RESUMO
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether preoperative clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification is associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes and spinopelvic parameters after posterior decompression and fusion for L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). SUMMARY: The CARDS classification for lumbar DS, an alternative to the Meyerding system, considers additional radiographic findings such as disc space collapse and segmental kyphosis and stratifies DS into 4 radiographically distinct classes. Although CARDS has been shown to be a reliable and reproducible method for classifying DS, very few studies have assessed whether the CARDS types represent distinct clinical entities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients with L4-L5 DS who underwent posterior lumbar decompression and fusion. Changes in spinopelvic alignment and patient-reported outcomes measures, including recovery ratios and percentage of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference, were compared among patients in each CARDS classification 1-year postoperatively using analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis H with Dunn post hoc analysis. Multiple linear regression determined whether CARDS groups significantly predicted patient-reported outcomes measures, lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) while controlling for demographic and surgical characteristics. RESULTS: Preoperative type B spondylolisthesis predicted decreased improvement in "physical component and mental component score of the short form-12" compared with type A spondylolisthesis (ß-coefficient = -5.96, P = 0.031) at 1 year. Significant differences were found between CARDS groups with regards to ΔLL (A: -1.63 degrees vs B: -1.17 degrees vs C: 2.88 degrees vs D: 3.19 degrees, P = 0.010) and ΔPI-LL (A: 1.02 degrees vs B: 2.09 degrees vs C: -2.59 degrees vs D: -3.70 degrees, P = 0.012). Preoperative type C spondylolisthesis was found to predict increased LL (ß-coefficient = 4.46, P = 0.0054) and decreased PI-LL (ß-coefficient = -3.49, P = 0.025) at 1 year compared with type A spondylolisthesis. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and radiographic outcomes differed significantly by preoperative CARDS classification type for patients undergoing posterior decompression and fusion for L4-L5 DS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Assuntos
Lordose , Fusão Vertebral , Espondilolistese , Animais , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Espondilolistese/diagnóstico por imagem , Espondilolistese/cirurgia , Estudos de Coortes , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Vértebras Lombares/diagnóstico por imagem , Vértebras Lombares/cirurgia , Fusão Vertebral/métodosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Primary hip and knee arthroplasty represent two of the most successful orthopaedic surgical interventions in the past century. Similarly, lumbar fusion (LF) remains a valuable, evidence-based option to relieve pain and disability related to spinal degenerative conditions. This study evaluates the relative improvements in 1-year health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures among patients undergoing primary single-level LF, primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), and primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Patients older than 18 years who underwent primary single-level posterior LF (posterolateral decompression and fusion with or without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, involving any single lumbar level), TKA, and THA at a single academic institution were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected. HRQOL measures were collected preoperatively and at 1-year postoperative time point including Short-Form 12 Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS) along with subspecialty-specific outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2,563 patients were included (346 LF, 1,035 TKA, and 1,182 THA). Change in MCS-12 and PCS-12 after LF did not vary markedly by preoperative diagnosis. LF patients had a significantly lower preoperative MCS-12 (LF: 50.8, TKA: 53.9, THA: 52.9, P < 0.001), postoperative MCS-12 (LF: 52.5, TKA: 54.8, THA: 54.5, P < 0.001), postoperative PCS-12 (LF: 40.1, TKA: 44.0, THA: 43.9, P < 0.001), ΔPCS-12 (LF: 7.9, TKA: 10.8, THA: 11.9, P < 0.001), and PCS-12 recovery ratio (LF: 10.7%, TKA: 15.1%, THA 16.6%, P < 0.001) compared with TKA and THA patients. In regression analysis, both TKA and LF were found to be independently associated with a smaller ΔPCS-12 improvement (TKA: ß = -1.36, P = 0.009; LF: ß = -4.74, P < 0.001) compared with THA. TKA (ß = -1.42, P = 0.003) was also independently associated with a smaller ΔMCS-12 improvement compared with THA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing single-level LF, TKA, and THA demonstrate notable improvements in HRQOL outcomes at 1 year postoperatively compared with preoperative baseline scores. The greatest improvements were found among THA patients, followed subsequently by TKA and LF patients. Both LF and TKA were independently associated with markedly less improvement in physical disability at 1 year postoperatively compared with THA. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Fusão Vertebral , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversosRESUMO
The social and medical implications intrinsic to patient zip codes with high opioid fatality may reveal residence in these locations to be a risk factor predicting chronic opioid use after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The purpose of this study is to determine if residence in Pennsylvania zip codes with high incidence of opioid overdose deaths is a risk factor for chronic postoperative opioid use after ACDF. Preoperative opioid usage did not vary meaningfully between high- and low-risk zip code groups. Patients in high-risk opioid overdose zip codes were significantly more likely to exhibit chronic postoperative opioid use. The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated that opioid discontinuation was less probable at any postoperative time for patients residing in high opioid fatality zip codes. Logistic regression found opioid tolerance, smoking, and depression to predict extended opioid use.
Assuntos
Overdose de Opiáceos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Fusão Vertebral , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Vértebras Cervicais/cirurgia , Tolerância a Medicamentos , Geografia , Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Fusão Vertebral/efeitos adversosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Investigations in spine surgery have demonstrated that trainee involvement correlates with increased surgical time, readmissions, and revision surgeries; however, the specific effects of spine fellow involvement remain unelucidated. This study aims to investigate the isolated effect of fellow involvement on surgical timing and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) after spine surgery and evaluate how surgical outcomes differ by fellow experience. METHODS: All patients aged 18 years or older who underwent primary or revision decompression or fusion for degenerative diseases and/or spinal deformity between 2017 and 2019 at a single academic institution were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics, surgical factors, intraoperative timing, transfusion status, length of stay (LOS), readmissions, revision rate, and preoperative and postoperative PROMs were recorded. Surgeries were divided based on spine fellow participation status and occurrence in the start or end of fellowship training. Univariate and multivariate analyses compared outcomes across fellow involvement and fellow experience groups. RESULTS: A total of 1,108 patients were included. Age, preoperative diagnoses, number of fusion levels, and surgical approach differed markedly by fellow involvement. Fellow training experience groups differed by patient smoking status, preoperative diagnosis, and surgical approach. On univariate analysis, spine fellow involvement was associated with extended total theater time, induction start to cut time, cut to close time, and LOS. Increased spine fellow training was associated with reduced cut to close time and LOS. On regression, fellow involvement predicted cut to close extension while increased fellow training experience predicted reduction in cut to close time, both independent of surgical factors and assisting residents or physician assistants. Transfusions, readmissions, revision rate, and PROMs did not differ markedly by fellow involvement or experience. CONCLUSION: Spine fellow participation predicted extended procedural duration. However, the presence of a spine fellow did not affect long-term postoperative outcomes. Furthermore, increased fellow training experience predicted decreased procedural time, underscoring a learning effect. AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIAL: The data sets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.
Assuntos
Bolsas de Estudo , Fusão Vertebral , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Duração da Cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Reoperação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Coluna Vertebral/cirurgiaRESUMO
The upper cervical spine accounts for the largest proportion of cervical range of motion afforded by a complex system of bony morphology and ligamentous stability. Its unique anatomy, however, also makes it particularly vulnerable during both low and high energy trauma. Trauma to this area, referred to as upper cervical spine trauma, can disrupt the stability of the upper cervical spine and result in a wide spectrum of injury. Numerous upper cervical injury classification systems have been proposed, each of which have distinct limitations and drawbacks that have prevented their universal adoption. In this article, we provide an overview of previous classifications, with an emphasis on the development of the new AO Spine Upper Cervical Classification System (AO Spine UCCS).