<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.
Read full abstract