Approach-based Comparative and Predictor Analysis of 30-day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using the ACS-NSQIP Dataset

Risk factors for extended hospital stay following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

Prior literature has examined predictors of length of stay (LOS) for lumbar fusion broadly, grouping multiple surgical approaches into one sample. Evaluating minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) specifically can reduce variability introduced by other approaches to effectively identify predictors of LOS. The purpose of this study is to evaluate preoperative predictors of extended LOS in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF.

METHODS

MIS-TLIF patients were identified from a spine surgeon's database. Preoperative predictors of LOS, including demographics, comorbidity data, spinal pathology, patient-reported back pain, leg pain, physical function, disability, general physical health, mental health, and depressive burden scores were analyzed. Univariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of LOS ≥ 48 and LOS ≥ 72 h, a multivariate analysis confirmed significance. Eight-hundred-one patients were included.

RESULTS

African-American patients were 4.3 times more likely to have a LOS≥48 h compared to Caucasians (p ≤ 0.001). Diagnosis of herniated nucleus pulposus and foraminal stenosis were negative predictors of an LOS ≥ 72 h (p ≤ 0.014, both). Self-identified African American patients were approximately twice as likely to have a LOS ≥ 72 h compared to Caucasians. Preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was positively correlated with LOS ≥ 48 h (p = 0.008). Other baseline patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were not predictive of LOS ≥ 48 or 72 h (p > 0.050, all).

CONCLUSIONS

Further research should explore why different demographic characteristics may be associated with extended postoperative LOS to target interventions toward potential health disparities. Understanding preoperative risk factors can help target increased healthcare costs and improve patient care through tailored interventions and future research.

Comparison of Complication Rates Between Transforaminal Interbody Fusion and Anteroposterior Fusion for One- or Two-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Introduction Although transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) combined with posterior fusion (AP) have similar fusion rates, it is unclear if choice of approach has an impact on post-operative complications. Research question Is the incidence of residual leg and/or back pain requiring additional treatment after one- or two-level TLIF and AP similar? Material and methods Adult patients who underwent one- or two-level TLIF or AP for degenerative pathology were identified and matched using age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), insurance status, smoking status, revision and number of levels fused. The incidence of radicular leg and back pain requiring emergency department visit/readmission or same level surgical intervention was compared between the two groups. Results Of the 319 TLIF and 288 AP cases, 119 cases in each cohort were matched. TLIF patients had shorter operative times (203 min vs 258 min, P<0.001) and hospital stays than the AP patients (3.76 days vs 4.98 days, P<0.001). The incidence of residual leg pain (7 vs 5, P=0.769) and back pain (13 vs 15, P=0.841) was similar between the two groups. Except for constipation, which was more common in the AP group, the incidence of complications was similar between the two groups. Conclusions Patients undergoing one- or two-level TLIF showed shorter operative time and hospital stay compared with those undergoing AP. The incidence of leg radiculopathy and back pain was similar between the two groups. Surgeons should consider these findings as part of the decision-making process regarding which approach to use in patients requiring a lumbar interbody fusion.

Lateral-PLIF for spinal arthrodesis: concept, technique, results, complications, and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery represents an effective option to treat degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine. To reduce the drawbacks of the classical technique, we developed a variant, so-called Lateral-PLIF, which we then evaluated through a prospective consecutive series of patients.

METHODS

All adult patients treated at our institute with single or double level Lateral-PLIF for lumbar degenerative disease from January to December 2017 were prospectively collected. Exclusion criteria were patients < 18 years of age, traumatic patients, active infection, or malignancy, as well as unavailability of clinical and/or radiological follow-up data. The technique consists of insert the cages bilaterally through the transition zone between the central canal and the intervertebral foramen, just above the lateral recess. Pre- and postoperative (2 years) questionnaires and phone interviews (4 years) assessed pain and functional outcomes. Data related to the surgical procedure, postoperative complications, and radiological findings (1 year) were collected.

RESULTS

One hundred four patients were selected for the final analysis. The median age was 58 years and primary symptoms were mechanical back pain (100, 96.1%) and/or radicular pain (73, 70.2%). We found a high fusion rate (95%). A statistically significant improvement in functional outcome was also noted (ODI p < 0.001, Roland-Morris score p < 0.001). Walking distance increased from 812 m ± 543 m to 3443 m ± 712 m (p < 0.001). Complications included dural tear (6.7%), infection/wound dehiscence (4.8%), and instrument failure (1.9%) but no neurological deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

Lateral-PLIF is a safe and effective technique for lumbar interbody fusion and may be considered for further comparative study validation with other techniques before extensive use to treat lumbar degenerative disease.

Radiographic Robustness of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Techniques

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVES

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) can be achieved with various techniques. Evidence supporting the long-term clinical advantages of one technique over another are inconclusive. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine the changes in sagittal parameters in the preoperative, intraoperative, and post-operative phase, (2) evaluate the radiographic maintenance of these parameters over time, and (3) compare the demographics and patient reported outcomes of patients undergoing various LIF techniques.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with degenerative spine disease undergoing single level anterior (ALIF), lateral (LLIF), posterior (PLIF), or transforaminal (TLIF) lumbar interbody fusion. Data collected included patient demographics and diagnosis at time of surgery. Upright lumbar radiographs taken pre-operatively, intra-operatively, and post-operatively were measured for lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), posterior disc height (PDH), and foraminal height (FH).

