Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity Between Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty Performed in the Inpatient and Outpatient Settings Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP Dataset

Prospective same day discharge instrumented lumbar spine surgery - a forty patient consecutive series

PURPOSE

Outpatient lumbar decompression surgeries have been successfully performed in France for over twenty years, earning acceptance. However, outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures and arthroplasties are less documented. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficiency, and safety of outpatient lumbar instrumented surgery.

METHODS

A prospective single-center study involving three experienced surgeons was conducted from September 2020 to September 2021, with a minimum six-month postoperative follow-up. Inclusion criteria comprised patients aged 18 to 75 eligible for same-day discharge, undergoing single-level lumbar spinal fusion or arthroplasty via anterior or posterior Wiltse approach. The primary endpoint was assessing the percentage of successful outpatient discharges (within twelve hours), with secondary endpoints including perioperative/postoperative complications and discharge pain prescriptions in terms of frequency and severity.

RESULTS

Forty patients (mean age: 44 years; 16/24 male/female ratio) underwent surgery, including 18 lumbar arthroplasties, twelve ALIF, and ten TLIF procedures. The majority of surgeries were performed at L4-L5 (18 procedures) and L5-S1 levels (22 procedures). 95% (38/40) of patients were successfully discharged within twelve hours, with only two patients discharged the following day. No postoperative hematomas, serious adverse events, or revision surgeries were noted.

CONCLUSION

95% of patients were discharged successfully within twelve hours following outpatient lumbar fusion surgery, with a 100% patient satisfaction rate. Specific technical solutions were not necessary, and oral pain relief sufficed. Patient selection and education, including early pain management, played crucial roles in complication avoidance. This study underscores the safety of outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures, leading to cost reduction and expedited recovery.

Presentation and management of infection in total disc replacement: A review

Background

Total disc replacement (TDR) is widely used in the treatment of cervical and lumbar spine pathologies. Although TDR infection, particularly delayed infection, is uncommon, the results can be devastating, and consensus on clinical management remains elusive. In this review of the literature, we asked: (1) What are the reported rates of TDR infection; (2) What are the clinical characteristics of TDR infection; and (3) How has infection been managed for TDR patients?

Methods

We performed a search of the literature using PubMed and Embase to identify studies that reported TDR infection rates, the identification and management of TDR infection, or TDR failures with positive cultures. Twenty database studies (17 focusing on the cervical spine and 3 on the lumbar spine) and 10 case reports representing 15 patients were reviewed along with device Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data reports.

Results

We found a lack of clarity regarding how infection was diagnosed, indicating a variation in clinical approach and highlighting the need for a standard definition of TDR infection. Furthermore, while reported infection rates were low, the absence of a clear definition prevented robust data analysis and may contribute to underreporting in the literature. We found that treatment strategy and success rely on several factors including patient symptoms and time to onset, microorganism type, and implant positioning/stability.

Conclusions

Although treatment strategies varied throughout the extant literature, common practices in eliminating infection and reconstructing the spine emerged. The results will inform future work on the creation of a more robust definition of TDR infection and as well as recommendations for management.

Risk Factors for Thirty-Day Readmission Following Lumbar Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Thirty-day readmission is one of the common complications after lumbar surgery. More 30-day readmission increases the total hospitalization, economic burden, and physical pain of patients, delays the progress of postoperative rehabilitation, and even lead to die. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the risk factors of 30-day readmission following lumbar surgery.

METHODS

We searched for all the clinical trials published from the establishment of the database to May 1, 2022 through the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed. Data including age, American Society of Anesthesiology physical status class, preoperative hematocrit (Hct), diabetes mellitus (DM), current smoker, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), length of hospital stay (LHS), operation time, and surgical site infection (SSI) were extracted. We used Review Manager 5.4 for data analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies with 30,989 participants were eligible for this meta-analysis. The analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences in the age (95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.35-2.90, P < 0.001), preoperative Hct (95% CI: 0.75-1.33, P < 0.001), DM (95% CI: 0.56-0.74, P < 0.001), COPD (95% CI: 0.38-0.58, P < 0.001), operation time (95% CI: -35.54-16.18, P < 0.001), LHS (95% CI: -0.54-0.50, P < 0.001), and SSI (95% CI: 0.02-0.03, P < 0.001) between no readmission and readmission groups. In terms of the American Society of Anesthesiology physical status class and current smoker, there was no significant effect on the 30-day readmission (P = 0.16 and P = 0.35 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, preoperative Hct, DM, COPD, operation time, LHS, and SSI are the danger factors of 30-day readmission following lumbar surgery.

