Clinical outcome in lumbar decompression surgery for spinal canal stenosis in the aged population: a prospective Swiss multicenter cohort study

Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of lumbar spinal stenosis, 2021 - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) guideline for the management of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was first published in 2011. Since then, the medical care system for LSS has changed and many new articles regarding the epidemiology and diagnostics of LSS, conservative treatments such as new pharmacotherapy and physical therapy, and surgical treatments including minimally invasive surgery have been published. In addition, various issues need to be examined, such as verification of patient-reported outcome measures, and the economic effect of revised medical management of patients with lumbar spinal disorders. Accordingly, in 2019 the JOA clinical guidelines committee decided to update the guideline and consequently established a formulation committee. The purpose of this study was to describe the formulation we implemented for the revision of the guideline, incorporating the recent advances of evidence-based medicine.

METHODS

The JOA LSS guideline formulation committee revised the previous guideline based on the method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan proposed by the Medical Information Network Distribution Service in 2017. Background and clinical questions were determined followed by a literature search related to each question. Appropriate articles based on keywords were selected from all the searched literature. Using prepared structured abstracts, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed. The strength of evidence and recommendations for each clinical question was decided by the committee members.

RESULTS

Eight background and 15 clinical questions were determined. Answers and explanations were described for the background questions. For each clinical question, the strength of evidence and the recommendation were both decided, and an explanation was provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of LSS was completed according to the latest evidence-based medicine. We expect that this guideline will be useful for all medical providers as an index in daily medical care, as well as for patients with LSS.

Improvement following minimally invasive lumbar decompression in patients 80 years or older compared with younger age groups

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive lumbar decompression in patients ≥ 80 years of age and compare them with those of younger age groups.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. Patients who underwent primary unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) (any number of levels) and had a minimum of 1 year of follow-up were included and divided into three groups by age: < 60 years, 60-79 years, and ≥ 80 years. The outcome measures were 1) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (visual analog scale [VAS] back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-12] Physical Component Summary [PCS] and Mental Component Summary [MCS] scores, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function [PROMIS PF]); 2) percentage of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the time taken to do so; and 3) complications and reoperations. Two postoperative time points were defined: early (< 6 months) and late (≥ 6 months).

RESULTS

A total of 345 patients (< 60 years: n = 94; 60-79 years: n = 208; ≥ 80 years: n = 43) were included in this study. The groups had significantly different average BMIs (least in patients aged ≥ 80 years), age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Indices (greatest in the ≥ 80-year age group), and operative times (greatest in 60- to 79-year age group). There was no difference in sex, number of operated levels, and estimated blood loss between groups. Compared with the preoperative values, the < 60-year and 60- to 79-year age groups showed a significant improvement in most PROMs at both the early and late time points. In contrast, the ≥ 80-year age group only showed significant improvement in PROMs at the late time point. Although there were significant differences between the groups in the magnitude of improvement (least improvement in ≥ 80-year age group) at the early time point in VAS back and leg, ODI, and SF-12 MCS, no significant difference was seen at the late time point except in ODI (least improvement in ≥ 80-year group). The overall MCID achievement rate decreased, moving from the < 60-year age group toward the ≥ 80-year age group at both the early (64% vs 51% vs 41% ) and late (72% vs 58% vs 52%) time points. The average time needed to achieve the MCID in pain and disability increased, moving from the < 60-year age group toward the ≥ 80-year age group (2 vs 3 vs 4 months). There was no significant difference seen between the groups in terms of complications and reoperations except in immediate postoperative complications (5.3% vs 4.8% vs 14%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although in this study minimally invasive decompression led to less and slower improvement in patients ≥ 80 years of age compared with their younger counterparts, there was significant improvement compared with the preoperative baseline.

Functional outcome in operated patients of multilevel lumbar canal stenosis and use of HRQoL role in depicting the anxiety and its correlation with the pain

Background

Lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) is a degenerative spinal disease of elderly people, and it not only impairs the mechanical activity but also alters the economic and mental status of the patients indirectly.

