Alvi, Mohammed Ali

OBJECTIVE Reduction of Meyerding grade is often performed during fusion for spondylolisthesis. Although radiographic appearance may improve, correlation with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is rarely reported. In this study, the authors’ aim was to assess the impact of spondylolisthesis reduction on 24-month PRO measures after decompression and fusion surgery for Meyerding grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis with a minimum 24-month follow-up, and quantitative correlation between Meyerding slippage reduction and PROs was performed. Baseline and 24-month PROs, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)–back pain (NRS-BP), NRS-leg pain (NRS-LP), and satisfaction (North American Spine Society patient satisfaction questionnaire) scores were noted. Multivariable regression models were fitted for 24-month PROs and complications after adjusting for an array of preoperative and surgical variables. Data were analyzed for magnitude of slippage reduction and correlated with PROs. Patients were divided into two groups: < 3 mm reduction and ≥ 3 mm reduction. RESULTS Of 608 patients from 12 participating sites, 206 patients with complete data were identified in the QOD and included in this study. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were similarly distributed between the cohorts except for depression, listhesis magnitude, and the proportion with dynamic listhesis (which were accounted for in the multivariable analysis). One hundred four (50.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm (mean 5.19, range 3 to 11), and 102 (49.5%) patients underwent lumbar decompression and fusion with slippage reduction < 3 mm (mean 0.41, range 2 to −2). Patients in both groups (slippage reduction ≥ 3 mm, and slippage reduction < 3 mm) reported significant improvement in all primary patient reported outcomes (all p < 0.001). There was no significant difference with regard to the PROs between patients with or without intraoperative reduction of listhesis on univariate and multivariable analyses (ODI, EQ-5D, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, or satisfaction). There was no significant difference in complications between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS Significant improvement was found in terms of all PROs in patients undergoing decompression and fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. There was no correlation with clinical outcomes and magnitude of Meyerding slippage reduction.

Abstract BACKGROUND Trials of lumbar spondylolisthesis are difficult to compare because of the heterogeneity in the populations studied. OBJECTIVE To define patterns of clinical presentation. METHODS This is a study of the prospective Quality Outcomes Database spondylolisthesis registry, including patients who underwent single-segment surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Twenty-four-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected. A k-means clustering analysis—an unsupervised machine learning algorithm—was used to identify clinical presentation phenotypes. RESULTS Overall, 608 patients were identified, of which 507 (83.4%) had 24-mo follow-up. Clustering revealed 2 distinct cohorts. Cluster 1 (high disease burden) was younger, had higher body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) grades, and globally worse baseline PROs. Cluster 2 (intermediate disease burden) was older and had lower BMI and ASA grades, and intermediate baseline PROs. Baseline radiographic parameters were similar ( P > .05). Both clusters improved clinically ( P < .001 all 24-mo PROs). In multivariable adjusted analyses, mean 24-mo Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scale Back Pain (NRS-BP), Numeric Rating Scale Leg Pain, and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) were markedly worse for the high-disease-burden cluster (adjusted- P < .001). However, the high-disease-burden cluster demonstrated greater 24-mo improvements for ODI, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D (adjusted- P < .05) and a higher proportion reaching ODI minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (adjusted- P = .001). High-disease-burden cluster had lower satisfaction (adjusted- P = .02). CONCLUSION We define 2 distinct phenotypes—those with high vs intermediate disease burden—operated for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Those with high disease burden were less satisfied, had a lower quality of life, and more disability, more back pain, and more leg pain than those with intermediate disease burden, but had greater magnitudes of improvement in disability, back pain, quality of life, and more often reached ODI MCID.

