Identifying subsets of patients with single-level degenerative disc disease for lumbar fusion: the value of prognostic tests in surgical decision making

Multicenter external validation of prediction models for clinical outcomes after spinal fusion for lumbar degenerative disease

BACKGROUND

Clinical prediction models (CPM), such as the SCOAP-CERTAIN tool, can be utilized to enhance decision-making for lumbar spinal fusion surgery by providing quantitative estimates of outcomes, aiding surgeons in assessing potential benefits and risks for each individual patient. External validation is crucial in CPM to assess generalizability beyond the initial dataset. This ensures performance in diverse populations, reliability and real-world applicability of the results. Therefore, we externally validated the tool for predictability of improvement in oswestry disability index (ODI), back and leg pain (BP, LP).

METHODS

Prospective and retrospective data from multicenter registry was obtained. As outcome measure minimum clinically important change was chosen for ODI with ≥ 15-point and ≥ 2-point reduction for numeric rating scales (NRS) for BP and LP 12 months after lumbar fusion for degenerative disease. We externally validate this tool by calculating discrimination and calibration metrics such as intercept, slope, Brier Score, expected/observed ratio, Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL), AUC, sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

We included 1115 patients, average age 60.8 ± 12.5 years. For 12-month ODI, area-under-the-curve (AUC) was 0.70, the calibration intercept and slope were 1.01 and 0.84, respectively. For NRS BP, AUC was 0.72, with calibration intercept of 0.97 and slope of 0.87. For NRS LP, AUC was 0.70, with calibration intercept of 0.04 and slope of 0.72. Sensitivity ranged from 0.63 to 0.96, while specificity ranged from 0.15 to 0.68. Lack of fit was found for all three models based on HL testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing data from a multinational registry, we externally validate the SCOAP-CERTAIN prediction tool. The model demonstrated fair discrimination and calibration of predicted probabilities, necessitating caution in applying it in clinical practice. We suggest that future CPMs focus on predicting longer-term prognosis for this patient population, emphasizing the significance of robust calibration and thorough reporting.

Rate of Reoperation Following Decompression-Only Procedure for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review of Literature

Background

Management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with decompression-only procedure has been performed for its added benefit of a shorter duration of surgery, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. However, reported failure rates for decompression-only procedures vary depending on the methods utilized for decompression. Hence, we aim to identify the failure rates of individual methods of decompression-only procedures performed for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Methods

An independent systematic review of 4 scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, Web of Science) was performed to identify relevant articles as per the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Studies reporting on failure rates defined by reoperation at the index level following decompression-only procedure for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included for analysis. Studies were appraised using ROBINS tool of Cochrane, and analysis was performed using the Open Meta[Analyst] software.

Results

The overall failure rate of decompression-only procedure was 9.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] [6.5-11.7]). Furthermore, open decompression had failure rate of 10.9% (95% CI [6.0-15.8]), while microendoscopic decompression had failure rate of 6.7% (95% CI [2.9-10.6]). The failure rate gradually increased from 6.9% (95% CI [2.0-11.7]) at 1 year to 7% (95% CI [3.6-10.3]), 11.7% (95% CI [4.5-18.9]), and 11.7% (95% CI [6.6-16.7]) at 2, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Single level decompression had a failure rate of 9.6% (95% CI [6.3-12.9]), while multilevel decompression recorded a failure rate of 8.7% (95% CI [5.6-11.7]).

Conclusion

High-quality evidence on the decompression-only procedure for degenerative spondylolisthesis is limited. The decompression-only procedure had an overall failure rate of 9.1% without significant differences between the decompression techniques.

Level of Evidence

Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Usefulness of discography, discoblock and a new mechanical method for identifying a painful segment/disc

BACKGROUND

We previously described a procedure for eliciting deep spatial discrimination of individual segments in the healthy lumbar spine of normal subjects: the percutaneous mechanical provocation (PMP) test. Our goal was to devise a method for accurate identification of the spinal level of pathology in chronic low back pain (CLBP). In the present study, we validated the PMP test, using a subgroup of CLBP patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). Because there is clinical consensus that IS back pain originates in the slipped segment/disc, the level of pathology can be directly compared to the result of the PMP test. The test is agnostic with respect to the underlying pathological mechanism, and therefore might be useful in identifying the involved segment(s) irrespective of the painful structure.

