NRS Leg Pain Research Articles

Opioid Use Prior to Adult Spine Deformity Correction Surgery is Associated With Worse Pre- and Postoperative Back Pain and Prolonged Opioid Demands.

Prospective multicenter database post-hoc analysis. Opioids are frequently prescribed for painful spinal conditions to provide pain relief and to allow for functional improvement, both before and after spine surgery. Amidst a current opioid epidemic, it is important for providers to understand the impact of opioid use and its relationship with patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate pre-/postoperative opioid consumption surrounding ASD and assess patient-reported pain outcomes in older patients undergoing surgery for spinal deformity. Patients ≥60 years of age from 12 international centers undergoing spinal fusion of at least 5 levels and a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patient-reported outcome scores were collected using the Numeric Rating Scale for back and leg pain (NRS-B; NRS-L) at baseline and at 2 years following surgery. Opioid use, defined based on a specific question on case report forms and question 11 from the SRS-22r questionnaire, was assessed at baseline and at 2-year follow-up. Of the 219 patients who met inclusion criteria, 179 (81.7%) had 2-year data on opioid use. The percentages of patients reporting opioid use at baseline (n = 75, 34.2%) and 2 years after surgery (n = 55, 30.7%) were similar (P = .23). However, at last follow-up 39% of baseline opioid users (Opi) were no longer taking opioids, while 14% of initial non-users (No-Opi) reported opioid use. Regional pre- and postoperative opioid use was 5.8% and 7.7% in the Asian population, 58.3% and 53.1% in the European, and 50.5% and 40.2% in North American patients, respectively. Baseline opioid users reported more preoperative back pain than the No-Opi group (7.0 vs 5.7, P = .001), while NRS-Leg pain scores were comparable (4.8 vs 4, P = .159). Similarly, at last follow-up, patients in the Opi group had greater NRS-B scores than Non-Opi patients (3.2 vs 2.3, P = .012), but no differences in NRS-Leg pain scores (2.2 vs 2.4, P = .632) were observed. In this study, almost one-third of surgical ASD patients were consuming opioids both pre- and postoperatively world-wide. There were marked international variations, with patients from Asia having a much lower usage rate, suggesting a cultural influence. Despite both opioid users and nonusers benefitting from surgery, preoperative opioid use was strongly associated with significantly more back pain at baseline that persisted at 2-year follow up, as well as persistent postoperative opioid needs.

Comparison of transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion outcomes in patients receiving a novel allograft versus rhBMP-2: a radiographic and patient-reported outcomes analysis.

Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) has been demonstrated to achieve the highest rates of arthrodesis in multilevel lumbar fusion but is also associated with possible perioperative morbidity. A novel allograft (OSTEOAMP) is a differentiated allograft that retains growth factors supporting bone healing. The authors sought to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of rhBMP-2 and the novel allograft in lumbar interbody arthrodesis to determine if the latter may be a safer and equally effective alternative to rhBMP-2 for single- and multilevel posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF or TLIF). Patients who underwent single- or multilevel TLIF or PLIF using either OSTEOAMP or rhBMP-2 at the authors' institution over a 2-year period were prospectively followed for 12 months. Healthcare utilization, safety measures, patient satisfaction, physical disability (measured on the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), back and leg pain (on the numeric rating scale [NRS]), quality of life (on the EQ-5D scale), and return to work (RTW) were prospectively recorded. For purposes of this study, this consecutive series was retrospectively analyzed and pseudarthrosis rates were assessed at 2 years of follow-up. All patients (100%) had both 12-month patient-reported outcome follow-up and 24-month clinical and radiographic follow-up. One thousand one hundred fifty-four patients (654 treated with OSTEOAMP, 500 with rhBMP-2) were prospectively enrolled in the institutional registry. After propensity score matching, there were no significant baseline differences between 330 novel allograft and 330 rhBMP-2 cases. Perioperative morbidity and 90-day hospital readmission (3.3% vs 2.4%, p = 0.485) did not significantly differ between the novel allograft and the rhBMP-2 cases. At the 2-year follow-up, symptomatic pseudarthrosis requiring revision surgery occurred in 8 patients (2.4%) with OSTEOAMP and 6 patients (1.8%) with rhBMP-2 (p = 0.589). The overall fusion rate at 2 years was similar between groups (p = 0.213). Both groups showed significant and equivalent improvement in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from baseline to 12-month follow-up, with no significant difference in 1-year mean NRS leg pain score (2.5 vs 2.7), ODI (25 vs 26), quality-adjusted life years (0.73 vs 0.73), satisfaction (83% vs 80%), or RTW (6.6 vs 7 weeks). In the authors' institutional experience, OSTEOAMP is a clinically viable substitute for rhBMP-2 for single- and multilevel lumbar fusion. This novel allograft provides clinically effective arthrodesis and improvements in PROMs comparable to rhBMP-2 with a similar safety profile. Additional indications and outcome assessment in longitudinal studies are needed to further characterize this allogeneic graft.

