Rates and risk factors associated with 90-day readmission following cervical spine fusion surgery: analysis of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) registry

BACKGROUND CONTEXTHospital readmission rates are an increasingly important focus. Identifying patients at risk for readmission can help decrease those rates and thus decrease the overall cost of care.PURPOSEWe sought to report the rates and the risk factors associated with 90-day hospital readmission after degenerative cervical spine surgery via either an anterior or posterior approach.STUDY DESIGNRetrospective review of prospectively collected databasePATIENT SAMPLEMichigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) registryOUTCOME MEASURESHospital readmission at 90 daysMETHODSThe MSSIC registry prospectively enrolls patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical spine disease. The registry was queried over a 4-year period to determine patient characteristics and risk factors associated with unplanned readmission at 90 days following degenerative cervical spine fusion surgery through either an anterior or posterior approach. Univariate and multivariate regression modeling was used to compare patient characteristics and odds of readmission.RESULTSOf 3,762 patients who underwent an anterior approach, 202 (5.4%) were readmitted within 90 days. Of 693 patients who underwent a posterior approach, 85 (12.3%) were readmitted within 90 days. Risk factors associated with increased likelihood of readmission after the anterior approach were male sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.56, confidence interval [CI] 1.10–2.20), American Society of Anesthesiologists class >2 (OR 1.70, CI 1.26–2.30), and increased length of stay (OR 1.10, CI 1.03–1.19). Factors associated with decreased likelihood of readmission after the anterior approach were being independently ambulatory preoperatively (OR 0.59, CI 0.46–0.76) and holding private insurance (OR 0.67, CI 0.50–0.90). A history of previous spine surgery was associated with increased risk of readmission after the posterior approach (OR 1.76, CI 1.37–2.25). Pain was the most common single reason cited for readmission after either approach (9% anterior, 13% posterior). After an anterior approach, common surgical reasons for readmission include new radicular findings (8%), dysphagia (6%), and surgical site hematoma (5%), whereas common medical reasons include pneumonia (7%), infection outside the surgical site (6%), and an electrolyte issue. After a posterior approach, common surgical reasons for readmission after 90 days include surgical site infection (8%) and new radicular findings (6%), whereas common medical reasons include infection outside the surgical site (9%), urinary tract infection (8%), and an abdominal issue (8%).CONCLUSIONSAnalysis of a large multicentered, spine-specific database for elective cervical spine fusion surgery demonstrated an unplanned 90-day readmission rate of 5.4% for the anterior approach and 12.3% for the posterior approach. Factors associated with readmission for the anterior approach include male sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists class >2, increased length of stay, holding private insurance, and being ambulatory preoperatively. A history of previous spine surgery was associated with increased odds of readmission after the posterior approach.     

Rates of reoperation and nonoperative intervention within 30 days of bariatric surgery

BackgroundComplications arising from laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are not insignificant and can necessitate additional invasive interventions or reoperations.ObjectivesIn this study, we identify early complications that result in nonoperative and operative interventions after LSG and LRYGB, the timeframe within which to expect them, and factors that influence the likelihood of their occurrence.SettingMulti-institutional database from across North America.MethodsData for this study were obtained from Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program participant use files for 2015 and 2016. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 15. Univariate analysis using Χ² for categoric data and independent t test for continuous data was performed to determine between group differences. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of operative and nonoperative reinterventions.ResultsIn 2015 and 2016, 243,747 underwent LRYGB or LSG, of which 3013 (1.24%) required a second operative procedure and 1536 (0.63%) required an invasive but nonoperative intervention. Complications occurred in 5.48% of LRYGB patients and 2.28% of LSG patients, the most common of which was bleeding. LSG was associated with far fewer nonoperative and operative interventions (.85% versus 2.2%, respectively) than LRYGB (.67% versus 2.5%). Renal insufficiency, including dialysis dependency, was an important predictor of reoperations among bariatric surgery patients. This was also true of nonoperative interventions; however, history of pulmonary embolism, and use of therapeutic anticoagulation were marginally stronger predictors.ConclusionsIn a representative, multinational sample, operative and nonoperative interventions were half as likely among LSG patients compared with LRYGB; however, overall rates still remained low. These findings, in conjunction with new efficacy data demonstrating comparable long-term weight loss between LRYGB and LSG, provide further support for the safety, effectiveness, and cost efficiency of LSG.     