METHODS

In 37 patients with confirmed IS (slippage 3-15mm), we compared sensitivity between the PMP test, the widely used provocative discography test and the discoblock test.

RESULTS

The PMP test reliably identified the slip level in patients with IS, with sensitivity of 92%. Accepting the slipped disc as the origin of pain in IS, the sensitivity of the provocative discography and discoblock tests were 49% and 35%, respectively: i.e., too low to be contributive in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The PMP test reliably identified the origin of localized pain in IS as the slip level, but should be used with care in CLBP patients in selecting discogenic pain patients for fusion surgery, since the specificity of the test is not known and it may be positive for any origin of localized pain.

Correlation between the degree of pain relief following discoblock and short-term surgical disability outcome among patients with suspected discogenic low back pain

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how well the degree of pain relief after discoblock predicts the disability outcome of subsequent fusion or total disc replacement (TDR) surgery, based on short-term Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a set of patients who had undergone discoblock and subsequent fusion or TDR surgery of the same lumbar intervertebral disc due to suspected discogenic chronic LBP between 2011 and 2018. We calculated the degree of pain relief following discoblock (ΔNRS) and the changes in both absolute and percentual ODI scores (ΔODI and ΔODI%, respectively) following fusion or TDR surgery. We analyzed the statistical significance of ΔNRS and ΔODI and the correlation (Spearman's rho) between ΔNRS and ΔODI%. The fusion and TDR group were analyzed both in combination and separately.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were eligible for the current study (fusion n=9, TDR n=6). ΔNRS was statistically significant in all groups, and ΔODI was statistically significant in the combined group and in the fusion group alone. The parameters of both decreased. We found a Spearman's rho of 0.57 (p=0.026) between ΔNRS and ΔODI% for the combined group. The individual Spearman's rho values were 0.85 (p=0.004) for the fusion group and 0.62 (p=0.191) for the TDR group.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that discoblock is a useful predictive criterion for disability outcome prior to surgery for discogenic LBP, especially when stabilizing spine surgery is under consideration.

ETHICAL COMMITTEE NUMBER

174/2019 (Oulu University Hospital Ethics Committee).

The role of the social determinants of health in outcomes of surgery for low back pain: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Low back pain is a major cause of morbidity and disability worldwide and is responsible for vast societal impact. Rates of surgical intervention for lumbar spine disorders continue to rise but poor outcomes remain common. Understanding how the social determinants of health (SDH) influence spinal surgical outcomes stands to inform appropriately tailored care practices and lead to better patient outcomes.

PURPOSE

To determine the relationships between the SDH and pain, opioid use, disability and work absenteeism following lumbar spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and narrative synthesis.

METHODS

We searched Embase, the Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science from inception to April 21, 2020. Studies eligible for inclusion involved participants receiving lumbar spine surgery and investigated the relationship between at least one SDH and post-surgical pain, opioid use, disability or work absenteeism. We evaluated the risk of bias of included studies and used the PROGRESS-Plus framework to organize a narrative synthesis of findings.

RESULTS

Relevant data was extracted from twenty-three studies involving 30,987 adults from 12 countries. A total of 107 relationships between the SDH and post-surgical outcomes were evaluated, 67 in multivariate analyses. Education was investigated in 23 analyses (14 studies): 70% revealed significant independent relationships between lower education and poorer outcomes. Socioeconomic status was investigated in nine analyses (four studies): 67% revealed independent relationships between lower socioeconomic status and poorer outcomes. Gender was investigated in 40 analyses (22 studies): indications that male versus female sex was associated with poorer outcomes were equivocal. Place of residence, race/ethnicity, and social capital were infrequently investigated.

CONCLUSIONS

Low educational attainment and low-income status are clear independent contributors to poorer outcomes following lumbar spine surgery. Occupational factors and work context are likely to be influential. Further research is critical to guide best-practice spinal surgery through a health equity lens.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42015015778.