RESULTS

194 patients in a single center were included. PDH and FH increased intra-operatively following ALIF (P < .0001), PLIF (P < .0001), LLIF (P < .0001), and TLIF (P < .0001). SL also increased intra-operatively for ALIF (P = .002) and LLIF (P = .0007). Compared to intra-operative radiographs, PDH and FH decreased at latest post-operative phase for ALIF (P < .03), LLIF (P < .003), TLIF (P < .001), and PLIF (P < .005). SL decreased for ALIF (P = .0008), and TLIF (P = .02). LL did not change postoperatively across techniques. Patient reported outcomes improved post-surgically and disability index decreased, but neither differed between techniques.

CONCLUSION

LIF, regardless of technique, was shown to provide significant radiographic changes in PDH and FH. Techniques utilizing larger intervertebral cage sizes (ALIF/LLIF) improved SL. Single level LIF did not affect overall LL. No single technique displayed superior radiographic robustness over time.

Development and external validation of a nomogram for predicting postoperative adverse events in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery: comparison of three predictive models

BACKGROUND

The burden of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD) has increased substantially with the unprecedented aging population. Identifying elderly patients with high risk of postoperative adverse events (AEs) and establishing individualized perioperative management is critical to mitigate added costs and optimize cost-effectiveness to the healthcare system. We aimed to develop a predictive tool for AEs in elderly patients with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), utilizing multivariate logistic regression, single classification and regression tree (hereafter, "classification tree"), and random forest machine learning algorithms.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of a prospective Geriatric Lumbar Disease Database (age ≥ 65). Our outcome measure was postoperative AEs, including prolonged hospital stays, postoperative complications, readmission, and reoperation within 90 days. Patients were grouped as either having at least one adverse event (AEs group) or not (No-AEs group). Three models for predicting postoperative AEs were developed using training dataset and internal validation using testing dataset. Finally, online tool was developed to assess its validity in the clinical setting (external validation).

RESULTS

The development set included 1025 patients (mean [SD] age, 72.8 [5.6] years; 632 [61.7%] female), and the external validation set included 175 patients (73.2 [5.9] years; 97 [55.4%] female). The predictive ability of our three models was comparable, with no significant differences in AUC (0.73 vs. 0.72 vs. 0.70, respectively). The logistic regression model had a higher net benefit for clinical intervention than the other models. A nomogram based on logistic regression was developed, and the C-index of external validation for AEs was 0.69 (95% CI 0.65-0.76).

CONCLUSION

The predictive ability of our three models was comparable. Logistic regression model had a higher net benefit for clinical intervention than the other models. Our nomogram and online tool ( https://xuanwumodel.shinyapps.io/Model_for_AEs/ ) could inform physicians about elderly patients with a high risk of AEs within the 90 days after TLIF surgery.

Trends in lumbar interbody fusion: A study of American Board of Orthopedic Surgery (ABOS) candidate data

Background

There has been an increase in posterior-based interbody fusions over the past two decades. Our objective was to evaluate trends in interbody fusion use among the American Board of Orthopedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II candidates.

Methods

The ABOS database from 2003 to 2012 was queried for common procedural terminology (CPT) codes indicating lumbar interbody fusion (22,558 anterior lumbar interbody fusion [ALIF] and 22,630 and 22,633 posterior lumbar interbody fusion [PLIF] or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF]). Trends in the use of interbody fusion technique, associated complications, and geographical variation were evaluated. We also queried utilization of the anterior and posterior interbody fusions by the International Classification of Diseases-9 code.

Results

6841 interbody fusion cases were identified (2329 ALIF and 4512 PLIF/TLIF). There was a significantly higher use of PLIF/TLIF than ALIF over the study period (P < 0.001). As compared to patients in the Midwest, those in the Northwest had significantly higher odds of undergoing PLIF/TLIF (odds ratio [OR]: 4.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.61-6.35, P <0.001), and those in the Southwest had significantly lower odds of PLIF/TLIF (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69-0.95, P = 0.01). The overall complication rate was 22.2% (n = 1,519). Vascular-related complications were significantly higher among patients undergoing ALIF (31 vs. 1, P <0.001), while those undergoing TLIF/PLIF were more likely to experience unspecified medical complications. On multivariate analysis, patients undergoing PLIF/TLIF had lower odds of experiencing a complication (P = 0.03, OR 0.87, CI 95%).

Conclusion

Over the 10-year study period, there has been a significantly increased rate of posterior interbody fusion among candidates taking part II ABOS examination.

The Anterior Versus Posterior Approach for Interbody Fusion in Patients Who Are Classified as Obese: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 9,021 Patients From a National Database

Introduction Lumbar spine interbody fusions have been performed to relieve back pain and improve stability due to various underlying pathologies. Anterior interbody fusion and posterior interbody fusion approaches are two main approaches that are classically compared. In an attempt to compare these two approaches to the spine, large retrospective national database reviews have been performed to compare and predict 30-day postoperative outcomes; however, they have conflicting findings. Obesity, defined as having a body mass index (BMI) over 30 kg/m2, may also contribute to the extent of spine pathology and is associated with increased rates of postoperative complications. Complication rates in patients who are obese have yet to be thoroughly investigated using a large national database. Our present investigation aims to make this comparison using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. The goal of the present study is to utilize a nationwide prospective database to determine short-term differences in postoperative outcomes between posterior and anterior lumbar fusion in patients with obesity and relate these findings to previous studies in the general population. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 9,021 patient data from the ACS-NSQIP database from 2015 to 2019 who underwent an elective, single-level fusion via anterior or posterior surgical approach. This database captures over 150 clinical variables on individual patient cases, including demographic data, preoperative risk factors and laboratory values, intraoperative data, and significant events up to postoperative day 30. All outcome measures were included in this analysis with special attention to rates of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), prolonged length of stay (LOS), reoperation, and operation time. Results Multivariable analysis controlling for age, BMI, sex, race, functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and selected comorbidities with P < 0.05 demonstrated that the anterior approach was an independent predictor for all significant outcomes except prolonged length of stay. Compared to the posterior approach, the anterior approach had a shorter total operation time (B = -13.257, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-17.522, -8.992], P < 0.001), higher odds of deep vein thrombosis (odds ratio (OR) = 2.210, 95% CI [1.211, 4.033], P= 0.010), and higher odds of pulmonary embolism (OR = 2.679, 95% CI [1.311, 5.477], P = 0.007) and was protective against unplanned reoperation (OR = 0.702, 95% CI [0.548, 0.898], P = 0.005). Conclusions The obese population makes up a large and growing demographic of those undergoing spine surgery, and as such, it is pertinent to investigate the differences, advantages, and disadvantages of lumbar fusion approaches in this group. While anterior approaches may be protective of longer operation time and unplanned reoperation, this benefit may not be clinically significant when considering an increased risk of DVT and PE. Given the short-term nature of this dataset and the limitations inherent in large de-identified retrospective database studies, these findings are interpreted with caution. Longer-term follow-up studies accounting for confounding variables with spine-centered outcomes will be necessary to further elucidate these nuances.

