An economic evaluation of perioperative adverse events associated with spinal surgery

Do TLIF and PLIF Techniques Differ in Perioperative Complications? - Comparison of Complications Rates of Two High Volume Centers

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective bicentric Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE

Posterior (PLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) have been clinically proven for the surgical treatment of degenerative spinal disorders. Despite many retrospective studies, the superiority of either technique has not been proven to date. In the literature, the complication rate of the conventional PLIF technique is reported to be significantly higher, but with inconsistent complication recording. In this retrospective bicentric study, a less invasive PLIF technique was compared with the conventional TLIF technique and complications were recorded using the validated SAVES V2 classification system.

METHODS

1142 patients underwent PLIF (702) or TLIF (n = 440) up to 3 levels in two specialized centers. Epidemiological data, intra- and postoperative complications during hospitalization and after discharge were analyzed according to SAVES V2.

RESULTS

The overall complication rate was 13.74%. TLIF-patients had slightly significant more complications than PLIF-patients (TLIF = 16.6%/PLIF = 11.9%, P = .0338). Accordingly, complications during revision surgeries were more frequent in the first cohort (TLIF = 20.9%/PLIF = 12.6%; P = .03252). In primary interventions, the surgical technique did not correlate with the complication rate (TLIF = 12.4%/PLIF = 11.7%). There were no significant differences regarding severity of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

An important component of this work is the complication recording according to a uniform classification system (SAVES V2). In contrast to previous literature, we could demonstrate that there is not a significant difference between the two surgical techniques.

Mitigating Medical Adverse Events Following Spinal Surgery: The Effectiveness of a Postoperative Quality Improvement (QI) Care Bundle

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Spine surgery is associated with a high incidence of postoperative medical adverse events (AEs). Many of these events are considered "minor" though their cost and effect on outcome may be underestimated. We sought to examine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a postoperative quality improvement (QI) care bundle in mitigating postoperative medical AEs in adult surgical spine patients.

METHODS

We collected 14-year prospective observational interrupted time series (ITS) with two historical cohorts: 2006 to 2008, pre-implementation of the postoperative QI care bundle; and 2009 to 2019, post-implementation of the postoperative QI care bundle. Adverse Events were identified and graded (Minor I and II) using the previously validated Spine AdVerse Events Severity (SAVES) system. Pearson Correlation tested for changes across patient and surgical variables. Adjusted segmented regression estimated the effect of the postoperative QI care bundle on the annual and absolute incidences of medical AEs between the two periods. A cost model estimated the annual cumulative cost savings through preventing these "minor" medical AEs.

RESULTS

We included 13,493 patients over the study period with a mean of 964 per year (SD ± 73). Mean age, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and mean spine surgical invasiveness index (SSII) increased from 48.4 to 58.1 years; 1.7 to 2.6; and 15.4 to 20.5, respectively (p < 0.001). Unadjusted analysis confirmed a significant decrease in the annual number of all medical AEs (p < 0.01). When adjusting for age, CCI and SSII, segmented regression demonstrated a significant absolute reduction in the annual incidence of cardiac, pulmonary, nausea and medication-related AEs by 9.58%, 7.82%, 11.25% and 15.01%, respectively (p < 0.01). The postoperative QI care bundle was not associated with reducing the annual incidence of delirium, electrolyte levels or GI AEs. Annual projected cost savings for preventing Grade I and II medical AEs were $1,808,300 CAD and $11,961,500 CAD.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative QI care bundles are effective for improving patient care and preventing medical care-related AEs, with significant cost savings. Postoperative QI care bundles should be tailored to the specific vulnerability of the surgical population for experiencing AEs.

Association between postoperative complications and hospital length of stay: a large-scale observational study of 4,495,582 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) registry

BACKGROUND

Precise estimates of risk-adjusted increases in postoperative length of stay (LOS) associated with postoperative complications across a range of complications and operations are not available in the existing literature.

METHODS

Associations between preoperative characteristics, postoperative complications and postoperative LOS were tested using medians, interquartile ranges, and nonparametric rank sum tests in a retrospective cohort study using the 2005-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) dataset. A negative binomial model was used with postoperative LOS as the dependent variable and preoperative characteristics and postoperative complications as independent variables. The model was applied to estimate each patient's postoperative LOS with and without each postoperative complication to measure the association between each complication and risk-adjusted change in postoperative LOS.

RESULTS

A total of 4,495,582 patients were included. After risk-adjustment, occurrence of each postoperative complication was associated with significantly increased postoperative LOS (between + 3.9 and + 20.1 days, p < 0.0001). The longest risk-adjusted postoperative LOS increases were associated with prolonged ventilator use (+ 20.1 days), wound disruption (+ 19.4 days), and acute renal failure (+ 17.1 days).

CONCLUSION

Occurrence of any postoperative complication was associated with increased risk-adjusted postoperative LOS. Degree of increase varied by complication. These data could be useful for patient counseling, allocation of resources, discharge planning, and quality improvement efforts.

Safety and benefit of ambulation within 24 hours in elderly patients undergoing lumbar fusion: propensity score matching study of 882 patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Elderly patients are less likely to recover from lumbar spine fusion (LSF) as rapidly compared with younger patients. However, there is still a lack of research on the effect of early ambulation on elderly patients undergoing LSF surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and benefit of ambulation within 24 hours in elderly patients who underwent LSF.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Consecutive patients (aged 65 and older) who underwent elective transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery for degenerative disorders from January 2019 to October 2022.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures included postoperative complications, postoperative drainage (mL), laboratory test data, length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission and reoperation within 3 months.

