Posterior Cervical Decompression And Fusion Research Articles

The Effect of C2 Muscular Exposure Technique on Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes After C2-T2 Posterior Cervical Fusion.

Retrospective cohort analysis. To determine whether the C2 exposure technique was a predictor of change in cervical alignment and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) after posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for degenerative indications. In PCDF handling of the C2 posterior paraspinal musculature during the operative approach varies by surgeon technique. To date, no studies have investigated whether maintenance of the upper cervical semispinalis cervicis attachments as compared with complete reflection of upper cervical paraspinal musculature from the posterior bony elements is associated with superior radiographic and clinical outcomes after PCDF. All adult patients who underwent C2-T2 PCDF for myelopathy or myeloradiculopathy at multi-institutional academic centers between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively identified. Patients were dichotomized by the C2 exposure technique into semispinalis preservation or midline muscular reflection groups. Preoperative and short and long-term postoperative radiographic outcomes (upper cervical alignment, global alignment, and fusion status) and PROMs (Visual Analog Scale-Neck, Neck Disability Index, and Short Form-12) were collected. Univariate analysis compared patient factors, radiographic measures, and PROMs across C2 exposure groups. A total of 129 patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria (73 muscle preservation and 56 muscle reflection). Patients in the muscular preservation group were on average younger (P= 0.005) and more likely to have bone morphogenic protein (P< 0.001) and C2 pars screws (P= 0.006) used during surgery. Preoperative to postoperative changes in C2 slope, C2 tilt, C2-C3 segmental lordosis, C2-C3 listhesis, C0-C2 Cobb angle, proximal junctional kyphosis, ADI, C1 lamina-occiput distance, C2 sagittal vertical axis, C2-C7 lordosis, and PROMs at all follow-up intervals did not vary significantly by C2 exposure technique. Likewise, there were no significant differences in fusion status, C2-C3 pseudoarthrosis, C2 screw loosening, and complication and revision rates between C2 exposure groups. Preservation of C2 semispinalis attachments versus muscular reflection did not significantly impact cervical alignment, clinical outcomes, or proximal junction complications in long-segment PCDF. Level III.

The effect of C2 screw type on perioperative outcomes and long-term stability after C2-T2 posterior cervical decompression and fusion.

To determine if C2 pedicle versus pars screw type predicts change in fusion status, C2 screw loosening, cervical alignment, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) after C2-T2 posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PDCF). All adult patients who underwent C2-T2 PCDF for myelopathy or myeloradiculopathy between 2013-2020 were retrospectively identified. Patients were dichotomized by C2 screw type into bilateral C2 pedicle and bilateral C2 pars screw groups. Preoperative and short- and long-term postoperative radiographic outcomes and PROMs were collected. Univariate and multivariate analysis compared patient factors, fusion status, radiographic measures, and PROMs across groups. A total of 159 patients met the inclusion/exclusion criteria (76 bilateral pedicle screws, 83 bilateral pars screws). Patients in the C2 pars relative to C2 pedicle screw group were on average more likely to have bone morphogenic protein (p = 0.001) and four-millimeter diameter rods utilized intraoperatively (p = 0.033). There were no significant differences in total construct and C2-3 fusion rate, C2 screw loosening, or complication and revision rates between C2 screw groups in univariate and regression analysis. Changes in C2 tilt, C2-3 segmental lordosis, C0-2 Cobb angle, proximal junctional kyphosis, atlanto-dens interval, C1 lamina-occiput distance, C2 sagittal vertical axis, C2-7 lordosis, and PROMs at all follow-up intervals did not vary significantly by C2 screw type. There were no significant differences in fusion status, hardware complications, and radiographic and clinical outcomes based on C2 screw type following C2-T2 PCDF. Accordingly, intraoperative usage criteria can be flexible based on patient vertebral artery positioning and surgeon comfort level.

167 Association Between Safety-net Hospital Status and Postoperative Outcomes Following ACDF or PCDF for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