Endoscopic anterior to psoas lumbar interbody fusion: indications, techniques, and clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

The retrospective study aimed to report the surgical technique and clinic-radiological outcomes of endoscopic anterior to psoas interbody lumbar fusion through the retroperitoneal approach with direct and indirect decompression.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the results of clinical parameters of patients who underwent endoscopic anterior to psoas interbody lumbar fusion between June 2013 and June 2022. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. The radiological outcomes were measured and statistically compared in disc height index (DHI), whole lumbar lordosis (WLL), pelvic Incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), Segmental lordosis (SL), the sagittal vertical axis (SVA).

RESULTS

A total of 35 patients were selected for the procedure ranging in age from 51 to 84 years with 17.83 ± 8.85 months follow-up. The mean operation time in lateral position for one level was 162.96 ± 35.76 min (n = 24), and 207.73 ± 66.60 min for two-level fusion. The mean endoscopic time was 32.83 ± 17.71 min per level, with a total estimated blood loss of 230.57 ± 187.22 cc. The mean postoperative VAS back, leg pain score and ODI improved significantly compared to the preoperative values; Radiological data showed significant change in WLL, SL, DHI, PI, PT, and SS; however, there is no significant difference in SVA postoperatively. Subgroup analysis for the radiographic data showed 50 mm length cage has significantly improved for the DHI, SS and SVA compare to 40 mm length cage. The subgroup analysis results showed that hypertensive patients had significantly higher proportion in the incomplete fusion group compare to complete fusion group at one-year follow-up.

OUTCOMES

The endoscopic anterior to psoas interbody lumbar fusion achieves satisfactory indirect and direct decompression. This convergent technique presents an effective choice for treating lumbar instability associated with disc herniations and foraminal stenosis, thus complementing the indications for oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

Incidence of Surgical Site Infection Following Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared With Posterior/Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Propensity Score-Weighted Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion ( P /TLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Previous studies have shown that LLIF can improve neurological symptoms to a comparable degree to P /TLIF. However, data on the risk of SSI after LLIF is lacking compared with P /TLIF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted under a retrospective cohort design in patients undergoing LLIF or P /TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases between 2013 and 2020 using a hospital administrative database. We used propensity score overlap weighting to adjust for confounding factors including age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, number of fusion levels, hospital size, and surgery year. We estimated weighted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for SSI within 30 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

We compared the risk of SSI between 2874 patients who underwent LLIF and 24,245 patients who received P/TLIF Patients who had received LLIF were at significantly less risk of experiencing an SSI compared with those receiving P/TLIF (0.7% vs. 1.2%; weighted OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.36 -0.92; P=0.02). As a secondary outcome, patients who had received LLIF had less risk of transfusion (7.8% vs. 11.8%; weighted OR: 0.63; 95% CI:0.54 -0.73; P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing lumbar interbody fusion, LLIF was associated with a significantly lower risk of SSI than P /TLIF. The small, but significantly, decreased risk of SSI associated with LLIF may inform decisions regarding the technical approach for lumbar interbody fusion.

Comparison of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Ambulatory Surgery Center and Traditional Hospital Settings, Part 2: Assessment of Surgical Safety in Medicare Beneficiaries

(1) Background: The clinical benefits and procedural efficiencies of performing minimally invasive fusion procedures, such as transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), in the ambulatory surgery center (ASC) are becoming increasingly well established. Currently, Medicare does not provide reimbursement for its beneficiaries eligible for TLIF in the ASC due to a lack of evidence regarding procedural safety. However, the initiation of the Hospital Without Walls program allowed for traditional hospital procedures to be relocated to other facilities such as ASCs, providing a unique opportunity to evaluate the utility of TLIF in the ASC in Medicare-age patients. (2) Methods: This single-center, retrospective study compared baseline characteristics, intraoperative variables, and 30-day postoperative safety outcomes between 48 Medicare-age patients undergoing TLIF in the ASC and 48 patients having the same procedure as hospital in-patients. All patients had a one-level TLIF using the VariLift^®-LX expandable lumbar interbody fusion device. (3) Results: There were similar patient characteristics, procedural efficiency, and occurrence of clinical 30-day safety events between the two study groups. However, there was a marked and statistically significant difference in the median length of stay favoring TLIF patients treated in the ASC (23.9 h vs. 1.6 h, p = 0.001). All ASC-treated patients were discharged on the day of surgery. Postoperative visits to address adverse events were rare in either group. (4) Conclusions: These findings provide evidence that minimally invasive TLIF can be performed safely and efficiently in the ASC in Medicare-age patients. With same-day discharge, fusion procedures performed in the ASC offer a similar safety and more attractive cost-benefit profile for older patients than the same surgery undertaken in the traditional hospital setting. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should strongly consider extending the appropriate reimbursement codes (CPT ^® 22630, 22633) for minimally invasive TLIF and PLIF to the ASC Covered Procedure List so that Medicare-age patients can realize the clinical benefits of surgeries performed in this setting.

Anterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery associated with lower risk of stroke, pneumonia, and infection compared to posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery

BACKGROUND

Prior studies, comparing anterior and posterior approaches to lumbar fusion surgery, found similar fusion rates and clinical outcomes, but are limited by sample size. Further evaluation of the postoperative complications of each approach is necessary.

METHODS

The MSpine database by PearlDiver was queried using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT codes to identify patients who had undergone single-level anterior or posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Readmission rates, ileus, lower extremity DVT, infection, pneumonia, and stroke were used to compare post-operative complications of an anterior vs. posterior approach.

RESULTS

112,023 patients were included in this study, with 38,529 (34.4%) in the anterior group (ALIF/LLIF) and 73,494 (65.6%) in the posterior group (PLIF/TLIF). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing an anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion had a higher odds ratio of lower extremity DVT (30-day OR: 1.19, 90-day OR: 1.16; P<0.05) and ileus complication (30-day OR: 1.87, P= <.05; 90-day OR: 1.81, P<.05). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing a posterior approach had a higher odds ratio of stroke (30-day: OR: 0.79, 90-day OR: 0.87; P<0.05), transfusion (30-day OR: 0.66, 90-day OR: 0.69; P<.05), infection (30-day OR: 0.88, 90-day OR: 0.91; P <.05), and pneumonia (30-day OR: 0.85, 90-day OR: 0.90; P<.05). There was no statistically significant difference in myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism between both approaches at 30 and 90-days postoperative.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior and posterior approaches for lumbar interbody fusion were associated with differences in postoperative complications at 30 and 90-days. The complication profiles associated with each approach can inform surgeon treatment decisions based on patient profiles.

Who bleeds during elective anterior lumbar surgery?

Background

Blood loss (BL) during elective anterior lumbar access for interbody fusion or disc replacement is a potentially major complication. This study sought to identify factors other than major vascular injury which contribute to BL and therefore this risk. Factors suggested to effect blood loss include age, increasing body mass index (BMI), sex, prothesis, intraoperative heparinization and continuation of low-dose aspirin (LD-ASA).

Methods

A Cell Saver was used in all cases with BL measured and recorded by an independent autotransfusionist. Heparin was administered intravenously when one or both of 2ndtoe saturation metre signal/s lost pulsatility indicating lower limb arterial flow was interrupted.

Results

The mean age of the 364 patients was 47 ± 13.2 yrs. [95% CI: 45 - 48]; and 191 (52%) were male. Age, BMI and heparinization showed a positive correlation with increased BL. There was no significant association with continuation of low-dose ASA with increased BL. Most patients underwent an ALIF - 265 (72%), 52 (14%) had a TDR, and 47 (13%) had a hybrid operation. There was a significant increase in mean BL between single- and two-level procedures in the non-heparinised group (48 vs 83 mls, p = 0.003). Intraoperative heparinization was administered in 102 patients (28%). The total mean BL for the heparin group (104 ml) which was significantly higher than for the non-heparin group (53 ml) (p = 0.001). Heparinisation did not significantly increase the mean BL in single or double level ALIF patients but did significantly increase the BL in single level TDR (57 vs 151 mls, p = 0.039).

Conclusions

Younger, leaner, non-heparinized, single level ALIF patients represented the lowest bleeding risk in anterior lumbar surgery. Conversely, older, increasing BMI, two operative levels, TDR prosthesis and heparinization represent the highest bleeding risk. Continuation of LD-ASA was not associated with an increase in BL.

Discharge to Rehabilitation Predicts Increased Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to compare 30-day readmission and postdischarge morbidity for posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) in patients who were discharged to home versus rehabilitation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

An increasing number of patients are being discharged to postacute inpatient care facilities following spine surgery. However, little research has been performed to evaluate the effect of this trend on short-term outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent PCDF from 2011 to 2018 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvements Program (NSQIP)-database. Regression was utilized to compare primary outcomes between home and rehabilitation groups and to control for predictors of outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 8912 patients. Unadjusted analysis revealed that rehabilitation-discharge patients had greater readmission (10.4% vs. 8.0%, P=0.002) and postdischarge morbidity (7.1% vs. 4.0%, P<0.001) rates. After controlling for patient-related factors, rehabilitation-discharge independently predicted postdischarge morbidity (P<0.001, odds ratio=2.232). Readmission no longer differed between groups (P=0.071, odds ratio=1.311). Rates of discharge to rehabilitation increased from 23.5% in 2011 to 25.3% in 2018, while postdischarge morbidity rates remained stagnant.Patients discharged to rehabilitation were older (66.9 vs. 59.4 y); more likely to be African American (21.4% vs. 13.8%) and have diabetes (27.1% vs. 17.5%), steroid use (6.4% vs. 4.7%, P=0.002), and American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA)-class ≥3 (80.2% vs. 57.7%); less likely to be male (53.9% vs. 57.4%, P=0.004) and smokers (20.3% vs. 26.6%); and had greater operative time (198 vs. 170 min) and length of hospital stay (5.9 vs. 3.3 d) (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite controlling for significant factors, discharge to rehabilitation independently predicted a 2.2 times increased odds of postdischarge morbidity. Rates of discharge to rehabilitation increased overtime without an appreciable decrease in postdischarge morbidity, suggesting that greater resources are being utilized in the postacute care period without an obvious justification. Therefore, home-discharge should be prioritized after hospitalization for PCDF when feasible. These findings are notable in light of reform efforts aimed at reducing costs while improving quality of care.

