Chungwon Bang, Kihyun Kwon, Joonghyun Ahn, Young-Hoon Kim
{"title":"80 岁以上患者脊柱手术的安全性:倾向得分匹配研究","authors":"Chungwon Bang, Kihyun Kwon, Joonghyun Ahn, Young-Hoon Kim","doi":"10.1177/21925682241304332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Using propensity match score to remove those confounding bias and focuses on age factor to compare clinical outcomes and perioperative complications following spinal surgery in cohort of Korean octogenarians treated at a single tertiary hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We classified patients of 80s as the octogenarian group (group O), those 65 and older, and under 80 as the elderly group (group E). We strategically employed the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) analysis as a method to counteract potential confounding variables. 1: 1 nearest-neighbor PSM for fusion level, estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion, body mass index (BMI), American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) surgical method and operation time was performed. After PSM, 98 patients are categorized each group evenly (group O, n = 49 vs group E, n = 49). Demographics, clinical, radiologic and postoperative complications were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The clinical outcomes showed no significant differences in the VAS and ODI preoperatively or postoperatively. And most of hospitalization related factors shows no differences between 2 groups. However, follow-up period was longer in group E (1053.37 ± 684.14 days) than group O (640.29 ± 496.68, <i>P</i> = 0.001) and group O has higher incidences of medical complication (38.77% vs 16.32%, <i>P</i> = 0.013), especially in delirium (34.69% vs 6.12%, <i>P</i> = 0.001) than group E.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With the preparation for the prevention and treatment of postoperative delirium, age itself should not be a reason to hesitate in performing the spinal surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"21925682241304332"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11585003/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Safety of Spinal Surgery in Patients over 80 Years of Age: Propensity Score Matching Study.\",\"authors\":\"Chungwon Bang, Kihyun Kwon, Joonghyun Ahn, Young-Hoon Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21925682241304332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Using propensity match score to remove those confounding bias and focuses on age factor to compare clinical outcomes and perioperative complications following spinal surgery in cohort of Korean octogenarians treated at a single tertiary hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We classified patients of 80s as the octogenarian group (group O), those 65 and older, and under 80 as the elderly group (group E). We strategically employed the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) analysis as a method to counteract potential confounding variables. 1: 1 nearest-neighbor PSM for fusion level, estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion, body mass index (BMI), American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) surgical method and operation time was performed. After PSM, 98 patients are categorized each group evenly (group O, n = 49 vs group E, n = 49). Demographics, clinical, radiologic and postoperative complications were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The clinical outcomes showed no significant differences in the VAS and ODI preoperatively or postoperatively. And most of hospitalization related factors shows no differences between 2 groups. However, follow-up period was longer in group E (1053.37 ± 684.14 days) than group O (640.29 ± 496.68, <i>P</i> = 0.001) and group O has higher incidences of medical complication (38.77% vs 16.32%, <i>P</i> = 0.013), especially in delirium (34.69% vs 6.12%, <i>P</i> = 0.001) than group E.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With the preparation for the prevention and treatment of postoperative delirium, age itself should not be a reason to hesitate in performing the spinal surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"21925682241304332\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11585003/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241304332\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241304332","RegionNum":3,"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
摘要
研究设计回顾性队列研究:方法:我们将 80 岁以上的患者分为八旬老人组(O 组)和老年组(E 组):我们将 80 岁以上的患者分为八旬老人组(O 组),65 岁及以上和 80 岁以下的患者分为老年人组(E 组)。我们有策略地采用倾向得分匹配(PSM)分析法来抵消潜在的混杂变量。我们对融合程度、估计失血量(EBL)、输血量、体重指数(BMI)、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)评分、查尔森综合征指数(CCI)手术方法和手术时间进行了1:1近邻PSM分析。PSM 后,98 名患者被平均分为两组(O 组,n = 49 对 E 组,n = 49)。对人口统计学、临床、影像学和术后并发症进行了分析:结果:临床结果显示,术前和术后的 VAS 和 ODI 无明显差异。大多数住院相关因素在两组之间也无差异。然而,E 组的随访时间(1053.37 ± 684.14 天)长于 O 组(640.29 ± 496.68 天,P = 0.001),且 O 组的医疗并发症发生率(38.77% vs 16.32%,P = 0.013)高于 E 组,尤其是谵妄(34.69% vs 6.12%,P = 0.001):在做好术后谵妄的预防和治疗准备后,年龄本身不应成为脊柱手术中犹豫不决的理由。
The Safety of Spinal Surgery in Patients over 80 Years of Age: Propensity Score Matching Study.
Study design: Retrospective cohort study.
Objectives: Using propensity match score to remove those confounding bias and focuses on age factor to compare clinical outcomes and perioperative complications following spinal surgery in cohort of Korean octogenarians treated at a single tertiary hospital.
Methods: We classified patients of 80s as the octogenarian group (group O), those 65 and older, and under 80 as the elderly group (group E). We strategically employed the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) analysis as a method to counteract potential confounding variables. 1: 1 nearest-neighbor PSM for fusion level, estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion, body mass index (BMI), American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) surgical method and operation time was performed. After PSM, 98 patients are categorized each group evenly (group O, n = 49 vs group E, n = 49). Demographics, clinical, radiologic and postoperative complications were analyzed.
Results: The clinical outcomes showed no significant differences in the VAS and ODI preoperatively or postoperatively. And most of hospitalization related factors shows no differences between 2 groups. However, follow-up period was longer in group E (1053.37 ± 684.14 days) than group O (640.29 ± 496.68, P = 0.001) and group O has higher incidences of medical complication (38.77% vs 16.32%, P = 0.013), especially in delirium (34.69% vs 6.12%, P = 0.001) than group E.
Conclusions: With the preparation for the prevention and treatment of postoperative delirium, age itself should not be a reason to hesitate in performing the spinal surgery.
期刊介绍:
Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).