OBJECTIVE Spinal procedures are increasingly conducted as outpatient procedures, with a growing proportion conducted in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). To date, studies reporting outcomes and cost analyses for outpatient spinal procedures in the US have not distinguished the various outpatient settings from each other. In this study, the authors used a state-level administrative database to compare rates of overnight stays and nonroutine discharges as well as index admission charges and cumulative 7-, 30-, and 90-day charges for patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression in freestanding ASCs and hospital outpatient (HO) settings. METHODS For this project, the authors used the Florida State Ambulatory Surgery Database (SASD), offered by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), for the years 2013 and 2014. Patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression for degenerative diseases were identified using CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) and ICD-9 codes. Outcomes of interest included rates of overnight stays, rate of nonroutine discharges, index admission charges, and subsequent admission cumulative charges at 7, 30, and 90 days. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the impact of outpatient type on index admission charges. Marginal effect analysis was employed to study the difference in predicted dollar margins between ASCs and HOs for each insurance type. RESULTS A total of 25,486 patients were identified; of these, 7067 patients (27.7%) underwent lumbar decompression in a freestanding ASC and 18,419 (72.3%) in an HO. No patient in the ASC group required an overnight stay compared to 9.2% (n = 1691) in the HO group (p < 0.001). No clinically significant difference in the rate of nonroutine discharge was observed between the two groups. The mean index admission charge for the ASC group was found to be significantly higher than that for the HO group ($35,017.28 ± $14,335.60 vs $33,881.50 ± $15,023.70; p < 0.001). Patients in ASCs were also found to have higher mean 7-day (p < 0.001), 30-day (p < 0.001), and 90-day (p = 0.001) readmission charges. ASC procedures were associated with increased charges compared to HO procedures for patients on Medicare or Medicaid (mean index admission charge increase $4049.27, 95% CI $2577.87–$5520.67, p < 0.001) and for patients on private insurance ($4775.72, 95% CI $4171.06–$5380.38, p < 0.001). For patients on self-pay or no charge, a lumbar decompression procedure at an ASC was associated with a decrease in index admission charge of −$10,995.38 (95% CI −$12124.76 to −$9866.01, p < 0.001) compared to a lumbar decompression procedure at an HO. CONCLUSIONS These “real-world” results from an all-payer statewide database indicate that for outpatient spine surgery, ASCs may be associated with higher index admission and subsequent 7-, 30-, and 90-day charges. Given that ASCs are touted to have lower overall costs for patients and better profit margins for physicians, these analyses warrant further investigation into whether this cost benefit is applicable to outpatient spine procedures.

OBJECTIVE Neurosurgeons generate an enormous amount of data daily. Within these data lie rigorous, valid, and reproducible evidence. Such evidence can facilitate healthcare reform and improve quality of care. To measure the quality of care provided objectively, evaluating the safety and efficacy of clinical activities should occur in real time. Registries must be constructed and collected data analyzed with the precision akin to that of randomized clinical trials to accomplish this goal. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Tumor Registry was launched in February 2019 with 8 sites in its initial 1-year pilot phase. The Tumor Registry was proposed by the AANS/CNS Tumor Section and approved by the QOD Scientific Committee in the fall of 2018. The initial pilot phase aimed to assess the feasibility of collecting outcomes data from 8 academic practices across the United States; these outcomes included length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient complications. RESULTS As of November 2019, 923 eligible patients have been entered, with the following subsets: intracranial metastasis (17.3%, n = 160), high-grade glioma (18.5%, n = 171), low-grade glioma (6%, n = 55), meningioma (20%, n = 184), pituitary tumor (14.3%, n = 132), and other intracranial tumor (24%, n = 221). CONCLUSIONS The authors have demonstrated here, as a pilot study, the feasibility of documenting demographic, clinical, operative, and patient-reported outcome characteristics longitudinally for 6 common intracranial tumor types.