Risk Factors for 30-day and 90-day Readmission After Lumbar Decompression

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess readmission rates and risk factors for 30-day and 90-day readmission after elective lumbar decompression at a single institution.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Hospital readmission is an undesirable aspect of interventional treatment. Studies evaluating readmissions after elective lumbar decompression typically analyze national databases, and therefore have several drawbacks inherent to their macroscopic nature that limit their clinical utility.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary one- to four-level lumbar decompression surgery were retrospectively identified. Demographic, surgical, and readmission data within "30-days" (0-30 days) and "90-days" (31-90 days) postoperatively were extracted from electronic medical records. Patients were categorized into four groups: (1) no readmission, (2) readmission during the 30-day or 90-day postoperative period, (3) complication related to surgery, and (4) Emergency Department (ED)/Observational (OBs)/Urgent (UC) care.

RESULTS

A total of 2635 patients were included. Seventy-six (2.9%) were readmitted at some point within the 30- (2.3%) or 90-day (0.3%) postoperative periods. Patients in the pooled readmitted group were older (63.1 yr, P  < 0.001), had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (31.2% with ASA of 3, P = 0.03), and more often had liver disease (8.1%, P = 0.004) or rheumatoid arthritis (12.0%, P = 0.02) than other cohorts. A greater proportion of 90-day readmissions and complications had surgical-related diagnoses or a diagnosis of recurrent disc herniation than 30-day readmissions and complications (66.7% vs. 44.5%, P = 0.04 and 33.3% vs. 5.5%, P < 0.001, respectively). Age (Odds ratio [OR]: 1.02, P = 0.01), current smoking status (OR: 2.38, P < 0.001), longer length of stay (OR: 1.14, P < 0.001), and a history of renal failure (OR: 2.59, P = 0.03) were independently associated with readmission or complication.

CONCLUSION

Increased age, current smoking status, hospital length of stay, and a history of renal failure were found to be significant independent predictors of inpatient readmission or complication after lumbar decompression.

Longitudinal Trends of Patient Demographics and Morbidity of Different Approaches in Lumbar Interbody Fusion: An Analysis Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to determine the time trend of demographics, complications, and outcomes for patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF/TLIF) or anterior lumbar interbody fusion/lateral lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF/LLIF) and to compare the differences in the time trends between both procedures.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LLIF procedures. Outcomes were analyzed for differences between 2 time periods in the PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LLIF cohorts separately (2009-2013 and 2015-2019). Longitudinal time trends of the 2 procedures were determined by difference-in-differences (DID) analysis. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

For both approaches, there was an increase in age and American Society of Anesthesiologists class over time, accompanied by a significant decrease in blood transfusions and morbidity. The DID analysis showed a greater change in age (DID:-1.8%; P < 0.001), and more patients were rated American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 (DID: -2.4%; P = 0.033) in the ALIF/LLIF cohort than in the PLIF/TLIF cohort. Length of stay declined significantly over time in both cohorts, with a greater reduction observed for patients who underwent ALIF/LLIF than for patients who underwent PLIF/TLIF (DID: 0.2%; P = 0.014). There were no changes in readmission rates over time in either cohort (PLIF/TLIF DID: 0.6%; P = 0.080; ALIF/LLIF DID: -0.2%; P = 0.696).

CONCLUSIONS

Time trends for PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LIIF showed a significant increase in the number of older patients with complex medical status undergoing surgery. Despite these trends, there were decreases in overall postoperative morbidity, incidence of blood transfusion, and length of stay, without increasing readmission. These results suggest general improvement in surgical and perioperative management of lumbar fusion over time with greater gains found in ALIF/LLIF-specific care than in PLIF/TLIF.

Diabetes Is Predictive of Postoperative Outcomes and Readmission Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The present study analyzes complication rates and episode-based costs for patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) following posterior lumbar fusion (PLF).

METHODS

PLF cases at a single institution from 2008 to 2016 were queried (n = 3226), and demographic and perioperative data were analyzed. Patients with and without the diagnosis of DM were compared using chi-square, Student's t test, and multivariable regression modeling.

RESULTS

Patients with diabetes were older (63.10 vs 56.48 years, P < .001) and possessed a greater number of preoperative comorbidities (47.84% of patients had Elixhauser Comorbidity Index >0 vs 42.24%, P < .001) than did patients without diabetes. When controlling for preexisting differences, diabetes remained a significant risk factor for prolonged length of stay (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.26-2.01, P < .001), intensive care unit stay (OR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.07-2.17, P = .021), nonhome discharge (OR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.46-2.37, P < .001), 30-day readmission (OR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.28-3.60, P = .004), 90-day readmission (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.05-2.59, P = .031), 30-day emergency room visit (OR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.27-3.63, P = .004), and 90-day emergency room visit (OR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.41-3.65, P < .001). Cost modeling controlling for overall comorbidity burden demonstrated that diabetes was associated with a $1709 increase in PLF costs (CI $344-$3074, P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings indicate a correlation between diabetes and a multitude of postoperative adverse outcomes and increased costs, thus illustrating the substantial medical and financial burdens of diabetes for PLF patients. Future studies should explore preventive measures that may mitigate these downstream effects.

Impact of Discharge to Rehabilitation on Postdischarge Morbidity Following Multilevel Posterior Lumbar Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare 30-day postdischarge morbidity for 3-or-more level (multilevel) posterior lumbar fusion in patients who were discharged to home versus rehabilitation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spine surgery has been increasingly performed in the elderly population, with many of these patients being discharged to rehabilitation and skilled nursing facilities. However, research evaluating the safety of nonhome discharge following spine surgery is limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent multilevel posterior lumbar fusion from 2005 to 2018 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Regression was utilized to compare primary outcomes between discharge disposition and to evaluate for predictors thereof.