Preoperative fatty infiltration of paraspinal muscles assessed by MRI is associated with less improvement of leg pain 2 years after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis

PurposeFatty infiltration (FI) of the paraspinal muscles may associate with pain and surgical complications in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). We evaluated the prognostic influence of MRI-assessed paraspinal muscles’ FI on pain or disability 2 years after surgery for LSS.MethodsA muscle fat index (MFI) was calculated (by dividing signal intensity of psoas to multifidus and erector spinae) on preoperative axial T2-weighted MRI of patients with LSS. Pain and disability 2 years after surgery were assessed using the Oswestry disability index, the Zurich claudication questionnaire and numeric rating scales for leg and back pain. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses (adjusted for preoperative outcome scores, age, body mass index, sex, smoking status, grade of spinal stenosis, disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis) were used to assess the associations between MFI and patient-reported clinical outcomes. In the logistic regression models, odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for associations between the MFI and ≥ 30% improvement of the outcomes (dichotomised into yes/no).ResultsA total of 243 patients were evaluated (mean age 66.6 ± 8.5 years), 49% females (119). Preoperative MFI and postoperative leg pain were significantly associated, both with leg pain as continuous (coefficient − 3.20, 95% CI − 5.61, − 0.80) and dichotomised (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.17, 1.95) scores. Associations between the MFI and the other outcome measures were not statistically significant.ConclusionPreoperative FI of the paraspinal muscles on MRI showed statistically significant association with postoperative NRS leg pain but not with ODI or ZCQ.

Functional outcomes correlate with sagittal spinal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXTDegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a debilitating condition associated with poor preoperative functional status. Surgical intervention has been shown to improve functional outcomes in this population though the optimal surgical procedure remains controversial. The importance of maintaining and/or improving sagittal and pelvic spinal balance parameters has received increasing interest in the recent DLS literature. However, little is known about the radiographic parameters most associated with improved functional outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for DLS. PURPOSETo identify the effect of postoperative sagittal spinal alignment on functional outcome after DLS surgery. STUDY DESIGNRetrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLETwo-hundred forty-three patients in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective DLS study database. OUTCOME MEASURESBaseline and 1-year postoperative leg and back pain on the 10-point Numeric Rating Scale and baseline and 1-year postoperative disability on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). METHODSAll enrolled study patients had a DLS diagnosis and underwent decompression in isolation or with posterolateral or interbody fusion. Global and regional radiographic alignment parameters were measured at baseline and 1-year postoperatively including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (LL). Both univariate and multiple linear regression was used to assess for the association between radiographic parameters and patient-reported functional outcomes with adjustment for possible confounding baseline patient factors. RESULTSTwo-hundred forty-three patients were available for analysis. Among participants, the mean age was 66 with 63% (153/243) female with the primary surgical indication of neurogenic claudication in 197/243 (81%) of patients. Worse pelvic incidence-LL mismatch was correlated with more severe disability [ODI, 0.134, p<.05), worse leg pain (0.143, p<.05) and worse back pain (0.189, p<.001) 1-year postoperatively. These associations were maintained after adjusting for age, BMI, gender, and preoperative presence of depression (ODI, R2 0.179, β, 0.25, 95% CI 0.08, 0.42, p=.004; back pain R2 0.152 (β, 0.05, 95% CI 0.022, 0.07, p<.001; leg pain score R2 0.059, β, 0.04, 95% CI 0.008, 0.07, p=.014). Likewise, reduction of LL was associated with worse disability (ODI, R2 0.168, β, 0.04, 95% CI -0.39, -0.02, p=.027) and worse back pain (R2 0.135, β, -0.04, 95% CI -0.06, -0.01, p=.007). Worsened SVA correlated with worse patient reported functional outcomes (ODI, R2 0.236, β, 0.12, 95% CI 0.05, 0.20, p=.001). Similarly, an increase (worsening) in SVA resulted in a worse NRS back pain (R2 0.136, β, 0.01, 95% CI .001, 0.02, p=.029) and worse NRS leg pain (R2 0.065, β, 0.02, 95% CI 0.002, 0.02, p=.018) scores regardless of surgery type. CONCLUSIONSPreoperative emphasis on regional and global spinal alignment parameters should be considered in order to optimize functional outcome in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis treatment.

403 Inferior Clinical Outcomes for Patients with Medicaid Insurance Following Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Prospective Registry Analysis of 608 Patients

INTRODUCTION: It remains unclear how type of insurance coverage impacts long-term, spine-specific patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: The prospective Quality Outcomes Database registry was queried for patients with grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent single-segment surgery. 24-month PROs compared included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scale Back Pain (NRS-BP), NRS Leg Pain (NRS-LP), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and North American Spine Society (NASS) Satisfaction. RESULTS: 608 patients undergoing surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (mean age 62.5 ± 11.5 years and 59.2% women) were selected. Insurance types included private insurance (n = 319, 52.5%), Medicare (n = 235, 38.7%), Medicaid (n = 36, 5.9%), and VA/government (n =17, 2.8%). 1 patient (0.2%) was uninsured and was removed from the analyses. In adjusted multivariable analyses, when compared to patients with private insurance, Medicaid was associated with worse 24-month postoperative ODI β = 10.2, 95% CI 3.9 - 16.5) and NRS-LP β = 1.3, 95% CI 0.3 - 2.4). Medicaid was associated with worse EQ-5D scores compared to private insurance (β = -0.07, 95% CI -0.01 - -0.14), but not when compared to Medicare and VA/government insurance (p &gt; 0.05). Medicaid was associated with lower odds of reaching ODI minimal clinically important difference (OR = 0.2, 95% CI 0.03 - 0.7) compared to VA/government insurance. NRS-BP and NASS satisfaction did not differ by insurance coverage (p &gt; 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite adjusting for potential confounding variables, Medicaid coverage was independently associated with worse 24-month PROs following lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery compared to other payer types. While all improved postoperatively, those with Medicaid coverage had relatively inferior improvements.