METHODS

Early ambulation patients (ambulation within 24 hours after surgery) were propensity-score matched 1:1 to a delayed ambulation patients (ambulation at a minimum of 48 hours postoperatively) based on age, intraoperative blood loss, and number of fused segments. The incidence of postoperative adverse events (AEs, including rates of complications, readmission, and prolonged LOS) and the average LOS were used to assess the safety and benefit of early ambulation, respectively. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to assess the association between early ambulation and postoperative AEs. The risk factors for delayed ambulation were also determined using multivariable logistic analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 998 patients with LSF surgery were reviewed in this study. After excluding 116 patients for various reasons, 882 patients (<24 hours: N=350, 24-48 hours: N=230, and >48 hours: N= 302) were included in the final analysis. After matching, sex, BMI, preoperative comorbidities, laboratory test data and surgery-related variables were comparable between the groups. The incidence of postoperative AEs was significantly lower in the EA group (44.3% vs 64.0%, p<.001). The average postoperative LOS of the EA group was 2 days shorter than the DA group (6.5 days vs 8.5 days, p<.001). Patients in the EA group had a significantly lower rate of prolonged LOS compared with the DA group (35.1% vs 55.3%, p<.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative drainage volumes between the two groups. Multivariable analysis identified older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.07, p<.001), increased intraoperative EBL (OR 1.002, p=.001), and higher international normalization ratio (OR 10.57, p=.032) as significant independent risk factors for delayed ambulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulation within 24 hours after LSF surgery is independently associated fewer AEs and shorter hospital stays in elderly patients. Implementing the goal of ambulation within 24 hours after LSF surgery into enhanced recovery after surgery protocols for elderly patients seems appropriate. Older age, increased intraoperative blood loss and worse coagulation function are associated with delayed ambulation.

Lumbar Laminotomy: Variables Affecting 90-day Overall Reimbursement

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar laminotomy/diskectomy is a common procedure performed to address radiculopathy that persists despite conservative treatment. Understanding cost/reimbursement variability and its drivers has the potential to help optimize related healthcare delivery. The goal of this study was to assess variability and factors associated with reimbursement through 90 days after single-level lumbar laminotomy/diskectomy.

METHODS

Lumbar laminotomies/diskectomies were isolated from the 2010 to 2021 PearlDiver M151 data set. Exclusion criteria included patients younger than 18 years; other concomitant spinal procedures; and indications of trauma, oncologic, or infectious diagnoses. Patient, surgical, and perioperative data were abstracted. These variables were examined using a multivariable linear regression model with Bonferroni correction to determine factors independently correlated with reimbursement.

RESULTS

A total of 28,621 laminotomies/diskectomies were identified. The average ± standard deviation 90-day postoperative reimbursement was $9,453.83 ± 19,343.99 and, with a non-normal distribution, the median (inner quartile range) was $3,314 ($5,460). By multivariable linear regression, variables associated with greatest increase in 90-day postoperative reimbursement were associated with admission (with the index procedure [+$11,757.31] or readmission [+$31,248.80]), followed by insurance type (relative to Medicare, commercial +$4,183.79), postoperative adverse events (+$2,006.60), and postoperative emergency department visits (+$1,686.89) ( P < 0.0001 for each). Lesser associations were with Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (+$286.67 for each point increase) and age (-$24.65 with each year increase) ( P < 0.001 and P = 0.003, respectively).

DISCUSSION

This study assessed a large cohort of lumbar laminotomies/diskectomies and found substantial variations in reimbursement/cost to the healthcare system. The largest increase in reimbursement was associated with admission (with the index procedure or readmission), followed by insurance type, postoperative adverse events, and postoperative emergency department visits. These results highlight the need to balance inpatient versus outpatient surgeries while limiting postoperative readmissions to minimize the costs associated with healthcare delivery.

Hospital spending and length of stay attributable to perioperative adverse events for inpatient hip, knee, and spine surgery: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The incremental hospital cost and length of stay (LOS) associated with adverse events (AEs) has not been well characterized for planned and unplanned inpatient spine, hip, and knee surgeries.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of hip, knee, and spine surgeries at an academic hospital in 2011-2012. Adverse events were prospectively collected for 3,063 inpatient cases using the Orthopaedic Surgical AdVerse Event Severity (OrthoSAVES) reporting tool. Case costs were retrospectively obtained and inflated to equivalent 2021 CAD values. Propensity score methodology was used to assess the cost and LOS attributable to AEs, controlling for a variety of patient and procedure factors.

RESULTS

The sample was 55% female and average age was 64; 79% of admissions were planned. 30% of cases had one or more AEs (82% had low-severity AEs at worst). The incremental cost and LOS attributable to AEs were $8,500 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5100-11,800) and 4.7 days (95% CI: 3.4-5.9) per admission. This corresponded to a cumulative $7.8 M (14% of total cohort cost) and 4,290 bed-days (19% of cohort bed-days) attributable to AEs. Incremental estimates varied substantially by (1) admission type (planned: $4,700/2.4 days; unplanned: $20,700/11.5 days), (2) AE severity (low: $4,000/3.1 days; high: $29,500/11.9 days), and (3) anatomical region (spine: $19,800/9 days; hip: $4,900/3.8 days; knee: $1,900/1.5 days). Despite only 21% of admissions being unplanned, adverse events in these admissions cumulatively accounted for 59% of costs and 62% of bed-days attributable to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study comprehensively demonstrates the considerable cost and LOS attributable to AEs in orthopaedic and spine admissions. In particular, the incremental cost and LOS attributable to AEs per admission were almost five times as high among unplanned admissions compared to planned admissions. Mitigation strategies focused on unplanned surgeries may result in significant quality improvement and cost savings in the healthcare system.

