Does Baseline Mental Health Influence Outcomes among Workers' Compensation Claimants Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion?

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: This study investigated the influence of preoperative mental health on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) among workers' compensation (WC) recipients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: No studies have evaluated the impact of preoperative mental functioning on outcomes following MIS TLIF among WC claimants. METHODS: WC recipients undergoing single-level MIS TLIF were identified. PROMs of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-item Short Form Physical and Mental Composite Scale (SF-12 PCS/MCS), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function evaluated subjects preoperatively/postoperatively. Subjects were grouped according to preoperative SF-12 MCS: <41 vs. ≥41. Demographic/perioperative variables, PROMs, and MCID were compared using inferential statistics. Multiple regression was used to account for differences in spinal pathology. RESULTS: The SF-12 MCS <41 and SF-12 MCS ≥41 groups included 48 and 45 patients, respectively. Significant differences in ΔPROMs were observed at SF-12 MCS at all timepoints, except at 6 months (p≤0.041, all). The SF-12 MCS <41 group had worse preoperative to 6-months SF-12 MCS, 12-weeks/6-months VAS back, 12-week VAS leg, and preoperative to 6-months ODI (p≤0.029, all). The SF-12 MCS <41 group had greater MCID achievement for overall ODI and 6-weeks/1-year/overall SF-12 MCS (p≤0.043, all); the SF-12 MCS ≥41 group had greater attainment for 6-month VAS back (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Poorer mental functioning adversely affected the baseline and intermediate postoperative quality-of-life outcomes pertaining to mental health, back pain, and disability among WC recipients undergoing lumbar fusion. However, outcomes did not differ 1-2 years after surgery. While MCID achievement for pain and physical function was largely unaffected by preoperative mental health score, WC recipients with poorer baseline mental health demonstrated higher rates of overall clinically meaningful improvements for disability and mental health.

Level-specific Perioperative and Clinical Outcome Comparison: Cervical Disk Replacement Versus Anterior Cervical Diskectomy and Fusion at C5-C6 in Patients With Myeloradiculopathy.

INTRODUCTION: This study compares perioperative and postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion (ACDF) or cervical disk replacement (CDR) at C5-C6 in patients with myeloradiculopathy. METHODS: Primary, elective, single-level CDR or ACDF procedures at C5-C6 for patients with myeloradiculopathy were included. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) included visual analog scale (VAS) neck, VAS arm, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), and Short-Form 12-Item Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS) collected at preoperative/6-week/12-week/6-month/1-year time points. Surgical cohorts were assessed for differences in demographics/perioperative characteristics using the chi square test and unpaired Student t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was determined by comparing ΔPROMs with established thresholds. Outcome measures were compared at postoperative time points with the Student t-test, and improvement from preoperative baseline was assessed with a paired sample t-test. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-seven patients were included, 43 CDR and 94 ACDF. CDR patients demonstrated significantly reduced surgical times (46.3 versus 55.1 minutes), estimated blood loss (24.4 versus 43.6 mL), revision surgery rates (0.0% versus 5.3%), postoperative length of stay (8.9 versus 23.0 hours), and postoperative narcotic consumption (P < 0.017, all). Complication rates and mean PROMs did not differ between cohorts. The CDR cohort markedly improved from baseline for all PROMs postoperatively except SF-12 PCS/PROMIS-PF at 6 weeks. The ACDF cohort markedly improved at each time point except VAS arm at 1 year, NDI at 6 weeks/1 year, and SF-12 PCS/PROMIS-PF at 6 weeks. A majority of both cohorts achieved overall MCID for VAS neck/NDI/PROMIS-PF. MCID achievement rates did not differ except NDI at 12 weeks/1 year and SF-12 PCS at 6 months, both favoring CDR. DISCUSSION: Both procedural cohorts demonstrated similar long-term clinical outcomes for arm/neck pain and physical function; however, patients undergoing CDR at C5-C6 demonstrated an improved ability to maintain 1-year postoperative progress for neck disability with improved 1-year NDI MCID achievement. The CDR cohort, in addition, demonstrated an improved perioperative profile and reduced rate of revision surgery.