OBJECTIVE The impact of the type of pain presentation on outcomes of spine surgery remains elusive. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of predominant symptom location (predominant arm pain vs predominant neck pain vs equal neck and arm pain) on postoperative improvement in patient-reported outcomes. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database cervical spine module was queried for patients undergoing 1- or 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative spine disease. RESULTS A total of 9277 patients were included in the final analysis. Of these patients, 18.4% presented with predominant arm pain, 32.3% presented with predominant neck pain, and 49.3% presented with equal neck and arm pain. Patients with predominant neck pain were found to have higher (worse) 12-month Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (coefficient 0.24, 95% CI 0.15–0.33; p < 0.0001). The three groups did not differ significantly in odds of return to work and achieving minimal clinically important difference in NDI score at the 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Analysis from a national spine registry showed significantly lower odds of patient satisfaction and worse NDI score at 1 year after surgery for patients with predominant neck pain when compared with patients with predominant arm pain and those with equal neck and arm pain after 1- or 2-level ACDF. With regard to return to work, all three groups (arm pain, neck pain, and equal arm and neck pain) were found to be similar after multivariable analysis. The authors’ results suggest that predominant pain location, especially predominant neck pain, might be a significant determinant of improvement in functional outcomes and patient satisfaction after ACDF for degenerative spine disease. In addition to confirmation of the common experience that patients with predominant neck pain have worse outcomes, the authors’ findings provide potential targets for improvement in patient management for these specific populations.

OBJECTIVE Optimizing patient discharge after surgery has been shown to impact patient recovery and hospital/physician workflow and to reduce healthcare costs. In the current study, the authors sought to identify risk factors for nonroutine discharge after surgery for cervical myelopathy by using a national spine registry. METHODS The Quality Outcomes Database cervical module was queried for patients who had undergone surgery for cervical myelopathy between 2016 and 2018. Nonroutine discharge was defined as discharge to postacute care (rehabilitation), nonacute care, or another acute care hospital. A multivariable logistic regression predictive model was created using an array of demographic, clinical, operative, and patient-reported outcome characteristics. RESULTS Of the 1114 patients identified, 11.2% (n = 125) had a nonroutine discharge. On univariate analysis, patients with a nonroutine discharge were more likely to be older (age ≥ 65 years, 70.4% vs 35.8%, p < 0.001), African American (24.8% vs 13.9%, p = 0.007), and on Medicare (75.2% vs 35.1%, p < 0.001). Among the patients younger than 65 years of age, those who had a nonroutine discharge were more likely to be unemployed (70.3% vs 36.9%, p < 0.001). Overall, patients with a nonroutine discharge were more likely to present with a motor deficit (73.6% vs 58.7%, p = 0.001) and more likely to have nonindependent ambulation (50.4% vs 14.0%, p < 0.001) at presentation. On multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with higher odds of a nonroutine discharge included African American race (vs White, OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.38–5.51, p = 0.004), Medicare coverage (vs private insurance, OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.00–4.65, p = 0.04), nonindependent ambulation at presentation (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.17–4.02, p = 0.01), baseline modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association severe myelopathy score (0–11 vs moderate 12–14, OR 2, 95% CI 1.07–3.73, p = 0.01), and posterior surgical approach (OR 11.6, 95% CI 2.12–48, p = 0.004). Factors associated with lower odds of a nonroutine discharge included fewer operated levels (1 vs 2–3 levels, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1–0.96, p = 0.009) and a higher quality of life at baseline (EQ-5D score, OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25–0.73, p = 0.001). On predictor importance analysis, baseline quality of life (EQ-5D score) was identified as the most important predictor (Wald χ2 = 9.8, p = 0.001) of a nonroutine discharge; however, after grouping variables into distinct categories, socioeconomic and demographic characteristics (age, race, gender, insurance status, employment status) were identified as the most significant drivers of nonroutine discharge (28.4% of total predictor importance). CONCLUSIONS The study results indicate that socioeconomic and demographic characteristics including age, race, gender, insurance, and employment may be the most significant drivers of a nonroutine discharge after surgery for cervical myelopathy.

