Citations

Abstract Rationale Pulmonary artery (PA) dilation on computed tomography (CT) has been associated with moderate-to-severe ­pulmonary hypertension (PH) using outdated diagnostic criteria. The association between PA size and mean PA pressure (mPAP) in mild PH and the prognostic implications of PA dilation remain unclear. Objectives To investigate associations between PA size, mPAP, and survival in subjects without significant lung disease aside from PH. Methods PA size on CT was measured for individuals with group 1 or 2 PH and matched controls in the Pulmonary Vascular Disease Phenomics cohort. Outcomes included mPAP on right heart catheterization (RHC) and time to heart and/or lung ­transplantation or death. Measurements and Main Results A total of 691 subjects were included, with 595 undergoing RHC. PA diameter and PA:aorta ratio demonstrated significant association with mPAP (ρ = 0.557 and 0.564, respectively). Size increased incrementally from no PH to mild PH to moderate-severe PH for PA diameter (27.64 [95% CI, 17.64-37.64] mm to 30.65 [95% CI, 18.99-42.31] mm to 36.00 [95% CI, 22.46-49.54] mm) and PA:aorta (0.89 [95% CI, 0.53-1.24] to 0.99 [95% CI, 0.63-1.35] to 1.19 [95% CI, 0.60-1.78]). PA diameter and PA:aorta demonstrated good discrimination of mPAP >20 mm Hg (area under the curve: 0.834 and 0.816, respectively). Transplant-free survival decreased across the continuum of PA diameter and PA:aorta (P <.001). Adjusted hazard ratio of third versus first quartile values was 2.36 (95% CI, 1.58-3.54) for PA diameter and 2.24 (95% CI, 1.52-3.30) for PA:aorta. Conclusions In subjects without significant lung disease outside of PH, PA size on CT was associated with increased mPAP and decreased transplant-free survival across the spectrum of PH severity and demonstrated modest diagnostic discriminatory ability using updated hemodynamic criteria.

Abstract Rationale: Prior studies report association between pulmonary artery (PA) dilation on computed tomography (CT) imaging and pulmonary hypertension (PH). These studies predate expansion of PH hemodynamic diagnostic criteria and do not report patient mortality. As such, little is known about the presence of vascular changes in mild PH or their association with survival. We sought to investigate these relationships in individuals without significant parenchymal lung disease. Methods: We obtained CT images for subjects with group 1 or 2 PH, disease comparators, and healthy controls enrolled in the Pulmonary Vascular Disease Phenomics (PVDOMICS) study. We used Osirix imaging software to measure the main, left, and right PA (MPA, LPA, and RPA) and MPA:aorta (PA:Ao) ratio by diameter and cross-sectional area at locations consistent with prior studies. We evaluated associations with mortality and mean PA pressure (mPAP) using multivariable Cox and linear regression models adjusting for age, sex, and BMI. Descriptive statistics are presented as mean ± SD. Results: We identified 558 subjects (59 controls, 138 comparators, and 361 PH [267 group 1, 94 group 2]). 79 subjects had mPAP < 21 mmHg, 39 had mPAP 21-24 mmHg, and 371 had mPAP ≥ 25 mmHg. Increased MPA, LPA, and RPA diameter and area, PA:Aodia, and PA:Aoarea were associated with decreased survival (all p < 0.001) after multivariable adjustment. First versus third quantiles of all measurements were associated with mortality, with adjusted hazard ratio of 2.99 [95% CI 1.77, 5.05] for MPA diameter (2.84 vs 3.82 cm), 3.74 [2.07, 6.74] for MPA area (7.26 vs 12.74 cm2) and 5.24 [2.58, 10.66] for LPA area (4.55 vs 7.03 cm2). All measures significantly increased alongside PH severity from mPAP < 20 to 21-24 to ≥ 25 mmHg (see figure 1 for MPA diameter). All measures positively correlated with mPAP, including MPA diameter (ρspearman = 0.55) and PA:Aodia (ρ = 0.56). After multivariable adjustment, Q1 to Q3 increments in MPA diameter and PA:Aodia were associated with mPAP increase of 12.5 [10.7, 14.4] and 13.9 [11.9, 15.8] mmHg, respectively. BMI showed no correlation with PA size (ρ = 0.076 for MPA area, -0.051 for PA:Aodia). Conclusions: PA size increases alongside PH severity using updated hemodynamic criteria and is associated with incremental increases in PA pressure and mortality. LPA dilation demonstrates particularly strong association with mortality. PA size does not correlate with BMI. These novel findings enhance our understanding of vascular changes across the PH disease spectrum.

