When is staging complex adult spinal deformity advantageous? Identifying subsets of patients who benefit from staged interventions.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of neurosurgery. Spine Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI:10.3171/2024.8.SPINE24365
Peter G Passias, Peter Tretiakov, Oluwatobi O Onafowokan, Ankita Das, Renaud Lafage, Justin S Smith, Breton G Line, Pratibha Nayak, Bassel Diebo, Alan H Daniels, Jeffrey L Gum, D Kojo Hamilton, Thomas J Buell, Alex Soroceanu, Justin K Scheer, Robert K Eastlack, Jeffrey P Mullin, Andrew J Schoenfeld, Gregory M Mundis, Naobumi Hosogane, Mitsuru Yagi, Praveen V Mummaneni, Dean Chou, Kai-Ming Fu, Khoi D Than, Neel Anand, David O Okonkwo, Michael Y Wang, Eric Klineberg, Khaled M Kebaish, Stephen Lewis, Richard Hostin, Munish Gupta, Lawrence Lenke, Han Jo Kim, Christopher P Ames, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess, Frank Schwab, Virginie Lafage, Douglas Burton
{"title":"When is staging complex adult spinal deformity advantageous? Identifying subsets of patients who benefit from staged interventions.","authors":"Peter G Passias, Peter Tretiakov, Oluwatobi O Onafowokan, Ankita Das, Renaud Lafage, Justin S Smith, Breton G Line, Pratibha Nayak, Bassel Diebo, Alan H Daniels, Jeffrey L Gum, D Kojo Hamilton, Thomas J Buell, Alex Soroceanu, Justin K Scheer, Robert K Eastlack, Jeffrey P Mullin, Andrew J Schoenfeld, Gregory M Mundis, Naobumi Hosogane, Mitsuru Yagi, Praveen V Mummaneni, Dean Chou, Kai-Ming Fu, Khoi D Than, Neel Anand, David O Okonkwo, Michael Y Wang, Eric Klineberg, Khaled M Kebaish, Stephen Lewis, Richard Hostin, Munish Gupta, Lawrence Lenke, Han Jo Kim, Christopher P Ames, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess, Frank Schwab, Virginie Lafage, Douglas Burton","doi":"10.3171/2024.8.SPINE24365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to identify baseline patient and surgical factors predictive of optimal outcomes in staged versus same-day combined-approach surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with baseline and perioperative (by 6 weeks) data were stratified based on single-stage (same-day) or multistage (staged) surgery, excluding planned multiple hospitalizations. Means comparison analyses were used to assess baseline demographic, radiographic, and surgical differences between cohorts. Backstep logistic regression and conditional inference tree analysis were used to identify variable thresholds associated with study-specific definitions of an optimal outcome in each cohort, defined as no intraoperative or surgery-related in-hospital adverse event.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 439 patients with complex ASD in the dataset (mean age 64.0 ± 9.3 years, 68% female, mean BMI 28.7 ± 5.5 kg/m2). Overall, 58.8% of patients were in the same-day group, while 41.2% were in the staged group. Demographically, cohorts were not significantly different (p > 0.05), but staged patients were more frail per total Edmonton Frail Scale score (p = 0.043). Staged patients also reported greater numeric rating scale scores for back pain than same-day patients (p = 0.002). Cohorts were comparable in magnitude of planned correction of C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, and T4-12 kyphosis (all p > 0.05). Controlling for baseline age, frailty, and number of levels fused, staged patients reported significantly higher PROMIS Discretionary Social Activities scores by 6 weeks (p = 0.029). Radiographic outcomes by 6 weeks were comparable between cohorts, in terms of both magnitude of change from baseline and overall result (all p > 0.05). Same-day patients were significantly more likely to experience in-hospital complications (p = 0.013). When considering frailty thresholds for staging, only a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤ 1.0 was associated with optimal outcome in same-day patients, while Edmonton Frail Scale score ≥ 7 (p = 0.036), ≥ 9 levels fused (p = 0.016), and baseline PI-LL mismatch ≥ 15.3° (p = 0.028) were associated with optimal outcome for staged patients. Yet, staging alone was not significantly associated with an optimal outcome perioperatively (p = 0.056).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While staged and same-day combined-approach surgeries yield comparable radiographic and patient-reported outcomes, certain subsets of complex ASD patients may benefit from staged surgery despite the invariably increased hospital length of stay. Individuals with increased frailty, moderate to severe PI-LL mismatch, and increased anticipated number of levels fused may experience a lower risk of perioperative adverse events if they undergo a staged procedure. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT04194138 (ClinicalTrials.gov).</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.8.SPINE24365","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to identify baseline patient and surgical factors predictive of optimal outcomes in staged versus same-day combined-approach surgery.

Methods: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with baseline and perioperative (by 6 weeks) data were stratified based on single-stage (same-day) or multistage (staged) surgery, excluding planned multiple hospitalizations. Means comparison analyses were used to assess baseline demographic, radiographic, and surgical differences between cohorts. Backstep logistic regression and conditional inference tree analysis were used to identify variable thresholds associated with study-specific definitions of an optimal outcome in each cohort, defined as no intraoperative or surgery-related in-hospital adverse event.