Correlation of mJOA,PROMIS physical function,and patient satisfaction in patients with cervical myelopathy: an analysis of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) database

BACKGROUND CONTEXTPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly utilized to evaluate the efficacy and value of spinal procedures. Among patients with cervical myelopathy, the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) remains the standard instrument, with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) and patient satisfaction also frequently assessed. These outcomes have not all been directly compared using a large spine registry at 2 years follow-up for cervical myelopathic patients undergoing surgery.PURPOSETo determine the correlation and association of PROMIS PF, mJOA, and patient satisfaction outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for cervical myelopathy.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective review of a multicenter spine registry database.PATIENT SAMPLEAdult patients with cervical myelopathy who underwent cervical spine surgery between 2/26/2018 and 4/17/2021.OUTCOME MEASURESPROMIS PF, mJOA, and North American Spine Society (NASS) patient satisfaction index.METHODSThe MSSIC database was accessed to gather pre- and postoperative outcome data on patients with cervical myelopathy. Spearman's correlation coefficients relating mJOA and PROMIS PF were quantified up to 2 years postoperatively. The correlations between patient satisfaction with mJOA and PROMIS were determined. Kappa statistics were used to evaluate for agreement between those reaching the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for mJOA and PROMIS PF. Odds ratios were calculated to determine the association between patient satisfaction and those reaching MCID for mJOA and PROMIS PF. Support for MSSIC is provided by BCBSM and Blue Care Network as part of the BCBSM Value Partnerships program.RESULTSData from 2,023 patients were included. Moderate to strong correlations were found between mJOA and PROMIS PF at all time points (p<.001). These outcomes had fair agreement at all postoperative time points when comparing those who reached MCID. Satisfaction was strongly related to changes from baseline for both mJOA and PROMIS PF at all time points (p<.001). Odds ratios associating satisfaction with PROMIS PF MCID were higher at all time points compared with mJOA, although the differences were not significant.CONCLUSIONSPROMIS PF has a strong positive correlation with mJOA up to 2 years postoperatively in patients undergoing surgery for cervical myelopathy, with similar odds of achieving MCID with both instruments. Patient satisfaction is predicted similarly by these outcome measures by 2 years postoperatively. These results affirm the validity of PROMIS PF in the cervical myelopathic population. Given its generalizability and ease of use, PROMIS PF may be a more practical outcome measure for clinical use compared with mJOA.     

Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery for axial back pain in the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative

BACKGROUND CONTEXTThe indications for surgical intervention of axial back pain without leg pain for degenerative lumbar disorders have been limited in the literature, as most study designs allow some degree of leg symptoms in the inclusion criteria.PURPOSETo determine the outcome of surgery (decompression only vs. fusion) for pure axial back pain without leg pain.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGProspectively collected data in the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC).PATIENT SAMPLEPatients with pure axial back pain without leg pain underwent lumbar spine surgery for primary diagnoses of lumbar disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis ≤ grade II.OUTCOME MEASURESMinimally clinically important difference (MCID) for back pain, Numeric Rating Scale of back pain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), MCID of PROMIS-PF, and patient satisfaction on the North American Spine Surgery Patient Satisfaction Index were collected at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery.METHODSLog-Poisson generalized estimating equation models were constructed with patient-reported outcomes as the independent variable, reporting adjusted risk ratios (RR_adj).RESULTSOf the 388 patients at 90 days, multi-level versus single level lumbar surgery decreased the likelihood of obtaining a MCID in back pain by 15% (RR_adj=0.85, p=.038). For every one-unit increase in preoperative back pain, the likelihood for a favorable outcome increased by 8% (RR_adj=1.08, p<.001). Of the 326 patients at 1 year, symptom duration > 1 year decreased the likelihood of a MCID in back pain by 16% (RR_adj=0.84, p=.041). The probability of obtaining a MCID in back pain increased by 9% (RR_adj=1.09, p<.001) for every 1-unit increase in baseline back pain score and by 14% for fusions versus decompression alone (RR_adj=1.14, p=.0362). Of the 283 patients at 2 years, the likelihood of obtaining MCID in back pain decreased by 30% for patients with depression (RR_adj=0.70, p<.001) and increased by 8% with every one-unit increase in baseline back pain score (RR_adj=1.08, p<.001).CONCLUSIONSOnly the severity of preoperative back pain was associated with improvement in MCID in back pain at all time points, suggesting that surgery should be considered for selected patients with severe axial pain without leg pain. Fusion surgery versus decompression alone was associated with improved patient-reported outcomes at 1 year only, but not at the other time points.     