Abstract BACKGROUND With a dramatic rise in prescription opioid use, it is imperative to review postsurgical prescribing patterns given their contributions to the opioid epidemic. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of departmental postoperative prescribing guidelines on opioid prescriptions following elective spine surgery. METHODS Patients undergoing elective cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2017 and 2018 were identified. Procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines to limit postoperative prescribing following neurosurgical procedures were developed in 2017 and implemented in January 2018. Preguideline data were available from July to December 2017, and postguideline data from July to December 2018. Discharge prescriptions in morphine milliequivalents (MMEs), the proportion of patients (i) discharged with an opioid prescription, (ii) needing refills within 30 d, (iii) with guideline compliant prescriptions were compared in the 2 groups. Multivariable (MV) analyses were performed to assess the impact of guideline implementation on refill prescriptions within 30 d. RESULTS A total of 1193 patients were identified (cervical: 308; lumbar: 885) with 569 (47.7%) patients from the preguideline period. Following guideline implementation, fewer patients were discharged with a postoperative opioid prescription (92.5% vs 81.7%, P < .001) and median postoperative opioid prescription decreased significantly (300 MMEs vs 225 MMEs, P < .001). The 30-d refill prescription rate was not significantly different between preguideline and postguideline cohorts (pre: 24.4% vs post: 20.2%, P = .079). MV analyses did not demonstrate any impact of guideline implementation on need for 30-d refill prescriptions for both cervical (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68, confidence interval [CI] = 0.37-1.26, P = .22) and lumbar cohorts (OR = 0.95, CI = 0.66-1.36, P = .78). CONCLUSION Provider-aimed interventions such as implementation of procedure-specific prescribing guidelines can significantly reduce postoperative opioid prescriptions following spine surgery without increasing the need for refill prescriptions for pain control.

Background CT-guided biopsy is a commonly used diagnostic procedure for spinal lesions. This meta-analysis aims to investigate its diagnostic performance and complications, as well as factors influencing outcomes. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies reporting outcomes of CT-guided biopsies for spinal lesions. Diagnostic yield (ie, the rate of procedures resulting in a specific pathological diagnosis) and diagnostic accuracy (ie, the rate of procedures resulting in the correct diagnosis) were the primary outcomes of interest. Complications following biopsy procedures were also included. Results Thirty-nine studies with 3917 patients undergoing 4181 procedures were included. Diagnostic yield per procedure was 91% (95% CI 88% to 94%) among 3598 procedures. The most common reason for non-diagnostic biopsies was inadequacy of sample. No difference in diagnostic yield between different locations and between lytic, sclerotic, and mixed lesions was found. Diagnostic yield did not differ between procedures using ≤13G and ≥14G needles. Diagnostic accuracy per procedure was 86% (95% CI 82% to 89%) among 3054 procedures. Diagnostic accuracy among 2426 procedures that yielded a diagnosis was 94% (95% CI 92% to 96%). Complication rate was 1% (95% CI 0.4% to 1.9%) among 3357 procedures. Transient pain and minor hematoma were the most common complications encountered. Conclusion In our meta-analysis of 39 studies reporting diagnostic performance and complications of CT-guided biopsy, we found a diagnostic yield of 91% and diagnostic accuracy of 86% with a complication rate of 1%. Diagnostic yield did not differ between different locations, between lytic, sclerotic and mixed lesions, and between wide- and thin-bore needles.

