Clinical Improvement After Lumbar Fusion

被引:0
|
作者
Shaikh, Hashim J. F. [1 ]
Cady-McCrea, Clarke I. [1 ]
Menga, Emmanuel N. [1 ]
Haddas, Ram [1 ]
Molinari, Robert N. [1 ]
Mesfin, Addisu [1 ]
Rubery, Paul T. [1 ]
Puvanesarajah, Varun [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Rochester, Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed & Phys Performance, Rochester, NY USA
[2] Univ Rochester, Sch Med & Dent, Orthopaed Surg, 601 Elmwood Ave, Box 665, Rochester, NY 14642 USA
关键词
posterior lumbar fusion; degenerative disease; early response; MCID; PROMIS; recovery; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; PROMIS PHYSICAL FUNCTION; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; BUNDLED PAYMENT; SPINE; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000004709
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design.Retrospective review of a single institution cohort.Objective.The goal of this study is to identify features that predict delayed achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) following elective lumbar spine fusion using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) surveys.Summary of Background Data.Preoperative prediction of delayed recovery following lumbar spine fusion surgery is challenging. While many studies have examined factors impacting the achievement of MCID for patient-reported outcomes in similar cohorts, few studies have assessed predictors of early functional improvement.Methods.We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing elective one-level posterior lumbar fusion for degenerative pathology. Patients were subdivided into two groups based on achievement of MCID for each respective PROMIS domain either before six months ("early responders") or after six months ("late responders") following surgical intervention. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine features associated with odds of achieving distribution-based MCID before or after six months follow up.Results.147 patients were included. The average age was 64.3 +/- 13.0 years. At final follow-up, 57.1% of patients attained MCID for PI and 72.8% for PF. However, 42 patients (49.4%) reached MCID for PI by six months, compared to 44 patients (41.1%) for PF. Patients with severe symptoms had the highest probability of attaining MCID for PI (OR 10.3; P=0.001) and PF (OR 10.4; P=0.001) Preoperative PROMIS symptomology did not predict early achievement of MCID for PI or PF. Patients who received concomitant iliac crest autograft during their lumbar fusion had increased odds of achieving MCID for PI (OR 8.56; P=0.001) before six months.Conclusion.Our study demonstrated that the majority of patients achieved MCID following elective one-level lumbar spine fusion at long-term follow-up, although less than half achieved this clinical benchmark for each PROMIS metric by six months. We also found that preoperative impairment was not associated with when patients would achieve MCID. Further prospective investigations are warranted to characterize the trajectory of clinical improvement and identify the risk factors associated with poor outcomes more accurately.
引用
收藏
页码:601 / 608
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Clinical outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Keorochana, Gun
    Setrkraising, Kitipong
    Woratanarat, Patarawan
    Arirachakaran, Alisara
    Kongtharvonskul, Jatupon
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2018, 41 (03) : 755 - 770
  • [32] Factors Associated With Clinical Outcomes After Lumbar Interbody Fusion With a Porous Nitinol Implant
    Abduljabbar, Fahad H.
    Makhdom, Asim M.
    Rajeh, Mona
    Tales, Alisson R.
    Mathew, Jacob
    Ouellet, Jean
    Weber, Michael
    Jarzem, Peter
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2017, 7 (08) : 780 - 786
  • [33] A Clinical Investigation of Contralateral Neurological Symptom after Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF)
    Bai, Jiayue
    Zhang, Wei
    Zhang, Xin
    Sun, Yapeng
    Ding, Wenyuan
    Shen, Yong
    MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, 2015, 21 : 1831 - 1838
  • [34] The Effect of Early Initiation of Rehabilitation After Lumbar Spinal Fusion A Randomized Clinical Study
    Oestergaard, Lisa G.
    Nielsen, Claus V.
    Bunger, Cody E.
    Sogaard, Rikke
    Fruensgaard, Soeren
    Helmig, Peter
    Christensen, Finn B.
    SPINE, 2012, 37 (21) : 1803 - 1809
  • [35] Clinical analysis of percutaneous facet screw fixation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Jang, JS
    Lee, SH
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2005, 3 (01) : 40 - 46
  • [36] Clinical Comparison of Endoscopic Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Treating Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
    Yang, Lihui
    Du, Peng
    Zang, Lei
    An, Likun
    Liu, Wei
    Li, Jian
    Diao, Wenbo
    Gao, Jian
    Yan, Ming
    Zhu, Wenyi
    Yuan, Shuo
    Fan, Ning
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2025, 38 (03): : E212 - E220
  • [37] SURGICAL-TREATMENT OF DOUBLE MAJOR SCOLIOSIS - IMPROVEMENT OF THE LUMBAR CURVE AFTER FUSION OF THE THORACIC CURVE
    LARGE, DF
    DOIG, WG
    DICKENS, DRV
    TORODE, IP
    COLE, WG
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1991, 73 (01): : 121 - 124
  • [38] Higher Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes Can Be Achieved After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Clinical and Radiographic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Classification Type D Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
    Chen, Xi
    Xu, Liang
    Qiu, Yong
    Chen, Zhong-hui
    Zhou, Qing-shuang
    Li, Song
    Sun, Xu
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 114 : E293 - E300
  • [39] Evaluation of the Predictors for Unfavorable Clinical Outcomes of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis After Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Machine Learning
    Dong, Shengtao
    Zhu, Yinghui
    Yang, Hua
    Tang, Ningyu
    Huang, Guangyi
    Li, Jie
    Tian, Kang
    FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 10
  • [40] RADIOGRAPHIC RESTORATION OF LUMBAR ALIGNMENT AFTER TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION
    Jagannathan, Jay
    Sansur, Charles A.
    Oskouian, Rod J., Jr.
    Fu, Kai-Ming
    Shaffrey, Christopher I.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2009, 64 (05) : 955 - 963