A Simpler, Modified Frailty Index Weighted by Complication Occurrence Correlates to Pain and Disability for Adult Spinal Deformity Patients

Persistent Lower Extremity Compensation for Sagittal Imbalance After Surgical Correction of Complex Adult Spinal Deformity: A Radiographic Analysis of Early Impact

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Achieving spinopelvic realignment during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery does not always produce ideal outcomes. Little is known whether compensation in lower extremities (LEs) plays a role in this disassociation. The objective is to analyze lower extremity compensation after complex ASD surgery, its effect on outcomes, and whether correction can alleviate these mechanisms.

METHODS

We included patients with complex ASD with 6-week data. LE parameters were as follows: sacrofemoral angle, knee flexion angle, and ankle flexion angle. Each parameter was ranked, and upper tertile was deemed compensation. Patients compensating and not compensating postoperatively were propensity score matched for body mass index, frailty, and T1 pelvic angle. Linear regression assessed correlation between LE parameters and baseline deformity, demographics, and surgical details. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity and history of total knee/hip arthroplasty evaluated outcomes.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ten patients (age: 61.3 ± 14.1 years, body mass index: 27.4 ± 5.8 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.1 ± 1.6, 72% female, 22% previous total joint arthroplasty, 24% osteoporosis, levels fused: 13.1 ± 3.8) were included. At baseline, 59% were compensating in LE: 32% at hips, 39% knees, and 36% ankles. After correction, 61% were compensating at least one joint. Patients undercorrected postoperatively were less likely to relieve LE compensation (odds ratio: 0.2, P = .037). Patients compensating in LE were more often undercorrected in age-adjusted pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, and T1 pelvic angle and disproportioned in Global Alignment and Proportion (P < .05). Patients matched in sagittal age-adjusted score at 6 weeks but compensating in LE were more likely to develop proximal junctional kyphosis (odds ratio: 4.1, P = .009) and proximal junctional failure (8% vs 0%, P = .035) than those sagittal age-adjusted score-matched and not compensating in LE.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative lower extremity compensation was a product of undercorrecting complex ASD. Even in age-adjusted realignment, compensation was associated with global undercorrection and junctional failure. Consideration of lower extremities during planning is vital to avoid adverse outcomes in perioperative course after complex ASD surgery.

Cost Benefit of Implementation of Risk Stratification Models for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Assess the extent to which defined risk factors of adverse events are drivers of cost-utility in spinal deformity (ASD) surgery.

METHODS

ASD patients with 2-year (2Y) data were included. Tertiles were used to define high degrees of frailty, sagittal deformity, blood loss, and surgical time. Cost was calculated using the Pearl Diver registry and cost-utility at 2Y was compared between cohorts based on the number of risk factors present. Statistically significant differences in cost-utility by number of baseline risk factors were determined using ANOVA, followed by a generalized linear model, adjusting for clinical site and surgeon, to assess the effects of increasing risk score on overall cost-utility.

RESULTS

By 2 years, 31% experienced a major complication and 23% underwent reoperation. Patients with ≤2 risk factors had significantly less major complications. Patients with 2 risk factors improved the most from baseline to 2Y in ODI. Average cost increased by $8234 per risk factor (R2 = .981). Cost-per-QALY at 2Y increased by $122,650 per risk factor (R2 = .794). Adjusted generalized linear model demonstrated a significant trend between increasing risk score and increasing cost-utility (r2 = .408, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of defined patient-specific and surgical risk factors, especially those with greater than two, were associated with increased index surgical costs and diminished cost-utility. Efforts to optimize patient physiology and minimize surgical risk would likely reduce healthcare expenditures and improve the overall cost-utility profile for ASD interventions.Level of evidence: III.