Cost consequence analysis of waiting for lumbar disc herniation surgery

The economic repercussions of waiting for lumbar disc surgery have not been well studied. The primary goal of this study was to perform a cost-consequence analysis of patients receiving early vs late surgery for symptomatic disc herniation from a societal perspective. Secondarily, we compared patient factors and patient-reported outcomes. This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the CSORN registry. A cost-consequence analysis was performed where direct and indirect costs were compared, and different outcomes were listed separately. Comparisons were made on an observational cohort of patients receiving surgery less than 60 days after consent (short wait) or 60 days or more after consent (long wait). This study included 493 patients with surgery between January 2015 and October 2021 with 272 patients (55.2%) in the short wait group and 221 patients (44.8%) classified as long wait. There was no difference in proportions of patients who returned to work at 3 and 12-months. Time from surgery to return to work was similar between both groups (34.0 vs 34.9 days, p = 0.804). Time from consent to return to work was longer in the longer wait group corresponding to an additional $11,753.10 mean indirect cost per patient. The short wait group showed increased healthcare usage at 3 months with more emergency department visits (52.6% vs 25.0%, p < 0.032), more physiotherapy (84.6% vs 72.0%, p < 0.001) and more MRI (65.2% vs 41.4%, p < 0.043). This corresponded to an additional direct cost of $518.21 per patient. Secondarily, the short wait group had higher baseline NRS leg, ODI, and lower EQ5D and PCS. The long wait group had more patients with symptoms over 2 years duration (57.6% vs 34.1%, p < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients reached MCID in terms of NRS leg pain at 3-month follow up in the short wait group (84.0% vs 75.9%, p < 0.040). This cost-consequence analysis of an observational cohort showed decreased costs associated with early surgery of $11,234.89 per patient when compared to late surgery for lumbar disc herniation. The early surgery group had more severe symptoms with higher healthcare utilization. This is counterbalanced by the additional productivity loss in the long wait group, which likely have a more chronic disease. From a societal economic perspective, early surgery seems beneficial and should be promoted.

A comparison study on patient-reported outcome between obese and non-obese patients with central lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing surgical decompression: 14,984 patients in the National Swedish Quality Registry for Spine Surgery.

Obesity has been associated with inferior outcomes after laminectomy due to central lumbar spinal stenosis (CLSS); we evaluated whether this occurs in surgery on national bases. We retrieved pre- and 1-year postoperative data from the National Swedish Quality Registry for Spine Surgery regarding patients aged ≥ 50 with laminectomy due to CLSS in 2005-2018. 4,069 patients had normal weight, 7,044 were overweight, 3,377 had class I obesity, 577 class II obesity, and 94 class III obesity ("morbid obesity"). Patient-reported outcome included satisfaction after 1 year, leg pain (Numerical Rating Scale [NRS], rating 0-10), disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], rating 0-100). Complications were also retrieved. 1-year postoperatively, 69% of patient of normal weight, 67% who were overweight, and 62% with obesity (classes I-III aggregated) were satisfied (p < 0.001) and 62%, 60%, and 57% in obese groups I-III, respectively (p = 0.7). NRS leg pain improved in normal-weight patients by 3.5 (95% CI 3.4-3.6), overweight by 3.2 (CI 3.1-3.2), and obese by 2.6 (CI 2.5-2.7), and 2.8 (CI 2.7-2.9), 2.5 (CI 2.2-2.7), and 2.6 (CI 2.0-3.2) in obese classes I-III, respectively. ODI improved in normal weight by 19 (CI 19-20), overweight by 17 (CI 17-18), and obese by 14 (CI 13-15), and 16 (CI 15-17), 14 (CI 13-16), 14 (CI 11-18) in obese classes I-III, respectively. 8.1% of normal weight, 7.0% of overweight, and 8.1% of obese patients suffered complications (p = 0.04) and 8.1%, 7.0%, and 17% among obese classes I-III, respectively (p < 0.01). Most obese patients are satisfied after laminectomy due to CLSS, even if satisfaction rate is inferior compared with normal-weight patients. The morbidly obese have more complications than patients with lower BMI.

In Single-Level, Open, Posterior Lumbar Fusion, Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion or Posterolateral Fusion Lead to Better Outcomes?