A Comparison of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Accuracy Between Robotic Navigation and Novel Fluoroscopy-Based Instrument Tracking for Patients Undergoing Instrumented Thoracolumbar Surgery

BACKGROUND

The accuracy of pedicle screws placed with instrument tracking and robotic navigation are individually comparable or superior to placement using standard fluoroscopy, however head-to-head comparisons between these adjuncts in a similar surgical population have yet to be performed.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous thoracic and lumbosacral spinal instrumentation were retrospectively enrolled. Instrumentation was performed using either fluoroscopy-based instrument tracking system (TrackX, TrackX Technologies) or robotic-navigation (ExcelsiusGPS, Globus Medical). Postinstrumentation computed tomography scans were graded for breach according to the Gertzbein-Robbins scale, with "acceptable" screws deemed as Grade A or B and "unacceptable" screws deemed as Grades C through E. Accuracy data was compared between both instrumentation modalities.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients, comprising a total of 250 screws (167 robot, 83 instrument tracking) were included. The overall accuracy between both modalities was similar, with 96.4% and 97.6% of screws with acceptable accuracy between instrument tracking and robotic navigation, respectively (I-squared 0.30, df = 1, P = 0.58). Between instrument tracking and robotic navigation, 92.8% and 95.8% of screws received Grade A, 3.6% and 1.8% a Grade B, 1.2% and 1.2% a Grade C, 1.2% and 0.6% a Grade D, and 1.2% and 0.6% a Grade E, respectively. The robot was abandoned intraoperatively in 2 cases due to unrecoverable registration inaccuracy or software failure, leading to abandonment of 8 potential screws (4.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a similar patient population, there is a similarly high degree of instrumentation accuracy between fluoroscopy-based instrument tracking and robotic navigation. There is a rare chance for screw breach with either surgical adjunct.

Rates, Predictive Factors, and Adverse Outcomes of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Disorders in Ontario, Canada, Between 2006 and 2015: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The addition of fusion surgery to the decompression for lumbar degenerative disorders remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the rate and outcome of decompression and fusion versus decompression alone.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cohort study used several linked administrative databases to identify patients who underwent spinal decompression surgery in Ontario, Canada, from 2006 to 2015. Patients who had previous spine surgery, concurrent lumbar disc replacement, or a diagnosis other than degenerative disc disease were excluded. Adjusted logistic regression was used to assess our outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 33,912 patients, of whom 9748 (28.74%) underwent fusion. Overall, fusion rates increased from 27.66% to 31.33% over the study period (P = 0.025). Factors associated with fusion included: older age, female sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3, previous total joint replacement, and surgery by an orthopedic surgeon. Fusion surgery was associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-3.09; P = 0.046), 30-day (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.53-2.46; P < 0.0001) and 90-day reoperation (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.35-2.05; P < 0.0001), and 30-day readmission (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.49; P = 0.027) when adjusting for confounding variables. The odds of suffering a complication after fusion and decompression surgery vs. decompression surgery alone were 4.3-fold greater (95% CI 3.78-5.09; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared with decompression alone, spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar disorders is associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes. These findings highlight the need for spine surgeons to consider carefully their indications for fusion procedures in the setting of degenerative spinal disorders.

National adverse event profile after lumbar spine surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders and comparison of complication rates between hospitals: a CSORN registry study

OBJECTIVE

Previous works investigating rates of adverse events (AEs) in spine surgery have been retrospective, with data collection from administrative databases, and often from single centers. To date, there have been no prospective reports capturing AEs in spine surgery on a national level, with comparison among centers.

METHODS

The Spine Adverse Events Severity system was used to define the incidence and severity of AEs after spine surgery by using data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective registry. Patient data were collected prospectively and during hospital admission for those undergoing elective spine surgery for degenerative conditions. The Spine Adverse Events Severity system defined minor and major AEs as grades 1-2 and 3-6, respectively.

RESULTS

There were 3533 patients enrolled in this cohort. There were 85 (2.4%) individual patients with at least one major AE and 680 (19.2%) individual patients with at least one minor AE. There were 25 individual patients with 28 major intraoperative AEs and 260 patients with 275 minor intraoperative AEs. Postoperatively there were 61 patients with a total of 80 major AEs. Of the 487 patients with minor AEs postoperatively there were 698 total AEs. The average enrollment was 321 patients (range 47-1237 patients) per site. The rate of major AEs was consistent among sites (mean 2.9% ± 2.4%, range 0%-9.1%). However, the rate of minor AEs varied widely among sites-from 7.9% to 42.5%, with a mean of 18.8% ± 9.7%. The rate of minor AEs varied depending on how they were reported, with surgeon reporting associated with the lowest rates (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of major AEs after lumbar spine surgery is consistent among different sites but the rate of minor AEs appears to vary substantially. The method by which AEs are reported impacts the rate of minor AEs. These data have implications for the detection and reporting of AEs and the design of strategies aimed at mitigating complications.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a review article.

METHODS

Under the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.

The Effect of Perioperative Adverse Events on Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes After Lumbar Spine Surgery

BACKGROUND

Perioperative adverse events (AEs) lead to patient disappointment and greater costs. There is a paucity of data on how AEs affect long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine perioperative AEs and their impact on outcome after lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

A total of 3556 consecutive patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network were analyzed. AEs were defined using the validated Spine AdVerse Events Severity system. Outcomes at 3, 12, and 24 mo postoperatively included the Owestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component Summary scales, visual analog scale (VAS) leg and back, EuroQol-5D (EQ5D), and satisfaction.

