Evaluative comparison of physician-based vs. patient-based outcomes in posterior lumbar fusion

Posterior lumbar fusion is a frequently performed procedure in spinal surgery. High percentages of good and excellent results are indicated by physicians. On the other hand patient-based outcomes are reported. Little is known about the correlations of these two assessment types. We aimed at their comparison. The analysis included 1013 patients with degenerative spinal disease or spondylolisthesis from an international spine registry, treated with posterior lumbar fusion. All patients were pre/postop assessed by physician-based McNab criteria (‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘fair’, ‘poor’). Of these patients, 210 (mean age 61 years; 57% females) were in addition assessed by patient-based Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The remaining 803 patients (mean age 59 years; 56% females) were assessed by patient-based Core Outcome Measure Index (COMI), including Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain as well as verbal self-rating (‘helped a lot’, ‘helped’, ‘helped only little’, ‘didn’t help’, ‘made things worse’). McNab criteria were compared to the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in ODI (12.8), in VAS back (1.2) and leg pain (1.6). We investigated the correlations between McNab criteria and these patient-based outcomes. In the ‘excellent’ group as rated by physicians, the proposed MCID was reached in 83% of patients for ODI, in 69% for VAS back and in 83% for VAS leg pain. All patients said the treatment had ‘helped’ or ‘helped a lot’. In the ‘good’ group 56% (ODI), 66% (back pain) and 86% (leg pain) reached the MCID. 96% of patients perceived the treatment as positive. In the ‘fair’ group 37% (ODI), 55% (back pain) and 63% (leg pain) reached the MCID. 49% had positive treatment considerations. The ‘poor’ group revealed 30% (ODI), 35% (back pain) and 44% (leg pain) of patients with reached MCID. Only 15% rated the treatment as positive. The Spearman correlation coefficients between McNab criteria on the one hand and ODI, back and leg pain as well as patients’ verbal self-rating on the other hand were 0.57, 0.37, 0.36 and 0.46 respectively. The comparison of physician and patient-based outcomes showed the highest correlations between McNab criteria and ODI, somewhat weaker correlations with patients’ self-rating and the weakest correlations with back and leg pain. Based on these findings, physicians’ evaluation of patient outcomes can be considered a valuable part of patient assessment, corresponding very well with patients’ perceptions of success or failure of spinal surgery.

Patient-rated Outcomes of Lumbar Fusion in Patients with Degenerative Disease of the Lumbar Spine: Does Age Matter?

Introduction: Current demographic changes are characterized by population aging, such that the surgical treatment of degenerative spine conditions in the elderly is gaining increasing relevance. However, there is a general reluctance to consider spinal fusion procedures in this patient age group due to the increased likelihood of complications. The aim of this study was to assess the patient-rated outcome and complication rates associated with lumbar fusion procedures in three different age groups. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients who underwent first-time, one to three level posterior instrumented fusion between 2004 and 2011, due to degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Data were obtained from our Spine Surgery Outcomes Database (linked to the International Spine Tango Register). Before surgery, patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI), and at 3 and 12 months after surgery they completed the COMI and rated the Global Treatment Outcome (GTO) and their satisfaction with care. Patients were divided into three groups according to their age: younger (≥50y <65y; n = 317), older (≥65y <80y; n = 350), and geriatric (≥ 80y; n = 40). Results: 707 consecutive patients were included. The preoperative comorbidity status differed significantly (p < 0.0001) between the age groups, with the highest scores in the geriatric group. General medical complications during surgery were lower in the younger age group (7%) than in the older (13.4%; p = 0.006) and geriatric groups (17.5%; p = 0.007). Duration of hospital stay was longer (p = 0.006) in the older group (10.8 ± 3.7 days) than the younger (10.0 ± 3.6 days) group. There were no significant group differences (p>0.05) for any of the COMI domains covering pain, function, symptom specific well-being, general quality of life, and social and work disability at either 3 months’ or 12 months’ follow-up. Similarly, there were no differences (p>0.05) between the age groups for GTO and patient-rated satisfaction at either follow-up. Conclusions: Preoperative comorbidity and general medical complications during lumbar fusion for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine are both greater in geriatric patients than in younger patients. However, patient-rated outcome is as good in the elderly as it is in younger age groups. These data suggest that geriatric age per se is not a contraindication to instrumented fusion for lumbar degenerative disease.