Determining minimal clinically important difference estimates following surgery for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine: analysis of the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) registry

BACKGROUND CONTEXTThere is significant variability in minimal clinically important difference (MCID) criteria for lumbar spine surgery that suggests population and primary pathology specific thresholds may be required to help determine surgical success when using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs).PURPOSEThe purpose of this study was to estimate MCID thresholds for 3 commonly used PROMs after surgical intervention for each of 4 common lumbar spine pathologies.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGObservational longitudinal study of patients from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) national registry.PATIENT SAMPLEPatients undergoing surgery from 2015 to 2018 for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS; n = 856), degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS; n = 591), disc herniation (DH; n = 520) or degenerative disc disease (DDD n = 185) were included.OUTCOME MEASURESPROMs were collected presurgery and 1-year postsurgery: the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and back and leg Numeric Pain Rating Scales (NPRS). At 1-year, patients reported whether they were ‘Much better’/’Better’/’Same’/’Worse’/’Much worse’ compared to before their surgery. Responses to this item were used as the anchor in analyses to determine surgical MCIDs for benefit (‘Much better’/‘Better’) and substantial benefit (‘Much better’).METHODSMCIDs for absolute and percentage change for each of the 3 PROMs were estimated using a receiving operating curve (ROC) approach, with maximization of Youden's index as primary criterion. Area under the curve (AUC) estimates, sensitivity, specificity and correct classification rates were determined. All analyses were conducted separately by pathology group.RESULTSMCIDs for ODI change ranged from −10.0 (DDD) to −16.9 (DH) for benefit, and −13.8 (LSS) to −22.0 (DS,DH) for substantial benefit. MCID for back and leg NPRS change were −2 to −3 for each group for benefit and −4.0 for substantial benefit for all groups on back NPRS. MCID estimates for percentage change varied by PROM and pathology group, ranging from −11.1% (ODI for DDD) to −50.0% (leg NPRS for DH) for benefit and from −40.0% (ODI for DDD) to −66.6% (leg NPRS for DH) for substantial benefit. Correct classification rates for all MCID thresholds ranged from 71% to 89% and were relatively lower for absolute vs percent change for those with high or low presurgical scores.CONCLUSIONSOur findings suggest that the use of generic MCID thresholds across pathologies in lumbar spine surgery is not recommended. For patients with relatively low or high presurgery PROM scores, MCIDs based on percentage change, rather than absolute change, appear generally preferable. These findings have applicability in clinical and research settings, and are important for future surgical prognostic work.     

Incidences,causes and risk factors of unplanned reoperations within 30 days of spine surgery: a single-center study based on 35,246 patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXTUnplanned reoperation, a quality indicator in spine surgery, has not been sufficiently investigated in a large-scale, single-center study.PURPOSETo assess the incidences, causes, and risk factors of unplanned reoperations within 30 days of spine surgeries in a single-center study.STUDY DESIGNRetrospective observational study.PATIENT SAMPLEA cohort of 35,246 patients who underwent spinal surgery in our hospital were included.OUTCOME MEASURESThe rates, chief reasons, and risk factors for unplanned reoperations within 30 days of spine surgery.METHODSWe retrospectively analyzed the data for patients who underwent spine surgeries for degenerative spinal disorders, tumor, or deformity and had subsequent unplanned operations within 30 days at a single tertiary academic hospital from January 2016 to July 2021. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the incidences, causes, and risk factors.RESULTSOut of 35,246 spinal surgery patients, 297 (0.84%) required unplanned reoperations within 30 days of spine surgery. Patients with a thoracic degenerative disease (3.23%), spinal tumor (1.63%), and spinal deformity (1.50%) had significantly higher rates of reoperation than those with atlantoaxial (0.61%), cervical (0.65%), and lumbar (0.82%) degenerative disease. The common causes for reoperation included epidural hematoma (0.403%), wound infections (0.148%), neurological deficit (0.108%), and pedicle screw malposition (0.077%). Unplanned reoperations were classified as hyperacute (45.45%), acute (30.98%), subacute (15.82%), or chronic (7.74%). Univariate analysis indicated that 20 clinical factors were associated with unplanned reoperation (p<.05). Multivariate Poisson regression analysis revealed that anemia (p<.001), osteoporosis (p=.048), ankylosing spondylitis (p=.008), preoperative foot drop (p=.011), deep venous thrombosis (p<.001), and previous surgical history (p<.001) were independent risk factors for unplanned spinal reoperation.CONCLUSIONSThe incidence of unplanned spinal reoperations was 0.84%. The chief common causes were epidural hematoma, wound infections, neurological deficit, and pedicle screw malposition. Anemia, osteoporosis, ankylosing spondylitis, preoperative foot drop, deep venous thrombosis, and previous surgical history led to an increased risk of unplanned reoperation within 30 days of spine surgery.     