RESULTS

AEs occurred in 767 (21.6%) patients, and 85 (2.4%) patients suffered major AEs. Patients with major AEs had worse ODI scores and did not reach minimum clinically important differences at 2 yr (no AE: 25.7 ± 19.2, major: 36.4 ± 19.1, P < .001). Major AEs were associated with worse ODI scores on multivariable linear regression (P = .011). PCS scores were lower after major AEs (43.8 ± 9.5, vs 37.7 ± 20.3, P = .002). On VAS leg and back and EQ5D, the 2-yr outcomes were significantly different between the major and no AE groups (<0.01), but these differences were small (VAS leg: 3.4 ± 3.0 vs 4.0 ± 3.3; VAS back: 3.5 ± 2.7 vs 4.5 ± 2.6; EQ5D: 0.75 ± 0.2 vs 0.64 ± 0.2). SF12 MCS scores were not different. Rates of satisfaction were lower after major AEs (no AE: 84.6%, major: 72.3%, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Major AEs after lumbar spine surgery lead to worse functional outcomes and lower satisfaction. This highlights the need to implement strategies aimed at reducing AEs.

Community acquired pressure injuries in a work-related spinal cord injury population: Problem characterization and assessment of a working solution

BACKGROUND

To characterize the problem of community-acquired pressure injuries (CAPIs) in a work-related spinal cord injury (SCI) population in Canada and assess the benefits of a person-centered solution. Characterization of the problem and a solution, albeit in an insured Worker's Compensation Board of British Columbia (WorkSafeBC) cohort, may inform the supply of solutions in the larger SCI population with disparate access to healthcare.

METHODS

For this observational study, data on 244 WorkSafeBC clients, who received an intervention featuring pressure injury (PI) assessment between 2011 and 2015, were used to characterize the problem. Data on observed injuries, risk, referrals, and outcomes were linked to healthcare service claims. Employing an activity-based costing methodology, total expenditures on attributed services were calculated for clients with 1 or more PIs. Intervention cost and benefits from the insurer's perspective are considered.

RESULTS

84 of 244 clients had 1 or more PIs at assessment, with attributed mean cost of $56,092 in 2015 Canadian dollars (CAD). Mean cost by PI severity range from $9580 to $238,736. At an intervention cost of $820,618, detection of less severe injuries provided an opportunity to prevent progression and achieve $3 million in cost avoidance. Follow-up data suggest reasonable returns. Reductions in the incidence, number, and risk of pressure injuries were also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis establishes the cost of CAPIs in a Canadian-based work-related SCI population and suggests preventative and early intervention is not only feasible but also practical. Results are relevant to decisions regarding the use of proactive prevention-based treatment models as opposed to reactive, solutions in the larger SCI population.

Ambulation on Postoperative Day #0 Is Associated With Decreased Morbidity and Adverse Events After Elective Lumbar Spine Surgery: Analysis From the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC)

BACKGROUND

While consistently recommended, the significance of early ambulation after surgery has not been definitively studied.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the relationship between ambulation on the day of surgery (postoperative day (POD)#0) and 90-d adverse events after lumbar surgery.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC) is a prospective multicenter registry of spine surgery patients. As part of routine postoperative care, patients either ambulated on POD#0 or did not. The 90-d adverse events of length of stay (LOS), urinary retention (UR), urinary tract infection (UTI), ileus, readmission, surgical site infection (SSI), pulmonary embolism/deep vein thrombosis (PE/DVT), and disposition to a rehab facility were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 23 295 lumbar surgery patients were analyzed. POD#0 ambulation was associated with decreased LOS (relative LOS 0.83, P &lt; .001), rehab discharge (odds ratio [OR] 0.52, P &lt; .001), 30-d (OR 0.85, P = .044) and 90-d (OR 0.86, P = .014) readmission, UR (OR 0.73, P = 10), UTI (OR 73, P = .001), and ileus (OR 0.52, P &lt; .001) for all patients. Significant improvements in LOS, rehab discharge, readmission, UR, UTI, and ileus were observed in subset analysis of single-level decompressions (4698 pts), multilevel decompressions (4079 pts), single-level fusions (4846 pts), and multilevel fusions (4413 pts). No change in rate of SSI or DVT/PE was observed for patients who ambulated POD#0.

CONCLUSION

POD#0 ambulation is associated with a significantly decreased risk for several key adverse events after lumbar spine surgery. Decreasing the incidence of these outcomes would be associated with significant cost savings. As ambulation POD#0 is a modifiable factor in any patient's postoperative care following most spine surgery, it should be encouraged and incorporated into spine-related, enhanced-recovery-after-surgery programs.

Impact of Inpatient Harms on Hospital Finances and Patient Clinical Outcomes

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of all-cause inpatient harms on hospital finances and patient clinical outcomes.

Research Design

A retrospective analysis of inpatient harm from 24 hospitals in a large multistate health system was conducted during 2009 to 2012 using the Institute of Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool for Measuring Adverse Events. Inpatient harms were detected and categorized into harm (F–I), temporary harm (E), and no harm.

Results

Of the 21,007 inpatients in this study, 15,610 (74.3%) experienced no harm, 2818 (13.4%) experienced temporary harm, and 2579 (12.3%) experienced harm. A patient with harm was estimated to have higher total cost ($4617 [95% confidence interval (CI), $4364 to 4871]), higher variable cost ($1774 [95% CI, $1648 to $1900]), lower contribution margin (−$1112 [95% CI, −$1378 to −$847]), longer length of stay (2.6 d [95% CI, 2.5 to 2.8]), higher mortality probability (59%; odds ratio, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.0 to 2.0]), and higher 30-day readmission probability (74.4%; odds ratio, 2.9 [95% CI, 2.6 to 3.2]). A patient with temporary harm was estimated to have higher total cost ($2187 [95% CI, $2008 to $2366]), higher variable cost ($800 [95% CI, $709 to $892]), lower contribution margin (−$669 [95% CI, −$891 to −$446]), longer length of stay (1.3 d [95% CI, 1.2 to 1.4]), mortality probability not statistically different, and higher 30-day readmission probability (54.6%; odds ratio, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.1 to 1.4]). Total health system reduction of harm was associated with a decrease of $108 million in total cost, $48 million in variable cost, an increase of contribution margin by $18 million, and savings of 60,000 inpatient care days.