Anesthesia and perioperative pain relief in the frail elderly patient

Demand for anesthesia and analgesia for the frail elderly is continuously increasing as the likelihood of encountering very elderly, very vulnerable, and very compromised patients has, ever so subtly, increased over the last three decades. The anesthesiologist has, increasingly, been obliged to offer professional services to frail patients. Fortunately, there has been a dramatic improvement in medications, methods of drug delivery, critical monitoring, and anesthesia techniques. Specific methodologies peculiar to the frail are now taught and practiced across all anesthesia subspecialties. However, administering anesthesia for the frail elderly is vastly different to giving an anesthetic to the older patient. Frail patients are increasingly cared for in specialized units-geriatric intensive therapy units, post-acute care services, palliative, hospices, and supportive care and aged care facilities. Several medications (e.g., morphine-sparing analgesics) more suited to the frail have become universally available in most centers worldwide so that best-practice, evidence-based anesthesia combinations of drugs and techniques are now increasingly employed. Every anesthetic and pain management techniques in the frail elderly patient are going to be discussed in this review.

Are We Focused on the Wrong Early Postoperative Quality Metrics? Optimal Realignment Outweighs Perioperative Risk in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

BACKGROUND

While reimbursement is centered on 90-day outcomes, many patients may still achieve optimal, long-term outcomes following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery despite transient short-term complications.

OBJECTIVE

Compare long-term clinical success and cost-utility between patients achieving optimal realignment and suboptimally aligned peers.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected multicenter database.

METHODS

ASD patients with two-year (2Y) data included. Groups were propensity score matched (PSM) for age, frailty, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and baseline deformity. Optimal radiographic criteria are defined as meeting low deformity in all three (Scoliosis Research Society) SRS-Schwab parameters or being proportioned in Global Alignment and Proportionality (GAP). Cost-per-QALY was calculated for each time point. Multivariable logistic regression analysis and ANCOVA (analysis of covariance) adjusting for baseline disability and deformity (pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL)) were used to determine the significance of surgical details, complications, clinical outcomes, and cost-utility.

RESULTS

A total of 930 patients were considered. Following PSM, 253 "optimal" (O) and 253 "not optimal" (NO) patients were assessed. The O group underwent more invasive procedures and had more levels fused. Analysis of complications by two years showed that the O group suffered less overall major (38% vs. 52%, p = 0.021) and major mechanical complications (12% vs. 22%, p = 0.002), and less reoperations (23% vs. 33%, p = 0.008). Adjusted analysis revealed O patients more often met MCID (minimal clinically important difference) in SF-36 PCS, SRS-22 Pain, and Appearance. Cost-utility-adjusted analysis determined that the O group generated better cost-utility by one year and maintained lower overall cost and costs per QALY (both p < 0.001) at two years.

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer late complications (mechanical and reoperations) are seen in optimally aligned patients, leading to better long-term cost-utility overall. Therefore, the current focus on avoiding short-term complications may be counterproductive, as achieving optimal surgical correction is critical for long-term success.

The 5-Factor Modified Frailty Index is Associated With Increased Risk of Reoperations and Adjacent Level Disease Following Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the predictive capability between the 5-factor modified frailty index (mFI-5) scores and adverse clinical and radiographic outcomes following single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

METHODS

All patients over the age of 50 undergoing single-level open or minimally invasive TLIF from 2012 to 2021 with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were identified. Deformity, trauma, emergency, and tumor cases were excluded as were patients undergoing revision surgeries. An mFI-5 score was computed for each patient using a set of five factors which included hypertension requiring medication, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, and partially or fully dependent functional status. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of mFI-5 scores on readmissions, reoperations, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

156 patients were included and grouped according to their level of frailty: no-frailty (mFI = 0, n = 67), mild frailty (mFI = 1, n = 59), and severe frailty (mFI = 2+, n = 30). Multivariate analysis found high levels of frailty (mFI = 2+) to be independent predictors of reoperation (OR: 16.9, CI: 2.7 - 106.9, P = .003) and related readmissions (OR = 16.5, CI: 2.6 - 102.7, P = .003) as compared to the no-frailty group. An mFI-5 score of 2+ was also predictive of any complication (OR = 4.5, CI: 1.4 - 14.3, P = .01) and adjacent segment disease (ASD) (OR = 12.5, CI: 1.2 - 134.0, P = .037).