Characterization of urgent versus nonurgent early readmissions (<30 days) following primary bariatric surgery: a single-institution experience

BackgroundStudies on early postoperative readmissions after bariatric surgery (BS) have examined readmissions as a single entity, regardless of urgency. Strategies to lower nonurgent readmissions would reduce unnecessary hospital utilization.ObjectivesTo identify predictors of urgent readmissions (UR) versus nonurgent readmissions (NUR) at 30 days post-BS.SettingSingle academic institution.MethodsPatients undergoing primary BS over 2 years (n = 589) were retrospectively reviewed. Baseline demographic, medical, and hospitalization data were compared between readmitted patients, stratified by urgency, and nonreadmitted patients. Multivariate regression models of UR and NUR were created using variables with a P value ≤ .2 on univariate analyses. A P value ≤ .05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThere were 39 documented instances of 30-day readmissions, of which 44% (n = 17) were NUR; NUR patients were more likely to be female (100% versus 78.2% male; P = .03) and trended toward being younger, experiencing ≥2 perioperative complications, and having a longer index hospital length of stay (LOS). Patients with URs had a higher baseline BMI (52.5 ± 11.4 kg/m² versus 48.7 ± 8.3 kg/m², respectively; P = .04), were more likely to have sleep apnea (77.3% versus 56.1%, respectively; P = .05), had a longer LOS (3 versus 2 d, respectively; P = .007), and were more likely to have ≥2 postoperative complications (46% versus 17.0%, respectively; P = .003) compared with those with an NUR. Independent predictors of NUR included public insurance (odds ratio [OR] = 3.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–11.67; P = .03), younger age (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1–1.01; P = .04), and female sex, while URs were independently predicted by LOS (OR = 1.3; 95% CI, 1.04–1.5; P = .02).ConclusionsPublic insurance appears to be associated with NURs, while LOS predicts URs after BS. This suggests an important dichotomy within readmissions based on urgency, which has important implications for targeted quality initiatives.     

Coagulation after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort analysis

Purpose

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) benefit patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Nevertheless, this therapy is associated with considerable postoperative pain due to the extensive abdominal incision. While epidural analgesia offers efficacious pain control, CRS and HIPEC therapy is associated with perioperative coagulopathy that may impact its use. The purpose of this retrospective study is to characterize the postoperative coagulopathy in this patient subset and to develop a model that will help predict those at risk.

Methods

Our database of patients treated with CRS and HIPEC (n = 171) was reviewed to assess perioperative changes in platelet count, international normalized ratio (INR), and partial thromboplastin time (PTT). Abnormal coagulation was defined by platelet count < 100 × 10^?9·L^?1, INR ≥ 1.5, or PTT ≥ 45 sec. Severe abnormality in coagulation was defined by platelet count < 50 ×10^?9·L^?1, INR > 2.0, and/or PTT > 60 sec. A logistic regression model was developed to determine if patient, disease, and/or surgical factor(s) were associated with the development of postoperative coagulopathy. Epidural catheter management in this patient population was also reviewed.