RESULTS

We identified 5276 patients. Unadjusted analysis revealed that patients who were discharged to rehabilitation had greater postdischarge morbidity (5.6% vs. 2.6%). After adjusting for baseline differences, discharge to rehabilitation no longer predicted postdischarge morbidity [odds ratio (OR)=1.409, confidence interval: 0.918-2.161, P=0.117]. Multivariate analysis also revealed that age (P=0.026, OR=1.023), disseminated cancer (P=0.037, OR=6.699), and readmission (P<0.001, OR=28.889) independently predicted postdischarge morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty days morbidity was statistically similar between patients who were discharged to home and rehabilitation. With appropriate patient selection, discharge to rehabilitation can potentially minimize 30-day postdischarge morbidity for more medically frail patients undergoing multilevel posterior lumbar fusion. These results are particularly important given an aging population, with a great portion of elderly patients who may benefit from postacute care facility discharge following spine surgery.

Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity Between Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty Performed in the Inpatient and Outpatient Settings Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP Dataset

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Spine surgery has been increasingly performed in the outpatient setting, providing greater control over cost, efficiency, and resource utilization. However, research evaluating the safety of this trend is limited. The objective of this study is to compare 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity for patients undergoing lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) in the inpatient versus outpatient settings.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LDA from 2005 to 2018 were identified using the ACS-NSQIP (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database. Regression was utilized to compare readmission, reoperation, and morbidity between surgical settings, and to evaluate for predictors thereof.

RESULTS

We identified 751 patients. There were no significant differences between inpatient and outpatient LDA in rates of readmission, reoperation, or morbidity on univariate or multivariate analyses. There were also no significant differences in rates of specific complications. Inpatient operative time (138 ± 75 minutes) was significantly (P < .001) longer than outpatient operative time (106 ± 43 minutes). In multivariate analysis, diabetes (P < .001, OR = 7.365), baseline dyspnea (P = .039, OR = 6.447), and increased platelet count (P = .048, OR = 1.007) predicted readmission. Diabetes (P = .016, OR = 6.533) and baseline dyspnea (P = .046, OR = 13.814) predicted reoperation. Baseline dyspnea (P = .021, OR = 8.188) and ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) class ≥3 (P = .014, OR = 3.515) predicted morbidity. Decreased hematocrit (P = .008) and increased operative time (P = .003) were associated with morbidity in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Readmission, reoperation, and morbidity were statistically similar between surgical setting, indicating that LDA can be safely performed in the outpatient setting. Higher ASA class and specific comorbidities predicted poorer 30-day outcomes. These findings can guide choice of surgical setting given specific patient factors.

Ninety-Day Readmission in Elective Revision Lumbar Fusion Surgery in the Inpatient Setting

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Identify the 90-day rate of readmission following revision lumbar fusion, (2) identify independent risk factors associated with increased rates of readmission within 90 days, (3) and identify the hospital costs associated with revision lumbar fusion and subsequent readmission within 90 days.

METHODS

Utilizing 2014 data from the Nationwide Readmissions Database, patients undergoing elective revision lumbar fusion were identified. With this sample, multivariate logistic regression was utilized to identify independent predictors of readmission within 90 days. An analysis of total hospital costs was also conducted.

RESULTS

In 2014, an estimated 14 378 patients underwent elective revision lumbar fusion. The readmission rate at 90 days was 3.1% (n = 446). Diabetes with chronic complications was the only comorbidity found to carry significantly increased odds of readmission. Surgical complications such as deep venous thrombosis, surgical wound disruption, hematoma, and pneumonia (experienced during the index admission) were also independent predictors of readmission. Anterior approaches were associated with increased odds of readmission. The most common related diagnoses on readmission were hardware issues, postoperative infection, and disc herniation. Readmissions were associated with an average of $96 152 in increased hospital costs per patient compared with those not readmitted.

CONCLUSION

Relevant patient comorbidities and surgical complications were associated with increased readmission within 90 days. Readmission within 90 days was associated with significant increases in hospital costs.

Thirty-Day Outcomes From Standalone Minimally Invasive Surgery-Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Patients in an Ambulatory Surgery Center vs. Hospital Setting

Objectives

We sought to evaluate differences in perioperative baseline characteristics, operative efficiency, and 30-day safety events for patients undergoing standalone minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in a hospital versus an ambulatory surgery center (ASC).

Methods

Patients were retrospectively identified and sequentially enrolled from the office records of a single, community neurosurgeon. Records for the first 50 qualifying patients in the hospital and ASC cohorts were retrieved. Variables collected included: baseline demographic and health status, operative safety (intra-op complications) and efficiency (operative time, fluoroscopy time, etc.), and 30-day post-operative safety (emergency room visits, re-admission, and re-operation).

Results

At baseline, hospital and ASC patients were equivalent in gender distribution, BMI, and pre-operative narcotic use. Statistically significant differences were found in age and comorbidity burden (ASA status and Charleson Comorbidity Index); p < 0.0001, p = 0.0039, and p < 0.001 respectively. The only significant difference in construct type between hospital and ASC patients was the proportion of one- versus two-level fusions; all two-level fusions were performed in the hospital group. There were no differences in operative time, need for transfusions, or iatrogenic complications. There were also no differences between the groups in 30-day events of ER visits, re-admission, re-operation, or post-operative narcotic refill use. The length of stay was significantly different between the ASC and hospital settings (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

As expected, ASC patients were younger and relatively healthier compared to their hospital counterparts. Thirty-day safety events of ER visits, re-admission, re-operation, and narcotic refill utilization were representative of population norms. Patients with standalone, expandable MIS-TLIF underwent efficient operative procedures and experienced minimal 30-day complications independent of their operative status. ASC patients had the added benefit of significantly reduced length of stay over their hospital counterparts. Given the equivalency of the 30-day post-operative course for both patient cohorts, a substantial reduction in economic burden is likely for the ASC patients.