Conclusions

This all-cause harm safety study indicates that inpatient harm has negative financial outcomes for hospitals and negative clinical outcomes for patients.

The cost effectiveness of minimally invasive spine surgery in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis: a comparison of transpsoas and open techniques

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatment improves quality of life in patients with adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). However, open ADS surgeries are complex, large magnitude operations associated with a high rate of complications. The lateral transpsoas interbody fusion technique is a less invasive alternative to open ADS surgery, but less invasive techniques tend to be more expensive. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the transpsoas technique for patients with ADS over a 12-month time horizon from a public payer perspective.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed based on a consecutive case series of patients who underwent ADS surgeries between 2006 and 2012. Effectiveness was expressed as the difference in patient reported preoperative and 12-month postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL), which was measured in quality-adjusted life years. Health-care resource use was tabulated based on a clinical chart review on an item-by-item basis. Unit cost data were obtained from published provincial costs in Alberta, Canada. All costs were adjusted to 2015 Canadian dollars. The base case analysis included costs for the surgery, initial hospitalization, and treatment for complications over a 12-month follow-up period. The uncomplicated case analysis included costs for the surgery and initial hospitalization only. The joint uncertainty surrounding the cost and HRQOL differences was estimated using bootstrapping with 10,000 replicates.

RESULTS

A total of 10 open technique and 12 transpsoas technique T11-pelvis fusions were included in the analysis. In the base case analysis, the transpsoas technique was less costly compared with the open technique, total cost of $83,513 (95% CI: $72,772-$94,253) versus $111,381 (95% CI: $36,340-$186,423), respectively (incremental cost $27,869), and was associated with 0.06 more quality-adjusted life years and/or patient. However, in the uncomplicated case, the open technique was less costly compared with the transpsoas technique ($47,795 [95% CI: $39,003-$56,586] vs $76,510 [95% CI: $72,273-$80,746]), respectively, with an incremental cost of $28,715. Based on the probabilistic analysis of 10,000 bootstrap iterations for the base case analysis, the transpsoas technique was more effective and less costly compared with the open technique 57% of time. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis by adjusting bone-morphogenetic protein-2 dosage further improved cost effectiveness of the transpsoas technique by lowering overall costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Transpsoas surgeries were associated with better outcomes in terms of HRQOL and lower costs over 1-year follow-up period compared with more invasive open technique. This study should be viewed as a pilot evaluation and should be replicated in a larger prospective multicenter controlled study.

The cost of intraoperative adverse events in abdominal and pelvic surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The assessment of intra-operative adverse events (iAEs) is a vastly under researched area with the potential to provide new methods on how to improve patient outcomes and hospital costs. Our objective was to determine the relationship between iAEs and total hospital costs in abdominal and pelvic surgery.

DATA SOURCES

We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework. Embase, MEDLINE and EBM Reviews online databases were searched to identify all studies that reported iAE rates and total hospital costs. We then analyzed the costing approach used in each article using the Drummond tool and evaluated articles quality using the GRADE method.

CONCLUSIONS

In total, 1709 unique references were identified through our literature search. After review, 23 were included. All studies that reported iAE rates and cost as the primary outcome found that iAEs significantly increased total hospital costs. We identified a relationship between iAEs and increased hospital costs. Future studies need to be performed to further evaluate the relationship between iAEs and cost as current studies are of low quality.

Factors Associated with Adverse Events in Inpatient Elective Spine, Knee, and Hip Orthopaedic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedic procedures for degenerative musculoskeletal conditions (predominantly osteoarthritis and spinal stenosis) represent an increasing burden on the health-care system. These procedures are also associated with adverse event rates and related cost. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors for adverse events associated with orthopaedic surgeries as captured within a common clinical point-of-care system for documenting adverse events (Orthopaedic Surgical AdVerse Events Severity [OrthoSAVES] system).

METHODS

In-hospital adverse events were recorded at the point of care over a 2-year period for inpatient elective knee, hip, and spine orthopaedic procedures for degenerative musculoskeletal conditions. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to investigate the association between various factors (age, sex, surgical site, body mass index, surgical risk classification, operative duration, length of stay, and medical comorbidities) and the occurrence of adverse events.

RESULTS

The sample included 2,146 patients. The overall adverse event rate was 27% (571 of 2,146), and by surgical site, the rates were 29% (130 of 442) for spine; 27% (266 of 998) for knee; and 25% (175 of 706) for hip. The most common adverse events had a low severity grade, but spinal procedures demonstrated more adverse events with a severity grade of ≥3. Increasing age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.05 to 1.41, per 15-year interval), male sex (OR = 1.43, 95% CI =1.16 to 1.77), increasing operative duration (OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.23, per 30-minute increase), length of stay (OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.17, per day), and undergoing revision surgery (OR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.35 to 3.70) were independently associated with a greater likelihood of the occurrence of an adverse event. Spine surgery demonstrated decreased odds of an adverse event compared with knee surgery (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.61) when operative duration and length of stay were taken into account.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our adjusted analysis, we found increasing age, male sex, revision surgery, length of stay, and increasing operative duration to be common independent risk factors for an adverse event across the population studied. The first 3 risk factors are not modifiable. The association between increasing operative duration and the risk of an adverse event across all anatomical regions and surgical procedures is a unique finding. However, modification of procedural efficiency is multifactorial and warrants further investigation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Spinal Cord Injury Clinical Registries: Improving Care across the SCI Care Continuum by Identifying Knowledge Gaps

