TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery
AU - Smith, Justin S.
AU - Shaffrey, Christopher I.
AU - Kim, Han Jo
AU - Passias, Peter
AU - Protopsaltis, Themistocles
AU - Lafage, Renaud
AU - Mundis, Gregory M.
AU - Klineberg, Eric
AU - Lafage, Virginie
AU - Schwab, Frank J.
AU - Scheer, Justin K.
AU - Kelly, Michael
AU - Hamilton, D. Kojo
AU - Gupta, Munish
AU - Deviren, Vedat
AU - Hostin, Richard
AU - Albert, Todd
AU - Riew, K. Daniel
AU - Hart, Robert
AU - Burton, Doug
AU - Bess, Shay
AU - Ames, Christopher P.
AU - on behalf of the International Spine Study Group, behalf of the International Spine Study Group
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2018.
PY - 2019/5/1
Y1 - 2019/5/1
N2 - Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objective: Factors that predict outcomes for adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD) have not been well defined. To compare ACSD patients with best versus worst outcomes. Methods: This study was based on a prospective, multicenter observational ACSD cohort. Best versus worst outcomes were compared based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NP-NRS), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. Results: Of 111 patients, 80 (72%) had minimum 1-year follow-up. For NDI, compared with best outcome patients (n = 28), worst outcome patients (n = 32) were more likely to have had a major complication (P =.004) and to have undergone a posterior-only procedure (P =.039), had greater Charlson Comorbidity Index (P =.009), and had worse postoperative C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA; P =.027). For NP-NRS, compared with best outcome patients (n = 26), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were younger (P =.045), had worse baseline NP-NRS (P =.034), and were more likely to have had a minor complication (P =.030). For the mJOA, compared with best outcome patients (n = 16), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were more likely to have had a major complication (P =.007) and to have a better baseline mJOA (P =.030). Multivariate models for NDI included posterior-only surgery (P =.006), major complication (P =.002), and postoperative C7-S1 SVA (P =.012); models for NP-NRS included baseline NP-NRS (P =.009), age (P =.017), and posterior-only surgery (P =.038); and models for mJOA included major complication (P =.008). Conclusions: Factors distinguishing best and worst ACSD surgery outcomes included patient, surgical, and radiographic factors. These findings suggest areas that may warrant greater awareness to optimize patient counseling and outcomes.
AB - Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objective: Factors that predict outcomes for adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD) have not been well defined. To compare ACSD patients with best versus worst outcomes. Methods: This study was based on a prospective, multicenter observational ACSD cohort. Best versus worst outcomes were compared based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NP-NRS), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. Results: Of 111 patients, 80 (72%) had minimum 1-year follow-up. For NDI, compared with best outcome patients (n = 28), worst outcome patients (n = 32) were more likely to have had a major complication (P =.004) and to have undergone a posterior-only procedure (P =.039), had greater Charlson Comorbidity Index (P =.009), and had worse postoperative C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA; P =.027). For NP-NRS, compared with best outcome patients (n = 26), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were younger (P =.045), had worse baseline NP-NRS (P =.034), and were more likely to have had a minor complication (P =.030). For the mJOA, compared with best outcome patients (n = 16), worst outcome patients (n = 18) were more likely to have had a major complication (P =.007) and to have a better baseline mJOA (P =.030). Multivariate models for NDI included posterior-only surgery (P =.006), major complication (P =.002), and postoperative C7-S1 SVA (P =.012); models for NP-NRS included baseline NP-NRS (P =.009), age (P =.017), and posterior-only surgery (P =.038); and models for mJOA included major complication (P =.008). Conclusions: Factors distinguishing best and worst ACSD surgery outcomes included patient, surgical, and radiographic factors. These findings suggest areas that may warrant greater awareness to optimize patient counseling and outcomes.
KW - adult
KW - cervical deformity
KW - outcomes
KW - surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067197176&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/2192568218794164
DO - 10.1177/2192568218794164
M3 - Article
C2 - 31192099
AN - SCOPUS:85067197176
SN - 2192-5682
VL - 9
SP - 303
EP - 314
JO - Global Spine Journal
JF - Global Spine Journal
IS - 3
ER -