Porche, Ken

OBJECTIVE Dysphagia has been shown to have an adverse effect on patient quality of life following cervical spine surgery, but its impact on patients’ ability to return to work (RTW) and return to physical activities (RTA) has never been investigated. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of postoperative dysphagia on patients’ ability to RTW and RTA after surgery. METHODS A prospectively maintained multi-institutional spine registry of patients who underwent cervical spine surgery between 2016 and 2023 was retrospectively reviewed. An Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) score ≥ 3 was used to quantify preoperative and 12-month postoperative dysphagia. Prolonged dysphagia was defined as new dysphagia present at 12 months among patients without baseline dysphagia. RTW and RTA were assessed at baseline and 12 months postoperatively. Mixed-effects logistic regressions were used to evaluate the effect of dysphagia on RTW and RTA. RESULTS Of the 1208 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 240 (20%) experienced prolonged dysphagia, of whom 208 (87%) underwent anterior surgery. Preoperatively, 709 (59%) patients were fully employed or on short-term leave, 307 (25%) were retired, and 191 (16%) were otherwise unemployed. At the 12-month follow-up, RTW and RTA status were collected for 629 (95%) of the 664 employed patients who planned to RTW after surgery and 1127 (93%) of the total cohort, respectively. Significantly lower rates of RTW (86% vs 96%, p < 0.001) and RTA (62% vs 79%, p < 0.001) were observed in patients with prolonged dysphagia. Multivariable analysis identified dysphagia as being independently associated with lower odds of RTW (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.14–0.86; p = 0.022) and RTA (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31–0.63; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Prolonged postoperative dysphagia—defined as a new EAT-10 score ≥ 3 at 12 months—was associated with substantially lower odds of returning to work and physical activities after cervical spine surgery, underscoring the importance of dysphagia prevention and management in postoperative care.

OBJECTIVE This study examines the recovery rates of patients who experience postoperative dysphagia within 1 month following cervical spine surgery. METHODS Data from a prospectively maintained multi-institutional quality registry were retrospectively analyzed. Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) questionnaire scores were collected at baseline and 1, 3, and 12 months postoperatively, with total scores ≥ 3 indicating dysphagia. Patients were grouped by whether they reported baseline dysphagia to assess the impact of baseline dysphagia on recovery. Recovery was defined as resolution of postoperative dysphagia and not reporting the condition at any follow-up time point. Patients were excluded from the recovery model if they did not report dysphagia within 1 month of surgery. Recovery to baseline was defined as reporting a postoperative EAT-10 score equal to or less than the baseline score at subsequent time points. Patients were excluded from the recovery-to-baseline model if they did not report EAT-10 scores within 1 month of surgery that were worse than their baseline score. Survival curves were generated for both models. RESULTS Of the 2003 patients in the registry, 627 met inclusion criteria for the recovery curve and 714 for the recovery-to-baseline curve. Of the patients without baseline dysphagia, 498 developed new postoperative dysphagia within 1 month, with cumulative recovery probabilities of 39.5% by 3 months and 59.1% by 12 months after cervical spine surgery. Furthermore, of the patients without baseline dysphagia, 73.5% (175/238) who reported no dysphagia at 3 months and 32.5% (68/209) who reported no dysphagia at 12 months experienced long-term recovery. Eighty patients with baseline dysphagia reported worse EAT-10 scores within 1 month, with cumulative probabilities of improvement to baseline or below of 37.7% by 3 months and 54.1% by 12 months. Patients with baseline dysphagia were significantly less likely to recover than patients without baseline dysphagia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.37, 95% CI 0.26–0.53; p < 0.001) but significantly more likely to recover to baseline (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.05–2.00; p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS Patients who develop postoperative dysphagia within 1 month of cervical spine surgery generally see symptomatic improvement over time. This analysis may aid in clinical decision-making when informing patients about the risk of developing postoperative dysphagia and the recovery rate of this surgical complication.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study proposes and assesses the validity of postoperative dysphagia severity categories based on patients' Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) scores and quality-of-life patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected before and after cervical spine surgery. METHODS: A prospectively collected multi-institutional quality registry including 2003 patients was retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized based on EAT-10 score severities, with thresholds determined by existing literature and significant differences in PROMs: none (0-2), mild (3-4), moderate (5-15), and severe (16-40). Correlations between EAT-10 severity and established PROMs were assessed at baseline, 3-, and 12-month follow-ups. The Dunn test using Bonferroni adjustment was used to identify differences in PROMs between EAT-10 severities. Multivariate linear regression assessed how EAT-10 severity affects PROMs at baseline, 3-, and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: Among 1659 patients with 3-month EAT-10 data, there were 1183 no, 149 mild, 245 moderate, and 82 severe dysphagia patients. Neck Disability Index and EuroQol 5-Dimension scores were significantly different between none vs mild ( P < .001; P = .001), mild vs moderate ( P < .001; P < .001), and moderate vs severe ( P = .035; P = .024) at 3 months. Among 1405 patients with 12-month EAT-10 data, there were 1044 no, 100 mild, 194 moderate, and 67 severe dysphagia patients. Neck Disability Index scores were significantly different between none vs mild ( P < .001) and moderate vs severe ( P = .004) but not for mild vs moderate ( P > .9) at 12 months. EuroQol 5-Dimension scores were significantly different between none vs mild ( P = .004) and mild vs moderate ( P = .005) but not for moderate vs severe ( P = .08). In multivariate regression, EAT-10 severity categories independently predicted worse PROMs at all time points. CONCLUSION: We propose none (0-2), mild (3-4), moderate (5-15), and severe (16-40) dysphagia categories based on EAT-10 scores. Evidence from univariate and multivariate analyses strengthens the validity of our proposed EAT-10 severity categories, providing statistical justification for their incorporation into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE This study investigated the relationship between diabetes and the incidence of postoperative dysphagia following cervical spine surgery (CSS). METHODS A prospectively collected multi-institutional quality registry was retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent CSS were categorized on the basis of diabetes status, and correlations with preoperative and postoperative Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) dysphagia questionnaire scores were assessed. Mixed-effects logistic regressions were performed to examine the impact of preoperative diabetes on postoperative dysphagia. RESULTS Of the 2001 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 400 (20%) had diabetes. Baseline dysphagia rates were not significantly different between groups (18% vs 14%, p = 0.08). Patients with diabetes had a significantly higher incidence of dysphagia at 1 month (66% vs 54%, p = 0.002), 3 months (39% vs 26%, p < 0.001), and 12 months (33% vs 24%, p = 0.004) after surgery compared to patients without diabetes. Including baseline dysphagia as a fixed effect, multivariable analysis indicated that diabetes was a significant predictor of postoperative dysphagia at 1 month (OR 1.46, p = 0.041) and 3 months (OR 1.63, p = 0.001) but not at 12 months (OR 1.21, p = 0.3). In patients with no baseline dysphagia, those with diabetes (329 of 400 [82.3%]) had a significantly higher incidence of new dysphagia than nondiabetics at 1 month (62% vs 50%, p = 0.003), 3 months (34% vs 21%, p < 0.001), and 12 months (27% vs 18%, p = 0.001). The mean change in EAT-10 scores between baseline and 12 months was significantly worse in patients with preoperative diabetes (2.440 ± 5.013 vs 1.688 ± 4.139, p = 0.025). Multivariable analysis indicated that diabetes was a significant predictor of new postoperative dysphagia at 1 month (OR 1.49, p = 0.040) and 3 months (OR 1.81, p < 0.001) but not at 12 months (OR 1.31, p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS Diabetes is a significant risk factor for experiencing postoperative dysphagia following CSS. Diabetes correlated with higher incidence of dysphagia at all postoperative time points and was a strong independent predictor of postoperative dysphagia at 1 and 3 months.