OBJECTIVE The ideal surgical management of grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis has not been determined despite extensive prior investigations. In this cohort study, the authors used data from the large, multicenter, prospectively collected Quality Outcomes Database to bridge the gap between the findings in previous randomized trials and those in a more heterogeneous population treated in a typical practice. The objective was to assess the difference in patient-reported outcomes among patients undergoing decompression alone or decompression plus fusion. METHODS The primary outcome measure was change in 24-month Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in ODI score change and 30% change in ODI score at 24 months were also evaluated. After adjusting for patient-specific and clinical factors, multivariable linear and logistic regressions were employed to evaluate the impact of fusion on outcomes. To account for differences in age, sex, body mass index, and baseline listhesis, a sensitivity analysis was performed using propensity score analysis to match patients undergoing decompression only with those undergoing decompression and fusion. RESULTS In total, 608 patients who had grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis were identified (85.5% with at least 24 months of follow-up); 140 (23.0%) underwent decompression alone and 468 (77.0%) underwent decompression and fusion. The 24-month change in ODI score was significantly greater in the fusion plus decompression group than in the decompression-only group (−25.8 ± 20.0 vs −15.2 ± 19.8, p < 0.001). Fusion remained independently associated with 24-month ODI score change (B = −7.05, 95% CI −10.70 to −3.39, p ≤ 0.001) in multivariable regression analysis, as well as with achieving the MCID for the ODI score (OR 1.767, 95% CI 1.058–2.944, p = 0.029) and 30% change in ODI score (OR 2.371, 95% CI 1.286–4.371, p = 0.005). Propensity score analysis resulted in 94 patients in the decompression-only group matched 1 to 1 with 94 patients in the fusion group. The addition of fusion to decompression remained a significant predictor of 24-month change in the ODI score (B = 2.796, 95% CI 2.228–13.275, p = 0.006) and of achieving the 24-month MCID ODI score (OR 2.898, 95% CI 1.214–6.914, p = 0.016) and 24-month 30% change in ODI score (OR 2.300, 95% CI 1.014–5.216, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that decompression plus fusion in patients with grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis may be associated with superior outcomes at 24 months compared with decompression alone, both in reduction of disability and in achieving clinically meaningful improvement. Longer-term follow-up is warranted to assess whether this effect is sustained.

Introduction: Several clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of a carotid revascularization procedure excluded patients above age 80. In the current study, we sought to assess the differences in characteristics of octogenarians undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) for carotid stenosis using “real-world” data from a national surgical quality registry. Methods: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) targeted datasets for CEA and CAS were queried for patients aged ≥80 years between 2012-2018. Results: We identified 5,814 patients undergoing CEA and 189 patients undergoing CAS. Patients in the CAS group were more likely to be ≥90 years (p=0.004), diabetic (p=0.04), had a history of CHF (p=0.012) and a bleeding-disorder (p<0.001). Patients in the CAS group were also more likely to have high risk anatomy (p<0.001), high-risk-physiology (p=0.028). Ninety-nine (52.4%) patients in the CAS group and 2,775 (47.7%) in the CEA group were symptomatic, with most patients in both groups presenting with an ipsilateral stroke. Among asymptomatic patients, 64 (74%) in the CAS group and 2222 (72.7%) in the CEA group had severe/total stenosis (>80%-100%) of the ipsilateral carotid, while 13(14.5%) in the CAS group and 302 (11%) in the CEA group had severe or total stenosis of contralateral carotid. Among symptomatic patients, 58(61.7%) in the CAS group and 1527 (57.5%) in the CEA group were found to have severe/total stenosis of the ipsilateral-carotid, while 12(12.8%) in the CAS group and 208(7.8%) in the CEA group were found to have severe/total occlusion of the contralateral carotid. In the carotid endarterectomy group, 12.2% (n=711) underwent CEA-alone, 44.3% (n=2,575) CEA with angioplasty, 29.9% (n=1,737) CEA with angioplasty and shunt, 2.9% (n=166) CEA with shunt and 10.7%(n=166) eversion CEA. In the CAS group, 52.4%(n=99) underwent CAS with a single tapered stent, 29.1%(n=55) CAS with single tapered stent with CPD, 11.1%(n=21) single straight stent with CPD and 1.6%(n=3) a single straight stent alone. Conclusion: These analyses from real-world data show that there may be some differences in demographic and comorbid characteristics between octogenarians undergoing CAS and CEA.