INTRODUCTION: Few prior studies have addressed the impact of safety-net hospital (SNH) status on outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using the 2016–2019 National Inpatient Sample Database. All adult patients (&gt;18 years old) undergoing elective ACDF or PCDF for CSM, identified using ICD-10-CM coding, were stratified into SNH and non-SNH (N-SNH) cohorts. Hospitals in the top quartile of Medicaid/uninsured patient admissions were defined as SNHs. Demographics, treating hospital characteristics, comorbidities, operative variables, adverse events (AEs), LOS, discharge disposition, and costs were assessed. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of prolonged LOS, non-routine discharge (NRD) disposition, and increased costs for ACDF and PCDF. RESULTS: Of the 49,945 study patients, 34,195 (68.5%) underwent ACDF and 15,750 (31.5%) underwent PCDF. Within the ACDF cohort, 8,025 patients (23.5%) were treated at SNHs. Among patients undergoing PCDF, 4,120 (26.2%) were treated at SNHs. Patients treated at SNHs were more likely to be Black- or Hispanic-identifying and have incomes in the bottom quartile in both cohorts. Mean LOS was significantly greater in the SNH cohorts for both procedures (ACDF:N-SNH: 2.43 ± 3.12 days vs SNH: 2.94 ± 4.13 days, p &lt;0.001; PCDF:N-SNH: 4.36 ± 4.28 days vs SNH: 5.41 ± 8.67 days, p = 0.002), as were mean costs (ACDF:N-SNH: $20,991 ± $12,126 vs SNH: $22,412 ± $15,302, p = 0.010; PCDF:N-SNH: $25,835 ± $16,812 vs SNH: $28,945 ± $29,166, p = 0.010). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the ACDF cohort treated at SNHs experienced NRDs (N-SNH: 10.9% vs SNH: 13.9%, p = 0.006). On multivariate analysis, SNH status was not significantly associated with extended LOS [ACDF: p = 0.097; PCDF: p = 0.158], NRD [ACDF: p = 0.288; PCDF: p = 0.246], or increased costs [ACDF: p = 0.664; PCDF: p = 0.593]. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest SNH status may not significantly impact postoperative outcomes following ACDF and PCDF.

Resource Utilization following Anterior Versus Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for Acute Central Cord Syndrome.

Retrospective cohort study. The purpose of this study is to compare the impact of anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) versus posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for the treatment of acute traumatic central cord syndrome (CCS) on hospital episodes of care in terms of (1) cost, (2) length of hospital stay, and (3) discharge destination. Acute traumatic CCS is the most common form of spinal cord injury in the United States. CCS is commonly treated with surgical decompression and fusion. Hospital resource utilization based on surgical approach remains unclear. Patients undergoing ACDF and PCDF for acute traumatic CCS were identified using the 2019 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review Limited Data Set and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2019 Impact File. Multivariate models for hospital cost of care, length of stay, and discharge destination were performed, controlling for confounders. Subanalysis of accommodation and revenue center cost drivers was performed. There were 1474 cases that met inclusion criteria: 673 ACDF (45.7%) and 801 PCDF (54.3%). ACDF was independently associated with a decreased cost of $9802 (P<0.001) and a 59.2% decreased risk of discharge to nonhome destinations (adjusted odds ratio: 0.408, P<0.001). The difference in length of stay was not statistically significant. On subanalysis of cost drivers, ACDF was associated with decreased charges ($55,736, P<0.001) compared with PCDF, the largest drivers being the intensive care unit ($15,873, 28% of total charges, P<0.001) and medical/surgical supply charges ($19,651, 35% of total charges, P<0.001). For treatment of acute traumatic CCS, ACDF was associated with almost $10,000 less expensive cost of care and a 60% decreased risk of discharge to nonhome destination compared with PCDF. The largest cost drivers appear to be ICU and medical/surgical-related. These findings may inform value-based decisions regarding the treatment of acute traumatic CCS. However, injury and patient clinical factors should always be prioritized in surgical decision-making, and increased granularity in reimbursement policies is needed to prevent financial disincentives in the treatment of patients with CCS better addressed with posterior approach-surgery.

Discrepancies in recommendations for return to regular activities after cervical spine surgery: A survey study

BackgroundThe recommended timing for returning to common activities after cervical spine surgery varies widely among physicians based on training background and personal opinion, without clear guidelines or consensus. The purpose of this study was to analyze spine surgeons’ responses about the recommended timing for returning to common activities after different cervical spine procedures. MethodsThis was a survey study including 91 spine surgeons. The participants were asked to complete an anonymous online survey. Questions regarding their recommended time for returning to regular activities (showering, driving, biking, running, swimming, sedentary work, and nonsedentary work) after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF), cervical disc replacement (CDR), posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF), and laminoplasty were included. Comparisons of recommended times for return to activities after each surgical procedure were made based on surgeons’ years in practice. ResultsFor ACDF and PCDF, there were no statistically significant differences in recommended times for return to any activity when stratified by years in practice. When considering CDR, return to non-sedentary work differed between surgeons in practice for 10 to 15 years, who recommended return at 3 months, and all other groups of surgeons, who recommended 6 weeks. Laminoplasty surgery yielded the most variability in activity recommendations, with earlier recommended return (6 weeks) to biking, non-sedentary work, and sedentary work in the most experienced surgeon group (>15 years in practice) than in all other surgeon experience groups (3 months). ConclusionsWe observed significant variability in surgeon recommendations for return to regular activities after cervical spine surgery.

Elective Single-Level Primary Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for Degenerative Spondylotic Cervical Myelopathy is Associated With Decreased Resource Utilization Versus Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.