Study Design. Retrospective review. Objective. The aim was to compare outcomes at 3 and 12 months for patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis treated with direct decompression (DD) versus indirect decompression (ID) techniques. Summary of Background Data. Debate persists regarding the optimal surgical strategy to treat lumbar spondylolisthesis. Novel techniques relying on ID have shown superior radiographic outcomes compared to DD, however, doubt remains regarding their effectiveness in achieving adequate decompression. Currently, there is a paucity of data comparing the clinical efficacy of DD to ID. Methods. The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), a national, multicenter prospective spine registry, was queried for patients who underwent DD and ID between April 2013 and January 2019. Propensity scores for each treatment were estimated using logistic regression dependent on baseline covariates potentially associated with outcomes. The propensity scores were used to exclude nonsimilar patients. Multivariable regression analysis was performed with the treatment and covariate as independent variables and outcomes as dependent variables. Results. A total of 4163 patients were included in the DD group and 86 in the ID group. The ID group had significantly lower odds of having a longer hospital stay and for achieving 30% improvement in back and leg pain at 3 months. These trends were not statistically significant at 12 months. There were no differences in ED5D scores or Oswestry disability index 30% improvement scores at 3 or 12 months. ID patient had a significantly higher rate of undergoing a repeat operation at 3 months (4.9% vs. 1.5%, P =0.015). Conclusion. Our study suggests that both DD and ID for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis result in similar clinical outcomes, with the exception that those treated with ID experienced a lower reduction in back and leg pain at 3 months and a higher 3-month reoperation rate. This data can provide surgeons with additional information when counseling patients on the pros and cons of ID versus DD surgery.

Study Design. Retrospective analysis on prospectively collected data. Objective. To determine the effectiveness of elective spine surgery in patients with Parkinson disease (PD). Background Context. PD has become increasingly prevalent in an aging population. While surgical treatment for degenerative spine pathology is often required in this population, previous literature has provided mixed results regarding its effectiveness. Methods. Data from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried between April 2013 and January 2019. Three surgical groups were identified: (1) elective lumbar surgery, (2) elective cervical surgery for myelopathy, (3) elective cervical surgery for radiculopathy. Patients without PD were propensity matched against patients with PD in a 5:1 ratio without replacement based on American Society of Anesthesiology grade, arthrodesis, surgical approach, number of operated levels, age, and baseline Oswestry Disability Index, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) extremity pain, NRS back pain, and EuroQol 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D). The mean difference was calculated for continuous outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index, NRS leg pain, NRS back pain, and EQ-5D at 3 and 12 mo after surgery) and the risk difference was calculated for binary outcomes (patient satisfaction, complications, readmission, reoperation, and mortality). Results. For the lumbar analysis, PD patients had a higher rate of reoperation at 12 months (risk difference=0.057, P=0.015) and lower mean EQ-5D score at 12 months (mean difference=−0.053, P=0.005) when compared with patients without PD. For the cervical myelopathy cohort, PD patients had lower NRS neck pain scores at 3 months (mean difference=−0.829, P=0.005) and lower patient satisfaction at 3 months (risk difference=−0.262, P=0.041) compared with patients without PD. For the cervical radiculopathy cohort, PD patients demonstrated a lower readmission rate at 3 months (risk difference=−0.045, P=0.014) compared with patients without PD. Conclusion. For the matched analysis, in general, patients with and without PD had similar patient-reported outcomes and complication, readmission, and reoperation rates. These results demonstrate that a diagnosis of PD alone should not represent a major contraindication to elective spine surgery.