CONCLUSION

High levels of frailty were predictive of related readmissions, reoperations, any complications, and ASD in older adult patients undergoing single-level TLIF.

Should Global Realignment Be Tailored to Frailty Status for Patients Undergoing Surgical Intervention for Adult Spinal Deformity?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Assess whether modifying spinal alignment goals to accommodate frailty considerations will decrease mechanical complications and maximize clinical outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) score was developed to assist in reducing mechanical complications, but has had less success predicting such events in external validation. Higher frailty and many of its components have been linked to the development of implant failure. Therefore, modifying the GAP score with frailty may strengthen its ability to predict mechanical complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included 412 surgical ASD patients with two-year follow-up. Frailty was quantified using the modified Adult Spinal Deformity Frailty Index (mASD-FI). Outcomes: proximal junctional kyphosis and proximal junctional failure (PJF), major mechanical complications, and "Best Clinical Outcome" (BCO), defined as Oswestry Disability Index<15 and Scoliosis Research Society 22-item Questionnaire Total>4.5. Logistic regression analysis established a six-week score based on GAP score, frailty, and Oswestry Disability Index US Norms. Logistic regression followed by conditional inference tree analysis generated categorical thresholds. Multivariable logistic regression analysis controlling for confounders was used to assess the performance of the frailty-modified GAP score.

RESULTS

Baseline frailty categories: 57% not frail, 30% frail, 14% severely frail. Overall, 39 of patients developed proximal junctional kyphosis, 8% PJF, 21% mechanical complications, 22% underwent reoperation, and 15% met BCO. The mASD-FI demonstrated a correlation with developing PJF, mechanical complications, undergoing reoperation, and meeting BCO at two years (all P <0.05). Regression analysis generated the following equation: Frailty-Adjusted Realignment Score (FAR Score)=0.49×mASD-FI+0.38×GAP Score. Thresholds for the FAR score (0-13): proportioned: <3.5, moderately disproportioned: 3.5-7.5, severely disproportioned: >7.5. Multivariable logistic regression assessing FAR score demonstrated associations with mechanical complications, reoperation, and meeting BCO by two years (all P <0.05), whereas the original GAP score was only significant for reoperation.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated adjusting alignment goals in adult spinal deformity surgery for a patient's baseline frailty status and disability may be useful in minimizing the risk of complications and adverse events, outperforming the original GAP score in terms of prognostic capacity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Frailty measured by risk analysis index and adverse discharge outcomes after adult spine deformity surgery: analysis of 3104 patients from a prospective surgical registry (2011-2020)

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Measurement of frailty with the Risk Analysis Index (RAI) has demonstrated improved outcome prediction compared to other frailty indices across the surgical literature. However, the generalizability and clinical utility of preoperative RAI scoring for prediction of postoperative morbidity after adult spinal deformity surgery is presently unknown. Thus, recent studies have called for an RAI analysis of spine deformity outcomes.

PURPOSE

The present study sought to evaluate the discriminatory accuracy of preoperative frailty, as measured by RAI, for predicting postoperative morbidity among adult spine deformity surgery patients using data queried from a large prospective surgical registry representing over 700 hospitals from 49 US states and 11 countries.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Secondary analysis of a prospective surgical registry.

PATIENT SAMPLE

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database (2011-2020).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was "adverse discharge outcome" (ADO) defined as discharge to a non-home, non-rehabilitation nursing/chronic care facility.