Two common approaches for open, one-level, posterior lumbar fusions include transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterolateral fusion (PLF) alone without an interbody. To compare TLIF vs PLF alone in (1) discharge disposition, (2) return to work (RTW), and (3) patient-reported outcomes (PROs). A single-center, retrospective cohort study was undertaken between October 2010 and May 2021, all with a 1-year follow-up and excluding patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis. Minimum clinically important difference for each PRO was used, which included Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Logistic/linear regression controlled for age, body mass index, disc height, flexion-extension movement, amount of movement on flexion-extension, and spondylolisthesis grade. Of 850 patients undergoing open, 1-level, posterior lumbar fusion, 591 (69.5%) underwent a TLIF and 259 (30.5%) underwent a PLF alone. Patients undergoing TLIF were younger (59.0 ± 11.3 vs 63.3 ± 12.6, P < .001), had higher body mass index (31.3 ± 6.6 vs 30.2 ± 12.6, P = .019), and more often had private insurance (50.3% vs 39.0%, P < .001). Regarding discharge disposition, no significance was found in multivariate regression (odds ratio = 2.07, 95% CI = 0.39-10.82, P = .385) with similar RTW between TLIF and PLF alone (80.8% vs 80.4%, P = .645) (odds ratio = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.19-6.81, P = .873). Regarding PROs, patients undergoing a TLIF had higher preoperative (6.7 ± 2.3 vs 6.4 ± 2.5, P = .046) and 3-month NRS-back pain (3.4 ± 2.6 vs 2.9 ± 2.5, P = .036), with similar 12-month NRS-back pain. Regarding NRS-leg pain, no differences were observed preoperatively ( P = .532) and at 3 months ( P = .808). No other significant differences were observed in ODI. TLIF patients had slightly higher NRS-back pain at baseline and 3 months, but similar NRS-leg pain, despite the added risk of placing an interbody. No differences were seen in discharge disposition, RTW, and 12-month pain scores and ODI.

A study comparing outcomes between obese and nonobese patients with lumbar disc herniation undergoing surgery: a study of the Swedish National Quality Registry of 9979 patients

BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate whether an increasing grade of obesity is associated with inferior outcomes after lumbar disc herniation (LDH) surgery.MethodsWe retrieved data from the Swedish register for spine surgery regarding patients aged 20–64 who underwent LDH surgery from 2006–2016 and had preoperative and one-year postoperative data. A total of 4156 patients were normal weight, 4063 were overweight, 1384 had class I obesity, 317 had class II obesity and 59 had class III obesity (“morbid obesity”). Data included patient satisfaction, improvement in leg pain (assessed using the National Rating Scale; NRS; rating 0–10), disability (assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index; ODI; rating 0–100) and complications.ResultsAt one year postsurgery, 80% of normal-weight patients, 77% of overweight patients and 74% of obese patients (class I-III evaluated together) were satisfied (p < 0.001) [75%, 71%, 75% in obesity classes I, II, and III, respectively (p = 0.43)]. On average, all groups improved by more than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in both NRS leg pain (> 3.5) and ODI (> 20). NRS leg pain improved by 4.8 in normal weight patients (95% CI 4.7–4.9), by 4.5 in overweight patients (4.5–4.6) and by 4.3 in obese patients (4.2–4.4) (p < 0.001) [4.4 (4.3–4.6), 3.8 (3.5–4.1) and 4.6 (3.9–5.3) in obesity classes I, II, and III, respectively (p < 0.001)]. The ODI improved by 30 in normal weight patients (30–31), by 29 in overweight patients (28–29) and by 26 in obese patients (25–27) (p < 0.001) [29 (28–29), 25 (22–27) and 27 (22–32) in obesity classes I, II, and III, respectively (p < 0.01)]. A total of 3.0% of normal-weight patients, 3.9% of overweight patients and 3.9% of obese patients suffered complications (p = 0.047) [3.8%, 4.4%, 3.5% in obesity classes I, II, and III, respectively (p = 0.90)].ConclusionsLDH surgery is also generally associated with favourable outcomes and few complications in patients with morbid obesity.

The Ideal Threshold of Hemoglobin A1C in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Elective Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

Retrospective cohort study. To evaluate the association of Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c) with surgical site infection (SSI) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and to identify optimal HbA1c thresholds to minimize the risk of SSI and maximize PROs. Diabetes mellitus has been associated with worsened outcomes following spine surgery. HbA1c, a surrogate of glycemic control, is an important assessment tool in diabetic patients. A single-center, retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data was undertaken. Diabetic patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression surgery between October 2010 and May 2021 were included. HbA1c, demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative data were collected. Primary outcomes included: 1) SSI, and 2) PROs, including the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-back/leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included: complications, readmissions, and reoperations within 90-days postoperatively. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was set at a 30% improvement from baseline PROs. Of 1819 patients who underwent lumbar decompression surgery, 368 patients had diabetes mellitus, and 177 had a documented preoperative HbA1c value. Of patients with available HbA1c values, the mean age was 62.5±12.3, the mean HbA1c value was 7.2±1.5%, and SSI occurred in 3 (1.7%) patients only, which prevented further analysis of SSI and HbA1c. A significant association was seen with a higher HbA1c and failure to achieve NRS-Back pain MCID30 [Odds ratio(OR)=0.53, 95% confidence interval(CI) 0.42-0.78; P =0.001] and ODI MCID30 (OR=0.58, 95%CI 0.44-0.77; P =0.001), but not NRS-Leg pain MCID30 (OR=1.29, 95%CI 0.86-1.93; P =0.208). ROC-curve analysis and Youden's index revealed an HbA1c threshold of 7.8 for NRS-Back pain MCID30 (AUC=0.65, P <0.001) and 7.5 for ODI MCID30 (AUC=0.65, P =0.001). In diabetic patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression surgery, HbA1c levels above 7.8 and 7.5 were associated with less improvement of NRS-Back and ODI scores at 12-months postoperatively, respectively. To optimize PROs, We recommend a preoperative HbA1c of 7.5 or below for diabetic patients undergoing elective lumbar decompression surgery.