Functional and radiological outcome of anterior retroperitoneal versus posterior transforaminal interbody fusion in the management of single-level lumbar degenerative disease

OBJECTIVE

In this study the authors compared the anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) techniques in a homogeneous group of patients affected by single-level L5–S1 degenerative disc disease (DDD) and postdiscectomy syndrome (PDS). The purpose of the study was to analyze perioperative, functional, and radiological data between the two techniques.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patient data was performed between 2015 and 2018. Patients were clustered into two homogeneous groups (group 1 = ALIF, group 2 = TLIF) according to surgical procedure. A statistical analysis of clinical perioperative and radiological findings was performed to compare the two groups. A senior musculoskeletal radiologist retrospectively revised all radiological images.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were comparable in terms of demographic features and surgical diagnosis and included in the study, involving 32 (44.4%) male and 40 (55.6%) female patients with an average age of 47.7 years. The mean follow-up duration was 49.7 months. Thirty-six patients (50%) were clustered in group 1, including 31 (86%) with DDD and 5 (14%) with PDS. Thirty-six patients (50%) were clustered in group 2, including 28 (78%) with DDD and 8 (22%) with PDS. A significant reduction in surgical time (107.4 vs 181.1 minutes) and blood loss (188.9 vs 387.1 ml) in group 1 (p < 0.0001) was observed. No significant differences in complications and reoperation rates between the two groups (p = 0.561) was observed. A significant improvement in functional outcome was observed in both groups (p < 0.001), but no significant difference between the two groups was found at the last follow-up. In group 1, a faster median time of return to work (2.4 vs 3.2 months) was recorded. A significant improvement in L5–S1 postoperative lordosis restoration was registered in the ALIF group (9.0 vs 5.0, p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

According to these results, interbody fusion is effective in the surgical management of discogenic pain. Even if clinical benefits were achieved earlier in the ALIF group (better scores and faster return to work), both procedures improved functional outcomes at last follow-up. The ALIF group showed significant reduction of blood loss, shorter surgical time, and better segmental lordosis restoration when compared to the TLIF group. No significant differences in postoperative complications were observed between the groups. Based on these results, the ALIF technique enhances radiological outcome improvement in spinopelvic parameters when compared to TLIF in the management of adult patients with L5–S1 DDD.

The effect of obesity on perioperative morbidity in oblique lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE

Obese patients have been shown to have longer operative times and more complications from surgery. However, for obese patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery, these differences may not be as significant. In the lateral position, it is thought that obesity is less of an issue because gravity pulls the visceral fat away from the spine; however, this observation is primarily anecdotal and based on expert opinion. The authors performed oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and they report on the perioperative morbidity in obese and nonobese patients.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent OLIF performed by 3 spine surgeons and 1 vascular surgeon at the University of California, San Francisco, from 2013 to 2018. Data collected included demographic variables; approach-related factors such as operative time, blood loss, and expected temporary approach-related sequelae; and overall complications. Patients were categorized according to their body mass index (BMI). Obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, and severe obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2.

RESULTS

There were 238 patients (95 males and 143 females). There were no significant differences between the obese and nonobese groups in terms of sex, levels fused, or smoking status. For the entire cohort, there was no difference in operative time, blood loss, or complications when comparing obese and nonobese patients. However, a subset analysis of the 77 multilevel OLIFs that included L5-S1 demonstrated that the operative times for the nonobese group was 223.55 ± 57.93 minutes, whereas it was 273.75 ± 90.07 minutes for the obese group (p = 0.004). In this subset, the expected approach-related sequela rate was 13.2% for the nonobese group, whereas it was 33.3% for the obese group (p = 0.039). However, the two groups had similar blood loss (p = 0.476) and complication rates (p = 0.876).

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity and morbid obesity generally do not increase the operative time, blood loss, approach-related sequelae, or complications following OLIF. However, obese patients who undergo multilevel OLIF that includes the L5-S1 level do have longer operative times or a higher rate of expected approach-related sequelae. Obesity should not be considered a contraindication to multilevel OLIF, but patients should be informed of potentially increased morbidity if the L5-S1 level is to be included.

90-day Readmission Rates for Single Level Anterior Lumbosacral Interbody Fusion: A Nationwide Readmissions Database Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Nationwide Readmissions Database Study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the patterns of readmissions and complications following hospitalization for elective single level anterior lumbobsacral interbody fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar interbody spine fusions for degenerative disease have increased annually in the United States, including associated hospital costs. Anterior lumbar interbody fusions (ALIFs) have become popularized secondary to higher rates of fusion compared with posterior procedures, and preservation of posterior elements. Prior national databases have sought to study readmission rates with some limitations due to older diagnosis and procedure codes. The newer 2016 International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10 CM) includes more specification of the surgical site.

METHODS

We utilized the 2016 United States Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD), this nationally representative, all-payer database that includes weighted probability sample of inpatient hospitalizations for all ages. We identified all adults (≥ 18 yrs) using the 2016 ICD-10 coding system who underwent elective primary L5-S1 ALIF and examined rates of readmissions within 90 days of discharge.

RESULTS

Between January and September 2016, a total of 7029 patients underwent elective stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF who were identified from NRD of whom 497 (7.07%) were readmitted within 90 days of their procedure. No differences in sex were appreciated. Medicare patients had statistically significant higher readmission rates (47.69%) among all payer types. With respect to intraoperative complications, vascular complications had statistically significant increased odds of readmission (OR, 3.225, 95% CI, 0.59 -1.75; P = 0.0001). Readmitted patients had higher total healthcare costs.