Timely access and ongoing delivery of care and therapeutic interventions is needed to maximize recovery and function after traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI). To ensure these decisions are evidence-based, access to consistent, reliable, and valid sources of clinical data is required. The Access to Care and Timing Model used data from the Rick Hansen SCI Registry (RHSCIR) to generate a simulation of healthcare delivery for persons after tSCI and to test scenarios aimed at improving outcomes and reducing the economic burden of SCI. Through model development, we identified knowledge gaps and challenges in the literature and current health outcomes data collection throughout the continuum of SCI care. The objectives of this article were to describe these gaps and to provide recommendations for bridging them. Accurate information on injury severity after tSCI was hindered by difficulties in conducting neurological assessments and classifications of SCI (e.g., timing), variations in reporting, and the lack of a validated SCI-specific measure of associated injuries. There was also limited availability of reliable data on patient factors such as multi-morbidity and patient-reported measures. Knowledge gaps related to structures (e.g., protocols) and processes (e.g., costs) at each phase of care have prevented comprehensive evaluation of system performance. Addressing these knowledge gaps will enhance comparative and cost-effectiveness evaluations to inform decision-making and standards of care. Recommendations to do so were: standardize data element collection and facilitate database linkages, validate and adopt more outcome measures for SCI, and increase opportunities for collaborations with stakeholders from diverse backgrounds.

A retrospective cohort study of adverse events in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery

Background

This study’s objective was to identify adverse events following common orthopaedic procedures, and to estimate the incidence rates and risks of these events and their associations with age, sex, and comorbidities.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study manually reviewed and extracted electronic medical data on the incidence and predictors of adverse events that occurred within 90 days of the 50 most frequent orthopaedic surgeries at an academic hospital in 2010. We also extracted demographic data, baseline comorbidities, and duration of follow-up (≤90 days). Patients were scored on the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and the Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI). We estimated incidence rates and risks for all events and associations using regression methods. Prolonged pain 42-days post-surgery was treated as a separate outcome.

Results

We included 1,552 patients; average age was 53.4 years, and 51.7% were female. A total of 1,148 adverse events were identified in 729 patients. The incidence rate of all adverse events was 10 events per 1,000 person-days at risk; 47% of all patients experienced at least one adverse event within 90 days. The most frequent events were prolonged pain (31% of all adverse events) and persistent swelling (7%). We found positive associations between both comorbidity scores and the incidence rate and 90-day risk of all adverse events, excluding pain, adjusting for age and sex (neither of which was associated with adverse events); the association was stronger for the FCI than for the CCI. For total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the incidence rate of all adverse events, excluding pain, was positively associated with both comorbidity scores and age; the 90-day risk was positively associate with the FCI score and male sex. The prevalence of prolonged pain at 42 days was greater in patients with higher FCI scores; for THA and TKA only, pain prevalence was greater in those with higher FCI scores and in men.

Conclusions

Adverse events are frequent following common orthopaedic procedures. The incidence is greatest for patients with more functional comorbidities. For THA and TKA procedures, being male and being older are also associated with a greater incidence of adverse events.

Decision analysis to identify the ideal treatment for adult spinal deformity: What is the impact of complications on treatment outcomes?

Objective

The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of treatment complications on outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD) using a decision analysis (DA) model.

Methods

The study included 535 ASD patients (371 with non-surgical (NS) and 164 with surgical (S) treatment) from an international multicentre database of ASD patients. DA was structured in two main steps; 1) Baseline analysis (Assessing the probabilities of outcomes, Assessing the values of preference -utilities-, Combining information on probability and utility and assigning the quality adjusted life expectancy (QALE) for each treatment) and 2) Sensitivity analysis. Complications were analyzed as life threatening (LT) and nonlife threatening (NLT) and their probabilities were calculated from the database as well as a thorough literature review. Outcomes were analyzed as improvement, no change and deterioration. Death/complete paralysis was considered as a separate category.

Results

All 535 patients were analyzed in regard to complications. Overall, there were 78 NLT and 12 LT complications and 3 death/paralysis. Surgical treatment offered significantly higher chances of clinical improvement but also was significantly more prone to complications (31.7% vs. 11.1%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Surgical treatment of ASD is more likely to cause complications compared to NS treatment. On the other hand, surgery has been shown to provide a higher likelihood of improvement in HRQoL scores. So, the decision on the type of treatment in ASD needs to take both chances of improvement and burden associated with S or NS treatments and better be arrived by the active participation of patients and physicians equipped with the present information.

Level of evidence

Level II, Decision analysis.

Can Surgeons Adequately Capture Adverse Events Using the Spinal Adverse Events Severity System (SAVES) and OrthoSAVES?

BACKGROUND

Physicians have consistently shown poor adverse-event reporting practices in the literature and yet they have the clinical acumen to properly stratify and appraise these events. The Spine Adverse Events Severity System (SAVES) and Orthopaedic Surgical Adverse Events Severity System (OrthoSAVES) are standardized assessment tools designed to record adverse events in orthopaedic patients. These tools provide a list of prespecified adverse events for users to choose from-an aid that may improve adverse-event reporting by physicians.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The primary objective was to compare surgeons' adverse-event reporting with reporting by independent clinical reviewers using SAVES Version 2 (SAVES V2) and OrthoSAVES in elective orthopaedic procedures.

METHOD

This was a 10-week prospective study where SAVES V2 and OrthoSAVES were used by six orthopaedic surgeons and two independent, non-MD clinical reviewers to record adverse events after all elective procedures to the point of patient discharge. Neither surgeons nor reviewers received specific training on adverse-event reporting. Surgeons were aware of the ongoing study, and reported adverse events based on their clinical interactions with the patients. Reviewers recorded adverse events by reviewing clinical notes by surgeons and other healthcare professionals (such as nurses and physiotherapists). Adverse events were graded using the severity-grading system included in SAVES V2 and OrthoSAVES. At discharge, adverse events recorded by surgeons and reviewers were recorded in our database.