FUSE-ML: development and external validation of a clinical prediction model for mid-term outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative disease

BACKGROUND

Indications and outcomes in lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative disease are notoriously heterogenous. Selected subsets of patients show remarkable benefit. However, their objective identification is often difficult. Decision-making may be improved with reliable prediction of long-term outcomes for each individual patient, improving patient selection and avoiding ineffective procedures.

METHODS

Clinical prediction models for long-term functional impairment [Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI)], back pain, and leg pain after lumbar fusion for degenerative disease were developed. Achievement of the minimum clinically important difference at 12 months postoperatively was defined as a reduction from baseline of at least 15 points for ODI, 2.2 points for COMI, or 2 points for pain severity.

RESULTS

Models were developed and integrated into a web-app ( https://neurosurgery.shinyapps.io/fuseml/ ) based on a multinational cohort [N = 817; 42.7% male; mean (SD) age: 61.19 (12.36) years]. At external validation [N = 298; 35.6% male; mean (SD) age: 59.73 (12.64) years], areas under the curves for functional impairment [0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.74], back pain (0.72, 95%CI: 0.64-0.79), and leg pain (0.64, 95%CI: 0.54-0.73) demonstrated moderate ability to identify patients who are likely to benefit from surgery. Models demonstrated fair calibration of the predicted probabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative disease remain difficult to predict. Although assistive clinical prediction models can help in quantifying potential benefits of surgery and the externally validated FUSE-ML tool may aid in individualized risk-benefit estimation, truly impacting clinical practice in the era of "personalized medicine" necessitates more robust tools in this patient population.

Prognostic factors for outcome following lumbar spine fusion surgery: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate the value of prognostic factors related to disability, pain and quality of life (QoL) for adult patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion surgery (LSFS).

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched the literature, assessed eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Key electronic databases were searched [PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PEDro and ZETOC] using pre-defined terms [e.g. LSFS] to 20/9/2020; with additional searching of journals, reference lists and unpublished literature. Prospective cohort studies with ≥ 12-month follow-up after LSFS were included. Narrative synthesis was based on recommendations by Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group. The GRADE tool enabled assessment of certainty of evidence. Prognostic factors and outcome were analysed and summarised when examined in ≥ 2 studies and when results pointed in the same direction in ≥ 75% of studies.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies (n =  8388, 2 low and 14 high risk of bias) were included with 39 prognostic factors identified. There is low certainty evidence that higher pre-operative severity of leg pain predicts greater improvement of leg pain and that pre-operative working predicts less post-operative disability both at 1-2-year follow-up. Other found associations were of very low certainty evidence.

CONCLUSION

No moderate to high certainty evidence exists. Use of leg pain and pre-operative working may be valuable predictors of outcome to inform clinical decision-making and advice regarding LSFS surgery. There is need for adequately powered low-risk-of-bias prospective observational studies to further investigate candidate prognostic factors.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Lumbar Decompression Surgery: A Review of 2699 Cases

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

OBJECTIVE

Despite numerous advances in the technology and techniques available to spinal surgeons, lumbar decompression remains the mainstay of degenerative lumbar spine surgery. It has proven efficacy in trials, but only limited evidence of advantage over conservative management in large scale systematic reviews. We collated data from a large surgically managed cohort to evaluate the patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively populated database. Patient demographics, surgical details, and patient outcomes (Spine Tango core outcome measures index [COMI]-Low Back) were collected for 2699 lumbar decompression surgeries.

RESULTS

Lumbar decompression was shown to be successful at improving leg pain (mean improvement in visual analogue scale [VAS] at 3 months = 4) and to a lesser extent, back pain (mean improvement in VAS at 3 months = 2.61). Mean improvement in COMI score was 3.15 for all-comers. Minimal clinically important improvement (MCID) in COMI score (-2 points) was achieved in 73% of patients by 2-year follow-up. Primary surgery was more effective than redo surgery: odds ratio 0.547 (95% CI 0.408-0.733, P < .001). The benefits across all outcomes were maintained for the 2-year follow-up period. Patients can be classified according to their outcome as "early responders"; achieving MCID by 3 months (61% primary vs 41% redo), "late responders"; achieving MCID by 2 years (15% vs 20%) or nonresponders (24% vs 39%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar decompression is effective in improving quality of life in appropriately selected patients. Patient-reported outcome measures collected routinely and collated within a registry are a powerful tool for assessing the efficacy of lumbar spine interventions and allow accurate counseling of patients perioperatively.

