adult spinal deformity
play

Adult Spinal Deformity Complications Eric Klineberg, MD Associate - PDF document

Adult Spinal Deformity Complications Eric Klineberg, MD Associate Professor Department of Orthopaedics UC DAVIS University of California, S PINE C ENTER Davis Speaking: AO, Depuy/Synthes Fellowship Funding: Depuy/Synthes, OREF Grants: AO


  1. Adult Spinal Deformity Complications Eric Klineberg, MD Associate Professor Department of Orthopaedics UC DAVIS University of California, S PINE C ENTER Davis Speaking: AO, Depuy/Synthes Fellowship Funding: Depuy/Synthes, OREF Grants: AO Foundation I have no financial interest with any company regarding this subject UC DAVIS Eric Klineberg, S PINE C ENTER MD 1

  2. Introduction  Surgical intervention can have a significant impact  Complications can be significant UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Introduction Deformity Surgery – Considered to have higher risks – Perioperative complications are frequent (up to 40%) UC DAVIS Glassman et al. Spine 2007 S PINE C ENTER 2

  3. What is a complication?  com·pli·ca·tion  noun \ ˌ käm- plə - ˈkā - shən \ : something that makes something harder to understand, explain, or deal with  medical : a disease or condition that happens in addition to another disease or condition : a problem that makes a disease or condition more dangerous or harder to treat UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER What is a complication? Complication List Infection  Major  o Deep, Pneumonia, Sepsis Gastrointestinal  Minor   Major  o Superficial, UTI, C Diff infection o Obstruction, Perforation, Bleed requiring surgery, Pancreatitis/Cholecystitis requiring surgery, Liver Implant Failure, SMA Syndrome  Major   Minor  o Hook dislodgement, Interbody fracture/migration, Rod fracture/dislodgement, Screw fracture o Ileus, Bleed not requiring surgical intervention, Pancreatitis/Cholecystitis no surgery  Minor  o Painful/promininent, Screw malposition/loosening, Interbody subsidence/dislodgement Renal  Major  Radiographic o Acute Renal failure requiring dialysis  Major   Minor  o DJK, PJK, Pseudoarthrosis o Acute Renal failure requiring medical intervention  Minor  Operative o Coronal/Sagittal imbalance, Curve decompensation, HO, Adjacent segment degeneration  Major  Neurologic o Retained sponge/instrument, Wrong surgical level, Unintended extension of fusion, Vascular injury,  Major  Visceral injury, EBL >4L o Visual deficit/blindness, Brachial plexus injury, CVA/Stroke, Spinal cord injury, Nerve root injury  Minor  with weakness, Retrograde ejaculation, Bowel/Bladder deficit o Dural tear, Fixation failure (hook/screw), Pedicle fracture, Posterior element fracture, Vertebral body  Minor  fracture o Neuropathy or sensory deficit, Pain (radiculopathy), Peripheral nerve palsy, Delirium Wound Problems Mortality  Major   All major  o Dehiscence requiring surgery, Hematoma/seroma requiring surgery +/- neurological deficit, Cardiopulmonary Incisional hernia  Minor   Major  o Cardiac arrest, PE, Respiratory arrest, DVT, MI, Reintubation, ARDS o Hematoma/seroma not requiring surgery, Hernia  Minor  o Coagulopathy, Arrhythmia, Pleural effusion, Hypotension, CHF Does it matter? UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 3

  4. INTRODUCTION  Glassman et al – major and minor complications did not adversely effect the improvement found in the HRQOL measures – except for deterioration in the SF-12 for major complications.  Theorized that outcome instruments were not sensitive enough to detect a difference  Perioperative complications may not have a continued impact at one year. UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER What is a complication?  Physician and patient dependent UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 4

  5. Prevention  Medical Optimization – Cardiac – Pulmonary – Nutritional – Metabolic – Bone Quality – What about consent? UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER  Informed Consent  Despite ranking the consent process as important, patient recall was only 41% immediately after discussion and video re- enforcement.  Recall subsequently declined to 20% at 6 months post-operatively. UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 5

  6. Prevention  Medical Optimization – Cardiac – Pulmonary – Nutritional – Metabolic – Bone Quality UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Cardiac  Clearance – Inc risk with:  Unstable coronary sx  Decompensated CHF  Arrhythmias  Severe valvular disease  PMH – MI, CHF, stroke , DM, Renal insuff, poor exercise tolerence  Perfusion Studies  Rx: beta blocker UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 6

  7. Pulmonary  Pre-op – CXR  Poor exercise tolerance > 2 min bicycle  PFT  Post-op – Mobilization – Minimize vent time UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Nutrition  Pre-op maximize – Risk factors: < 60yo, DM, Osteomyelitis, SCI – Labs: albumin, pre-albumin, TLC count  Feed early if possible – Nutrition Consult – Feeding tube – G-tube  Take 6-12 weeks for nutrition to return to baseline UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 7