Patient-Rated Outcomes of Lumbar Fusion in Patients with Degenerative Disease of the Lumbar Spine: Does Age Matter?

STUDY DESIGN Single centre retrospective study of prospectively collected data, nested within the Eurospine Spine Tango data acquisition system. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess the patient-rated outcome and complication rates associated with lumbar fusion procedures in three different age groups. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA There is a general reluctance to consider spinal fusion procedures in elderly patients due to the increased likelihood of complications. METHODS Before and at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery, patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI). At the 3-, 12-, and 24-month follow-ups they also rated the Global Treatment Outcome (GTO) and their satisfaction with care. Patients were divided into three age groups: younger (≥50y < 65y; n = 317), older (≥65y < 80y; n = 350), and geriatric (≥ 80y; n = 40). RESULTS 707 consecutive patients were included. The preoperative comorbidity status differed significantly (p < 0.0001) between the age groups, with the highest scores in the geriatric group. Medical complications during surgery were lower in the younger age group (7%) than in the older (13.4%; p = 0.006) and geriatric groups (17.5%; p = 0.007); surgical complications tended to be higher in the elderly group (younger, 6.3%; older, 6.0%; geriatric, 15.0%; p = 0.09). There were no significant group differences (p > 0.05) for the scores on any of the COMI domains, GTO, or patient-rated satisfaction at either 3-, 12-, and 24-months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Despite greater comorbidity and complication rates in geriatric patients, the patient-rated outcome was as good in the elderly as it was in younger age groups up to two years after surgery. These data indicate that geriatric age needs careful consideration of associated risks but is not per se a contraindication for fusion for lumbar degenerative disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 4.

Harvesting local cylinder autograft from adjacent vertebral body for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: surgical technique, operative feasibility and preliminary clinical results

Autogenous iliac crest has long served as the gold standard for anterior lumbar arthrodesis although added morbidity results from the bone graft harvest. Therefore, femoral ring allograft, or cages, have been used to decrease the morbidity of iliac crest bone harvesting. More recently, an experimental study in the animal showed that harvesting local bone from the anterior vertebral body and replacing the void by a radio-opaque beta-tricalcium phosphate plug was a valid concept. However, such a concept precludes theoretically the use of posterior pedicle screw fixation. At one institution a consecutive series of 21 patients underwent single- or multiple-level circumferential lumbar fusion with anterior cages and posterior pedicle screws. All cages were filled with cancellous bone harvested from the adjacent vertebral body, and the vertebral body defect was filled with a beta-tricalcium phosphate plug. The indications for surgery were failed conservative treatment of a lumbar degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to report on the surgical technique, operative feasibility, safety, benefits, and drawbacks of this technique with our primary clinical experience. An independent researcher reviewed all data that had been collected prospectively from the onset of the study. The average age of the patients was 39.9 (26-57) years. Bone grafts were successfully harvested from 28 vertebral bodies in all but one patient whose anterior procedure was aborted due to difficulty in freeing the left common iliac vein. This case was converted to a transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF). There was no major vascular injury. Blood loss of the anterior procedure averaged 250 ml (50-350 ml). One tricalcium phosphate bone plug was broken during its insertion, and one endplate was broken because of wrong surgical technique, which did not affect the final outcome. One patient had a right lumbar plexopathy that was not related to this special technique. There was no retrograde ejaculation, infection or pseudoarthrosis. One patient experienced a deep venous thrombosis. At the last follow up (mean 28 months) all patients had a solid lumbar spine fusion. At the 6-month follow up, the pain as assessed on the visual analog scale (VAS) decreased from 6.9 to 4.5 (33% decrease), and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) reduced from 48.0 to 31.7 with a 34% reduction. However, at 2 years follow up there was a trend for increase in the ODI (35) and VAS (5). The data in this study suggest that harvesting a cylinder of autograft from the adjacent vertebral body is safe and efficient. Filling of the void defect with a beta-tricalcium phosphate plug does not preclude the use of posterior pedicle screw stabilization.