Presenting Mental Health Influences Postoperative Clinical Trajectory and Long-Term Patient Satisfaction After Lumbar Decompression.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), postoperative patient-reported satisfaction, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement after minimally invasive surgery lumbar decompression (MIS-LD) in patients stratified by their preoperative 12-Item Short-Form Mental Component Score (SF-12 MCS). METHODS: Patients who underwent single-level/multilevel MIS-LD were included. PROMs were administered preoperatively and 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year postoperatively. Patients were grouped by preoperative SF-12 MCS. Demographic/perioperative characteristics were compared among groups using a χ2 and Student t test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Mean PROM and postoperative satisfaction scores were compared using an unpaired Student t test. PROM improvement within cohorts was assessed with paired-samples t test. MCID achievement rates were compared using χ2 analysis. RESULTS: A total of 297 patients were included: 111 patients in SF-12 MCS <48.9 and 186 patients in the SF-12 MCS ≥48.9 cohort. Cohorts showed mean postoperative differences for visual analog scale (VAS) back score at 12 weeks, VAS leg score at 6 weeks/12 weeks, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 6 weeks/12 weeks, SF-12 MCS at all postoperative time points, and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Score at 6 weeks/12 weeks (P < 0.022, all). Of patients in the SF-12 MCS <48.9 cohort, more achieved MCID for SF-12 MCS at all postoperative time points and ODI at 1 year (P < 0.023, all). More patients in the SF-12 MCS ≥48.9 cohort achieved MCID for VAS leg score at 12 weeks and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Score at 6 weeks (P < 0.038). Patients in the SF-12 MCS <48.9 cohort showed inferior postoperative satisfaction for VAS leg score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/1 year, VAS back score at 12 weeks, and ODI at all postoperative time points. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with inferior mental health preoperatively showed worse mean short-term postoperative clinical outcome for leg/back pain, physical function and disability, short-term and long-term postoperative satisfaction for leg pain and disability, and long-term satisfaction for sleeping/lifting/walking/standing/sex/travel.

Neck Disability at Presentation Influences Long-Term Clinical Improvement for Neck Pain, Arm Pain, Disability, and Physical Function in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative characteristics, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients stratified by preoperative neck disability. BACKGROUND: The Neck Disability Index (NDI) assesses a patient's self-perceived neck disability and is often used to assess the efficacy of cervical surgical intervention. Our study (a retrospective cohort study) evaluates how preoperative severity of patient neck disability influences postoperative clinical improvement after ACDF. METHODS: Primary, single-level, or multilevel ACDF procedures were included. PROMs were administered at preoperative/6 week/12 week/6 month/1 year/2 year time points and included Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS) for neck and arm pain, NDI, and 12-Item Short-Form (SF-12) Physical Composite Score (PCS). Patients were grouped according to preoperative NDI <50 (mild to moderate neck disability) or NDI ≥50 (severe neck disability). Demographics/perioperative characteristics/postoperative complications/mean PROMs/MCID achievement rates were compared using χ2 or Student t test. Postoperative improvement from preoperative baseline within each cohort was assessed with paired-samples t test. MCID achievement was determined by comparing ΔPROMs with established thresholds. RESULTS: A total of 225 patients were included, 150 NDI <50 and 75 NDI ≥50. The NDI ≥50 cohort was significantly younger (P = 0.002). Cohorts did not differ for spinal disease/operative duration/estimated blood loss/postoperative length of stay/postoperative narcotic consumption/adjacent segment disease rate/1-year arthrodesis rate/6-month pseudarthrosis rate. Postoperative VAS pain score on postoperative day 0 and 1 was significantly increased in the NDI ≥50 cohort (P < 0.048, all). Postoperative complication rates did not differ. All mean PROMs differed at all time points (P < 0.043, all). The NDI <50 patient cohort significantly improved from preoperative baseline for all PROMs and time points except SF-12 PCS/Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System-Physical Function at 6 weeks. The NDI ≥50 cohort significantly improved for all PROMs and time points except SF-12 PCS at 6 weeks. The NDI ≥50 cohort showed a greater proportion achieving MCID for NDI at 6 weeks/2 years/overall (P < 0.037, all). CONCLUSIONS: Both cohorts showed significant long-term clinical improvement for neck pain/arm pain/physical function/neck disability, although patients with severe preoperative neck disability reported inferior mean scores for these outcomes at all time points.

Systematic Review: Applications of Intraoperative Ultrasonography in Spinal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: As a result of increased practicality and decreased costs and radiation, interest has increased in intraoperative ultrasonography (iUS) in spinal surgery applications; however, few studies have provided a robust overview of its use in spinal surgery. We synthesize findings of existing literature on use of iUS in navigation, pedicle screw placement, and identification of anatomy during spinal interventions. METHODS: PRISMA guidelines were used in this systematic review. Studies were identified through PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases using the search string. Abstracts mentioning iUS in spine applications were included. On full-text review, exclusion criteria were implemented, including outdated studies or those with weak topic relevance or statistical power. On elimination of duplicates, multireviewer screening for eligibility, and citation search, 44 articles were analyzed. RESULTS: Navigation using iUS is safe, effective, and economical. iUS registration accuracy and success are within clinically acceptable limits for image-guided navigation. Pedicle screw instrumentation with iUS is precise, with a favorable safety profile. Anatomic landmarks are reliably identified with iUS, and surgeons are overwhelmingly successful in neural or vascular tissue identification with iUS modalities, including standard B mode, Doppler, and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. iUS use in traumatic reduction of fractures properly identifies anatomic structures, intervertebral disc space, and vasculature. CONCLUSIONS: iUS eliminates radiation, decreases costs, and provides sufficient accuracy and reliability in identification of anatomic and neurovascular structures in various spinal surgery settings.

