首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Patient profiling can identify patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) at risk for conversion from nonoperative to surgical treatment: initial steps to reduce ineffective ASD management
Authors:Peter G. Passias  Cyrus M. Jalai  Breton G. Line  Gregory W. Poorman  Justin K. Scheer  Justin S. Smith  Christopher I. Shaffrey  Douglas C. Burton  Kai-Ming G. Fu  Eric O. Klineberg  Robert A. Hart  Frank Schwab  Virginie Lafage  Shay Bess
Affiliation:1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases, NYU Langone Medical Center, 301 E 17th St, New York, NY 10003, USA;2. International Spine Study Group, Arvada, CO, USA;3. Department of Neurological Surgery, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 N. St. Clair Street Suite 2210, Chicago, IL 60611, USA;4. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, 415 Ray C. Hunt Dr., Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA;5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Kansas School of Medicine, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA;6. Department of Neurosurgery, Cornell University School of Medicine, 525 East 68th Street, Box 99 Starr 651, New York, NY 10065, USA;7. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, Davis, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3800, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA;8. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oregon Health & Sciences University, 3147 S.W. Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239, USA;9. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY 10021, USA
Abstract:

Background Context

Non-operative management is a common initial treatment for patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) despite reported superiority of surgery with regard to outcomes. Ineffective medical care is a large source of resource drain on the health system. Characterization of patients with ASD likely to elect for operative treatment from non-operative management may allow for more efficient patient counseling and cost savings.

Purpose

This study aimed to identify deformity and disability characteristics of patients with ASD who ultimately convert to operative treatment compared with those who remain non-operative and those who initially choose surgery.

Study Design/Setting

A retrospective review was carried out.

Patient Sample

A total of 510 patients with ASD (189 non-operative, 321 operative) with minimum 2-year follow-up comprised the patient sample.

Outcome Measures

Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 Health Assessment (SF-36), Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire (SRS-22r), and spinopelvic radiographic alignment were the outcome measures.

Methods

Demographic, radiographic, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from a cohort of patients with ASD prospectively enrolled into a multicenter database were evaluated. Patients were divided into three treatment cohorts: Non-operative (NON=initial non-operative treatment and remained non-operative), Operative (OP=initial operative treatment), and Crossover (CROSS=initial non-operative treatment with subsequent conversion to operative treatment). NON and OP groups were propensity score-matched (PSM) to CROSS for baseline demographics (age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index). Time to crossover was divided into early (<1?year) and late (>1?year). Outcome measures were compared across and within treatment groups at four time points (baseline, 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years).

Results

Following PSM, 118 patients were included (NON=39, OP=38, CROSS=41). Crossover rate was 21.7% (41/189). Mean time to crossover was 394 days. All groups had similar baseline sagittal alignment, but CROSS had larger pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch than NON (11.9° vs. 3.1°, p=.032). CROSS and OP had similar baseline PROM scores; however, CROSS had worse baseline ODI, PCS, SRS-22r (p<.05). At time of crossover, CROSS had worse ODI (35.7 vs. 27.8) and SRS Satisfaction (2.6 vs. 3.3) compared with NON (p<.05). Alignment remained similar for CROSS from baseline to conversion; however, PROMs (ODI, PCS, SRS Activity/Pain/Total) worsened (p<.05). Early and late crossover evaluation demonstrated CROSS-early (n=25) had worsening ODI, SRS Activity/Pain at time of crossover (p<.05). From time of crossover to 2-year follow-up, CROSS-early had less SRS Appearance/Mental improvement compared with OP. Both CROSS-early/late had worse baseline, but greater improvements, in ODI, PCS, SRS Pain/Total compared with NON (p<.05). Baseline alignment and disability parameters increased crossover odds—Non with Schwab T/L/D curves and ODI≥40 (odds ratio [OR]: 3.05, p=.031), and Non with high PI-LL modifier grades (“+”/‘++’) and ODI≥40 (OR: 5.57, p=.007) were at increased crossover risk.

Conclusions

High baseline and increasing disability over time drives conversion from non-operative to operative ASD care. CROSS patients had similar spinal deformity but worse PROMs than NON. CROSS achieved similar 2-year outcome scores as OP. Profiling at first visit for patients at risk of crossover may optimize physician counseling and cost savings.
Keywords:Adult spinal deformity  Crossover  Disability  Non-operative treatment  Operative treatment  Patient profiling
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号