Retrospective cohort study. To compare elective single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) in terms of (1) cost, (2) length of hospital stay, and (3) discharge destination in Medicare patients. A sub-analysis of potential cost drivers was also performed. In the era of value-based medicine, there is substantial interest in reducing the cost of care. Both ACDF and PCDF are used to treat DCM but carry different morbidity and risk profiles that can impact hospital resource utilization. However, this has not been assessed on a national level. Patients undergoing single-level elective ACDF and PCDF surgery were identified using the 2019 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR) Limited Data Set (LDS) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) 2019 Impact File. Multivariate models of hospital cost of care, length of stay, and discharge destination were performed, controlling for confounders. A univariate sub-analysis of 9 revenue centers was performed. In all, 3942 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean cost of elective single-level cervical fusion for myelopathy was $18,084±10,783, and the mean length of stay was 2.45±2.95d. On multivariate analysis, ACDF was independently associated with decreased cost of $5,814 (P<0.001), shorter length of stay by 1.1 days (P<0.001), and decreased risk of nonhome discharge destination by 58% (adjusted odds ratio: 0.422, P<0.001).On sub-analysis of 9 revenue centers, medical/surgical supply ($10,497, 44%), operating room charges ($5401, 23%), and accommodations ($3999, 17%) were the largest drivers of charge differences. Single-level elective primary ACDF for DCM was independently associated with decreased cost, decreased hospital length of stay, and a lower rate of nonhome discharge compared with PCDF. Medical and surgical supply, operating room, and accommodation differences between ACDF and PCDF are potential areas for intervention. Increased granularity in reimbursement structures is warranted to prevent the creation of disincentives to the treatment of patients with DCM with pathology that is better addressed with PCDF. Level-III Retrospective Cohort Study.

Impact of Preoperative Frailty on Outcomes in Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Undergoing Anterior vs. Posterior Cervical Surgery.

Introduction: Frailty has been shown to negatively influence patient outcomes across many disease processes, including in the cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) population. The aim of this study was to assess the impact that frailty has on patients with CSM who undergo anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF). Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using the 2016-2019 national inpatient sample. Adult patients (≥18 years old) undergoing ACDF only or PCDF only for CSM were identified using ICD codes. The patients were categorized based on receipt of ACDF or PCDF and pre-operative frailty status using the 11-item modified frailty index (mFI-11): pre-Frail (mFI = 1), frail (mFI = 2), or severely frail (mFI ≥ 3). Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative characteristics, perioperative adverse events (AEs), and healthcare resource utilization were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of extended length of stay (LOS) and non-routine discharge (NRD). Results: A total of 37,990 patients were identified, of which 16,665 (43.9%) were in the pre-frail cohort, 12,985 (34.2%) were in the frail cohort, and 8340 (22.0%) were in the severely frail cohort. The prevalence of many comorbidities varied significantly between frailty cohorts. Across all three frailty cohorts, the incidence of AEs was greater in patients who underwent PCDF, with dysphagia being significantly more common in patients who underwent ACDF. Additionally, the rate of adverse events significantly increased between ACDF and PCDF with respect to increasing frailty (p < 0.001). Regarding healthcare resource utilization, LOS and rate of NRD were significantly greater in patients who underwent PCDF in all three frailty cohorts, with these metrics increasing with frailty in both ACDF and PCDF cohorts (LOS: p < 0.001); NRD: p < 0.001). On a multivariate analysis of patients who underwent ACDF, frailty and severe frailty were found to be independent predictors of extended LOS [(frail) OR: 1.39, p < 0.001; (severely frail) OR: 2.25, p < 0.001] and NRD [(frail) OR: 1.49, p < 0.001; (severely frail) OR: 2.22, p < 0.001]. Similarly, in patients who underwent PCDF, frailty and severe frailty were found to be independent predictors of extended LOS [(frail) OR: 1.58, p < 0.001; (severely frail) OR: 2.45, p < 0.001] and NRD [(frail) OR: 1.55, p < 0.001; (severely frail) OR: 1.63, p < 0.001]. Conclusions: Our study suggests that preoperative frailty may impact outcomes after surgical treatment for CSM, with more frail patients having greater health care utilization and a higher rate of adverse events. The patients undergoing PCDF ensued increased health care utilization, compared to ACDF, whereas severely frail patients undergoing PCDF tended to have the longest length of stay and highest rate of non-routine discharge. Additional prospective studies are necessary to directly compare ACDF and PCDF in frail patients with CSM.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities Among Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion or Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A National Administrative Database Analysis

