Cargando…
Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Factors that predict outcomes for adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD) have not been well defined. To compare ACSD patients with best versus worst outcomes. METHODS: This study was based on a prospective, multicenter observational ACSD cohort. Be...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6542159/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31192099 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218794164 |
_version_ | 1783422895249162240 |
---|---|
author | Smith, Justin S. Shaffrey, Christopher I. Kim, Han Jo Passias, Peter Protopsaltis, Themistocles Lafage, Renaud Mundis, Gregory M. Klineberg, Eric Lafage, Virginie Schwab, Frank J. Scheer, Justin K. Kelly, Michael Hamilton, D. Kojo Gupta, Munish Deviren, Vedat Hostin, Richard Albert, Todd Riew, K. Daniel Hart, Robert Burton, Doug Bess, Shay Ames, Christopher P. |
author_facet | Smith, Justin S. Shaffrey, Christopher I. Kim, Han Jo Passias, Peter Protopsaltis, Themistocles Lafage, Renaud Mundis, Gregory M. Klineberg, Eric Lafage, Virginie Schwab, Frank J. Scheer, Justin K. Kelly, Michael Hamilton, D. Kojo Gupta, Munish Deviren, Vedat Hostin, Richard Albert, Todd Riew, K. Daniel Hart, Robert Burton, Doug Bess, Shay Ames, Christopher P. |
author_sort | Smith, Justin S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Factors that predict outcomes for adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD) have not been well defined. To compare ACSD patients with best versus worst outcomes. METHODS: This study was based on a prospective, multicenter observational ACSD cohort. Best versus worst outcomes were compared based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NP-NRS), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. RESULTS: Of 111 patients, 80 (72%) had minimum 1-year follow-up. For NDI, compared with best outcome patients (n = 28), worst outcome patients (n = 32) were more likely to have had a major complication (P = .004) and to have undergone a posterior-only procedure (P = .039), had greater Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = .009), and had worse postoperative C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA; P = .027). For NP-NRS, compared with best outcome patients (n = 26), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were younger (P = .045), had worse baseline NP-NRS (P = .034), and were more likely to have had a minor complication (P = .030). For the mJOA, compared with best outcome patients (n = 16), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were more likely to have had a major complication (P = .007) and to have a better baseline mJOA (P = .030). Multivariate models for NDI included posterior-only surgery (P = .006), major complication (P = .002), and postoperative C7-S1 SVA (P = .012); models for NP-NRS included baseline NP-NRS (P = .009), age (P = .017), and posterior-only surgery (P = .038); and models for mJOA included major complication (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Factors distinguishing best and worst ACSD surgery outcomes included patient, surgical, and radiographic factors. These findings suggest areas that may warrant greater awareness to optimize patient counseling and outcomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6542159 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65421592019-06-12 Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery Smith, Justin S. Shaffrey, Christopher I. Kim, Han Jo Passias, Peter Protopsaltis, Themistocles Lafage, Renaud Mundis, Gregory M. Klineberg, Eric Lafage, Virginie Schwab, Frank J. Scheer, Justin K. Kelly, Michael Hamilton, D. Kojo Gupta, Munish Deviren, Vedat Hostin, Richard Albert, Todd Riew, K. Daniel Hart, Robert Burton, Doug Bess, Shay Ames, Christopher P. Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Factors that predict outcomes for adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD) have not been well defined. To compare ACSD patients with best versus worst outcomes. METHODS: This study was based on a prospective, multicenter observational ACSD cohort. Best versus worst outcomes were compared based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NP-NRS), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. RESULTS: Of 111 patients, 80 (72%) had minimum 1-year follow-up. For NDI, compared with best outcome patients (n = 28), worst outcome patients (n = 32) were more likely to have had a major complication (P = .004) and to have undergone a posterior-only procedure (P = .039), had greater Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = .009), and had worse postoperative C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA; P = .027). For NP-NRS, compared with best outcome patients (n = 26), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were younger (P = .045), had worse baseline NP-NRS (P = .034), and were more likely to have had a minor complication (P = .030). For the mJOA, compared with best outcome patients (n = 16), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were more likely to have had a major complication (P = .007) and to have a better baseline mJOA (P = .030). Multivariate models for NDI included posterior-only surgery (P = .006), major complication (P = .002), and postoperative C7-S1 SVA (P = .012); models for NP-NRS included baseline NP-NRS (P = .009), age (P = .017), and posterior-only surgery (P = .038); and models for mJOA included major complication (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Factors distinguishing best and worst ACSD surgery outcomes included patient, surgical, and radiographic factors. These findings suggest areas that may warrant greater awareness to optimize patient counseling and outcomes. SAGE Publications 2018-08-16 2019-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6542159/ /pubmed/31192099 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218794164 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Smith, Justin S. Shaffrey, Christopher I. Kim, Han Jo Passias, Peter Protopsaltis, Themistocles Lafage, Renaud Mundis, Gregory M. Klineberg, Eric Lafage, Virginie Schwab, Frank J. Scheer, Justin K. Kelly, Michael Hamilton, D. Kojo Gupta, Munish Deviren, Vedat Hostin, Richard Albert, Todd Riew, K. Daniel Hart, Robert Burton, Doug Bess, Shay Ames, Christopher P. Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery |
title | Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery |
title_full | Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery |
title_short | Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery |
title_sort | comparison of best versus worst clinical outcomes for adult cervical deformity surgery |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6542159/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31192099 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568218794164 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT smithjustins comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT shaffreychristopheri comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT kimhanjo comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT passiaspeter comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT protopsaltisthemistocles comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT lafagerenaud comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT mundisgregorym comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT klinebergeric comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT lafagevirginie comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT schwabfrankj comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT scheerjustink comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT kellymichael comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT hamiltondkojo comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT guptamunish comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT devirenvedat comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT hostinrichard comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT alberttodd comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT riewkdaniel comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT hartrobert comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT burtondoug comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT bessshay comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery AT ameschristopherp comparisonofbestversusworstclinicaloutcomesforadultcervicaldeformitysurgery |