Study Design: This was an observational study. Objectives: This study aims to determine the correlation between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) pulled from a national spine registry and physician ratings from physician review websites (PRWs). Summary of Background Data: PRWs are frequently utilized by patients to make health care decisions; however, many PRWs appear to incorporate subjective experiences unrelated to a surgeon’s clinical performance into ratings. As such, their utility as a health care decision-making tool remains unclear. Materials and Methods: This study evaluated 8834 patients from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) who underwent 1-level elective lumbar spine surgery. The lumbar module of QOD was queried to rank 124 surgeons using PROs (Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQOL, Numerical Rating Scale—back/leg pain, and patient satisfaction). The QOD PRO-ranking system was compared against PRWs including Healthgrades, Vitals, WebMD, and Google. The Spearman correlation coefficients, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and multiple linear regression models were used for statistical comparison. The primary outcome was the correlation between PRW scores and PROs. Results: Surgeon PRO-derived ranking showed high intercorrelational congruence with coefficients between the 3 PROs (Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQOL, Numerical Rating Scale back/leg) ranging between 0.70 and 0.88. Low correlations were observed between PRO-derived rankings and PRWs, ranging from 0.23 to 0.37. Healthgrades performed most similarly to PRO-derived rankings, correlating best with patient satisfaction, though the correlation was low (ρ=0.37). Conclusions: While PRWs are often used to evaluate surgeon competency, these results demonstrate they poorly correlate with a surgeon’s clinical ability measured by PROs. PRWs should be used with caution when making health care decisions by patients, payers, and administrators. Level of Evidence: Level III.

Background: DPP4 (dipeptidyl peptidase-4) inhibitors comprise a class of oral diabetes medication that have the potential for off-target cardiovascular effects. We previously showed that DPP4 inhibition attenuates the hypotensive effect of acute ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibition and increases norepinephrine. Here, we investigated the effects of DPP4 during sustained ACE inhibition compared with during therapy with an ARB (angiotensin receptor blocker) or calcium channel blocker (neutral comparator) in a randomized, double-blinded crossover study. Methods: We enrolled 106 adults with type 2 diabetes and hypertension and 100 received intervention. Subjects were randomized to one of 3 blood pressure arms: ramipril, valsartan, or amlodipine for a total of 15 weeks and received 3 one-week crossover therapies in random order: placebo + placebo, sitagliptin + placebo, and sitagliptin + aprepitant separated by 4-week washout. Results: We found that DPP4 inhibition increased norepinephrine during ramipril but did not increase blood pressure. Aprepitant, a NK1 (substance P) receptor blocker, lowered standing heart rate during renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade with ramipril or valsartan. Conclusions: Increased catecholamines during concurrent ACE and DPP4 inhibition may contribute to cardiovascular complications in patients predisposed to heart failure.

Study Design. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data. Objective. To develop and validate prediction models for 12-month patient-reported outcomes of disability, pain, and myelopathy in patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery. Summary of Background Data. Predictive models have the potential to be utilized preoperatively to set expectations, adjust modifiable characteristics, and provide a patient-centered model of care. Methods. This study was conducted using data from the cervical module of the Quality Outcomes Database. The outcomes of interest were disability (Neck Disability Index:), pain (Numeric Rating Scale), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for myelopathy. Multivariable proportional odds ordinal regression models were developed for patients with cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Patient demographic, clinical, and surgical covariates as well as baseline patient-reported outcomes scores were included in all models. The models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling to estimate the likely performance on a new sample of patients. Results. Four thousand nine hundred eighty-eight patients underwent surgery for radiculopathy and 2641 patients for myelopathy. The most important predictor of poor postoperative outcomes at 12-months was the baseline Neck Disability Index score for patients with radiculopathy and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for patients with myelopathy. In addition, symptom duration, workers’ compensation, age, employment, and ambulatory and smoking status had a statistically significant impact on all outcomes (P < 0.001). Clinical and surgical variables contributed very little to predictive models, with posterior approach being associated with higher odds of having worse 12-month outcome scores in both the radiculopathy and myelopathy cohorts (P < 0.001). The full models overall discriminative performance ranged from 0.654 to 0.725. Conclusions. These predictive models provide individualized risk-adjusted estimates of 12-month disability, pain, and myelopathy outcomes for patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative cervical disease. Predictive models have the potential to be used as a shared decision-making tool for evidence-based preoperative counselling. Level of Evidence: 2.