Results: There were 439 patients with complex ASD in the dataset (mean age 64.0 ± 9.3 years, 68% female, mean BMI 28.7 ± 5.5 kg/m2). Overall, 58.8% of patients were in the same-day group, while 41.2% were in the staged group. Demographically, cohorts were not significantly different (p > 0.05), but staged patients were more frail per total Edmonton Frail Scale score (p = 0.043). Staged patients also reported greater numeric rating scale scores for back pain than same-day patients (p = 0.002). Cohorts were comparable in magnitude of planned correction of C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, and T4-12 kyphosis (all p > 0.05). Controlling for baseline age, frailty, and number of levels fused, staged patients reported significantly higher PROMIS Discretionary Social Activities scores by 6 weeks (p = 0.029). Radiographic outcomes by 6 weeks were comparable between cohorts, in terms of both magnitude of change from baseline and overall result (all p > 0.05). Same-day patients were significantly more likely to experience in-hospital complications (p = 0.013). When considering frailty thresholds for staging, only a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤ 1.0 was associated with optimal outcome in same-day patients, while Edmonton Frail Scale score ≥ 7 (p = 0.036), ≥ 9 levels fused (p = 0.016), and baseline PI-LL mismatch ≥ 15.3° (p = 0.028) were associated with optimal outcome for staged patients. Yet, staging alone was not significantly associated with an optimal outcome perioperatively (p = 0.056).

Conclusions: While staged and same-day combined-approach surgeries yield comparable radiographic and patient-reported outcomes, certain subsets of complex ASD patients may benefit from staged surgery despite the invariably increased hospital length of stay. Individuals with increased frailty, moderate to severe PI-LL mismatch, and increased anticipated number of levels fused may experience a lower risk of perioperative adverse events if they undergo a staged procedure. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT04194138 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
复杂成人脊柱畸形分期治疗何时有利?确定可从分期干预中获益的患者群体。
研究目的本研究旨在确定可预测分期手术与当日联合入路手术最佳疗效的患者基线和手术因素:成人脊柱畸形(ASD)患者的基线和围手术期(6周前)数据根据单阶段(当天)或多阶段(分阶段)手术进行分层,不包括计划中的多次住院。均值比较分析用于评估不同组群之间的基线人口统计学、放射学和手术学差异。采用反步逻辑回归和条件推理树分析来确定与每个队列中最佳结果的研究特异性定义相关的变量阈值,最佳结果定义为术中或手术相关的院内不良事件:数据集中有 439 名复杂 ASD 患者(平均年龄为 64.0 ± 9.3 岁,68% 为女性,平均体重指数为 28.7 ± 5.5 kg/m2)。总体而言,58.8%的患者属于当天组,41.2%的患者属于分期组。从人口统计学角度看,两组患者无明显差异(P > 0.05),但按埃德蒙顿体弱量表总分计算,分期患者更体弱(P = 0.043)。分期患者的背痛数字评分量表得分也高于当日患者(p = 0.002)。在计划矫正 C7-S1 矢状垂直轴、骨盆入射角-腰椎前凸(PI-LL)不匹配和 T4-12 脊柱后凸方面,各组患者的矫正程度相当(均 p > 0.05)。在控制基线年龄、虚弱程度和融合水平数的情况下,分期患者在6周前的PROMIS自主社交活动评分明显更高(P = 0.029)。就与基线相比的变化幅度和总体结果而言,各组患者在 6 周前的放射学结果相当(均 p > 0.05)。当天入院的患者出现院内并发症的几率明显更高(p = 0.013)。在考虑分期的虚弱阈值时,只有夏尔森综合指数≤1.0与当天患者的最佳预后相关,而埃德蒙顿虚弱量表评分≥7(p = 0.036)、融合≥9级(p = 0.016)和基线PI-LL不匹配≥15.3°(p = 0.028)与分期患者的最佳预后相关。然而,单纯分期与围手术期的最佳预后并无明显关联(p = 0.056):结论:尽管分期手术和当天联合入路手术在放射影像学和患者报告结果方面具有可比性,但某些复杂的ASD患者可能会从分期手术中获益,尽管住院时间必然会延长。虚弱程度增加、中度至重度PI-LL不匹配、预计融合水平数增加的患者如果接受分期手术,围手术期不良事件的风险可能会降低。临床试验注册号:NCT04194138(ClinicalTrials.gov)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.70%
发文量
396
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Primarily publish original works in neurosurgery but also include studies in clinical neurophysiology, organic neurology, ophthalmology, radiology, pathology, and molecular biology.
期刊最新文献
Clinical and radiographic comparison of robot-assisted single-position versus traditional dual-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Impact of pedicle screw accuracy on clinical outcomes after 1- or 2-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Awake, endoscopic lumbar interbody spinal fusion: 10 years of experience with the first 400 cases. Patient-reported outcome trajectories the first 24 months after surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a Quality Outcomes Database study. The impact of lower thoracic versus upper lumbar upper instrumented vertebra in minimally invasive correction of adult spinal deformity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1