Recovery Kinetics: Comparison of Patients Undergoing Primary or Revision Procedures for Adult Cervical Deformity Using a Novel Area Under the Curve Methodology.
Date
2019-07
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Repository Usage Stats
views
downloads
Citation Stats
Attention Stats
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Limited data are available to objectively define what constitutes a "good" versus a "bad" recovery for operative cervical deformity (CD) patients. Furthermore, the recovery patterns of primary versus revision procedures for CD is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE:To define and compare the recovery profiles of CD patients undergoing primary or revision procedures, utilizing a novel area-under-the-curve normalization methodology. METHODS:CD patients undergoing primary or revision surgery with baseline to 1-yr health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores were included. Clinical symptoms and HRQL were compared among groups (primary/revision). Normalized HRQL scores at baseline and follow-up intervals (3M, 6M, 1Y) were generated. Normalized HRQLs were plotted and area under the curve was calculated, generating one number describing overall recovery (Integrated Health State). Subanalysis identified recovery patterns through 2-yr follow-up. RESULTS:Eighty-three patients were included (45 primary, 38 revision). Age (61.3 vs 61.9), gender (F: 66.7% vs 63.2%), body mass index (27.7 vs 29.3), Charlson Comorbidity Index, frailty, and osteoporosis (20% vs 13.2%) were similar between groups (P > .05). Primary patients were more preoperatively neurologically symptomatic (55.6% vs 31.6%), less sagittally malaligned (cervical sagittal vertical axis [cSVA]: 32.6 vs 46.6; T1 slope: 28.8 vs 36.8), underwent more anterior-only approaches (28.9% vs 7.9%), and less posterior-only approaches (37.8% vs 60.5%), all P < .05. Combined approaches, decompressions, osteotomies, and construct length were similar between groups (P > .05). Revisions had longer op-times (438.0 vs 734.4 min, P = .008). Following surgery, complication rate was similar between groups (66.6% vs 65.8%, P = .569). Revision patients remained more malaligned (cSVA, TS-CL; P < .05) than primary patients until 1-yr follow-up (P > .05). Normalized HRQLs determined primary patients to exhibit less neck pain (numeric rating scale [NRS]) and myelopathy (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association) symptoms through 1-yr follow-up compared to revision patients (P < .05). These differences subsided when following patients through 2 yr (P > .05). Despite similar 2-yr HRQL outcomes, revision patients exhibited worse neck pain (NRS) Integrated Health State recovery (P < .05). CONCLUSION:Despite both primary and revision patients exhibiting similar HRQL outcomes at final follow-up, revision patients were in a greater state of postoperative neck pain for a greater amount of time.
Type
Department
Description
Provenance
Subjects
Citation
Permalink
Published Version (Please cite this version)
Publication Info
Segreto, Frank A, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Justin S Smith, Breton G Line, Robert K Eastlack, Justin K Scheer, Dean Chou, et al. (2019). Recovery Kinetics: Comparison of Patients Undergoing Primary or Revision Procedures for Adult Cervical Deformity Using a Novel Area Under the Curve Methodology. Neurosurgery, 85(1). pp. E40–E51. 10.1093/neuros/nyy435 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/19124.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
Scholars@Duke
Christopher Ignatius Shaffrey
I have more than 25 years of experience treating patients of all ages with spinal disorders. I have had an interest in the management of spinal disorders since starting my medical education. I performed residencies in both orthopaedic surgery and neurosurgery to gain a comprehensive understanding of the entire range of spinal disorders. My goal has been to find innovative ways to manage the range of spinal conditions, straightforward to complex. I have a focus on managing patients with complex spinal disorders. My patient evaluation and management philosophy is to provide engaged, compassionate care that focuses on providing the simplest and least aggressive treatment option for a particular condition. In many cases, non-operative treatment options exist to improve a patient’s symptoms. I have been actively engaged in clinical research to find the best ways to manage spinal disorders in order to achieve better results with fewer complications.
Peter Passias
Throughout my medical career, I have remained dedicated to improving my patients' quality of life. As a specialist in adult cervical and spinal deformity surgery, I understand the significant impact our interventions have on individuals suffering from debilitating pain and physical and mental health challenges. Spinal deformity surgery merges the complexities of spinal biomechanics with the needs of an aging population. My research focuses on spinal alignment, biomechanics, innovative surgical techniques, and health economics to ensure value-based care that enhances patient outcomes.
Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.