Why and how should we measure outcomes in spine surgery?

Pain outcome of non-instrumented lumbar decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease using patient-reported pain outcome instruments

Objectives

A clinical disorder known as degenerative lumbar spine disease (DLSD) is characterized by persistent low back pain (LBP) coupled with radiculopathy and other signs of neurologic impairment. Using patient-reported pain outcome assessment tools, this study evaluated the pain outcome of non-instrumented lumbar decompressive surgery for DLSD.

Materials and Methods

A prospective longitudinal research was conducted. Using the metric visual analog scale (VAS) score and the Oswestry disability index (ODI), consenting patients who underwent non-instrumented lumbar decompressive surgery for symptomatic DLSD were evaluated for radicular pain and LBP. The evaluation was conducted both immediately before surgery and 6 months after surgery. Data generated by comparing the pre-operative and post-operative VAS and ODI scores were then analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Results

Sixty-seven patients in total completed the study. Thirty-six (54%) males and 31 (46%) females, with a mean age and body mass index of 55.28 years and 29.5 k/m2, respectively. At 6 months postoperatively, there was significant pain reduction from the pre-operative baseline VAS for LBP (67.12-32.74) with P < 0.001, VAS for radicular pain (75.39-32.75) with P < 0.001, and ODI (65.30-27.66) with P < 0.001. There was a greater decrease in radicular pain than in LBP following lumbar decompressive only surgery (P = 0.03).

Conclusion

Patients with symptomatic DLSD and high pre-operative back pain scores without considerable listhesis should anticipate a significant reduction in radicular and back pain intensity, as well as pain-related functional disability, 6 months after non-instrumented lumbar decompressive surgery.

Does Laterality Matter? The Effect of Unilateral v. Bilateral Sacroiliac Screw Fixation on Personal Hygiene

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative analysis of prospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether sacroiliac (SI) screw fixation ipsilateral to hand dominance compared to bilateral fixation impacts personal hygiene (wiping) after toileting.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with long arthrodesis (≥T12-pelvis) who had undergone primary unilateral or bilateral SI fixation with a minimum of 2-years-follow-up.

RESULTS

117 consecutive patients were included and separated into 2 groups: bilateral SI fixation (BL, n = 61) and unilateral SI fixation (UNI, n = 56), with no difference in age. Of UNI patients, 10.7% (6) performed personal hygiene with a different hand after surgery, compared to 6.6% (4) of patients who received BL fixation (P = 0.422). All UNI patients who switched hands were right-hand dominant, and 5/6 received right-sided fixation. There was no statistical difference found between number of levels fused (<8, 9-11, or >11 levels) and changes in personal hygiene habits. Over a third of patients from both groups had difficulty performing personal hygiene after fusion (UNI = 39.3% BL = 36.1%, P = 0.719).

CONCLUSION

SI screws increase the difficulty of performing personal hygiene; yet, the side of unilateral screws does not significantly change personal hygiene habits when compared to bilateral screw placement. Moreover, the length of the construct does not have a significant impact on ability to perform personal hygiene, cause changes in habits, or require the assistance of another individual. However, among our sample of individuals, bilateral fixation did result in a higher rate of revision instrumentation.