This is single-center observational prospective study conducted for 2 years and included 30 consecutive operated patients of multilevel LCS patients and excluded the patients with single-level LCS, with primary LCS or with grade II subluxation. We analyzed the various measurement indices used for the surgical outcome assessment as ED-5D 5L and OLBPDI (Oswestry low back pain disability index). Statistical analysis was done using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) Version 21.0 statistical Analysis Software. The independent t test, post hoc analysis, Wilcoxon signed rank statistic test and RM-ANOVA test were also applied.

Result

Most patients have improvement in pain and all the components of HRQoL (health-related quality of life) after surgery, which was further improved in mean follow-up of 1 year. Our study also suggested that the patients with higher anxiety/depression have higher pain intensity and low HRQoL, which was persistent in postoperative period (p < .001).

Conclusion

ED-5D 5L and OLBPD are good indices to assess all the components of quality of life and give valuable information overall. Anxiety has shown important correlation with the pain component in both preoperative and postoperative phase.

Pre-operative prognostic factors for walking capacity after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) reduces walking and quality of life. It is the main indication for spinal surgery in older people yet 40% report walking disability post-operatively. Identifying the prognostic factors of post-operative walking capacity could aid clinical decision-making, guide rehabilitation and optimise health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the evidence for pre-operative mutable and immutable prognostic factors for post-operative walking in adults with LSS.

DESIGN

Systematic review with narrative synthesis.

METHODS

Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey) were searched for observational studies, evaluating factors associated with walking after surgery in adults receiving surgery for LSS from database inception to January 2020. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias (Quality in Prognosis Studies). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method was used to determine level of evidence for each factor.

RESULTS

5526 studies were screened for eligibility. Thirty-four studies (20 cohorts, 9,973 participants, 26 high, 2 moderate, 6 low risk of bias) were included. Forty variables (12 mutable) were identified. There was moderate quality of evidence that pre-operative walking capacity was positively associated with post-operative walking capacity. The presence of spondylolisthesis and the severity of stenosis were not associated with post-operative walking capacity. All other factors investigated had low/very low level of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Greater pre-operative walking is associated with greater post-operative walking capacity but not spondylolisthesis or severity of stenosis. Few studies have investigated mutable prognostic factors that could be potentially targeted to optimise surgical outcomes.

The Influence of Comorbidity on Postoperative Outcomes Following Lumbar Decompression

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the association between comorbidity burden and reaching minimum clinically important difference (MCID) following lumbar decompression (LD).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is limited research on the influence of preoperative comorbidity burden on patient-reported outcome improvement following LD.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained surgical registry was retrospectively reviewed for eligible spine surgeries between 2015 and 2019. Inclusion criteria were primary, single, or multilevel LD. Patients were excluded for missing preoperative patient-reported outcome surveys. Stratification was based on Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score: 0 points (no comorbidities), 1-2 points (low CCI), ≥3 points (high CCI). Demographics and perioperative characteristics were evaluated for differences. Linear regression assessed postoperative improvement for visual analogue scale (VAS) back, VAS leg, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Short Form-12 Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF) scores through 1 year. Achievement rate of MCID was compared between groups and evaluated for significant predictors.

RESULTS

Three hundred fourteen patients were included (123 no comorbidities, 100 low CCI, 91 high CCI). Higher CCI patients were older, more likely to smoke, and have comorbid diseases (all P<0.001). Perioperative differences included increased operative time, levels decompressed, length of stay, and discharge day in the CCI≥3 group. No differences in the rate of achieving MCID for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI. CCI≥3 subgroup had a lower rate of reaching MCID at 6 months for SF-12 PCS, at 6 weeks for PROMIS-PF, and the overall rate for both SF-12 PCS and PROMIS-PF (all P<0.05). Multilevel procedures was a predictor for MCID achievement for ODI.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with increased comorbidities undergoing LD had an equivalent MCID achievement rate for pain and disability metrics through 1 year. High CCI patients did, however, have a lower rate of achieving MCID for their physical function surveys which suggests that comorbidity burden influences improvement in physical function following LD.