OBJECTIVE Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is commonly performed in both inpatient and outpatient settings. In this study, the authors evaluate the influence of surgical setting on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), satisfaction, dysphagia, and complications following ACDF. METHODS A prospectively collected, multi-institutional quality improvement registry was retrospectively reviewed. Patients eligible for study inclusion were those who underwent ACDF without corpectomy or arthroplasty between 2016 and 2023. The patients were stratified by surgery setting, with same-day discharge indicating outpatients and an overnight stay indicating inpatients. PROMs were collected preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Patient satisfaction was measured using the North American Spine Society (NASS) outcome assessment questionnaire, and dysphagia was measured using the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10). Propensity score overlap weighting (average treatment effect in the overlap population) was used to balance baseline covariates. RESULTS Of the 1514 patients who underwent ACDF, 462 were inpatients and 1052 were outpatients. The outpatient cohort was younger (55.1 ± 10.7 vs 60.5 ± 11.0 years, p < 0.001), had higher rates of private insurance (73% vs 52%, p < 0.001), had a lower mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status (2.3 ± 0.6 vs 2.6 ± 0.6, p < 0.001), and underwent more single-level surgeries (53% vs 33%, p < 0.001). Propensity weighting resulted in comparable mean ages (58.9, p > 0.9) and ASA classes (2.5, p = 0.8) as well as private insurance rates (56%, p > 0.9) between the cohorts. After weighting, the inpatient cohort had a higher share of single-level fusions (46% vs 37%, p = 0.007). An outpatient status was associated with significantly better 12-month numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for neck pain (2.4 ± 2.7 vs 3.1 ± 3.0, p = 0.006), NRS scores for arm pain (1.7 ± 2.6 vs 2.2 ± 3.0, p = 0.047), and Neck Disability Index (NDI; 7.7 ± 7.8 vs 9.8 ± 9.4, p = 0.004) and greater improvement from baseline to 12 months on the NDI (−12.5 ± 9.7 vs −10.8 ± 10.5, p = 0.017), EQ-5D (0.242 ± 0.220 vs 0.209 ± 0.226, p = 0.047), and EQ visual analog scale (10.6 ± 21.6 vs 7.1 ± 20.8, p = 0.012). Fewer outpatients reported dysphagia at 3 months postoperatively (31% vs 40%, p = 0.010). No differences were observed in readmissions or revision procedures, although fewer outpatients experienced new neurological deficits (1.0% vs 2.6%, p = 0.032) and pneumonia (< 0.1% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001). In terms of the 12-month NASS outcome assessment, a smaller proportion of the outpatient cohort reported the lowest satisfaction score (3.9% vs 8.0%, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS Outpatient setting was associated with better PROMs at the 12-month follow-up when patients were weighted by baseline health status. These findings support the efficacy of outpatient ACDF in appropriately selected patients.

