Comparison of reoperation incidence after fusion versus decompression for lumbar degenerative disease: A propensity score-weighted study.

Annals of clinical epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-10-31 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.37737/ace.25001
Soichiro Masuda, Toshiki Fukasawa, Shunsuke Fujibayashi, Bungo Otsuki, Koichi Murata, Takayoshi Shimizu, Shuichi Matsuda, Koji Kawakami
{"title":"Comparison of reoperation incidence after fusion versus decompression for lumbar degenerative disease: A propensity score-weighted study.","authors":"Soichiro Masuda, Toshiki Fukasawa, Shunsuke Fujibayashi, Bungo Otsuki, Koichi Murata, Takayoshi Shimizu, Shuichi Matsuda, Koji Kawakami","doi":"10.37737/ace.25001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reoperation after lumbar spine surgery is a major issue for both patients and physicians. It is uncertain whether fusion is superior to decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease regarding reoperation rate. We aim to evaluate the reoperation rate after fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease compared with decompression alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was conducted under a retrospective cohort design in patients undergoing fusion or decompression alone in one or two levels for lumbar degenerative disease using a Japanese claims-based database. Primary outcome was reoperation incidence during the follow-up period, and secondary outcome was reoperation incidence within 90 days postoperatively. Confounding factors were handled using propensity score overlap weighting. Cumulative incidence of reoperation was calculated from the Kaplan-Meier curve and hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for reoperation were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>8497 patients (2051 patients in the fusion group and 6446 in the decompression alone group) were included in the study. There was no difference in reoperation rate between fusion and decompression alone (weighted HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.69 to 1.04]; p = 0.11).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent fusion or decompression alone, no significant difference was observed between the two groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":517436,"journal":{"name":"Annals of clinical epidemiology","volume":"7 1","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11799856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of clinical epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37737/ace.25001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Reoperation after lumbar spine surgery is a major issue for both patients and physicians. It is uncertain whether fusion is superior to decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease regarding reoperation rate. We aim to evaluate the reoperation rate after fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease compared with decompression alone.

Methods: This study was conducted under a retrospective cohort design in patients undergoing fusion or decompression alone in one or two levels for lumbar degenerative disease using a Japanese claims-based database. Primary outcome was reoperation incidence during the follow-up period, and secondary outcome was reoperation incidence within 90 days postoperatively. Confounding factors were handled using propensity score overlap weighting. Cumulative incidence of reoperation was calculated from the Kaplan-Meier curve and hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for reoperation were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models.

Results: 8497 patients (2051 patients in the fusion group and 6446 in the decompression alone group) were included in the study. There was no difference in reoperation rate between fusion and decompression alone (weighted HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.69 to 1.04]; p = 0.11).

Conclusions: Among patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent fusion or decompression alone, no significant difference was observed between the two groups.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Introduction to Mendelian randomization. Blood hemoglobin levels of the general population residing at low range altitudes. Changes in treatments and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest between the SOS-KANTO 2012 and 2017 studies. Comparison of reoperation incidence after fusion versus decompression for lumbar degenerative disease: A propensity score-weighted study. Evaluating optimal rehabilitation strategies in ICU: study protocol for a multicentre cohort study to assess Physical Activity dosing, Muscle mass, and physICal outcomeS (IPAMICS study).
×
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