Results

Significant differences (adjusted P < 0.007) were noted between median preoperative and postoperative platelet and INR values on postoperative days (POD) 0 through 6 and days 0 through 3, respectively. Highest observed median differences between preoperative and postoperative values showed a decrease in platelet count of 94 × 10^?9·L^?1 (POD 2 and POD 3), an increase in INR of 0.2 (POD 0 to POD 2), and a decrease in PTT of 3.1 sec (POD 5). Coagulopathy and severe coagulopathy occurred in 38% and 4.7% of patients, respectively. Predictors of coagulopathy included intraoperative transfusion of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) and perhaps the peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI). Epidural catheters were inserted in 26 patients for a median [IQR] duration of 7.0 [5.0-7.0] days without complication. At the time of their removal, no blood products were required to correct abnormal coagulation values.

Conclusions

Altered coagulation may appear during the postoperative period in approximately 40% of our patients treated with CRS and HIPEC. Intraoperative transfusion of RBCs and possibly increased PCI are associated with abnormal postoperative coagulation. Close monitoring of coagulation parameters is required to help ensure safe removal of an epidural catheter.

     

Factor analysis of the North American Spine Society outcome assessment instrument: a study based on a spine registry of patients treated with lumbar and cervical disc arthroplasty

Background contextStudies involving factor analysis (FA) of the items in the North American Spine Society (NASS) outcome assessment instrument have revealed inconsistent factor structures for the individual items.PurposeThis study examined whether the factor structure of the NASS varied in relation to the severity of the back/neck problem and differed from that originally recommended by the developers of the questionnaire, by analyzing data before and after surgery in a large series of patients undergoing lumbar or cervical disc arthroplasty.Study design/settingProspective multicenter observational case series.Patient sampleThree hundred ninety-one patients with low back pain and 553 patients with neck pain completed questionnaires preoperatively and again at 3 to 6 and 12 months follow-ups (FUs), in connection with the SWISSspine disc arthroplasty registry.Outcome measuresNorth American Spine Society outcome assessment instrument.MethodsFirst, an exploratory FA without a priori assumptions and subsequently a confirmatory FA were performed on the 17 items of the NASS-lumbar and 19 items of the NASS-cervical collected at each assessment time point. The item-loading invariance was tested in the German version of the questionnaire for baseline and FU.ResultsBoth NASS-lumbar and NASS-cervical factor structures differed between baseline and postoperative data sets. The confirmatory analysis and item-loading invariance showed better fit for a three-factor (3F) structure for NASS-lumbar, containing items on “disability,” “back pain,” and “radiating pain, numbness, and weakness (leg/foot)” and for a 5F structure for NASS-cervical including disability, “neck pain,” “radiating pain and numbness (arm/hand),” “weakness (arm/hand),” and “motor deficit (legs).”ConclusionsThe best-fitting factor structure at both baseline and FU was selected for both the lumbar- and cervical-NASS questionnaires. It differed from that proposed by the originators of the NASS instruments. Although the NASS questionnaire represents a valid outcome measure for degenerative spine diseases, it is able to distinguish among all major symptom domains (factors) in patients undergoing lumbar and cervical disc arthroplasty; overall, the item structure could be improved. Any potential revision of the NASS should consider its factorial structure; factorial invariance over time should be aimed for, to allow for more precise interpretations of treatment success.     

Predictors of 30-day follow-up visit completion after primary bariatric surgery: an analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program data registry

BackgroundAdherence to follow-up visits is often unsatisfactory after bariatric surgery.ObjectivesTo identify predictors, including surgery type and preoperative demographics, body mass index (BMI), medical conditions, and smoking status, of 30-day follow-up visit completion.SettingMetabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program participating centers (2015–2018).MethodsPatients who underwent primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy were included in this analysis. Data were analyzed using weighted logistic regression. Subanalyses included stratification of the sample by sex and age (<45, 45–60, and >60 years).ResultsPatients (n = 566,774) were predominantly female (79.6%), White (72.4%), non-Hispanic (77.9%), and middle-aged (44.5 ± 11.9 years), with a mean BMI of 45.3 ± 7.8 kg/m². More than 95% of patients completed the 30-day visits. In the whole-sample analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.02) and the presence of non–insulin-dependent diabetes (OR, 1.04), hypertension (OR, 1.03), hyperlipidemia (OR, 1.10), obstructive sleep apnea (OR, 1.15), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (OR, 1.16) were positive predictors of the 30-day visit completion (P_s < .01). Conversely, sleeve gastrectomy procedure (OR, .86), Black race (OR, .87), Hispanic ethnicity (OR, .94), and the presence of insulin-dependent diabetes (OR, .96) and smoking (OR, .83) were negative predictors (P_s < .01). Several differences emerged in subanalyses. For example, in sex stratification, Hispanic ethnicity lost its significance in men. In age stratification, BMI and male sex emerged as positive predictors in the age groups of <45 and 45–60 years, respectively.ConclusionAlthough challenged by small effect sizes, this analysis identified subgroups at a higher risk of being lost to follow-up after bariatric surgery.     