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of racial disparities on surgical outcomes for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Adult patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for CSM were identified from the 2016 to 019 National Inpatient Sample Database using the International Classification of Diseases codes. Patients were categorized based on approach (ACDF or PCDF) and race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic). Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative characteristics, adverse events, and health care resource utilization were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of extended length of stay (LOS), nonroutine discharge (NRD), and exorbitant costs. A total of 46,500 patients were identified, of which 36,015 (77.5%) were White, 7465 (16.0%) were Black, and 3020 (6.5%) were Hispanic. Black and Hispanic patients had a greater comorbidity burden compared to White patients (P= 0.001) and a greater incidence of any postoperative complication (P= 0.001). Healthcare resource utilization were greater in the PCDF cohort than the ACDF cohort and greater in Black and Hispanic patients compared to White patients (P < 0.001). Black and Hispanic patient race were significantly associated with extended hospital LOS ([Black] odds ratio [OR]: 2.24, P < 0.001; [Hispanic] OR: 1.64, P < 0.001) and NRD ([Black] OR: 2.33, P < 0.001; [Hispanic] OR: 1.49, P= 0.016). Among patients who underwent PCDF, Black race was independently associated with extended hospital LOS ([Black] OR: 1.77, P < 0.001; [Hispanic] OR: 1.47, P= 0.167) and NRD ([Black] OR: 1.82, P < 0.001; [Hispanic] OR: 1.38, P= 0.052). Our study suggests that patient race may influence patient outcomes and healthcare resource utilization following ACDF or PCDF for CSM.

Comparison of revision surgery for pseudarthrosis with or without adjacent segment disease after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

BackgroundPatients with a pseudarthrosis after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) may have concurrent adjacent segment disease (ASD). Although prior studies have shown posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) is effective in repairing pseudarthrosis, improvement in patient reported outcomes (PROs) has been marginal. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of PCDF in achieving symptom relief in patients with pseudarthrosis after ACDF and whether that is altered by the additional treatment of ASD. MethodsThirty-two patients with pseudarthrosis were compared with 31 patients with pseudarthrosis and concurrent ASD after ACDF who underwent revision PCDF with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Primary outcomes measures included the neck disability index (NDI), and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores for neck and arm pain. Secondary measures included estimated blood loss (EBL), operating room (OR) time, and length of stay. ResultsDemographics between cohorts were similar, however there was a significantly higher mean body mass index (BMI) in the group with concurrent ASD (32.23 vs. 27.76, p=.007). Patients with concurrent ASD had more levels fused during PCDF (3.7 vs. 1.9, p<.001), greater EBL (165 cc vs. 106 cc, p=.054), and longer OR time (256 minutes vs. 202 minutes, p<.000). Preoperative PROs for NDI (56.7 vs. 56.5, p=.954), NRS arm pain (5.9 vs. 5.7, p=.758), and NRS neck pain (6.6 vs. 6.8, p=.726) were similar in both cohorts. At 12 months patients with concurrent ASD experienced a slightly greater, but not statistically significant, improvement in PROs (Δ NDI 4.40 vs. -1.44, Δ NRS neck pain 1.17 vs. 0.42, Δ NRS arm pain 1.28 vs. 0.10, p=.107). ConclusionsPCDF is a standard procedure for treatment of pseudarthrosis following ACDF, however improvements in PROs are marginal. Slightly greater improvements were seen in patients whose indication for surgery also included concurrent ASD, rather than a diagnosis of pseudarthrosis alone.

Is It Necessary to Cross the Cervicothoracic Junction in Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion for Multilevel Degenerative Cervical Spine Disease? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCF) is a common procedure for treating patients with multilevel degenerative cervical spine disease. The selection of lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) relative to the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of PCF construct terminating at the lower cervical spine and crossing the CTJ. A comprehensive literature search was performed for relevant studies in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library database. Complications, rate of reoperation, surgical data, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and radiographic outcomes were compared between PCF construct terminating at or above C7 (cervical group) and at or below T1 (thoracic group) in patients with multilevel degenerative cervical spine disease. A subgroup analysis based on surgical techniques and indications was performed. Fifteen retrospective cohort studies comprising 2071 patients (1163 in the cervical group and 908 in the thoracic group) were included. The cervical group was associated with a lower incidence of wound-related complications (RR, 0.58; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.92, p = 0.022; 831 patients in cervical group vs. 692 patients in thoracic group), a lower reoperation rate for wound-related complications (RR, 0.55; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.96, p = 0.034; 768 vs. 624 patients), and less neck pain at the final follow-up (WMD, -0.58; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.23, p = 0.001; 327 vs. 268 patients). However the cervical group also developed a higher incidence of overall adjacent segment disease (ASD, including distal ASD and proximal ASD) (RR, 1.87; 95% CI 1.27 to 2.76, p = 0.001; 1079 vs. 860 patients), distal ASD (RR, 2.18; 95% CI 1.36 to 3.51, p = 0.001; 642 vs. 555 patients), overall hardware failure (including hardware failure of LIV and hardware failure occurring at other instrumented vertebra) (RR, 1.48; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.15, p = 0.040; 614 vs. 451 patients), and hardware failure of LIV (RR, 1.89; 95% CI 1.21 to 2.95, p = 0.005; 380 vs. 339 patients). The operating time was reasonably shorter (WMD, -43.47; 95% CI -59.42 to -27.52, p < 0.001; 611 vs. 570 patients) and the estimated blood loss was lower (WMD, -143.77; 95% CI -185.90 to -101.63, p < 0.001; 721 vs. 740 patients) when the PCF construct did not cross the CTJ. PCF construct crossing the CTJ was associated with a lower incidence of ASD and hardware failure but a higher incidence of wound-related complications and a small increase in qualitative neck pain, without difference in neck disability on the NDI. Based on the subgroup analysis for surgical techniques and indications, prophylactic crossing of the CTJ should be considered for patients with concurrent instability, ossification, deformity, or a combination of anterior approach surgeries as well. However, long-term follow-up outcomes and patient selection-related factors such as bone quality, frailty, and nutrition status should be addressed in further studies.