Risk Factors for 30-day Unplanned Readmission following Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

Surgical procedures for lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD), which have emerged in the 21-century, are commonly practiced worldwide. Regarding financial burdens and health costs, readmissions within 30days following surgery are inconvenient. We performed a systematic review to integrate real-world evidence and report the current risk factors associated with 30-day readmission following surgery for LDD.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2022 to identify relevant studies reporting risk factors for 30-day readmission following surgery for LDD.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included in the review. Potential risk factors were identified in the included studies that reported multivariate analysis results, including age, race, obesity, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score, anemia, bleeding disorder, chronic pulmonary disease, heart failure, dependent status, depression, diabetes, frailty, malnutrition, chronic steroid use, surgeries with anterior approach, multilevel spinal surgeries, perioperative transfusion, presence of postoperative complications, prolonged operative time, and prolonged length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several potential perioperative risk factors associated with unplanned readmission following surgery for LDD. Preoperatively identifying patients that are at increased risk of readmission is critical for achieving the best possible outcomes.

Predictors of Extended Hospitalization and Early Reoperation After Elective Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) has emerged as a motion-sparing alternative to lumbar fusion. Although LDA may be amenable to the ambulatory surgical setting, to date no study has identified the factors predisposing patients to extended hospital stay.

METHODS

A national surgical quality improvement database was queried from 2011 to 2019 for patients undergoing elective, single-level, primary LDA. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to elucidate predictors of length of stay (LOS) at or above the 90th percentile of the study population (3 days). Secondary study endpoints included rates of complications, as well as predictors and reasons for unplanned reoperation within 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 630 patients met eligibility criteria for the study, of whom 517 (82.1%) had LOS <3 days and 113 (17.9%) had LOS ≥3 days. Multivariate logistic regression revealed associations between prolonged hospitalization and postoperative diagnosis of degenerative disk disease, obesity, Hispanic identity, and operation length >120 minutes. Before discharge, patients with LOS ≥3 days were more likely to have venous thromboembolisms, pneumonia, surgical site infections, and reoperations. Independent predictors of reoperation were wound infections, diabetes, and smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications following elective single-level LDA are relatively rare, with few extended hospitalizations being attributable to any specific complication. Risk factors for prolonged LOS appear to be related to diagnosis and surgical time rather than to modifiable preoperative comorbidities. Conversely, unplanned reoperations within 30 days are associated with optimizable perioperative factors such as smoking, diabetes, and surgical site infection.

Impact of Multidisciplinary Intraoperative Teams on Thirty-Day Complications After Sacral Tumor Resection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary intraoperative teams on surgical complications in patients undergoing sacral tumor resection.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients with primary or metastatic sacral tumors managed at a single comprehensive cancer center over a 7-year period. Perioperative complication rates were compared between those treated by an unassisted spinal oncologist and those treated with the assistance of at least 1 other surgical specialty. Statistical analysis involved univariable and stepwise multivariable logistic regression models to identify predictors of multidisciplinary management and 30-day complications.

RESULTS

A total of 107 patients underwent 132 operations for sacral tumors; 92 operations involved multidisciplinary teams, including 54% of metastatic tumor operations and 74% of primary tumor operations. Patients receiving multidisciplinary management had higher body mass indexes (29.8 vs. 26.3 kg/m²; P = 0.008), larger tumors (258 vs. 55 cm³; P < 0.001), and higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores (3 vs. 2; P = 0.049). Only larger tumor volume (odds ratio [OR], 1.007 per cm³; P < 0.001) and undergoing treatment for a malignant primary versus a metastatic tumor (OR, 23.4; P < 0.001) or benign primary tumor (OR, 29.3; P < 0.001) were predictive of multidisciplinary management. Although operations involving multidisciplinary teams were longer (467 vs. 231 minutes; P < 0.001) and had higher blood loss (1698 vs. 774 mL; P = 0.004), 30-day complication rates were similar (37 vs. 27%; P = 0.39). On multivariable analysis, only larger tumor volume (OR, 1.004 per cm³; P = 0.005) and longer surgical duration (OR, 1.002 per minute; P = 0.03) independently predicted higher 30-day complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients managed with multidisciplinary teams had larger tumors and worse baseline health, 30-day complications were similar. This finding suggests that the use of multidisciplinary teams may help to mitigate surgical morbidity in those with high baseline risk.