Mental health improvements after elective spine surgery: a Canadian Spine Outcome Research Network (CSORN) study

BACKGROUND CONTEXTSpine patients have a higher rate of depression then the general population which may be caused in part by levels of pain and disability from their spinal disease.PURPOSEDetermination whether improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) resulting from successful spine surgery leads to improvements in mental health.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGThe Canadian Spine Outcome Research Network prospective surgical outcome registry.OUTCOME MEASURESChange between preoperative and postoperative SF12 Mental Component Score (MCS). Secondary outcomes include European Quality of Life (EuroQoL) Healthstate, SF-12 Physical Component Score (PCS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient Health Questionaire-9 (PHQ9), and pain scales.METHODSThe Canadian Spine Outcome Research Network registry was queried for all patients receiving surgery for degenerative thoracolumbar spine disease. Exclusion criteria were trauma, tumor, infection, and previous spine surgery. SF12 Mental Component Scores (MCS) were compared between those with and without significant improvement in postoperative disability (ODI) and secondary measures. Multivariate analysis examined factors predictive of MCS improvement.RESULTSEighteen hospitals contributed 3222 eligible patients. Worse ODI, EuroQoL, PCS, back pain and leg pain correlated with worse MCS at all time points. Overall, patients had an improvement in MCS that occurred within 3 months of surgery and was still present 24 months after surgery. Patients exceeding Minimally Clinically Important Differences in ODI had the greatest improvements in MCS. Major depression prevalence decreased up to 48% following surgery, depending on spine diagnosis.CONCLUSIONSLarge scale, real world, registry data suggests that successful surgery for degenerative lumbar disease is associated with reduction in the prevalence of major depression regardless of the specific underlaying diagnosis. Worse baseline MCS was associated with worse baseline HRQOL and improved postoperatively with coincident improvement in disability, emphasizing that mental wellness is not a static state but may improve with well-planned spine surgery.     

Inter-semispinal plane (ISP) block for postoperative analgesia following cervical spine surgery: A prospective randomized controlled trial

Study objectiveWe evaluated the perioperative analgesic effects of the inter-semispinal plane (ISP) block in patients undergoing posterior cervical spine surgery.DesignProspective, randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial.SettingOperating room and surgical ward.Patients60 patients aged 18–60 years of either gender, ASA I-II, undergoing elective posterior cervical spine surgery.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned into a control group (general anesthesia only), ISP group received bilateral ultrasound guided ISP block at the level of C5 using 20 ml bupivacaine 0.25% on each side.MeasurementsVisual analog scale (VAS), intraoperative fentanyl and 24 h postoperative pethidine consumptions and time to first rescue analgesic request were documented.Main resultsThe median (quartiles) of 24 h postoperative rescue pethidine consumption was significantly lower in the ISP group [0 (0–46.25) mg] compared to that of the control group [143 (116.75–169.00) mg]; P < 0.001). VAS was significantly lower in the ISP group at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h,4 h, 6 h, 8 h and 12 h postoperative compared to control group (P < 0.05). At 18 and 24 h, VAS was not significantly different between groups. The median (quartiles) of intraoperative fentanyl consumption in the ISP group [0 (0–40.75) μg] was significantly lower compared to that of the control group [63.5 (39.5–90.25) μg]; P < 0.001]. The time to first rescue analgesic administration was significantly longer in the ISP group compared to the control group (P < 0.001).ConclusionBilateral ultrasound-guided ISP block can provide decreased 24 h postoperative analgesic consumption as well as lower pain scores in the first 12 postoperative hours in patients undergoing posterior cervical spine surgery.     