The influence of comorbidities on the treatment outcome in symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) affects mainly elderly patients. To this day, it is unclear whether comorbidities influence treatment success. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of comorbidities on the treatment effectiveness in symptomatic LSS.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and reviewed prospective or retrospective studies from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from inception to May 2020, including adult patients with LSS undergoing surgical or conservative treatment. Main outcomes were satisfaction, functional and symptoms improvement, and adverse events (AE). Proportions of outcomes within two subgroups of a comorbidity were compared with risk ratio (RR) as summary measure. Availability of ≥3 studies for the same subgroup and outcome was required for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Of 72 publications, 51 studies, mostly assessing surgery, there was no evidence reported that patients with comorbidities were less satisfied compared to patients without comorbidities (RR 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.45, I 2 94%), but they had an increased risk for AE (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.01, I 2 72%). A limited number of studies found no influence of comorbidities on functional and symptoms improvement. Older age did not affect satisfaction, symptoms and functional improvement, and AE (age >80 years RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.52, I 2 60%). Diabetes was associated with more AE (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.47, I 2 58%).

CONCLUSION

In patients with LSS and comorbidities (in particular diabetes), a higher risk for AE should be considered in the treatment decision. Older age alone was not associated with an increased risk for AE, less functional and symptoms improvement, and less treatment satisfaction.

Identifying biopsychosocial factors that impact decompressive laminectomy outcomes in veterans with lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective cohort study

ABSTRACT

One in 3 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing decompressive laminectomy (DL) to alleviate neurogenic claudication do not experience substantial improvement. This prospective cohort study conducted in 193 Veterans aimed to identify key spinal and extraspinal factors that may contribute to a favorable DL outcome. Biopsychosocial factors evaluated pre-DL and 1 year post-DL were hip osteoarthritis, imaging-rated severity of spinal stenosis, scoliosis/kyphosis, leg length discrepancy, comorbidity, fibromyalgia, depression, anxiety, pain coping, social support, pain self-efficacy, sleep, opioid and nonopioid pain medications, smoking, and other substance use. The Brigham Spinal Stenosis (BSS) questionnaire was the main outcome. Brigham Spinal Stenosis scales (symptom severity, physical function [PF], and satisfaction [SAT]) were dichotomized as SAT < 2.42, symptom severity improvement ≥ 0.46, and PF improvement ≥ 0.42, and analyzed using logistic regression. Sixty-two percent improved in 2 of 3 BSS scales (ie, success). Baseline characteristics associated with an increased odds of success were-worse BSS PF (odds ratio [OR] 1.24 [1.08-1.42]), greater self-efficacy for PF (OR 1.30 [1.08-1.58]), lower self-efficacy for pain management (OR 0.80 [0.68-0.94]), less apparent leg length discrepancy (OR 0.71 [0.56-0.91]), greater self-reported alcohol problems (OR 1.53 [1.07-2.18]), greater treatment credibility (OR 1.31 [1.07-1.59]), and moderate or severe magnetic resonance imaging-identified central canal stenosis (OR 3.52 [1.06-11.6]) moderate, OR 5.76 [1.83-18.1] severe). Using opioids was associated with lower odds of significant functional improvement (OR 0.46 [0.23-0.93]). All P < 0.05. Key modifiable factors associated with DL success-self-efficacy, apparent leg length inequality, and opioids-require further investigation and evaluation of the impact of their treatment on DL outcomes.

Surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of surgery for the management of patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

Sixty-three patients with lumbar canal stenosis were randomized into two groups: the intervention group (IG) and control group (CG). IG patients underwent surgery and both groups participated in the same physical therapy program twice a week for a period of 12 weeks and were followed up at 1 year. The primary endpoint was visual analogue scale for pain, and the secondary endpoints were function (6-min walk test, Roland Morris and Oswestry questionnaires), quality of life (SF-36 questionnaire) and satisfaction with treatment (Likert scale).