RESULTS

Adverse-event data for 164 patients were collected (48 patients who had spine surgery, 51 who had hip surgery, 34 who had knee surgery, and 31 who had shoulder surgery). Overall, 99 adverse events were captured by the reviewers, compared with 14 captured by the surgeons (p < 0.001). Surgeons adequately captured major adverse events, but failed to record minor events that were captured by the reviewers. A total of 93 of 99 (94%) adverse events reported by reviewers required only simple or minor treatment and had no long-term adverse effect. Three patients experienced adverse events that resulted in use of invasive or complex treatment that had a temporary adverse effect on outcome.

CONCLUSION

Using SAVES V2 and OrthoSAVES, independent reviewers reported more minor adverse events compared with surgeons. The value of third-party reviewers requires further investigation in a detailed cost-benefit analysis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study.

Impact of spine surgery complications on costs associated with management of adult spinal deformity

A better understanding of the consequences of spine surgery complications is warranted to optimize patient-reported outcomes and contain the rising health care costs associated with the management of adult spinal deformity (ASD). We systematically searched PubMed and Scopus databases using keywords "adult spinal deformity surgery," "complications," and "cost" for published studies on costs of complications associated with spinal surgery, with a particular emphasis on ASD and scoliosis. In the 17 articles reviewed, we identified 355,354 patients with 11,148 reported complications. Infection was the most commonly reported complication, with an average treatment cost ranging from $15,817 to $38,701. Hospital costs for patients with deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary thromboembolism, and surgical site infection were 2.3 to 3.1 times greater than for patients without those complications. An effort to collect and characterize data on cost of complications is encouraged, which may help health care providers to identify potential resources to limit complications and overall costs.

Impact of a Bundled Payment System on Resource Utilization During Spine Surgery

BACKGROUND

In a bundled payment system, a single payment covers all costs associated with a single episode of care. Spine surgery may be well suited for bundled payments because of clearly defined episodes of care, but the impact on current practice has not been studied. We sought to examine how a theoretical bundled payment strategy with financial disincentives to resource utilization would impact practice patterns.

METHODS

A multiple-choice survey was administered to spine surgeons describing eight clinical scenarios. Respondents were asked about their current practice, and then their practice in a hypothetical bundled payment system. Respondents could choose from multiple types of implants, bone grafts, and other resources utilized at the surgeon's discretion.

RESULTS

Forty-three respondents completed the survey. Within each scenario, 24%-49% of respondents changed at least one aspect of management. The proportion of cases performed without implants was unchanged for four scenarios and increased in four by an average of 8%. Use of autologous iliac crest bone graft increased across all scenarios by an average of 18%. Use of neuromonitoring decreased in all scenarios by an average of 21%. Differences in costs were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial disincentives to resource utilization may result in some changes to surgeons' practices but these appear limited to items with less clear benefits to patients. Choices of implants, which account for the majority of intra-operative costs, did not change meaningfully. A bundling strategy targeting peri-operative costs solely related to surgical practice may not yield substantive savings while rationing potentially beneficial treatments to patient care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Decision-making in the treatment of adult spinal deformity

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is a very diverse condition that affects the quality of life of the involved individuals deeply. There is an ongoing discussion as to whether treatment should be surgical (which is potentially dangerous) or non-surgical.In addition to a systematic review of literature on the surgical treatment of ASD with special emphasis on complications, a decision-analysis was performed using the patient information within a European multi-centric database of ASD.The probabilities of improvement and complications as well as associated disease burden (utility) were calculated at the baseline and at first-year follow-up.Decision-analysis suggests that the chances of clinical improvement are significantly higher with surgical treatment. Though surgical treatment is significantly more prone to complications, the likelihood of improvement remains higher than that offered by non-surgical treatment.Surgical treatment of ASD appears to be associated with a higher likelihood of clinical improvement. Future work needs to focus on refining the criteria for appropriate patient selection and decreasing the incidence of complications. Cite this article: Acaroglu E, European Spine Study Group. Decision-making in the treatment of adult spinal deformity. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:167-176. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000013.

Development, implementation and evaluation of a patient handoff tool to improve safety in orthopaedic surgery

OBJECTIVE

To develop, implement and test the effect of a handoff tool for orthopaedic trauma residents that reduces adverse events associated with the omission of critical information and the transfer of erroneous information.

DESIGN

Components of this project included a literature review, resident surveys and observations, checklist development and refinement, implementation and evaluation of impact on adverse events through a chart review of a prospective cohort compared with a historical control group.

SETTING

Large teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Findings of a literature review were presented to orthopaedic residents, epidemiologists, orthopaedic surgeons and patient safety experts in face-to-face meetings, during which we developed and refined the contents of a resident handoff tool. The tool was tested in an orthopaedic trauma service and its impact on adverse events was evaluated through a chart review. The handoff tool was developed and refined during the face-to-face meetings and a pilot implementation. Adverse event data were collected on 127 patients (n = 67 baseline period; n = 60 test period).

INTERVENTION

A handoff tool for use by orthopaedic residents.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Adverse events in patients handed off by orthopaedic trauma residents.

RESULTS

After controlling for age, gender and comorbidities, testing resulted in fewer events per person (25-27% reduction; P < 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary evidence suggests that our resident handoff tool may contribute to a decrease in adverse events in orthopaedic patients.