P41. Reoperation, complications and patient reported outcomes in patients with Parkinson's disease undergoing elective spine surgery: a propensity matched analysis

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Parkinson's Disease (PD) is a common neurodegenerative condition that has become increasingly prevalent in an aging population. While surgical treatment for degenerative spine pathology is often required in this population, previous literature has suggested that patients with PD have higher complication rates and inferior outcomes compared to the general population. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> To determine if patients with PD have worse PROs and higher reoperation, complication and readmission rates after elective spine surgery compared to the general population when adjusting for baseline covariates through propensity matching. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), a national, longitudinal, multicenter spine outcomes registry was performed. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> For the lumbar cohort, 343 patients with PD and 46,738 patients without PD were included. The cervical myelopathy cohort included 49 patients with PD and 6,426 patients without PD. The cervical radiculopathy cohort consisted of 37 patients with PD and 13,751 patients without PD. <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> Outcomes included: 1) reoperation, 2) complications, 3) readmission, and 4) PROs of NDI/ODI, NRS back/arm/leg pain, mJOA scores, patient satisfaction ratings at 3 and 12 months. In addition, Qaly scores were assessed at 12 months. <h3>METHODS</h3> Data from the QOD was queried between 04/2013-01/2019. Three surgical groups were identified: 1) Elective lumbar surgery, 2) Elective cervical surgery for myelopathy, 3) Elective cervical surgery for radiculopathy. Patients with any other neurodegenerative condition other than PD were excluded. Patients without PD were propensity matched against patients with PD in a 5 to 1 ratio without replacement based on ASA grade, arthrodesis, surgical approach, number of operated levels, age, and baseline ODI, NRS extremity pain, NRS back pain and EQ5D. Regressions with cluster-robust standard errors were used to estimate average effect of how the outcome would change if the PD patient didn't have the disease. The mean difference was used for continuous outcomes (ODI, NRS leg pain, NRS back pain, and EQ-5D at 3 and 12 months after surgery) and the risk difference was used for binary outcomes (patient satisfaction, complications, readmission, revision surgery and mortality). <h3>RESULTS</h3> For the lumbar analysis, PD patients had a higher rate of revision surgery at 12 months (risk difference=0.057, p=0.015) and lower mean Qaly score at 12 months (mean difference=-0.053, p=0.005) when compared to the control group. For the cervical myelopathy cohort, PD patients had lower NRS neck pain scores at 3 months (mean difference=-0.829, p=0.005) but also lower patient satisfaction at 3 months (risk difference=-0.262, p=0.041) compared to the control group. For the cervical radiculopathy cohort, PD patients demonstrated a lower readmission rate at 3 months (risk difference=-0.045, p=0.014) compared to the control group. <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Patients with PD had similar PROs at 12 months following elective spine surgery when adjusting for baseline covariates through propensity matching. PD patients undergoing lumbar surgery had a higher reoperation rate than those without PD. These results demonstrate that a diagnosis of PD should not be a major contraindication to elective spine surgery, as PD patients had similar 12-month PROs compared to those without PD, though decreased PROs at 3-months and higher reoperation rates in lumbar surgery may be seen. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

P99. Are two-year reoperation rates different for circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) vs open ASD surgery? A propensity matched cohort study using a prospective ASD database

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> As surgical techniques for deformity correction evolve towards minimizing tissue trauma, further clarity is warranted to define differences in complication profiles between cMIS and open surgeries. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> To compare cMIS and open surgery reoperation rates and identify contributing etiologies to reoperation in each cohort. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> Prospective multicenter observational series. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> Database enrollment required age=18 years, adult spinal deformity and circumferential minimally invasive spine surgery. <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> Reoperation rate, patient reported outcomes (PROMS), spinopelvic parameters, mechanical failures (defined as rod breakage/dislocation, screw breakage/loosening, set screw loosening, proximal/distal junctional kyphosis, pseudoarthrosis) and other factors contributing to re-operation such as wound infection, medial breach, nerve impingement by screw, vertebral body fracture, sagittal/coronal imbalance, and wound infection. <h3>METHODS</h3> A total of 85 patients (pts) with cMIS for ASD with 2-year follow-up (2YFU) were identified and propensity matched to 85 patients in open cohort. Propensity matching was performed based on pre-operative PT, PI-LL, BMI, and SVA. Patient demographic variables, reoperation rate, and complications contributing to reoperation were compared with uni- and multi-variate analysis at any time in each cohort (33 open, 17 cMIS). PROMS at 2YFU were compared in the reoperated cohorts. <h3>RESULTS</h3> Total of 33 reoperation in the open cohort vs 17 in cMIS were identified. The reoperation rate was significantly higher in the open cohort at 39% (33/85) compared to 20% (17/85) in the cMIS cohort (P= 0.012). The reoperation rate in open cohort related to mechanical failure was 52% (17/33) compared to 35% (6/17) in cMIS cohort (P= 0.43). No significant difference was found in rates of specific etiologies contributing to complications in the cMIS vs open reoperation cohorts under uni- and multivariate analysis. The change in spinopelvic parameters among the two reoperation cohorts at 2YFU were statistically not significant (δCVA, δSVA, δPI-LL, δPT, δLL CA, δTL CA). Under univariate analysis, the following PROMS were similar: ODI, NRS Leg and Back Pain, EQ5D, EQ5D-VAS, SF-36 PCS,SF-36 MCS. However, SRS-22 in open cohort was significantly higher at 2YFU (3.55 ± 0.73 open vs. 3,10 ± 0.56 MIS, p = 0.029). <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Findings in our ongoing study show that cMIS procedures were associated with a significantly lower reoperation rate compared to open surgical approaches. PROMS and the change in spinopelvic parameters were similar at 2YFU in both reoperated cohorts (except for SRS-22 favored open cohort). <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