RESULTS

No significant difference between groups was observed for pain over time (p = 0.145). Significant differences between groups, in favor of the IG, were observed for the Oswestry score (p = 0.006) and vitality domain score of the SF-36 (p = 0.047). Function in the Roland Morris and 6-min walk test and the role of the physical domain of SF-36 also showed significant differences between the groups; however, these differences occurred due to a worsening of the IG in the short term, and the medium-term. The Likert scale demonstrated greater satisfaction with the IG treatment compared to control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar stenosis surgery did not improve pain in short and medium terms. Function and vitality were better in the group that underwent surgery in the medium term, and patients were more satisfied with the surgical treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02879461 ).

How do spinopelvic parameters influence patient-reported outcome measurements after lumbar decompression?

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Spinopelvic parameters indicative of sagittal imbalance include a pelvic tilt (PT) greater than 20° and a mismatch between pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL) greater than 10°. However, unlike in fusion surgery, the relationship between spinopelvic parameters and patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in patients undergoing lumbar decompression surgery for neurologic symptoms is less clear.

PURPOSE

To determine whether PROMs are affected by the amount of residual (postoperative) PI-LL mismatch or PT in patients undergoing one- to three-level lumbar decompression surgeries.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study (Level of Evidence: III).

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing between one to three levels of lumbar decompression surgery at a single, academic institution.

OUTCOME MEASURES

PROMs-including the PCS-12, MCS-12, ODI, and VAS Back and Leg pain scores-and radiographic measurements of spinopelvic parameters.

METHODS

Patients were separated into groups based on a postoperative PI-LL mismatch of ≤10° or >10° and a postoperative PT<20° or ≥20°. Absolute PROM scores, the recovery ratio (RR) and the percentage of patients achieving Minimum Clinically Important Difference between groups were compared and a multiple linear regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 167 patients were included, with 27 patients in the PI-LL>10° group and 91 patients in the PT≥20° group. All groups exhibited significant improvement after surgery for each PROM included (p<.05) except for MCS-12 scores in the PI-LL≤10° group and both PT groups. Comparing between groups, all patients were similar with respect to preoperative scores, postoperative scores, change in scores, recovery ratios, and percentage change in Minimum Clinically Important Difference, except that patients with PT≥20° had higher pre- and postoperative VAS Back scores (p=.036 and p=.024, respectively). With multiple linear regression, postoperative PI-LL>10° and PT≥20° were not significant predictors of worse outcomes for any measured PROM.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with postoperative measurements PI-LL>10° and PT≥20° without instability had similar PROMs at 1 year after limited lumbar decompression when compared to patients without a spinopelvic mismatch.

Microscopic decompressive laminectomy versus percutaneous endoscopic decompressive laminectomy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common lumbar degenerative disease in the elderly, usually requiring surgery if conservative treatment fails. Microscopic decompressive laminectomy (MDL) and percutaneous endoscopic decompressive laminectomy (PEDL) have been widely used to treat LSS. This study aims to provide a protocol for the evaluation and comparison of the efficacy, safety and applicability between MDL and PEDL.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MDL and PEDL for treating LSS from inception to December 2019 in the following databases: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase and China Biology Medicine. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook 5.2.0. Subsequently, a meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Given the nature of this study, no ethical approval will be required. The protocol will be disseminated via a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020164765.

Scoliosis, diabetes mellitus and total laminectomy at the 4th lumbar vertebra are independent risk factors for post-laminectomy fracture around the isthmus

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify the risk factors and clinical outcomes for post-laminectomy fracture around the isthmus, which can cause back pain or radiculopathy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study involving all patients who underwent laminectomy splitting the spinous process for lumbar spinal stenosis between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome measure was post-laminectomy fracture around the isthmus. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on reoperation rate. To evaluate risk factors for fracture, the following parameters were collected: (1) patient characteristics and concomitant diabetes mellitus, (2) lumbar scoliosis and sagittal alignment parameters, and (3) surgical data, such as rate of total laminectomy. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the independent risk factors for post-laminectomy fracture.

