Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Recovery kinetics following spinal deformity correction: a comparison of isolated cervical, thoracolumbar, and combined deformity morphometries.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Passias, PG; Segreto, FA; Lafage, R; Lafage, V; Smith, JS; Line, BG; Scheer, JK; Mundis, GM; Hamilton, DK; Kim, HJ; Horn, SR; Bortz, CA ...
Published in: Spine J
August 2019

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The postoperative recovery patterns of cervical deformity patients, thoracolumbar deformity patients, and patients with combined cervical and thoracolumbar deformities, all relative to one another, is not well understood. Clear objective benchmarks are needed to quantitatively define a "good" versus a "bad" postoperative recovery across multiple follow-up visits, varying deformity types, and guide expectations. PURPOSE: To objectively define and compare the complete 2-year postoperative recovery process among operative cervical only, thoracolumbar only, and combined deformity patients using area-under-the-curve (AUC) methodology. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of 2 prospective, multicenter adult cervical and spinal deformity databases. PATIENT SAMPLE: One hundred seventy spinal deformity patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Common health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessments across both databases included the EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) back pain assessment. In order to compare disability improvements, the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were merged into one outcome variable, the ODI-NDI. Both assessments are gauged on the same scale, with minimal question deviation. Sagittal Radiographic Alignment was also assessed at pre- and all postoperative time points. METHODS: Operative deformity patients >18 years old with baseline (BL) to 2-year HRQOLs were included. Patients were stratified by cervical only (C), thoracolumbar only (T), and combined deformities (CT). HRQOL and radiographic outcomes were compared within and between deformity groups. AUC normalization generated normalized HRQOL scores at BL and all follow-up intervals (6 weeks, 3 months, 1 year, and 2 year). Normalized scores were plotted against follow-up time interval. AUC was calculated for each follow-up interval, and total area was divided by cumulative follow-up length, determining overall, time-adjusted HRQOL recovery (Integrated Health State, IHS). Multiple linear regression models determined significant predictors of HRQOL discrepancies among deformity groups. RESULTS: One hundred seventy patients were included (27 C, 27 T, and 116 CT). Age, BMI, sex, smoking status, osteoporosis, depression, and BL HRQOL scores were similar among groups (p >. 05). T and CT patients had higher comorbidity severities (CCI: C 0.696, T 1.815, CT 1.699, p = .020). Posterior surgical approaches were most common (62.9%) followed by combined (28.8%) and anterior (6.5%). Standard HRQOL analysis found no significant differences among groups until 1-year follow-up, where C patients exhibited comparatively greater NRS back pain (4.88 vs. 3.65 vs. 3.28, p = .028). NRS Back pain differences between groups subsided by 2-years (p>.05). Despite C patients exhibiting significantly faster ODI-NDI minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement (33.3% vs. 0% vs. 23.0%, p < .001), all deformity groups exhibited similar ODI-NDI MCID achievement by 2-years (51.9% vs. 59.3% vs. 62.9%, p = 0.563). After HRQOL normalization, similar results were observed relative to the standard analysis (1-year NRS Back: C 1.17 vs. T 0.50 vs. CT 0.51, p < .001; 2-year NRS Back: 1.20 vs. 0.51 vs. 0.69, p = .060). C patients exhibited a worse NRS back normalized IHS (C 1.18 vs. T 0.58 vs. CT 0.63, p = .004), indicating C patients were in a greater state of postoperative back pain for a longer amount of time. Linear regression models determined postoperative distal junctional kyphosis (adjusted beta: 0.207, p = .039) and osteoporosis (adjusted beta: 0.269, p = .007) as the strongest predictors of a poor NRS back IHS (model summary: R2 = 0.177, p = .039). CONCLUSIONS: Despite C patients exhibiting a quicker rate of MCID disability (ODI-NDI) improvement, they exhibited a poorer overall recovery of back pain with worse NRS back scores compared with BL status and other deformity groups. Postoperative distal junctional kyphosis and osteoporosis were identified as primary drivers of a poor postoperative NRS back IHS. Utilization of the IHS, a single number adjusting for all postoperative HRQOL visits, in conjunction with predictive modelling may pose as an improved method of gauging the effect of surgical details and complications on a patient's entire recovery process.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Spine J

DOI

EISSN

1878-1632

Publication Date

August 2019

Volume

19

Issue

8

Start / End Page

1422 / 1433

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Spine
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Orthopedics
  • Neurosurgical Procedures
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Kyphosis
  • Humans
  • Female
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Passias, P. G., Segreto, F. A., Lafage, R., Lafage, V., Smith, J. S., Line, B. G., … International Spine Study Group. (2019). Recovery kinetics following spinal deformity correction: a comparison of isolated cervical, thoracolumbar, and combined deformity morphometries. Spine J, 19(8), 1422–1433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.03.006
Passias, Peter G., Frank A. Segreto, Renaud Lafage, Virginie Lafage, Justin S. Smith, Breton G. Line, Justin K. Scheer, et al. “Recovery kinetics following spinal deformity correction: a comparison of isolated cervical, thoracolumbar, and combined deformity morphometries.Spine J 19, no. 8 (August 2019): 1422–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.03.006.
Passias PG, Segreto FA, Lafage R, Lafage V, Smith JS, Line BG, et al. Recovery kinetics following spinal deformity correction: a comparison of isolated cervical, thoracolumbar, and combined deformity morphometries. Spine J. 2019 Aug;19(8):1422–33.
Passias, Peter G., et al. “Recovery kinetics following spinal deformity correction: a comparison of isolated cervical, thoracolumbar, and combined deformity morphometries.Spine J, vol. 19, no. 8, Aug. 2019, pp. 1422–33. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2019.03.006.
Passias PG, Segreto FA, Lafage R, Lafage V, Smith JS, Line BG, Scheer JK, Mundis GM, Hamilton DK, Kim HJ, Horn SR, Bortz CA, Diebo BG, Vira S, Gupta MC, Klineberg EO, Burton DC, Hart RA, Schwab FJ, Shaffrey CI, Ames CP, Bess S, International Spine Study Group. Recovery kinetics following spinal deformity correction: a comparison of isolated cervical, thoracolumbar, and combined deformity morphometries. Spine J. 2019 Aug;19(8):1422–1433.
Journal cover image

Published In

Spine J

DOI

EISSN

1878-1632

Publication Date

August 2019

Volume

19

Issue

8

Start / End Page

1422 / 1433

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Spine
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Orthopedics
  • Neurosurgical Procedures
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Kyphosis
  • Humans
  • Female