Modified Frailty Index as a Predictor of Postoperative Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes after Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.

A retrospective cohort study. To determine whether the 11-item modified frailty index (mFI) is associated with readmission rates, complication rates, revision rates, or differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients undergoing posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF). mFI incorporates preexisting medical comorbidities and dependency status to determine physiological reserve. Based on previous literature, it may be used as a predictive tool for identifying postoperative clinical and surgical outcomes. Patients undergoing elective PCDF at our urban academic medical center from 2014 to 2020 were included. Patients were categorized by mFI scores (0-0.08, 0.09-0.17, 0.18-0.26, and ≥0.27). Univariate statistics compared demographics, comorbidities, and clinical/surgical outcomes. Multiple linear regression analysis evaluated the magnitude of improvement in PROMs at 1 year. A total of 165 patients were included and grouped by mFI scores: 0 (n=36), 0.09 (n=62), 0.18 (n=42), and ≥0.27 (n=30). The severe frailty group (mFI ≥0.27) was significantly more likely to be diabetic (p <0.001) and have a greater Elixhauser comorbidity index (p =0.001). They also had worse baseline Physical Component Score-12 (PCS-12) (p =0.011) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) (p =0.012) scores and worse 1-year postoperative PCS-12 (p =0.008) and mJOA (p =0.001) scores. On regression analysis, an mFI score of 0.18 was an independent predictor of greater improvement in ΔVisual Analog Scale neck (β =-2.26, p =0.022) and ΔVAS arm (β =-1.76, p =0.042). Regardless of frailty status, patients had similar 90-day readmission rates (p =0.752), complication rates (p =0.223), and revision rates (p =0.814), but patients with severe frailty were more likely to have longer hospital length of stay (p =0.006) and require non-home discharge (p <0.001). Similar improvements across most PROMs can be expected irrespective of the frailty status of patients undergoing PCDF. Complication rates, 90-day readmission rates, and revision rates are not significantly different when stratified by frailty status. However, patients with severe frailty are more likely to have longer hospital stays and require non-home discharge.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Anterior and Posterior Surgical Approaches for Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy.

Retrospective cohort. To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between approach techniques for the treatment of multilevel degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Both anterior and posterior approaches for the surgical treatment of cervical myelopathy are successful techniques in the treatment of myelopathy. However, the optimal treatment has yet to be determined, especially for multilevel disease, as the different approaches have separate complication profiles and potentially different impacts on HRQoL metrics. Retrospective review of a prospectively managed single institution database of patient-reported outcome measures after 3 and 4-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) for DCM. The electronic medical record was reviewed for patient baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes whereas preoperative radiographs were analyzed for baseline cervical lordosis and sagittal balance. Bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to compare the two groups. We identified 153 patients treated by ACDF and 43 patients treated by PCDF. Patients in the ACDF cohort were younger (60.1 ± 9.8 vs . 65.8 ± 6.9 yr; P < 0.001), had a lower overall comorbidity burden (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 2.25 ± 1.61 vs . 3.07 ± 1.64; P = 0.002), and were more likely to have a 3-level fusion (79.7% vs . 30.2%; P < 0.001), myeloradiculopathy (42.5% vs . 23.3%; P = 0.034), and cervical kyphosis (25.7% vs . 7.69%; P = 0.027). Patients undergoing an ACDF had significantly more improvement in their neck disability index after surgery (-14.28 vs . -3.02; P = 0.001), and this relationship was maintained on multivariate analysis with PCDF being independently associated with a worse neck disability index (+8.83; P = 0.025). Patients undergoing an ACDF also experienced more improvement in visual analog score neck pain after surgery (-2.94 vs . -1.47; P = 0.025) by bivariate analysis. Our data suggest that patients undergoing an ACDF or PCDF for multilevel DCM have similar outcomes after surgery.

Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity between Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Performed in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings.