RESULTS

Twelve of the 92 patients suffered a post-laminectomy fracture around the isthmus. Logistic regression analysis revealed that diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR]: 15.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.93-80.98; P=0.001), L4 total laminectomy (OR: 14.68; 95% CI: 1.51-142.76; P=0.021), and lumbar scoliosis (OR: 5.72; 95% CI: 1.16-28.21; P=0.032) were independent risk factors. The fracture group included 2 patients (16.7%) who required reoperation at the decompression level for recurrent leg pain, whereas the non-fracture group included 2 (2.5%) who underwent reoperation at a level different from the index procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-laminectomy fractures around the isthmus were significantly associated with scoliosis, diabetes mellitus, and total laminectomy at L4. Total laminectomy at L4 is best avoided to reduce the risk of post-laminectomy fracture in patients with scoliosis or diabetes mellitus.

Clinical outcomes of lumbar spinal surgery in patients 80 years or older with lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis of all available evidence was performed to assess the safety and efficacy of surgery for lumbar stenosis and spondylolisthesis in patients 80 years or older versus those younger than 80 years.

METHODS

A search of the literature was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. Relevant studies comparing the clinical outcomes of lumbar surgery in octogenarians and younger patients were selected according to the eligibility criteria. The predefined endpoints were extracted and meta-analysed from the identified studies.

RESULTS

Data from 16 observational studies including 374,197 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled data revealed that patients 80 years or older had a significantly higher incidence of overall complication, mortality, readmission and longer length of hospital stay than younger patients. There was a similar improvement in the clinical symptoms (Oswestry Disability Index and pain) of patients in the two groups. No significant differences in overall wound complication, reoperation rate, operative time and intraoperative blood loss were found between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results revealed that the clinical improvement in pain and disability did not significantly differ according to age, although the patients aged 80 years or older had increased incidences of mortality and complication than younger patients. Age alone is not a contraindication for lumbar surgery in very old patients. A careful preoperative evaluation, proper patient selection and appropriate surgical approach are important to achieve successful surgical outcomes. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Comparison of Effects of PELD and Fenestration in the Treatment of Geriatric Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis

Purpose

Although degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is increasingly being diagnosed in older people, there is much uncertainty about the appropriate operative treatment options. The objective of this study was to compare the outcome of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) versus fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis (LRS) in geriatric patients over 75 years old.

Materials and methods

This prospective controlled study was performed on 46 consecutive over aged patients with lateral recess stenosis who underwent either PELD or fenestration. Clinical data were recorded before, 1 week, 3 months and 1.5 years after surgery using visual analog scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score (JOA), The Short-Form-36 (SF-36), and the modified Macnab evaluation criteria.

Results

The patients’ mean age was 82.7 years (aged 75–93 years) in PELD group and 79.1 years (aged 75–88 years) in fenestration group. No statistical difference was found between PELD group and fenestration group with regards to VAS-back pain, VAS-leg pain, JOA and at 3 months and 1.5-year follow-up. However, the PELD group had a lower mean VAS for back pain at 1 week postoperatively (P<0.05). The quality of life in PELD group achieved the same remarkable improvement as fenestration group (P>0.05). Operative time (min) was similar between two groups (p>0.05), while the PELD techniques brought advantages in blood loss (mL) (48.3 vs 128.2, p<0.05), early ambulation (h) (5.5 vs 25.2, p<0.05), and anesthesia-related complications.

Conclusion

Both PELD and fenestration showed favorable clinical outcomes for the treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis. In addition, PELD had advantages such as reduced traumatization and less anesthesia-related complications. In terms of quality of life and complications after operation, PELD under local anesthesia could be an efficient supplement to conventional decompression surgery in geriatric patients with lumbar lateral recess stenosis.