Influence of dynamic preoperative body mass index changes on patient-reported outcomes after surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease

Psychological factors demonstrably and often massively influence outcomes of degenerative spine surgery, and one could hypothesize that preoperative weight loss may correlate with motivation and lifestyle adjustment, thus leading to potentially enhanced outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the effect of preoperative weight loss or gain, respectively, on patient-reported outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. Weight loss was defined as a BMI decrease of ≤ − 0.5 kg/m² over a period of at least 1 month, and weight gain as a BMI increase of ≥ 0.5 kg/m² in the same time period, respectively. The primary endpoint was set as the achievement of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in the ODI at 1 or 2 years postoperatively. A total of 154 patients were included. Weight loss (odds ratio (OR): 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52 to 2.80) and weight gain (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.43 to 2.55) showed no significant influence on MCID achievement for ODI compared to a stable BMI. The same results were observed when analysing long-term NRS-BP and NRS-LP. Regression analysis showed no correlation between BMI change and PROM change scores for any of the three PROMs. Adjustment for age and gender did not alter results. Our findings suggest that both preoperative weight loss and weight gain may have no measurable effect on long-term postoperative outcome compared to a stable BMI. Weight loss preoperatively—as a potential surrogate sign of patient motivation and lifestyle change—may thus not influence postoperative outcomes.

Gender differences in the surgical management of lumbar degenerative disease: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Despite efforts toward achieving gender equality in clinical trial enrollment, females are often underrepresented, and gender-specific data analysis is often unavailable. Identifying and reducing gender bias in medical decision-making and outcome reporting may facilitate equitable healthcare delivery. Gender disparity in the utilization of surgical therapy has been exemplified in the orthopedic literature through studies of total joint arthroplasty. A paucity of literature is available to guide the management of lumbar degenerative disease, which stratifies on the basis of demographic factors. The objective of this study was to systematically map and synthesize the adult surgical literature regarding gender differences in pre- and postoperative patient-reported clinical assessment scores for patients with lumbar degenerative disease (disc degeneration, disc herniation, spondylolisthesis, and spinal canal stenosis).

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to September 2018. Study characteristics including patient demographics, diagnoses, procedures, and pre- and postoperative clinical assessment scores (pain, disability, and health-related quality of life [HRQoL]) were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty articles were identified, accounting for 32,951 patients. Six studies accounted for 84% of patients; 5 of the 6 studies were published by European groups. The most common lumbar degenerative conditions were disc herniation (59.0%), disc degeneration (20.3%), and spinal canal stenosis (15.9%). The majority of studies reported worse preoperative pain (93.3%), disability (81.3%), and HRQoL (75%) among females. The remainder reported equivalent preoperative scores between males and females. The majority of studies (63.3%) did not report preoperative duration of symptoms, and this represents a limitation of the data. Eighty percent of studies found that females had worse absolute postoperative scores in at least one outcome category (pain, disability, or HRQoL). The remainder reported equivalent absolute postoperative scores between males and females. Seventy-three percent of studies reported either an equivalent or greater interval change for females.

CONCLUSIONS

Female patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disease (disc degeneration, disc herniation, spondylolisthesis, and spinal canal stenosis) have worse absolute preoperative pain, disability, and HRQoL. Following surgery, females have worse absolute pain, disability, and HRQoL, but demonstrate an equal or greater interval change compared to males. Further studies should examine gender differences in preoperative workup and clinical course.