OBJECTIVE Patient satisfaction with treatment outcome is gaining an increasingly important role in assessing the value of surgical spine care delivery. Nationwide data evaluating the predictors of patient satisfaction in elective cervical spine surgery are lacking. The authors sought to decipher the impacts of the patient, surgical practice, and surgeon on satisfaction with outcome following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS The authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database for patients undergoing 1- to 2-level ACDF for degenerative spine disease since 2013. Patient satisfaction with the surgical outcome as measured by the North American Spine Society (NASS) scale comprised the primary outcome. A multivariable proportional odds logistic regression model was constructed with adjustments for baseline patient characteristics and surgical practice and surgeon characteristics as fixed effects. RESULTS A total of 4148 patients (median age 54 years, 48% males) with complete 12-month NASS satisfaction data were analyzed. Sixty-seven percent of patients answered that “surgery met their expectations” (n = 2803), while 20% reported that they “did not improve as much as they had hoped but they would undergo the same operation for the same results” (n = 836). After adjusting for a multitude of patient-specific as well as hospital- and surgeon-related factors, the authors found baseline Neck Disability Index (NDI) score, US geographic region of hospital, patient race, insurance status, symptom duration, and Workers’ compensation status to be the most important predictors of patient satisfaction. The discriminative ability of the model was satisfactory (c-index 0.66, overfitting-corrected estimate 0.64). CONCLUSIONS The authors’ results found baseline NDI score, patient race, insurance status, symptom duration, and Workers’ compensation status as well as the geographic region of the hospital to be the most important predictors of long-term patient satisfaction after a 1- to 2-level ACDF. The findings of the present analysis further reinforce the role of preoperative discussion with patients on setting treatment goals and realistic expectations.

Abstract Context Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors may increase the risk of heart failure. Decreased degradation of vasoactive peptides like substance P [also degraded by angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)] and Y1 agonists peptide YY (PYY 1-36) and neuropeptide Y (NPY 1-36) could contribute. Objective This study tested the hypothesis that there is an interactive effect of DPP4 inhibition and ACE inhibition (vs antihypertensive control subjects) on vasoactive peptides after a mixed meal. Participants and Design Fifty-three patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension were randomized to double-blind treatment with ramipril, valsartan, or amlodipine for 15 weeks in parallel groups. During the 5th, 10th, and 15th weeks, participants also received placebo + placebo, sitagliptin 100 mg/d + placebo, and sitagliptin + aprepitant 80 mg/d in random order. On the last day of each crossover treatment, participants underwent a mixed-meal study. Results Sitagliptin increased postprandial glucagon-like peptide-1 and decreased glucose in all antihypertensive groups. Sitagliptin increased NPY 1-36 and decreased Y2 agonists NPY 3-36 and PYY 3-36 in all groups. During ramipril or valsartan, but not amlodipine, sitagliptin increased postprandial norepinephrine; substance P receptor blockade with aprepitant prevented this effect. Despite increased norepinephrine, sitagliptin decreased postprandial blood pressure during ACE inhibition. Conclusion DPP4 inhibition increases postprandial concentrations of the Y1 agonist NPY 1-36. During treatment with an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, DPP4 inhibition increased postprandial norepinephrine through a substance P receptor–dependent mechanism. Increased NPY 1-36 and norepinephrine could increase risk of heart failure but did not result in higher postprandial blood pressure.