47. Economic consequences of waiting for lumbar disc herniation surgery

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Despite the well-established benefits of lumbar discectomy, many patients wait for their surgery which delays their return to work and potentially increases health care costs. The economic repercussions of such delays have not been well studied. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> This study aims to provide meaningful comparisons of costs to decisions-makers who plan health care services. The main goal of this study was to quantify the cost differences in terms of direct and indirect costs of early surgery for symptomatic disc herniation compared to late surgery. In other words, this study aimed to unveil what is the cost of being on a surgical waitlist for a lumbar discectomy. Secondarily, we report PROS and compared the proportions of patients reaching meaningful patient reported outcomes (PROs) between early and late surgery. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the CSORN registry. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> Comparisons were made between patients receiving surgery less than 60 days after consent (short wait) and 60 days or more after consent (long wait). <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> The Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) claims history database was used for direct costs estimates. Canada Income Statistics and the human capital method were used to calculate indirect costs. The primary outcome was defined as the cost difference between short wait and long wait groups to determine the overall cost of waiting for surgery. <h3>METHODS</h3> Continuous data are summarized using means and standard deviations, compared using Student's t-tests. Categorical data are expressed as numbers and percentages, compared using chi-square tests. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as 30% improvement in NRS leg and NRS back from baseline to 3 months. The proportion of patients reaching MCID was compared between patients who returned to work at 3 months or not and between short- and long-wait groups. PROs at 3 months were adjusted for baseline score. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed with IBM SPSS for Windows release 28. <h3>RESULTS</h3> A total of 493 patients were included in this study with 272 patients (55.2%) in the short-wait group and 221 patients (44.8%) in the long-wait group. Demographics were similar between the two groups. The proportions of patients who returned to work at 3 months and 12 months postoperatively were similar (p <0.596; p <0.798). Time from surgery to return to work was similar between both groups (34.0 vs 34.9 days, p<0.804). Inherently, the longer wait group had significantly longer time from consent to return to work. This extended wait corresponded to an additional $11,753.10 indirect cost due to productivity loss while waiting for surgery. The short-wait group showed increased health care usage with patients more commonly visiting the emergency department (52.6% vs 25.0%, p <0.032), using physiotherapy (84.6% vs 72.0%, p <0.001) and receiving MRI (65.2% vs 41.4%, p <0.043). This corresponded to an additional direct cost of $518.21 per patient. The short wait group had higher baseline NPR leg, ODI, EQ5D, PCS and MCS. A higher proportion of patients reached MCID in terms of NRS leg pain at 3-month follow-up in the short wait group (84.0% vs 75.9%, p <0.040). <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Early surgery is associated with cost saving of $11,234.89 per patient when compared to late surgery for lumbar disc herniation. The higher health care utilization in patients receiving early surgery is counterbalanced by the additional productivity loss of the long waiters. From a societal economic perspective, early surgery seems beneficial and should be promoted. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

P123. Have robotic procedures improved perioperative and long-term outcomes after overcoming the learning curve? A 2-year analysis

P123. Have robotic procedures improved perioperative and long-term outcomes after overcoming the learning curve? A 2-year analysis

113 Clinical Presentation Phenotypes of Patients Operated for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: An Analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database

INTRODUCTION: Trials of lumbar spondylolisthesis are difficult to compare due to heterogeneity in the populations studied. METHODS: This is a study of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database Spondylolisthesis Registry, including patients who underwent single-segment surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Twenty-four-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared. A k-means clustering analysis—an unsupervised machine learning algorithm—was used to identify clinical presentation phenotypes. RESULTS: Overall, 608 patients were identified, of which 507 (83.4%) had 24-month follow up. Clustering revealed 2 distinct cohorts. Cluster 1 (high-disease-burden) was younger, had higher BMI and ASA grades, and globally worse baseline PROs. Cluster 2 (intermediate-disease-burden) was older, had lower BMI and ASA grades, and intermediate baseline PROs. Baseline radiographic parameters were similar (p &gt; 0.05). In multivariable adjusted analyses, mean 24-month ODI, NRS-back pain, NRS-leg pain, and EQ-5D were markedly worse for the high-disease-burden cluster (adjusted p &lt; 0.001). However, the high-disease-burden cluster demonstrated greater 24-month improvements for ODI, NRS-back pain, and EQ-5D (adjusted-p &lt; 0.05) and a higher proportion reaching ODI minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (adjusted-p = 0.001). High-disease-burden cluster had lower satisfaction (adjusted-p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: We define two distinct phenotypes—those with high- versus intermediate-disease-burden—operated for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Those with high-disease-burden were less satisfied, had a lower quality of life, and more disability, more back pain, and more leg pain than those with intermediate-disease-burden, but had greater magnitudes of improvement in disability, back pain, quality of life and more often reached ODI MCID.

Does reduction of the Meyerding grade correlate with outcomes in patients undergoing decompression and fusion for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis?