Return hospital visits and morbidity within 60 days after day surgery: a retrospective study of 18,736 day surgical procedures

BACKGROUND: As day surgery includes more extensive procedures focus should be put on late outcome. The frequency of day surgery-related return visits and the associated morbidity were examined to identify suitable indicators of quality. METHODS: From two centres, 16,048 patients underwent 18,736 day surgery operations including 4,829 surgical abortions. Patients were retrospectively analysed for contacts to Danish hospitals within 60 post-operative days and the associated morbidity and mortality. Data were obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry and the National Causes of Death Registry. Patient records were studied to validate contacts as being definite, likely, possible or not related. RESULTS: Altogether 113 patients (not including the surgical abortions) were readmitted to hospitals with 117 complications definitely or likely related to day surgery. The most common complications were haematomas or haemorrhage (0.40%) and infections (0.29%). Morbidity after the two most common procedures, hernia repair and knee arthroscopy, was observed in 1:39 patients and 1:220 patients, respectively. More serious complications included four patients with septic arthritis of the knee and six patients with venous thromboembolism. After surgical abortion, pelvic inflammation and bleeding were observed in 3.1% and 2.2%, respectively, with centre differences. Altogether no myocardial infarctions, central nervous system deficits, pneumonias or deaths were recorded that could definitely or likely be related to day surgery. CONCLUSION: Day surgery in Denmark is a safe practice. Readmission rates, haematomas and wound infections are likely future indicators of outcome quality after day surgery.     

Clinically meaningful improvement in disabilities of arm,shoulder, and hand (DASH) following cervical spine surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXTPatients with cervical spine disease suffer from upper limb disability. At present, no clinical benchmarks exist for clinically meaningful change in the upper limb function following cervical spine surgery.PURPOSEPrimary: to establish clinically meaningful metrics; the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) of upper limb functional improvement in patients following cervical spine surgery. Secondary: to identify the prognostic factors of MCID and SCB of upper limb function following cervical spine surgery.STUDY DESIGNRetrospective cohort study.PATIENT SAMPLEAdult patients ≥18 years of age who underwent cervical spine surgery from 2012 to 2016.OUTCOME MEASURESPatient-reported outcomes: Neck disability index (NDI) and Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH).METHODSMCID was defined as minimal improvement and SCB as substantial improvement in the DASH score at last follow-up. The anchor-based methods (ROC analyses) defined optimal MCID and SCB thresholds with area under curve (AUC) in discriminating improved vs. non-improved patients. The MCID was also calculated by distribution-based methods: half standard-deviation (0.5-SD) and standard error of the mean (SEM) method. A multivariable logistic regression evaluated the impact of baseline factors in achieving the MCID and SCB in DASH following cervical spine surgery.RESULTSBetween 2012 and 2016, 1,046 patients with average age of 57±11.3 years, 53% males, underwent cervical spine surgery. Using the ROC analysis, the threshold for MCID was –8 points with AUC of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.67–0.79) and the SCB was –18 points with AUC of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85–0.91). The MCID was –11 points by 0.5–SD and –12 points by SEM-method. On multivariable analysis, patients with myelopathy had lower odds of achieving MCID and SCB, whereas older patients and those with ≥6 months duration of symptoms had lower odds of achieving DASH MCID and SCB respectively.CONCLUSIONsIn patients undergoing cervical spine surgery, MCID of –8 points and SCB of –18 points in DASH improvement may be considered clinically significant. These metrics may enable evaluation of minimal and substantial improvement in the upper extremity function following cervical spine surgery.     

Risk factors for cardiovascular death within 30 days after anaesthesia and urgent or emergency surgery: a nested case-control study

The Oxford Record Linkage Study (an epidemiological database) was used to identify patients who died from a cardiovascular cause within 30 days of emergency or urgent surgery under general anaesthesia. Each case was paired with a control patient (matched for age within 10 yr of the patient, operation and consultant). Additional clinical information was sought from the patient's case notes. Cases and controls were compared for cardiovascular risk factors using conditional logistic regression analysis and a prognostic model was generated. Only one significant risk factor was identified in the final model: a history of cardiac failure (odds ratio 14.84; 95% confidence intervals 2.53-87.13; P = 0.003). Associations between a history of cerebrovascular accident or renal impairment and cardiovascular mortality were seen using univariate analysis but not after adjustment for confounding factors.