  8. Metabolic  Optimize Diabetes – Serum glucose 110 mg/dL  Pre-op and intra-op  High blood glucose associated with increase in complications – Infection, pneumonia UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Bone Quality  Pre-operative prevention, treatment – Osteoporosis < 2.5 STD – Risk factors:  age > 50, smoking, Caucasian, Hx of Fx – Rx: Bisphosphonates – Forteo?  Fracture  PJK vs PJF – Who needs revision after? UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 8

  9. Intra-Operative  Blood loss – TXA, Amicar – Hypotension  Two Surgeons? – UCSF group and others UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Surgical Strategy UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 9

  10. Surgical Strategy UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Surgical Strategy UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 10

  11. Do Complications affect HRQoL?  355 pts prospectively enrolled in the ISSG multicenter study  202 met the inclusion criteria  Mean age 57.4, levels fused 12  Four groups identified: – No Complications N=84 – Minor Complications N=87 – Major Complications N=65 – Both Major and Minor N=35 UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Baseline Pre-OP Demographics � No� Complications� Minor� Major� Both� p-value� � Age� 55.2� 57.7� 61.1� 58.8� 0.072� � BMI� 26.9� 27.3� 28.1� 28.4� 0.487� � ASA� 2.2� 2.4� 2.4� 2.4� 0.06� � Charlson� 1.2� 1.9� 2.0� 1.9� 0.015*� � Smoker� (%)� 6� 11� 8� 11� 0.693� � SVA� (mm)� 45.6� 53.9� 68.6� 68.5� 0.217� � Max� Cobb� (Degrees)� 41.5� 45.0� 41.9� 44.2� 0.689� � Prior� Spine� Fusion� 75.0� 73.0� 80.6� 70.6� 0.853� � Surgery� (%) � �  Similar distribution for Age, BMI, and ASA, as well as Pre-OP spinopelvic parameters.  Sig lower Charlson Comorbidity Index for the no complication group. UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 11

  12. Operative Summary � � No� Complications� Minor� Major� � � Both� � p-value� Levels� Fused� 12.0� 11.9� 12.3� 12.4� 0.825� Osteotomy� (%)� 71.1� 55.6� 71.4� 73.0� 0.997� PSO/PVCR� (%)� 22.9� 21.1� 31.7� 29.7� 0.413� BMP� (%)� 51.8%� 86.7%� 86.5%� 69.8%� 0.0001� Anterior� (%)� 14.5� 30.0� 30.2� 40.5� 0.013� EBL� (cc)� 1783� 2061� 2698� 2704� 0.005*� OR� Time� (min)� 412� 494� 517� 533� 0.0001**� Length� of� Stay� (Days)� 8.0� 8.9� 10.5� 9.9� 0.073�  Trend towards > PSO for Major and Both complication groups  No complication group also had the lowest percent of BMP, anterior approach, EBL and Time in the OR. May be a surrogate for surgical complexity. – UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Baseline/1 Year HRQoL All� No� � Major� Minor� Both� P� values� Complication� Complication� Baseline� ODI� 42.5� � � � � � � � 41.3� � � � � � � � 46.4� 39.5� 42.5� NS� (Std)� (19.6)� (19.5)� (17)� (19.5)� (16.9)� 1� year� ODI� � 28.3� � � � � � � � � 26.6� � � � � � � � � � � 29.9� 26.9� 28.1� NS� (Std)� (20.2)� (18.6)� (20)� (20.0)� (19.5)� Baseline� PCS� 32.9� � � � � � � � 32.9� � � � � � � � � � � � � 31.1� 33.9� 31.8� NS� (Std)� (10.3)� (9.75)� (8.8)� (10.3)� (9.9)� 1� year� PCS� 39.5� � � � � � � � � 41.3� � � � � � � � � 38.0� 40.7� 39.8� NS� (Std)� (11.1)� (10.9)� (12)� (10.8)� (11.3)� � Significant improvement in All groups from Baseline to 1 year No differences between groups for any of the outcome measures, regardless of complication UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 12

  13. 1 Year HRQoL � No� Readmission� Readmission� P� Value� 1� year� ODI� 24.5� 39.5� P� <� 0.01� 1� year� PCS� 41.3� 31.9� P� <� 0.01� � No� Reoperation� Reoperation� � 1� year� ODI� 24.8� 37.1� P� <� 0.01� 1� year� PCS� 41.1� 33.9� P� <� 0.01� � Resolution� Of� � No� Resolution� Complication� 1� year� ODI� 24.5� 39.5� P� <� 0.01� 1� year� PCS� 41.3� 31.9� P� <� 0.01� � Significant impact on ODI and PCS for readmission, reoperation and no complication resolution. UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER Discussion  We found that baseline metrics were similar for complication and non-complication groups except for Charslon  Increased complexity of surgery (BMP, EBL, OR time) correlated with complications. – Perhaps a function of increased deformity UC DAVIS S PINE C ENTER 13

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend