Porter, Kimberly R.

Study Design. Retrospective observational study. Objective. To evaluate whether the combined American Spine Registry and Medicare (ASR/CMS) data yield substantially different findings versus ASR data alone with regard to key parameters such as risk stratification, complication rates, and readmission rates in lumbar surgery investigated through an analysis of 8755 spondylolisthesis cases. Summary of Background Data. Medicare data correlation has been effective for determining revision rates for other procedures, such as total hip replacement. Our aim is to determine whether these findings are translatable in the realm of lumbar spinal surgery investigated through an analysis of 8755 spondylolisthesis cases. Materials and Methods. The American Spine Registry (ASR) was queried for Medicare-eligible patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. This cohort was analyzed based on ASR data alone in comparison to the same patients in the combined ASR/Medicare (ASR/CMS) data set. The primary outcome of interest was readmission at 30 and 90 days postoperatively. Results. There were 8755 Medicare-eligible cases with a diagnosis of spondylolisthesis within the ASR. The mean age was 72.7 years and 60.8% were female. Medical comorbidities were more frequently detected in the combined ASR/CMS data set, reflected by a higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score (3.49 vs. 3.27, P<0.001). Hospital readmission rates were significantly higher in the combined ASR/CMS data set at both 30 days (4.89% vs. 1.83%, P<0.001) and 90 days (7.68% vs. 2.66%, P<0.001), with notable increases in readmissions for infections and medical complications. Discharge disposition remained comparable across data sets, with most patients discharged to home or home health care. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that integrating patient-identified Medicare data with the ASR provides a more comprehensive assessment of outcomes for lumbar spinal fusion surgery as demonstrated through an analysis of 8755 spondylolisthesis cases. These findings, establish the importance of multisource data linkage to overcome the limitations of single-source registries, thereby enhancing data quality for clinical decision-making and quality improvement in spinal surgery.

OBJECTIVE Clear diagnostic delineation is necessary for the development of a strong evidence base in lumbar spinal surgery. Experience with existing national databases suggests that International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition (ICD-10) coding is insufficient to support that need. The purpose of this study was to assess agreement between surgeon-specified diagnostic indication and hospital-reported ICD-10 codes for lumbar spine surgery. METHODS Data collection for the American Spine Registry (ASR) includes an option to denote the surgeon’s specific diagnostic indication for each procedure. For cases treated between January 2020 and March 2022, surgeon-delineated diagnosis was compared with the ICD-10 diagnosis generated by standard ASR electronic medical record data extraction. For decompression-only cases, the primary analysis focused on the etiology of neural compression as determined by the surgeon versus that determined on the basis of the related ICD-10 codes extracted from the ASR database. For lumbar fusion cases, the primary analysis compared structural pathology, which may have required fusion, as determined by the surgeon versus that determined on the basis of the extracted ICD-10 codes. This allowed for identification of agreement between surgeon delineation and extracted ICD-10 codes. RESULTS In 5926 decompression-only cases, agreement between the surgeon and ASR ICD-10 codes was 89% for spinal stenosis and 78% for lumbar disc herniation and/or radiculopathy. Both the surgeon and database indicated no structural pathology (i.e., none) suggesting the need for fusion in 88% of cases. In 5663 lumbar fusion cases, agreement was 76% for spondylolisthesis but poor for other diagnostic indications. CONCLUSIONS Agreement between surgeon-specified diagnostic indication and hospital-reported ICD-10 codes was best for patients who underwent decompression only. In the fusion cases, agreement with ICD-10 codes was best in the spondylolisthesis group (76%). In cases other than spondylolisthesis, agreement was poor due to multiple diagnoses or lack of an ICD-10 code that reflected the pathology. This study suggested that standard ICD-10 codes may be inadequate to clearly define the indications for decompression or fusion in patients with lumbar degenerative disease.