Reduction of Meyerding grade is often performed during fusion for spondylolisthesis. Although radiographic appearance may improve, correlation with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is rarely reported. In this study, the authors' aim was to assess the impact of spondylolisthesis reduction on 24-month PRO measures after decompression and fusion surgery for Meyerding grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis with a minimum 24-month follow-up, and quantitative correlation between Meyerding slippage reduction and PROs was performed. Baseline and 24-month PROs, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-back pain (NRS-BP), NRS-leg pain (NRS-LP), and satisfaction (North American Spine Society patient satisfaction questionnaire) scores were noted. Multivariable regression models were fitted for 24-month PROs and complications after adjusting for an array of preoperative and surgical variables. Data were analyzed for magnitude of slippage reduction and correlated with PROs. Patients were divided into two groups: < 3 mm reduction and ≥ 3 mm reduction. Of 608 patients from 12 participating sites, 206 patients with complete data were identified in the QOD and included in this study. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were similarly distributed between the cohorts except for depression, listhesis magnitude, and the proportion with dynamic listhesis (which were accounted for in the multivariable analysis). One hundred four (50.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm (mean 5.19, range 3 to 11), and 102 (49.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction < 3 mm (mean 0.41, range 2 to -2). Patients in both groups (slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm, and slippage reduction < 3 mm) reported significant improvement in all primary patient reported outcomes (all p < 0.001). There was no significant difference with regard to the PROs between patients with or without intraoperative reduction of listhesis on univariate and multivariable analyses (ODI, EQ-5D, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, or satisfaction). There was no significant difference in complications between cohorts. Significant improvement was found in terms of all PROs in patients undergoing decompression and fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. There was no correlation with clinical outcomes and magnitude of Meyerding slippage reduction.

Opioid use prior to surgery is associated with worse preoperative and postoperative patient reported quality of life and decreased surgical cost effectiveness for symptomatic adult spine deformity; A matched cohort analysis

BackgroundPreoperative opioid is associated with poor postoperative outcomes for several surgical specialties, including neurosurgical, orthopedic, and general surgery. Patients with symptomatic adult spinal deformity (SASD) are among the highest patient populations reporting opioid use prior to surgery. Surgery for SASD has been demonstrated to improve patient reported quality of life, however, little medical economic data exists evaluating impact of preoperative opioid use upon surgical cost-effectiveness for SASD. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact that preoperative opioid use has upon SASD surgery including duration of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, postoperative complications, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), and surgical cost-effectiveness using a propensity score matched analysis model. MethodsSurgically treated SASD patients enrolled into a prospective multi-center SASD study were assessed for preoperative opioid use, and divided into two cohorts; preoperative opioid users (OPIOID) and preoperative opioid non-users (NON). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control for patient age, medical comorbidities, spine deformity type and magnitude, and surgical procedures for OPIOID vs NON. Preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative PROMs, duration of ICU and hospital stay, postoperative complications, and opioid use at one and two years postoperative were compared for OPIOID vs NON. Preoperative, one year, and minimum two-year postoperative SF6D values were calculated, and one- and two-year postoperative QALYs were calculated using SF6D change from baseline. Hospital costs at the time of index surgery were calculated and cost/QALY compared at one and two years postop for OPIOID vs NON. Results261/357 patients (mean follow-up 3.3 years) eligible for study were evaluated. Following the PSM control, OPIOID (n=97) had similar preoperative demographics, smoking and depression history, spine deformity magnitude, and surgery performed as NON (n=164; p>0.05). Preoperatively, OPIOID reported greater NRS back pain (7.7 vs 6.7) and leg pain (5.2 vs 3.9), worse ODI (50.8 vs 36.9), worse SF-36 PCS (28.8 vs 35.6), and worse SRS-22r self-image (2.3 vs 2.5) than NON, respectively (p<0.05). OPIOID had longer ICU (41.2 vs 21.4 hours) and hospital stay (10.6 vs 8.0 days) than NON, respectively (p<0.05). At last postoperative follow up, OPIOID reported greater NRS back pain (4.1 vs 2.3) and leg pain (2.9 vs 1.7), worse ODI (32.4 vs 19.4), worse SF-36 PCS (37.4 vs 47.0), worse SRS-22r self-image (3.5 vs 4.0), and lower SRS-22r treatment satisfaction score (2.5 vs 4.5) than NON, respectively (p<0.05). At last follow-up postoperative Cost/QALY was higher for OPIOID ($44,558.31) vs NON ($34,304.36; p<0.05). At last follow up OPIOID reported greater postoperative opioid usage than NON [41.2% vs. 12.9%, respectively; odds ratio =4.7 (95% CI=2.6-8.7; p<0.05)]. ConclusionsProspective, multi-center, matched analysis demonstrated SASD patients using opioids prior to SASD surgery reported worse preoperative and postoperative quality of life, had longer ICU and hospital stay, had less cost effectiveness of SASD surgery. Preoperative opioid users also reported lower treatment satisfaction, and reported greater postoperative opioid use than non-users. These data should be used to council patients on the negative impact preoperative opioid use can have on SASD surgery.