Improving recovery after elective degenerative spine surgery: 5-year experience with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol

OBJECTIVEEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has led to a paradigm shift in various surgical specialties. Its application can result in substantial benefits in perioperative healthcare utilization through preoperative physical and mental patient optimization and modulation of the recovery process. Still, ERAS remains relatively new to spine surgery. The authors report their 5-year experience, focusing on ERAS application to a broad population of patients with degenerative spine conditions undergoing elective surgical procedures, including anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).METHODSA multimodal ERAS protocol was applied between November 2013 and October 2018. The authors analyze hospital stay, perioperative outcomes, readmissions, and adverse events obtained from a prospective institutional registry. Elective tubular microdiscectomy and mini-open decompression as well as minimally invasive (MI) anterior or posterior fusion cases were included. Their institutional ERAS protocol contains 22 pre-, intra-, and postoperative elements, including preoperative patient counseling, MI techniques, early mobilization and oral intake, minimal postoperative restrictions, and regular audits.RESULTSA total of 2592 consecutive patients were included, with 199 (8%) undergoing fusion. The mean hospital stay was 1.1 ± 1.2 days, with 20 (0.8%) 30-day and 36 (1.4%) 60-day readmissions. Ninety-four percent of patients were discharged after a maximum 1-night hospital stay. Over the 5-year period, a clear trend toward a higher proportion of patients discharged home after a 1-night stay was observed (p < 0.001), with a concomitant decrease in adverse events in the overall cohort (p = 0.025) and without increase in readmissions. For fusion procedures, the rate of 1-night hospital stays increased from 26% to 85% (p < 0.001). Similarly, the average length of hospital stay decreased steadily from 2.4 ± 1.2 days to 1.5 ± 0.3 days (p < 0.001), with a notable concomitant decrease in variance, resulting in an estimated reduction in nursing costs of 46.8%.CONCLUSIONSApplication of an ERAS protocol over 5 years to a diverse population of patients undergoing surgical procedures, including ALIF, for treatment of degenerative spine conditions was safe and effective, without increase in readmissions. The data from this large case series stress the importance of the multidisciplinary, iterative improvement process to overcome the learning curve associated with ERAS implementation, and the importance of a dedicated perioperative care team. Prospective trials are needed to evaluate spinal ERAS on a higher level of evidence.

Histomorphology and immunohistochemical patterns in degenerative disc disease and clinical-radiological correlations: a prospective study

PURPOSE

Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a common condition causing low-back pain, disability and, eventually, neurological symptoms. This investigation aimed to investigate intervertebral disc DDD-related changes, evaluating histomorphology and cytokines secretion, and their clinical-radiological correlations.

METHODS

This is a monocentric prospective observational study. A cohort of patients who underwent microdiscectomy for DDD, from June 2018 to January 2019, were enrolled. Discs samples were examined for histomorphology, chondrons count, immunohistochemistry for Hif-1α, Nf200 and Egr-1. Demographical and clinical data were also collected.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were finally included. MRI evaluation showed a Modic I alteration in nine patients and a Modic II in 11. The disability grade was low-moderate (ODI score was ≤ 40%) in eight patients and high (ODI score > 40%) in 12. The Modic I was associated with a low-moderate disability in two (22%) patients and to a high disability in seven (88%) (p < 0.01). In Modic I group and in ODI > 40% groups, there were a significative higher mean disability grade 48.4 (± 8.3)%, number of chondrons per section, cells per chondron, Nf200+ nerve fibers and Hif-1α expression, compared with Modic II and ODI ≤ 40% groups, respectively. There were no differences in terms of Egr-1 expression.

CONCLUSIONS

The discs with Modic I MRI signal could represent potential targets for medical treatments, whereas Modic II seems to be a more likely point of no return in a degenerative process. Therefore, further investigations are to better investigate inflammatory pathways and degenerative mechanisms in DDD.

Predictors of loss of follow-up in a prospective registry: which patients drop out 12 months after lumbar spine surgery?

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) are essential in clinical practice and research. Prospective trials and registries often struggle with high rates of loss of follow-up (LOFU), which may bias their findings. Little is known on risk factors for PROM nonresponse, especially for digitally mailed questionnaires.

PURPOSE

To elucidate which patients are at high risk for LOFU by identifying associated predictors.

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis of a prospective registry.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients that underwent surgery for degenerative lumbar disease were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate of PROM follow-up response at 12 months postoperatively.

METHODS

Preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively, patients were asked to complete a range of PROM questionnaires using a web-based tool. All patients who successfully completed their baseline questionnaire were included. Patients were not actively reminded upon nonresponse. Univariate and independent predictors of LOFU at 12 months were identified.