A retrospective cohort study. To compare 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity for patients undergoing posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) in inpatient vs. outpatient settings. PCDF has recently been increasingly performed in outpatient settings, often utilizing minimally invasive techniques. However, literature evaluating short-term outcomes for PCDF is scarce. Moreover, no currently large-scale database studies have compared short-term outcomes between PCDF performed in the inpatient and outpatient settings. Patients who underwent PCDF from 2005 to 2018 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Regression analysis was utilized to compare primary outcomes between surgical settings and evaluate for predictors thereof. We identified 8,912 patients. Unadjusted analysis revealed that outpatients had lower readmission (4.7% vs. 8.8%, p =0.020), reoperation (1.7% vs. 3.8%, p =0.038), and morbidity (4.5% vs. 11.2%, p <0.001) rates. After adjusting for baseline differences, readmission, reoperation, and morbidity no longer statistically differed between surgical settings. Outpatients had lower operative time (126 minutes vs. 179 minutes) and levels fused (1.8 vs. 2.2) (p <0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that age (p =0.008; odds ratio [OR], 1.012), weight loss (p =0.045; OR, 2.444), and increased creatinine (p <0.001; OR, 2.233) independently predicted readmission. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of ≥3 predicted reoperation (p =0.028; OR, 1.406). Rehabilitation discharge (p <0.001; OR, 1.412), ASA-class of ≥3 (p =0.008; OR, 1.296), decreased hematocrit (p <0.001; OR, 1.700), and operative time (p <0.001; OR, 1.005) predicted morbidity. The 30-day outcomes were statistically similar between surgical settings, indicating that PCDF can be safely performed as an outpatient procedure. Surrogates for poor health predicted negative outcomes. These results are particularly important as we continue to shift spinal surgery to outpatient centers. This importance has been highlighted by the need to unburden inpatient sites, particularly during public health emergencies, such as the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

The Impact of Obstructive Sleep Apnea on Clinical, Perioperative, and Cost Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis From 2008 to 2016.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a pervasive problem that can result in diminished neurocognitive performance, increased risk of all-cause mortality, and significant cardiovascular disease. While previous studies have examined risk factors that influence outcomes following cervical fusion procedures, to our knowledge, no study has examined the cost or outcome profiles for posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) procedures in patients with OSA. All cases at a single institution between 2008 and 2016 involving a PCDF were included. The primary outcome was prolonged extubation, defined as an extubation that took place outside of the operating room. Secondary outcomes included admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), complications, extended hospitalization, nonhome discharge, readmission within 30 and 90 days, emergency room visit within 30 and 90 days, and higher total costs. We reviewed 1191 PCDF cases, of which 93 patients (7.81%) had a history of OSA. At the univariate level, patients with OSA had higher rates of ICU admissions (33.3% vs 16.8%, P < 0.0001), total complications (29.0% vs 19.0%, P = 0.0202), and respiratory complications (12.9% vs 6.6%, P = 0.0217). Multivariate regression analyses revealed no difference in the odds of a prolonged extubation (P = 0.4773) and showed that history of OSA was not predictive of higher costs. However, a significant difference was observed in the odds of having an ICU admission (P = 0.0046). While patients with sleep apnea may be more likely to be admitted to the ICU postoperatively, OSA status a lone is not a risk factor for poor primary and secondary clinical outcomes following posterior cervical fusion procedures. Various deformities of the cervical spine can exert extraluminal forces that partially collapse or obstruct the airway, thereby predisposing patients to OSA; however, no study has examined the cost or outcome profiles for PCDF procedures in patients with OSA. Therefore, this investigation highlights the ways in which OSA influences the risks, outcomes, and costs following PCDF using medical data from an institutional registry.

135. Elective primary anterior cervical decompression and fusion for degenerative spondylotic cervical myelopathy is associated with decreased resource utilization vs posterior cervical decompression and fusion

135. Elective primary anterior cervical decompression and fusion for degenerative spondylotic cervical myelopathy is associated with decreased resource utilization vs posterior cervical decompression and fusion

25. Perioperative complications associated with epidural injections followed by cervical decompression and fusion

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Cervical epidural steroid injections (CESIs) are widely used to alleviate pain caused by degenerative diseases of the cervical spine. However, some data suggest a potential link between CESIs and infection rates following fusion surgeries. No prior studies have assessed the association between CESI and other postoperative outcomes such as hematomas, revision rates, or wound complications following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF). Therefore, using a national dataset, we aimed to explore whether an association exists between preoperative CESIs and a variety of serious complications following ACDF and PCDF surgery. <h3>METHODS</h3> In this retrospective cohort study, we queried the IBM MarketScan national claims dataset (after IRB approval) and included adult patients who had undergone inpatient or outpatient ACDF or PCDF surgery due to disc herniation, stenosis, radiculopathy, spondylosis, or myelopathy from January 2014 to September 2017. Current procedural terminology codes were used to identify patients who received a CESI within one year prior to their surgery. Multivariable logistic regression measured the association between preoperative CESI and postoperative rates of 90-day infection, hematoma, wound complications, revision surgery, or combined complications (the former first three complications). We report odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). <h3>RESULTS</h3> Among 44,777 ACDF patients, 31.2% (n=13,950) received a preoperative CESI. For PCDF, 3,284 patients underwent the surgery of which 22.3% (n=734) received a preoperative CESI. The median time from most recent CESI to ACDF surgery is 76 days (interquartile range 41-144 days) and 95 days (interquartile range 49-176 days) for PCDF. Among ACDF patients, preoperative CESI was associated with lower odds of developing a hematoma following ACDF (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.37-0.99; p=0.0453); no significant associations existed for the other outcomes including infection (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77-1.26; p=0.8846), revision surgery (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.71-1.23; p=0.6300), wound complications (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.71-1.17; p=0.4865) or combined complications (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.73-1.07; p=0.1904). In the PCDF cohort, no significant associations existed between preoperative CESI and post-PCDF infection (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.82-1.95; p=0.2962), revision surgery (OR 1.96; 95% CI 0.91-4.18; p=0.0842), wound complications (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.71-1.72; p=0.6608) or combined complications (OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.78-1.68; p=0.4929). <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Our study is the first to assess a broad complication profile that includes hematoma rates, infection rates, revision rates, and wound complications following ACDF and PCDF surgeries. We found no association between preoperative CESI and the aforementioned complications following ACDF and PCDF which supports first-hand clinical outcomes. Future work will aim to delineate the role of timing of CESI before ACDF and PCDF surgery, and the impact of quantity of CESIs on complication risks. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