23. Outcomes of direct vs indirect decompression for lumbar spondylolisthesis: A propensity matched cohort analysis

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Debate persists regarding the optimal surgical strategy to treat lumbar spondylolisthesis. The recent development of novel anterior approaches (direct lateral and oblique lumbar interbody fusion) has led to a rise in the utilization of anterior lumbar interbody fusion procedural codes. These new techniques rely on indirect decompression to treat the patient's neural compression, which is criticized by proponents of direct decompressive techniques. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> To compare 3- and 12-month outcomes between patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis treated with direct decompression (DD) vs indirect decompression (ID) and interbody fusion. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> Lumbar module of the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), a national, multicenter prospective spine registry. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> A total of 4,163 patients underwent DD (posterior lumbar laminectomy with interbody fusion) and 86 patients underwent ID (anterior lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation/fusion without laminectomy). <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), NRS-back pain, NRS-leg pain, EQ5D, satisfaction, major complication, minor complication, readmission, and return to work at 3- and 12-months postsurgery, return to OR within 30 days. <h3>METHODS</h3> Propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression with surgical procedure as the dependent variable. Independent variables included the baseline covariates that are potentially associated with outcomes. Based on the logit of estimated propensity score, DD patients were one-to-one matched to ID patients using a greedy matching strategy without replacement. Binary outcomes between ID and DD propensity score matched patients were compared using McNemar's test. The estimates of risk difference and relative risk were determined as well as 95% confidence intervals using asymptotic score methods. Continuous outcomes were compared using two sample paired t-test. <h3>RESULTS</h3> In the propensity-matched analysis, the DD and ID cohorts did not differ with respect to their 12 month postoperative improvement in ODI (p=0.262), back pain (p=0.715), leg pain (p=0.144), EQ5D (0.384), satisfaction (0.423), readmission (p=1.00), return to OR within 30 days (p=0.317), return to work (p=0.366), or minor (p=1.00) / major (p=0.480) complication rates. The ID group did demonstrate a statistically-significant lower level of improvement in achieving a 30-percent reduction in leg pain at 3-months vs the DD cohort (p=0.05, RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.7091-0.9996). <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> DD and ID strategies to treat lumbar spondylolisthesis were similar in terms of 12-month PRO improvement, readmission, complications, return to work and satisfaction. The ID cohort did demonstrate a statistically-significant lower reduction in leg pain at 3 months, which was not maintained at 12 months. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

Patient-Reported Outcomes After Complex Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: 5-Year Results of the Scoli-Risk-1 Study.

Study Design:Prospective cohort.Objective:To prospectively evaluate PROs up to 5-years after complex ASD surgery.Methods:The Scoli-RISK-1 study enrolled 272 ASD patients undergoing surgery from 15 centers. Inclusion criteria was Cobb angle of >80°, corrective osteotomy for congenital or revision deformity, and/or 3-column osteotomy. The following PROs were measured prospectively at intervals up to 5-years postoperative: ODI, SF36-PCS/MCS, SRS-22, NRS back/leg. Among patients with 5-year follow-up, comparisons were made from both baseline and 2-years postoperative to 5-years postoperative. PROs were analyzed using mixed models for repeated measures.Results:Seventy-seven patients (28.3%) had 5-year follow-up data. Comparing baseline to 5-year data among these 77 patients, significant improvement was seen in all PROs: ODI (45.2 vs. 29.3, P < 0.001), SF36-PCS (31.5 vs. 38.8, P < 0.001), SF36-MCS (44.9 vs. 49.1, P = 0.009), SRS-22-total (2.78 vs. 3.61, P < 0.001), NRS-back pain (5.70 vs. 2.95, P < 0.001) and NRS leg pain (3.64 vs. 2.62, P = 0.017). In the 2 to 5-year follow-up period, no significant changes were seen in any PROs. The percentage of patients achieving MCID from baseline to 5-years were: ODI (62.0%) and the SRS-22r domains of function (70.4%), pain (63.0%), mental health (37.5%), self-image (60.3%), and total (60.3%). Surprisingly, mean values (P > 0.05) and proportion achieving MCID did not differ significantly in patients with major surgery-related complications compared to those without.Conclusions:After complex ASD surgery, significant improvement in PROs were seen at 5-years postoperative in ODI, SF36-PCS/MCS, SRS-22r, and NRS-back/leg pain. No significant changes in PROs occurred during the 2 to 5-year postoperative period. Those with major surgery-related complications had similar PROs and proportion of patients achieving MCID as those without these complications.

Back Dominant Pain Has Equal Outcomes to Radicular Dominant Pain Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion in Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: A CSORN Study.

Study Design:Retrospective Cohort Study.Objectives:This study aimed to determine how the surgeon-determined and patient-rated location of predominant pain influences patient-rated outcomes at 1-year after posterior lumbar fusion in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis.Methods:We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients prospectively enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network national registry between 2009 and 2017 that underwent posterior lumbar fusion for isthmic spondylolisthesis. Using longitudinal mixed-model repeated-measures analysis the change from baseline in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 1 year after surgery was compared between surgeon-determined groups (back vs. radicular) and between patient-rated pain groups (back, leg, and equal) derived from preoperative pain scores on the numerical rating scale (NRS).Results:83/252 (33%) patients had a surgeon-determined chief complaint of back pain, while 103 (41%) patients rated their back pain as the predominant pain location, and 78 (31%) rated their back and leg pain to be equal. At baseline patients in the surgeon-determined radicular group had worse NRS-leg pain than those in the back-pain group but equal NRS-back pain. At baseline patients in the patient-rated equal pain group had similar back pain compared to the patient-rated back pain group and similar leg pain compared to the patient-rated leg pain group. All PROMs improved post-operatively and were not different between the 2 groups at 1 year.Conclusions:Our study found no difference in outcome, irrespective of whether a surgeon determines the patient’s primary pain complaint back or radicular dominant, or the patient rates pain in one location greater than another.