RESULTS

We included 1,456 patients, of which 861 (59%) were lost to follow-up at 12 months. Univariately, lower age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 1, smoking, lack of prior surgery, higher pain scores and functional disability, and lower quality-of-life were associated with LOFU (all p<.05). Only lower age (OR: 0.98, p=.001), smoking (OR: 1.46, p=.019), lack of prior surgery (OR: 0.59, p=.019), and spondylolisthesis (OR: 0.47, p=.024) independently predicted LOFU.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective registry of lumbar spine surgery patients based on web-based outcome capturing, younger age, active smoking status, lack of prior surgery, and nonspondylolisthesis surgery were independent predictors of loss of follow-up. In the future, it may become possible to preoperatively identify patients at high-risk for study dropout. As the implementation of prospective registries and the use of automated follow-up methods are on the rise, it is crucial to ensure efficiency and reduce bias of the methods on which all clinical research is based on.

Safety and Efficacy of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Discogenic Chronic Low Back Pain in a Short-stay Setting: Data From a Prospective Registry

Introduction As a possible treatment option for chronic lower back pain (CLBP) due to single-level degenerative disc disorder (DDD), the efficacy of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) has been reviewed various times in the existing literature. Nevertheless, a scarcity of data exists pertaining to ALIF procedures carried out in a short-stay setting using an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocol, particularly concerning the safety. Methods Prospectively collected data are analyzed to study the efficacy and safety of short-stay ERAS ALIF in treatment of single-level DDD. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in both back and leg pain along with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to collect measure outcomes. The primary endpoint was a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of ≥30% for the ODI at 12 months. Results Forty-four patients underwent surgery after failed long-term conservative treatment. MCID was achieved in 78%. Age was the only significant factor in association with MCID (p = 0.03), while gender, Modic changes, results of prognostic tests, prior surgery and smoking status had no significant influence on either MCID or change scores for any outcome measure. One complication in the form of transient new radiculopathy occurred in one patient (2.3%). Conclusion With overall positive outcomes in terms of both efficacy and safety, an ALIF procedure with subsequent implementation of an ERAS protocol in a short-stay setting can be an option for strictly selected patients with CLBP. Further study, however, possibly with a larger sample size, would be necessary to substantiate these findings.

Tandem Disc Herniation of the Lumbar and Cervical Spine: Case Series and Review of the Epidemiological, Pathophysiological and Genetic Literature

Introduction

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and cervical disc herniation (CDH) represent a relevant public health problem. Patients with symptomatic tandem herniations of the cervical and lumbar spine are rare and not described in the literature. In these patients, certain variables may predispose the development of disc herniation which could increase the understanding of the development of disc herniations. Our aim is to present the first case series of tandem disc herniation, and to elucidate whether tandem herniation is attributable to a certain propensity for disc herniation or not.

Methods 

From a prospective registry, patients with symptomatic tandem disc herniations were included, and the literature was reviewed on the comparative pathophysiology, genetics, and epidemiology of disc herniation and disc degeneration.

Results

Out of 3,156 patients with disc herniations in our registry, 16 presented with symptomatic tandem LDH and CDH that required discectomy. Therefore, we estimate the incidence of tandem disc herniation at 0.51% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26% - 0.75%) in the surgical population. The mean number of degenerated lumbar discs was 2.1 ± 1.1. Compared to the 1,241 patients with isolated LDH, no investigated factors were significantly associated with tandem herniations.

Conclusion

From a genetic, pathophysiological, and epidemiological position, disc herniation is not commonly a consequence of disc degeneration. Rather, degeneration and herniation seem to exist as two separate and distinctly different processes. Based on the literature, it is tenable that tandem disc herniation does not deviate from the normal pathophysiology, but rather occurs in the rare case that two individual herniated discs coincide.

Are patient-reported outcome measures biased by method of follow-up? Evaluating paper-based and digital follow-up after lumbar fusion surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Long-term follow-up of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) is essential in both modern spinal care and research. Lack of time and staff are commonly reported barriers to implementing long-term follow-up of PROM. Automated and digital follow-up systems for PROM collection are seeing widespread use, yet their validity and comparative effectiveness have never been evaluated.

