stratified into 3 surgery groups: MIS, hybrid surgery, and open surgery. The following pre- and postoperative radiographic parameters were assessed: lumbar major Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic tilt. Scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and a visual analog scale (VAS) for both back and leg pain were also obtained from each patient. Results Of the 234 patients with adult spinal deformity, 184 patients had pre- and postoperative radiographs and were thus included in the study (MIS, n = 42; hybrid, n = 33; open, n = 109). Patients were a mean of 61.7 years old and had a mean body mass index of 26.9 kg/m(2). Regarding radiographic outcomes, the MIS group maintained a significantly smaller mean lumbar Cobb angle (13.1°) after surgery compared with the open group (20.4°, p = 0.002), while the hybrid group had a significantly larger lumbar curve correction (26.6°) compared with the MIS group (18.8°, p = 0.045). The mean change in the PI-LL was larger for the hybrid group (20.6°) compared with the open (10.2°, p = 0.023) and MIS groups (5.5°, p = 0.003). The mean sagittal vertical axis correction was greater for the open group (25 mm) compared with the MIS group (≤ 1 mm, p = 0.008). Patients in the open group had a significantly larger postoperative thoracic kyphosis (41.45°) compared with the MIS patients (33.5°, p = 0.005). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of pre- and postoperative mean ODI and VAS scores at the 1-year follow-up. However, patients in the MIS group had much lower estimated blood loss and transfusion rates compared with patients in the hybrid or open groups (p < 0.001). Operating room time was significantly longer with the hybrid group compared with the MIS and open groups (p < 0.001). Major complications occurred in 14% of patients in the MIS group, 14% in the hybrid group, and 45% in the open group (p = 0.032). Conclusions This study provides valuable baseline characteristics of radiographic parameters among 3 different surgical techniques used in the treatment of adult spinal deformity. Each technique has advantages, but much like any surgical technique, the positive and negative elements must be considered when tailoring a treatment to a patient. Minimally invasive surgical techniques can result in clinical outcomes at 1 year comparable to those obtained from hybrid and open surgical techniques.
    Neurosurgical FOCUS 05/2014; 36(5):E13. DOI:10.3171/2014.3.FOCUS1424 · 2.14 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Available studies disagree regarding the influence of patient sex on mortality and complications after spine surgery. We sought to conduct a systematic review and pool the results of existing research to better understand this issue. We performed a systematic review to address two questions: (1) Does sex (male versus female) influence mortality after spine surgery? (2) Does sex impact the development of postoperative complications after spine surgery? This systematic review was performed through a query of PubMed using a structured search algorithm. Additional queries of Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the tables of contents of orthopaedic and neurosurgical journals were also conducted using search terms such as "sex factors", "male or female", "risk factors", and "spine surgery". Selected papers were independently abstracted by three of the authors (AJS, ENR, EIW) and pooling was performed. Our literature search returned 720 studies, of which 99 underwent full review. Of these, 50 were selected for final abstraction. The Cochrane Q test was used to assess study heterogeneity; significant study heterogeneity was present and so a random-effects model was used. A Harbord test was used to evaluate for the presence of publication bias; this analysis found no statistically significant evidence of publication bias. Males were at increased odds of mortality after spine surgery (odds ratio [OR], 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-1.97; p < 0.001). No differences between the sexes were identified for the odds of complications (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95-1.13; p = 0.42). Our results determined that males were at elevated odds of mortality but not of complications after spine surgery. These results should be used to inform preoperative discussion and decision-making at the time of surgical consent. Future work should be directed at determining the underlying factors responsible for increased mortality among males and prospective studies specifically designed to evaluate sex-based differences in outcomes after spine surgery. Level III, therapeutic study.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 12/2014; DOI:10.1007/s11999-014-4102-z · 2.88 Impact Factor