The Economic Burden of Autonomic Dysreflexia during Hospitalization for Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury

We sought to determine the economic burden of autonomic dysreflexia (AD) from the perspective of the Canadian healthcare system in a case series of individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) presenting to emergency care. In doing so, we sought to illustrate the potential return on investments in the translation of evidence-informed practices and developments in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of AD. Activity-based costing methodology was employed to estimate the direct healthcare or hospitalization costs of AD following presentation to the emergency department. Differences in trends were noted between patients who were promptly diagnosed, managed, and discharged, and patients whose experience followed a less direct or ideal path to discharge. We recorded 29 emergency room visits for conditions ultimately diagnosed as AD. Overall, median length of stay was 3 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 1.25-5.75), but extended up to 103 consecutive days. Cost analysis revealed median healthcare costs of $5029 (IQR = $2397-9522) for hospital admissions for AD, with the highest estimated hospital cost for a single admission > $190,000. Emergency room admissions resulting from AD can result in dramatic healthcare costs. Delayed diagnosis and inefficient management of AD may lead to further complications, adding to the strain on already limited healthcare resources. Prompt recognition of AD; broader translation of evidence-informed practices; and novel diagnosis, self-management, and/or therapeutic/pharmaceutical applications may prove to mitigate the burden of AD and improve patient well-being.

Excess length of stay and economic consequences of adverse events in Dutch hospital patients

Background

To investigate the average and extrapolated excess length of stay and direct costs of adverse events (AEs) and preventable AEs in Dutch hospitals, and to evaluate patient characteristics associated with excess length of stay and costs.

Methods

Data of a large retrospective patient record review study on AEs was used. A stratified sample of 20 Dutch hospitals was included. Excess length of stay and costs attributable to AEs and preventable AEs were calculated and extrapolated to a national estimate. The association between patient characteristics and excess length of stay (and costs thereof) attributable to AEs and preventable AEs was investigated through multilevel linear regression analyses.

Results

A total of 2975 patient records were included in the analysis, of which 325 experienced one or more AEs. Hospital patients experiencing an AE stayed 5.11 (95 % CI 3.91–6.30) more days in hospital and cost €2600 (95 % CI €1968–€3232) more compared to those without an AE. There was no significant difference in days and costs between preventable and non-preventable AEs. Extrapolated to a national level, AEs cost more than €300 million, which was 1.3 % of the national hospital care budget. Patients with hospital-acquired infections had a statistically significant longer length of stay compared to the reference group (patients with AEs on the cardiovascular system).

Conclusions

This study showed that AEs lead to substantial excess length of stay and increased costs. Special attention should be paid to patients with AEs due to an hospital-acquired infection.

Comparative analysis of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: in-hospital outcomes and costs

BACKGROUND

The rate of shoulder arthroplasty has continued to increase at an exponential rate during the past decade in large part owing to approval by the Food and Drug Administration of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Whereas reverse shoulder arthroplasty has resulted in expanded surgical indications, there are numerous reports of relatively high complication rates. The increased prevalence of both anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty underscores the need to elucidate whether perioperative outcomes are influenced by type of total shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of shoulder arthroplasty type, anatomic or reverse, with respect to perioperative adverse events, in-hospital death, prolonged hospital stay, nonroutine disposition, and hospital charges in a nationally representative sample.

METHODS

By use of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 2011, the first year that reverse total shoulder arthroplasty received a unique International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision procedure code, an estimated 51,052 patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty were separated into anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (58%) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (43%). Comparisons of early outcome measures between anatomic and reverse total shoulder cohorts were performed by bivariate and multivariable analyses with logistic regression modeling.

RESULTS

Compared with anatomic shoulder arthroplasty recipients, patients undergoing reverse shoulder replacement were at higher risk for in-hospital death, multiple perioperative complications, prolonged hospital stay, increased hospital cost, and nonroutine discharge.

CONCLUSION

Despite the expanding indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty, it is an independent risk factor for inpatient morbidity, mortality, and hospital costs and should perhaps be offered more judiciously and performed in the hands of appropriately trained shoulder specialists.

Adverse events in emergency oncological spine surgery: a prospective analysis

Object

Most descriptions of spine surgery morbidity and mortality in the literature are retrospective. Emerging prospective analyses of adverse events (AEs) demonstrate significantly higher rates, suggesting underreporting in retrospective and prospective studies that do not include AEs as a targeted outcome. Emergency oncological spine surgeries are generally palliative to reduce pain and improve patients' neurology and health-related quality of life. In individuals with limited life expectancy, AEs can have catastrophic implications; therefore, an accurate AE incidence must be considered in the surgical decision-making process. The purpose of this study was to determine the true incidence of AEs associated with emergency oncological spine surgery.

Methods

The authors carried out a prospective cohort study in a quaternary care referral center that included consecutive patients admitted between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2012. Inclusion criteria were all patients undergoing emergency surgery for metastatic spine disease. AE data were reported and collected on standardized AE forms (Spine AdVerse Events Severity System, version 2 [SAVES V2] forms) at weekly dedicated morbidity and mortality rounds attended by attending surgeons, residents, fellows, and nursing staff.

Results

A total of 101 patients (50 males, 51 females) met the inclusion criteria and had complete data. Seventysix patients (76.2%) had at least 1 AE, and 11 patients (10.9%) died during their admission. Intraoperative surgical AEs were observed in 32% of patients (9.9% incidental durotomy, 16.8% blood loss > 2 L). Transient neurological deterioration occurred in 6 patients (5.9%). Infectious complications in this patient population were significant (surgical site 6%, other 50.5%). Delirium complicated the postoperative period in 20.8% of cases.

Conclusions

When evaluated in a rigorous prospective manner, metastatic spine surgery is associated with a higher morbidity rate than previously reported. This AE incidence must be considered by the patient, oncologist, and surgeon to determine appropriate management and preventative strategies to reduce AEs in this fragile patient population.