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to assess the validity of digital follow-up systems in comparison with the conventional paper-based follow-up (PB-FU).

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected double follow-up data.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis or degenerative disc disease between 2013 and 2016 were included in the study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The study determined the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for back and leg pain severity at baseline, 6 weeks, 12 months, and 24 months.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After lumbar spinal fusion surgery, a double follow-up of PROM was carried out by conventional PB-FU during clinical visits, while simultaneously completing an automatically dispatched digital follow-up questionnaire. As the primary end point, we assessed the intraindividual discrepancy in PROM between PB-FU and automated digital follow-up (AD-FU).

RESULTS

Forty patients completed all parts of the dual follow-up trajectory and were analyzed. We detected no discrepancy in ODI or NRS for back and leg pain severity at any of the baseline, 6-week, 12-month, or 24 month follow-ups (all p>.05). This was confirmed in a sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of dual paper-based and digital follow-up after lumbar fusion surgery, patients report highly similar values using either method of follow-up. It appears that AD-FU without incentives produces lower response rates. To reassess the validity of these systems for data collection in spinal patient care, a prospective validation with higher statistical power is warranted.

Is elective degenerative lumbar spine surgery in older adults safe in a short-stay clinic? Data from an institutional registry

PURPOSE

Physicians are increasingly confronted with degenerative spinal pathologies and the possibility of elective surgical treatment in older adults. Little is known on safety and effectiveness of short-stay, elective lumbar spine surgery in this population. We aim to describe patient profiles of older adults undergoing surgery at a specialized short-stay clinic, and describe associated risk profiles and outcomes.

METHODS

From a prospective registry, patients older than 65 were compared to younger controls. All patients underwent a strict anesthesiologic screening preoperatively, leading to a carefully selected cohort of relatively robust older adults suited for safe treatment at a short-stay clinic. A range of perioperative data and reoperations were available from all patients, and a subgroup of patients completed outcome assessments for disability, pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

RESULTS

Of the 3279 included patients, 382 (12%) were older than 65. Older patients presented more often with spinal stenosis, and index levels were placed higher (p < 0.001). While there was no difference in complications, reoperations, and blood loss (p > 0.05), older people had longer surgical times and length of stay, although not by a clinically relevant margin (p < 0.001). Long-term patient-reported outcomes were equal (p > 0.05). However, older adults had worse 6-week outcomes for leg pain, functional disability, and HRQOL (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher age should not be considered a contraindication for elective lumbar spine surgery at short-stay clinics. If the anesthesiologic risk can be controlled, conservative treatments have failed, and muscle-sparing techniques are applied, favorable outcomes can be achieved with an acceptable risk profile in a safe manner.

Gender differences in degenerative spine surgery: Do female patients really fare worse?

PURPOSE

Prior data has set the precedent that female patients fare somewhat worse than men after spine surgery. We aimed to evaluate the effect of gender on patient-reported outcomes after lumbar spine surgery for degenerative pathologies.

METHODS

We identified a consecutive cohort of patients from a prospective registry. Absolute values, as well as change scores for back and leg pain severity (numeric rating scale [NRS]), functional disability (Oswestry disability index [ODI]), and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) as assessed by EQ-5D were compared among male and female patients.

RESULTS

Of the 3279 included patients, 1543 (47%) were female. At baseline, women reported higher NRS for back and leg pain, higher ODI, but equal HRQOL (all p < 0.05). Otherwise, both groups had comparable baseline data. The absolute differences in patient-reported outcomes persisted at the 6-week, 12- and 24-months follow-up, with women now additionally reporting worse HRQOL as assessed by EQ-5D (all p < 0.05). For all outcome measures, change scores were equal among male and female patients, as were the incidences of complications and reoperations (all p > 0.05). Clinical success was achieved in 82% of men and 79% of women (p = 0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Female patients are generally scheduled for surgery with a more advanced disease state. While women seem to report more severe symptoms at long-term follow-up, the degree of improvement is equal among men and women. Female patients may thus fare worse in terms of absolute scores, but enjoy the same benefit from surgery in relative terms. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.