OBJECTIVE Cervical dystonia (CD) is the most common focal dystonia, characterized by abnormal head postures and pain, often refractory to botulinum toxin therapy. Selective peripheral denervation (SPD) remains a key surgical option, but long-term outcomes in large cohorts are underreported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of SPD in patients with botulinum toxin–refractory CD, focusing on symptom severity, pain, and head posture improvement. METHODS This retrospective study included 160 adults (mean ± SD age 54 ± 12.0 years, 46% male) with refractory CD who underwent SPD at a single center by a single surgeon from January 2005 to July 2023. Outcomes were assessed using subjective clinical measures and the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS), which was calculated retrospectively from clinical records. The modified Bertrand technique involved selective denervation and myotomies tailored to each patient’s dystonic pattern. TWSTRS scores were analyzed at baseline, 3 months, 1 year, and final follow-up (mean ± SD 10.3 ± 9.0 months). Time to minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (≥ 12-point TWSTRS drop) was evaluated with covariate-adjusted Kaplan-Meier modeling (ever vs never revised, evaluated with the log-rank test) and a counting-process Cox model with revision as a time-dependent covariate. RESULTS Among 160 patients (mean follow-up duration 21.6 ± 35.6 months), TWSTRS improved by 73.5% at 3 months and 61.3% at last follow-up (p < 0.001). Median time to MCID was 3.0 months for never revised patients versus 22.0 months for ever revised patients (log-rank chi-square statistic = 19.09, p < 0.0001). In a time-dependent Cox model, revision surgery was significantly associated with higher likelihood of achieving MCID (HR 2.31, p < 0.005). Pain relief and improved head posture were reported in over 50% of patients. Complications were minimal, and recurrence was observed in 4.2% of cases. Outcomes were consistent with or exceeded those reported in the literature with either SPD or deep brain stimulation (DBS). CONCLUSIONS SPD is an effective and durable surgical option for refractory CD, significantly improving pain, posture, and quality of life. Although revision surgery delayed time to improvement, it significantly increased the likelihood of achieving meaningful clinical improvement. Overall efficacy aligns with the existing literature, reinforcing its role as a first-line surgical intervention. Further studies should explore strategies to enhance long-term outcomes and delineate the role of SPD relative to DBS.

OBJECTIVE This study aimed to determine minimum clinically important difference (MCID) values for dysphagia using the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in patients undergoing anterior cervical surgery, focusing on early dissatisfaction and later satisfaction thresholds to guide clinical decisions. METHODS Data were prospectively collected from patients undergoing anterior cervical surgery across three institutions from 2016 to 2024. Dysphagia severity was assessed preoperatively and at various postoperative stages up to 1 year using EAT-10. The inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control for confounding variables. The retrospective study of patient data employed two analytical phases: the first phase examined the relationship between dissatisfaction at 3 months (indicated by a North American Spine Society satisfaction score > 2) and changes in EAT-10 scores from baseline to peak (i.e., worst) postoperative scores; the second phase focused on recovery, comparing changes in EAT-10 scores from peak postoperative scores to 12 months against satisfaction (score < 2) at 12 months. RESULTS The mean ± SD baseline EAT-10 score for the 1463 patients included in the study was 1.5 ± 4.7 and the mean peak score was 5.2 ± 7.4. The patients underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (90%), arthroplasty (6%), or corpectomy (4%); a hybrid procedure was used in 1%. The phase 1 analysis indicated that a 4-point increase in EAT-10 score was a threshold for significant postoperative dissatisfaction in those without baseline dysphagia, with much higher thresholds observed in patients with any baseline dysphagia. In phase 2, among patients with baseline EAT-10 scores < 3 who experienced an increase to EAT-10 score ≥ 8 postoperatively, a subsequent decrease of 9 points by 12 months was necessary to report satisfaction. For patients with baseline scores 3–8 whose postoperative scores rose to ≥ 8, a subsequent decrease of 15 points was necessary for satisfaction. Patients with initial scores of ≥ 8 who did not improve to < 3 immediately after surgery required further reductions of 2–11 points to reach satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS The MCID thresholds from this study provide crucial benchmarks for assessing dysphagia changes after anterior cervical surgery, allowing tailored interventions. Patients with baseline dysphagia are less likely to experience early dissatisfaction, and high peak scores negatively impact long-term satisfaction. These findings emphasize the importance of proactive dysphagia management to enhance patient outcomes.