A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Preference-Based Instruments with the Older Population

Older people (aged 65 years and over) are the fastest growing age cohort in the majority of developed countries, and the proportion of individuals defined as the oldest old (aged 80 years and over) living with physical frailty and cognitive impairment is rising. These population changes put increasing pressure on health and aged care services, thus it is important to assess the cost effectiveness of interventions targeted for older people across health and aged care sectors to identify interventions with the strongest capacity to enhance older peoples' quality of life and provide value for money. Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is a form of economic evaluation that typically uses preference-based instruments to measure and value health-related quality of life for the calculation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYS) to enable comparisons of the cost effectiveness of different interventions. A variety of generic preference-based instruments have been used to measure older people's quality of life, including the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT); Health Utility Index Mark 2 (HUI2); Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3); Short-Form-6 Dimensions (SF-6D); Assessment of Quality of Life-6 dimensions (AQoL-6D); Assessment of Quality of Life-8 dimensions (AQoL-8D); Quality of Wellbeing Scale-Self-Administered (QWB-SA); 15 Dimensions (15D); EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D); and an older person specific preference-based instrument-the Investigating Choice Experiments Capability Measure for older people (ICECAP-O). This article reviews the development and application of these instruments within the older population and discusses the issues surrounding their use with this population. Areas for further research relating to the development and application of generic preference-based instruments with populations of older people are also highlighted.

Minimally invasive spine surgery decreases postoperative pain and inflammation for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis

In certain cases, lumbar spinal stenosis may lead to lumbar nervous disorder. A previous study indicated that minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) presents benefits compared with conventional open surgery (COS). In the current study, the efficacy of MISS and COS for lumbar spinal stenosis patients was investigated. A total of 82 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were enrolled and divided into two age-matched groups that received MISS (n=41) or COS (n=41). Patient parameters, including symptoms, inflammatory score, visual analog score (VAS), wound length, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), hospital stay and postoperative outcomes were analyzed in the current study. Outcomes indicated that both MISS and COS significantly improved symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis compared with the baseline. It was observed that MISS resulted in decreased wound length and hospital stay compared with COS for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. The results revealed that MISS had better outcomes compared with COS in improving ODI and inflammatory score for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Notably, it was identified that MISS exhibited improved VAS for back and leg pain compared with the COS group for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. In conclusion, these outcomes indicate that MISS was more effective compared with COS for improving symptoms in patients with lumbar stenosis.

Risk factors for perioperative morbidity in spine surgeries of different complexities: a multivariate analysis of 1,009 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

There is a broad spectrum of complications during or after surgical procedures, with differing incidences reported in the published literature. Heterogeneity can be explained by the lack of an established evidence-based classification system for documentation and classification of complications in a standardized manner.

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to identify predictive risk factors for perioperative and early postoperative morbidities in spine surgeries of different complexities in a large cohort of consecutive patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This study is a retrospective case series.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measures are the occurrence of perioperative and early postoperative morbidities.

METHODS

A classification of surgical complexity (Grades I-III) was created and applied to 1,009 patients who consecutively underwent spine surgery at a single university hospital. The incidence and the type of perioperative and early postoperative morbidities were documented. Multivariate binary logistic regression analyzed risk factors for (1) hospital stay of ≥10 days, (2) intermediate care unit (IMC) stay of ≥24 hours, (3) blood loss of >500 mL, and occurrence of a (4) surgical or (5) medical morbidity.

RESULTS

A deviation from the regular postoperative course (defined as "morbidity") included surgical reasons, such as relapse of symptoms of any kind (3.3%), wound healing problems (2.4%), implant-associated complications (1.6%), postoperative neurologic deficits (1.5%), infection (1.5%), fracture (0.8%), and dural tear in need of revision (0.6%). Medical reasons included anemia (1.8%), symptomatic electrolyte derailment (1.0%), and cardiac complications (0.7%), among others. An independent risk factor associated with a surgical reason for an irregular postoperative course was male gender. Risk factors associated with a medical reason for an irregular postoperative course were identified as preoperatively high creatinine levels, higher blood loss, and systemic steroid use. Independent risk factors for a prolonged hospitalization were preoperatively high C-reactive protein level, prolonged postoperative IMC stay, and revision surgery. Spinal stabilization or fusion surgery, particularly if involving the lumbosacral spine, age, and length of surgery were associated with blood loss of >500 mL. Higher surgical complexity, involvement of the pelvis in instrumentation, American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade ≥III, and preoperatively higher creatinine levels were associated with a postoperative IMC stay of >24 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study confirms several modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for perioperative and early postoperative morbidities in spine surgery, among which surgical factors (such as complexity, revision surgery, and instrumentation, including the pelvis) play a crucial role. A classification of surgical complexity is proposed and validated.