METHODS

Adult spine deformity surgeries were queried from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database (2011-2020) using diagnosis and procedure codes. The relationship between increasing preoperative RAI frailty score and increasing rate of primary endpoint (ADO) was assessed with Cochran-Armitage linear trend tests. Discriminatory accuracy was tested by computation of concordance statistics (with 95% confidence interval [CI]) in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 3,104 patients underwent spine deformity surgery and were stratified by RAI score: 0-10: 22%, 11-15: 11%, 16-20: 29%, 21-25: 26%, 26-30: 8.0%, 31-35: 2.4%, and 36+: 1.4%. The rate of ADO was 14% (N=439/3094). The rate of ADO increased significantly with increasing RAI score (p<.0001). RAI demonstrated robust discriminatory accuracy for prediction of ADO in ROC analysis (C-statistic: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.69-0.74, p<.001). In pairwise comparison of ROC curves (DeLong test), RAI demonstrates superior discriminatory accuracy compared to the 5-factor modified frailty index (mFI-5; p<.001).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative frailty, as measured by RAI, is a robust predictor of postoperative morbidity (measured by ADO) after adult spine deformity surgery. The frailty score may be translated directly to the bedside with a user-friendly risk calculator, deployed here: https://nsgyfrailtyoutcomeslab.shinyapps.io/spineDeformity.

Performance of the Modified Adult Spinal Deformity Frailty Index in Preoperative Risk Assessment

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single-center, consecutively enrolled database of adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the mASD-FI in predicting clinical and patient-reported outcomes after ASD-corrective surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The recently described modified Adult Spinal Deformity frailty index (mASD-FI) quantifies frailty of ASD patients, but the utility of this clinical prediction tool as a means of prognosticating postoperative outcomes has not been investigated.

METHODS

ASD patients with available mASD-FI scores and HRQL data at presentation and 2-years postop were included.Patients were stratified by mASD-FI score using published cutoffs: not frail (NF <7), frail (F, 7-12), severely frail (SF, >12). Analysis of vaiance assessed differences in patient factors across frailty groups. Linear regression assessed the relationship of mASD-FI with length of stay (LOS) and HRQLs. Multivariable logistic regression revealed how frailty category predicted odds of complications, infections and reoperation.

RESULTS

A total of 509 patients included (59 years, 79%F, 27.7 kg/m 2 ). The cohort presented with moderate baseline deformity: sagittal vertical axis (83.7 mm ± 71), PT (12.7° ± 10.8°), PI-LL (43.1° ± 21.1°). Mean preoperative mASD-FI score was 7.2, frailty category: NF (50.3%), F (34.0%), SF (15.7%).Age, BMI, and Charlson Comorbidity Index increased with frailty categories (all P < 0.001); however, fusion length ( P = 0.247) and osteotomy rate ( P = 0.731) did not. At baseline, increasing frailty was associated with inferior Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D), SRS-22r, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and NRS Back and Leg (all P < 0.001). Greater frailty was associated with increased LOS and reduced postoperative HRQL. Controlling for complication incidence, baseline mASD-FI predicted 2 year postop scores for year ODI (b = 0.7, 0.58-0.8, P < 0.001) SRS (b = -0.023, -0.03 to -0.02, P < 0.001), EQ-5D (b = -0.003, -0.004 to -0.002, P < 0.001). F and SF were associated with greater odds of unplanned revision surgery and complications.

CONCLUSION

Higher preoperative mASD-FI score was associated with significantly greater complications, higher rate of unplanned reoperations and lower postoperative HRQL in this investigation. The mASD-FI provides similar prognostic utility while reducing burden for surgeons and patients.

The Clinical Impact of Failing to Achieve Ideal Proportional Realignment in Adult Spinal Deformity Patients

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The impact of not achieving ideal realignment in the global alignment and proportion (GAP) score in adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction on clinical outcomes is understudied at present.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the clinical impact of failing to achieve GAP proportionality in ASD surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

METHODS

Operative ASD patients with fusion to S1/pelvis and with pre-(BL) and 2-year (2Y) data were included. Patients were assessed for matching their 6-week (6W) age-adjusted alignment goals. 1 Patients were stratified by age-adjusted match at 6W postoperatively (Matched) and 6W GAP proportionality (proportioned: GAP-P; moderately disproportioned: GAP-MD; severely disproportioned: GAP-SD). Groups were assessed for differences in demographics, surgical factors, radiographic parameters, and complications occurring by 2Y. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess independent effects of not achieving GAP proportionality on postoperative outcomes for Matched and Unmatched patients.