CONCLUSION

The 90-day readmission rate following stand-alone single level lumbosacral (L5-S1) ALIF was 7.07%. ALIF procedures have increased in frequency, and an understanding of the comorbidities, age-related demographics, and costs associated with 90-day readmissions are critical. Surgeons should consider these risk factors in preoperative planning and optimization.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Early Discharged Lumbar Spine Fusion Reduced Postoperative Readmissions: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Early discharge (ED) has emerged and gained popularity in spine surgery. However, the benefits of ED in lumbar fusion have not yet been validated by large cohort studies. To evaluate the effects of ED on readmissions and reoperations in lumbar fusion, this study utilized a national database to enroll patients who had undergone lumbar fusion surgery at age 50–70 years, and grouped them into an ED group or a comparison group. In the comprehensive follow-up of 180 days post-operation, the two groups were compared. There were 18,008 patients in the cohort, including 2172 in the ED group and 15,836 in the comparison group. The ED group was slightly younger (59.9 vs. 60.7 years, p < 0.001), more male predominant (44.9% vs. 36.9%, p < 0.001), and had fewer medical comorbidities. The ED group had less incidences of readmission than the comparison group. (Crude hazard ratio = 0.73, and adjusted HR = 0.75, both p < 0.001). Overall, the cumulative incidences of readmission in the ED group (9.5%) were lower than those in the comparison group (12.8%, p < 0.001), whereas reoperations were insignificantly different (1.5% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.189). For patients aged 50–70 years and who require lumbar fusion surgery, ED could yield a 25% reduced risk of readmission for any cause within 180 days post-operation. Since the reoperation rates remained similar, our results suggest that ED may be a promising option for elderly patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Comparative and Predictor Analysis of 30-day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Multilevel ACDF Versus Single and Multilevel ACCF Using the ACS-NSQIP Dataset

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the differences in 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity for patients undergoing multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or single and multilevel anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite increasing rates of surgical treatment of cervical spine disease, few studies have compared outcomes by surgical technique. To the best of our knowledge, this is the only large-scale administrative database study that directly evaluates early outcomes between multilevel ACDF and single and multilevel ACCF.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ACDF and ACCF were identified using the NSQIP database. Multivariate regression was utilized to compare rates of readmission, reoperation, morbidity, and specific complications between surgical techniques, and to evaluate for predictors of primary outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 15,600 patients. ACCF independently predicted (P < 0.001) greater reoperation (odds ratio [OR] = 1.876) and morbidity (OR = 1.700), but not readmission, on multivariate analysis. ACCF was also associated with greater rates of transfusion (OR = 3.273, P < 0.001) and DVT/thrombophlebitis (OR = 2.852, P = 0.001). ACCF had significantly (P < 0.001) greater operative time and length of stay. In the cohort, increasing age (P < 0.001), diabetes (P = 0.025), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.027), disseminated cancer (P = 0.009), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class ≥3 (P < 0.001) predicted readmission. Age (P = 0.011), female sex (P = 0.001), heart failure (P = 0.002), ASA class ≥3 (P < 0.001), and increased creatinine (P = 0.044), white cell count (P = 0.033), and length of stay (P < 0.001) predicted reoperation. Age (P < 0.001), female sex (P = 0.002), disseminated cancer (P = 0.010), ASA class ≥3 (P < 0.001), increased white cell count (P = 0.036) and length of stay (P < 0.001), and decreased hematocrit (P < 0.001) predicted morbidity. Within ACDF, three or more levels treated compared to two levels did not predict poorer 30-day outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Compared to multilevel ACDF, ACCF was associated with an 88% increased odds of reoperation and 70% increased odds of morbidity; readmission was similar between techniques. Older age, higher ASA class, and specific comorbidities predicted poorer 30-day outcomes. These findings can guide surgical solution given specific factors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Risk factors for post-discharge complications and readmissions in home-discharges after elective posterior lumbar fusions

OBJECTIVES

Previous literature has studied overall post-operative outcomes following lumbar fusions. We examined the rates and risk factors for adverse outcomes in patients who are being discharged home.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The 2012-2016 ACS-NSQIP database was used to query for patients undergoing 1- to 2-level posterior lumbar fusions (PLFs) for degenerative spinal pathology. Patients discharged to a destination other than home were removed from the database.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 19,179 home-discharge patients, 546 (2.8%) experienced any adverse event (AAE), 276 experienced a severe adverse event (SAE) and 321 (1.7%) experienced a minor adverse event (MAE). Overall re-admission and re-operation rate in home-discharged patients was 4.4% and 2.5%. Multivariate analysis identified the following predictors for experiencing an AAE - Bleeding disorder (OR 2.25), BMI ≥ 35.0 vs. BMI < 25 (OR 1.96), chronic steroid use (OR 1.89), a LOS > 3 days (OR 1.53), insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (OR 1.44), hypertension (OR 1.28) and female gender (OR 1.24). Patients with a pre-discharge complication (OR 2.12), bleeding disorders (OR 1.84), chronic steroid use (OR 1.55), age>75 (OR 1.49), age>65 (OR 1.26), history of severe COPD (OR 1.43), total operative time >210 min. (OR 1.26), ASA > II (OR 1.26) and undergoing a 2-level fusion (OR 1.21) were likely to be re-admitted from home.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers should utilize the data to risk-stratify and better understand the need of provision of supplemental health-care services, in home-discharged patients, and/or regular clinic follow-up to minimize the rate of adverse events and reduce costs in a bundled-payment environment.