Short-term outcomes following posterior cervical fusion among octogenarians with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a NSQIP database analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Degenerative changes in the cervical spine occur in an age-dependent manner. As the US population continues to age, the incidence of age-dependent, multilevel, degenerative cervical pathologies is expected to increase. Similarly, the average age of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) will likely trend upward. Posterior cervical fusion (PCF) is often the treatment modality of choice in the management of multilevel cervical spine disease. Although outcomes following anterior cervical fusion for degenerative disease have been studied among older patients (aged 80 years and older), it is unknown if these results extend to octogenarian patients undergoing PCF for the surgical management of CSM.

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to quantify surgical outcomes following PCF for the treatment of CSM among the octogenarian patient population compared with patients younger than 80 years old.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This was a retrospective study that used the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP).

PATIENT SAMPLE

The sample included patients aged 60-89 who had CSM and who underwent PCF from 2012 to 2014.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measures were multimorbidity, prolonged length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition (to home or skilled nursing/rehabilitation facility), 30-day all-cause readmission, and 30-day reoperation.

METHODS

The NSQIP database was queried for patients with CSM (International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code 721.1) aged 60-89 who underwent PCF (Current Procedural Terminology code 22600) from 2012 to 2014. Cohorts were defined by age group (60-69, 70-79, 80-89). Data were collected on gender, race, elective or emergent status, inpatientor outpatient status, where patients were admitted from (home vs. skilled nursing facility), American Society of Anesthesiologists class, comorbidities, and single- or multilevel fusion. After controllingfor these variables, logistic regression analysis was used to compare outcome measures in the different age groups.

RESULTS

A total of 819 patients with CSM who underwent PCF (416 aged 60-69, 320 aged 70-79, and 83 aged 80-89) were identified from 2012 to 2014. Of the PCF procedures, 79.7% were multilevel. There were no significant differences in the odds of multimorbidity, prolonged LOS, readmission, or reoperation when comparing octogenarian patients with CSM with patients aged 60-69 or 70-79. Patients aged 60-69 and 70-79 were significantly more likely to be discharged to home than patients over 80 (odds ratio [OR] 4.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-10.4, p<.0001, and OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.1-6.4, p=.0005, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with patients aged 60-69 and 70-79, octogenarian patients with CSM were significantly more likely to be discharged to a location other than home following PCF. After controlling for patient comorbidities and demographics, 80- to 89-year-old patients with CSM who underwent PCF did not differ in other outcomes when compared with the other age cohorts. These results can improve preoperative risk counseling and surgical decision-making.

Minimum Clinically Important Difference: Current Trends in the Spine Literature

STUDY DESIGN

Review of the 2011 to 2015 minimum clinically important difference (MCID)-related publications in Spine, Spine Journal, Journal of Neurosurgery-Spine, and European Spine Journal.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the various determinations of MCID and to analyze its usage in the spine literature of the past 5 years in order to develop a basic reference to help practitioners interpret or utilize MCID.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

MCID represents the smallest change in a domain of interest that is considered beneficial to a patient or clinician. The many sources of variation in calculated MCID values and inconsistency in its utilization have resulted in confusion in the interpretation and use of MCID.

METHODS

All articles from 2011 to 2015 were reviewed. Only clinical science articles utilizing patient reported outcome scores (PROs) were included in the analysis. A keyword search was then performed to identify articles that used MCID. MCID utilization in the selected papers was characterized and recorded.

RESULTS

MCID was referenced in 264/1591 (16.6%) clinical science articles that utilized PROs: 22/264 (8.3%) independently calculated MCID values and 156/264 (59.1%) used previously published MCID values as a gauge of their own results. Despite similar calculation methods, there was a two- or three-fold range in the recommended MCID values for the same instrument. Half the studies recommended MCID values within the measurement error. Most studies (97.2%) using MCID to evaluate their own results relied on generic MCID. The few studies using specific MCID (MCID calculated for narrowly defined indications or treatments) did not consistently match the characteristics of their sample to the specificity of the MCID. About 48% of the studies compared group averages instead of individual scores to the MCID threshold.