RESULTS

Included: One hundred twenty three ASD patients. At baseline, 39.8% were GAP-SD, and 12.2% GAP-SD at 6W. Of 123 patients, 51.2% (n =63) had more than or equal to one match at 6W. GAP-SD rates did not differ by being Matched or Unmatched ( P = 0.945). GAP-SD/Unmatched patients had higher rates of reoperation, implant failure, and PJF by 2Y postop (all P <0.05). Regressions controlling for age at BL, levels fused, and CCI, revealed 6W GAP-SD/Unmatched patients had higher odds of reoperation (OR: 54 [3.2-899.9]; P =0.005), implant failure (OR: 6.9 [1.1-46.1]; P =0.045), and PJF (OR: 30.1 [1.4-662.6]; P =0.031). Compared to GAP-P or GAP-MD patients, GAP-SD/ Matched patients did not have higher rates of reoperation, implant failure, or junctional failure (all P >0.05). The regression results for both Matched and Unmatched cohorts were consistent when proportionality was substituted by the continuous GAP score.

CONCLUSION

In ASD patients who meet age-adjusted realignment goals, GAP proportionality does not significantly alter complication rates. However, GAP proportionality remains an important consideration in patients with sub-optimal age- adjusted alignment. In these cases, severe global disproportion is associated with higher rates of reoperation, implant failure, rod fracture, and junctional failure.

Which frailty scales for patients with adult spinal deformity are feasible and adequate? A systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Frailty as a concept is not yet fully understood, and is not the same as comorbidity. It is associated with an increased risk of adverse events and mortality after surgery, which makes its preoperative assessment significant. Despite its relevance, it still remains unclear which scales are appropriate for use in patients with spinal pathology.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility and measurement properties of frailty scales for spine patients, specifically with adult spinal deformity (ASD), and to propose adequate scales for primary triage to prevent surgery in too frail patients and for preoperative assessment to modify patients' condition and surgical plans.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Systematic review.

METHODS

Systematic search was performed between 2010 and 2021 including terms relating to spinal disorders, frailty scales, and methodological quality. Characteristics of the studies and frailty scales and data describing relation to treatment outcomes were extracted. The risk of bias was determined with the QAREL score.

RESULTS

Of the 1993 references found, 88 original studies were included and 23 scales were identified. No prospective interventional study was found where the preoperative frailty assessment was implemented. Predictive value of scales for surgical outcomes varied, dependent on spinal disorders, type of surgeries, patients' age and frailty at baseline, and outcomes. Seventeen studies reported measurement properties of eight scales but these studies were not free of bias. In 30 ASD studies, ASD-Frailty Index (ASD-FI, n=14) and 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-11, n=11) were most frequently used. These scales were mainly studied in registry studies including young adult population, and carry a risk of sample bias and make their validity in elderly population unclear. ASD-FI covers multidisciplinary concepts of frailty with 40 items but its feasibility in clinical practice is questionable due to its length. The Risk Analysis Index, another multidisciplinary scale with 14 items, has been implemented for preoperative assessment in other surgical domains and was proven to be feasible and effective in interventional prospective studies. The FRAIL is a simple questionnaire with five items and its predictive value was confirmed in prospective cohort studies in which only elderly patients were included.

CONCLUSIONS

No adequate scale was identified in terms of methodological quality and feasibility for daily practice. Careful attention should be paid when choosing an adequate scale, which depends on the setting of interest (eg triage or preoperative work-up). We recommend to further study a simple and predictive scale such as FRAIL for primary triage and a comprehensive and feasible scale such as Risk Analysis Index for preoperative assessment for patients undergoing spine surgery, as their adequacy has been shown in other medical domains.