P84. Day of admission is associated with hospital length of stay following elective posterior cervical decompression and fusion for cervical myelopathy

BACKGROUND CONTEXTThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant strain on the US health care system, with many hospitals struggling to provide resources for perioperative care and even necessitating the cessation of elective surgery for periods of time. Therefore, it is imperative to understand the hospital resource demands of elective surgery and identify ways to optimize them. With the traditional hospital staffing structure, there is minimal coverage on weekends, which can lead to delays in discharge for surgeries performed later in the week.PURPOSETo identify 1) length of hospital stay 2) cost of hospital episode and 3) discharge destination following treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) with posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) based on day of hospital admission.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective case-control analysis.PATIENT SAMPLEThe 2019 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR) Limited Data Set (LDS) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) 2019 Impact File were utilized. Patients undergoing elective PCDF for CSM were included. Nonelective surgery, combined anterior and posterior cervical fusions, revision cases, thoracic extension, disc replacements, fractures, traumatic spinal cord injury and epidural abscesses were excluded.OUTCOME MEASURESLength of stay, cost, and discharge destination.METHODSPotential demographic, comorbidity, surgical, perioperative and hospital confounders were evaluated. Multivariate models for hospital length of stay, cost of care and discharge destination were performed including surgical approach and potential confounders.RESULTSThere were 7,212 cases that met inclusion criteria. There were 4,026 males (55.8%) and 3,186 females (44.2%). The majority of patients were aged 65-74 (n=3,609, 50.0%) and 75-84 (n=2,009, 27.9%). The mean length of stay was 3.89±3.171 days and cost of hospital episode was $28,854.066±15,649.294 for elective surgical treatment of CSM with PCDF. The majority of patients were discharged home (n=4,605, 63.9%). There were 1,507 cases admitted on Tuesday (20.9%), 1,601 cases admitted on Wednesday (22.2%),623 cases admitted on Thursday (22.5%), 373 cases admitted on Friday (19.0%) and 1,108 cases admitted on Saturday (15.4%). On univariate analysis, there were significant differences in length of stay based on day of admission (Tuesday: 3.59±2.58 days, Wednesday: 3.74±2.919 days, Thursday: 3.89±2.92 days, Friday: 4.13±3.76 days and Saturday: 4.23±3.71 days, p=0.006). However, there were no differences in cost (p=0.340) or incidence of discharge home (p=0.389). On multivariate analysis, day of admission was associated with length of stay, with each later day in the week associated with a 0.155 days increased length of hospital stay (95% confidence interval: 0.101-0.208, p<0.001). Day of admission was not associated with cost of hospital episode (p=0.591) or discharge destination (p=0.813).CONCLUSIONSElective PCDF for CSM involves significant hospital resource utilization with almost 4 day mean length of stay and 40% of patients discharged to non-home destinations. Cost of care reached almost $30,000 for the acute hospital episode. Surgery performed later in the week was independently associated with increased length of stay. Interestingly, cost of care and discharge destination were not associated with day of surgery. These findings may aid surgeons and hospitals organize weekly surgery schedules to optimize hospital resources.FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUSThis abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.

Should we bridge the cervicothoracic junction in long cervical fusions? A meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature.