CONCLUSION

Despite a clear interest in MCID as a measure of patient improvement, its current developments and uses have been inconsistent.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

A novel use of the Spine Tango registry to evaluate selection bias in patient recruitment into clinical studies: an analysis of patients participating in the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Outcome Study (LSOS)

PURPOSE

Patients enrolled in clinical studies typically represent a sub-set of all who are eligible, and selection bias may compromise the generalizability of the findings. Using Registry data, we evaluated whether surgical patients recruited by one of the referring centres into the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Outcome Study (LSOS; a large-scale, multicentre prospective observational study to determine the probability of clinical benefit after surgery) differed in any significant way from those who were eligible but not enrolled.

METHODS

Data were extracted for all patients with lumbar spinal stenosis registered in our in-house database (interfaced to Eurospine's Spine Tango Registry) from 2011 to 2013. Patient records and imaging were evaluated in relation to the admission criteria for LSOS to identify those who would have been eligible for participation but were not enrolled (non-LSOS). The Tango surgery data and Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) data at baseline and 3 and 12 months after surgery were analysed to evaluate the factors associated with LSOS enrolment or not.

RESULTS

514 potentially eligible patients were identified, of which 94 (18%) were enrolled into LSOS (range 2-48% for the 6 spine surgeons involved in recruiting patients) and 420 (82%) were not; the vast majority of the latter were due to non-referral to the study by the surgeon, with only 5% actually refusing participation. There was no significant difference in gender, age, BMI, smoking status, or ASA score between the two groups (p ≥ 0.18). Baseline COMI was significantly (p = 0.002) worse in the non-LSOS group (7.4 ± 1.9) than the LSOS group (6.7 ± 1.9). There were no significant group differences in any Tango surgery parameters (additional spine patholothegies, operation time, blood loss, complications, etc.) although significantly more patients in the non-LSOS group had a fusion procedure (38 vs 18% in LSOS; p = 0.0004). Postoperatively, neither the COMI nor its subdomain scores differed significantly between the groups (p > 0.05). Multiple logistic regression revealed that worse baseline COMI (p = 0.021), surgeon (p = 0.003), and having fusion (p = 0.014) predicted non-enrolment in LSOS.

CONCLUSION

A high proportion of eligible patients were not enrolled in the study. Non-enrolment was explained in part by the specific surgeon, worse baseline COMI status, and having a fusion. The findings may reflect a tendency of the referring surgeon not to overburden more disabled patients and those undergoing more extensive surgery with the commitments of a study. Beyond these factors, non-enrolment appeared to be somewhat arbitrary, and was likely related to surgeon forgetfulness, time constraints, and administrative errors. Researchers should be aware of potential selection bias in their clinical studies, measure it (where possible) and discuss its implications for the interpretation of the study's findings.

Predictors of improvement in quality of life and pain relief in lumbar spinal stenosis relative to patient age: a study based on the Spine Tango registry

BACKGROUND

An open decompression is the most common treatment for lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS), even in the elderly. However, it is not clear whether the treatment outcome is age dependent. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the improvement in quality of life (QoL) and pain relief, after open decompression for LSS in relation to patient age.

METHODS

The study was performed on the basis of Spine Tango registry data. The database query resulted in 4768 patients from 40 international Spine Tango centres. The patients were subdivided into three age groups: (1) 20-64, (2) 65-74, and (3) ≥75 years. In multivariate logistic regression models, predictors for improvement in QoL and achievement of the minimum clinically relevant change in pain of two points were analysed.

RESULTS

All groups benefited from significant improvement in QoL and back and leg pain relief. Age group had no significant influence on the outcomes. The preoperative status of each outcome was a predictor for its own postoperative outcome. Fewer previous surgeries, rigid or dynamic stabilization, and lower patient comorbidity also had a partially predictive influence for one or the other outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm that all age groups significantly benefit from the open decompressive treatment of LSS. Age group had no significant influence on any outcome.