Long posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCF) is commonly performed to surgically treat patients with multilevel cervical pathology. In cases in which constructs may necessitate crossing the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ), recommendations for appropriate caudal fusion level vary in the literature. The aim of this study was to report the clinical and radiological outcomes of multilevel PCFs ending at C7 versus those crossing the CTJ. A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus was conducted to identify articles that evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes of long PCFs that ended at C7 (cervical group) or crossed the CTJ (thoracic group). Based on heterogeneity, random-effects models of a meta-analysis were used to estimate the pooled estimates and the 95% confidence intervals. PCF outcome data of 1120 patients from 10 published studies were included. Compared with the cervical group, the thoracic group experienced greater mean blood loss (453.0 ml [95% CI 333.6-572.5 ml] vs 303.5 ml [95% CI 203.4-403.6 ml]), longer operative times (235.5 minutes [95% CI 187.7-283.3 minutes] vs 198.5 minutes [95% CI 157.9-239.0 minutes]), and a longer length of stay (6.7 days [95% CI 3.3-10.2 days] vs 6.2 days [95% CI 3.8-8.7 days]); however, these differences were not statistically significant. None of the included studies specifically investigated factors that led to the decision of whether to cross the CTJ. The cervical group had a mean fusion rate of 86% (95% CI 71%-94%) compared with the thoracic group with a rate of 90% (95% CI 81%-95%). Of patients in the cervical group, 17% (95% CI 10%-28%) required revision surgery compared with 7% (95% CI 4%-13%) of those in the thoracic group, but this difference was not statistically significant. The proportion of patients who experienced complications in the cervical group was found to be 28% (95% CI 12%-52%) versus 14% (95% CI 7%-26%) in the thoracic group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference (no overlap of 95% CIs) in the incidence of adjacent-segment disease, pseudarthrosis, or wound-related complications between groups. This meta-analysis suggests similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in multilevel PCF, regardless of inclusion of the CTJ. The lowest instrumented level did not significantly affect revision rates or complications. The ideal stopping point must be tailored to each patient on an individualized basis.

Depression Increases Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Revision Rates and Diminishes Neck Disability Index Improvement.

A retrospective cohort study. To determine if depression and/or anxiety significantly affect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF). Mental health diagnoses are receiving increased recognition for their influence of outcomes after spine surgery. The magnitude that mental health disorders contribute to patient-reported outcomes following PCDF requires increased awareness and understanding. A review of electronic medical records identified patients who underwent a PCDF at a single institution during the years 2013-2020. Patients were placed into either depression/anxiety or nondepression/anxiety group based on their medical history. A delta score (∆) was calculated for all PROMs by subtracting postoperative from preoperative scores. χ 2 tests and t tests were utilized to analyze categorical and continuous data, respectively. Regression analysis determined independent predictors of change in PROMs. Alpha was set at 0.05. A total of 195 patients met inclusion criteria, with 60 (30.8%) having a prior diagnosis of depression/anxiety. The depression/anxiety group was younger (58.8 vs . 63.0, P =0.012), predominantly female (53.3% vs . 31.9%, P =0.007), and more frequently required revision surgery (11.7% vs . 0.74%, P =0.001). In addition, they had worse baseline mental component (MCS-12) (42.2 vs . 48.6, P <0.001), postoperative MCS-12 (46.5 vs . 52.9, P =0.002), postoperative neck disability index (NDI) (40.7 vs . 28.5, P =0.001), ∆NDI (-1.80 vs . -8.93, P =0.010), NDI minimum clinically important difference improvement (15.0% vs . 29.6%, P =0.046), and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Neck scores (3.63 vs . 2.48, P =0.018). Only the nondepression/anxiety group improved in MCS-12 ( P =0.002) and NDI ( P <0.001) postoperatively. Depression and/or anxiety was an independent predictor of decreased magnitude of NDI improvement on regression analysis (β=7.14, P =0.038). Patients with history of depression or anxiety demonstrate less improvement in patient-reported outcomes and a higher revision rate after posterior cervical fusion, highlighting the importance of mental health on clinical outcomes after spine surgery.

Multifidus Sarcopenia Is Associated With Worse Patient-reported Outcomes Following Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion.

Retrospective cohort study. The present study is the first to assess the impact of paraspinal sarcopenia on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF). While the impact of sarcopenia on PROMs following lumbar spine surgery is well-established, the impact of sarcopenia on PROMs following PCDF has not been investigated. We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing PCDF from C2 to T2 at a single institution between the years 2017 and 2020. Two independent reviewers who were blinded to the clinical outcome scores utilized axial cuts of T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging sequences to assess fatty infiltration of the bilateral multifidus muscles at the C5-C6 level and classify patients according to the Fuchs Modification of the Goutalier grading system. PROMs were then compared between subgroups. We identified 99 patients for inclusion in this study, including 28 patients with mild sarcopenia, 45 patients with moderate sarcopenia, and 26 patients with severe sarcopenia. There was no difference in any preoperative PROM between the subgroups. Mean postoperative Neck Disability Index scores were lower in the mild and moderate sarcopenia subgroups (12.8 and 13.4, respectively) than in the severe sarcopenia subgroup (21.0, P <0.001). A higher percentage of patients with severe multifidus sarcopenia reported postoperative worsening of their Neck Disability Index (10 patients, 38.5%; P =0.003), Visual Analog Scale Neck scores (7 patients, 26.9%; P =0.02), Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Component Scores (10 patients, 38.5%; P =0.02), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Mental Component Scores (14 patients, 53.8%; P =0.02). Patients with more severe paraspinal sarcopenia demonstrate less improvement in neck disability and physical function postoperatively and are substantially more likely to report worsening PROMs postoperatively. 3.