Influence of Self-Identified Gender on Clinical Outcomes and Postoperative Patient Satisfaction After Lumbar Decompression: Cohort-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the patient-reported outcomes (PROs), minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement, and perceived postoperative satisfaction after minimally invasive lumbar decompression of patients stratified by self-identified gender. METHODS: Patients who had undergone single minimally invasive lumbar decompression were identified. The PRO measures were administered preoperatively and postoperatively and included the PRO measurement information system-physical function, visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and 12-item short form physical and mental component scores. The patients were grouped by self-identified gender. Propensity score matching was performed. The mean PROs and postoperative satisfaction scores were compared between cohorts using a 2-sample t test. The postoperative PRO improvement within each cohort was calculated using a paired t test. MCID achievement was determined by comparison to previously established threshold values. The MCID achievement rates were compared among the groups using simple logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 128 propensity score-matched patients were included: 44 in the female group and 84 in the male group. The male group demonstrated worse VAS scores for back pain at 12 weeks and a worse ODI at 6 weeks (P < 0.046 for all). The female cohort had achieved greater rates of a MCID for the ODI at 6 months (P < 0.049). Patients in the self-identified female group demonstrated higher levels of postoperative satisfaction for the VAS score for leg pain at 6 and 12 weeks), the VAS score for back pain at 12 weeks, and the ODI at 6 and 12 weeks (P < 0.028 for all). Additionally, patients in the self-identified female group demonstrated greater levels of satisfaction for lifting at 6 and 12 weeks (P < 0.014 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similar preoperative baseline values, postoperative improvement, and clinical outcomes, our results suggest that the self-identified male patients will have poorer short-term satisfaction for disability, leg pain, back pain, and lifting versus patients in the self-identified female group. Self-identified gender might influence patient satisfaction and could be attributed to differing preoperative expectations at baseline for short-term recovery.

Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Posterior Instrumentation at L5/S1.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L5/S1. METHODS: Primary, elective, single, MIS-TLIF, or ALIF with posterior fixation at L5/S1 were identified. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected. Coarsened exact matching was used to control for significant differences. Achievement of minimum clinically important difference [MCID] was determined by comparing ΔPROM scores with threshold values. Demographic/perioperative characteristics were compared between MIS-TLIF and ALIF cohorts using χ2 Student t tests. Differences in mean PROM scores, MCID rates, and postoperative complications were evaluated using an unpaired t test. RESULTS: After coarsened exact matching, 93 patients received MIS-TLIF and 50 received ALIF. Cohorts differed in operative time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative narcotic consumption on postoperative day 0 (P < 0.034, all). Mean PROMs differed significantly on 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Summary at 6 weeks and 1 year, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function at 6 weeks, Oswestry Disability Index at 6 weeks, and visual analog scale (VAS) back at 6 weeks, with the ALIF cohort showing significantly improved mean PROMs (P ≤ 0.044, all). Significantly greater rates were reported of MCID achievement for PROMs for the ALIF cohort: VAS back at 6 weeks, Oswestry Disability Index at 12 weeks, 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Summary at 6 weeks, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function at 12 weeks (P ≤ 0.047, all). A greater rate of MCID achievement for the MIS-TLIF cohort was seen for 6-week and overall VAS leg (P < 0.046, all). Postoperative fever was greater in the TLIF cohort (9.6% vs. 2.0%; P < 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing ALIF showed significantly improved rates of MCID achievement for disability, physical function, and back pain during the early postoperative period. However, the overall MCID achievement rate for leg pain was higher for the MIS-TLIF cohort.

The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Disability on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), satisfaction, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion stratified by preoperative disability. METHODS: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions were grouped by preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score: ODI <41 or ODI ≥41. PROMs administered pre/postoperatively included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS) back/leg, ODI, and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS)/12-Item Short-Form Mental Composite Score (SF-12 MCS). Satisfaction scores were collected for VAS back/leg and ODI. Coarsened exact match controlled for differences between cohorts. T tests compared mean PROMs and postoperative improvement/satisfaction between cohorts. Simple logistic regression compared MCID achievement. RESULTS: After coarsened exact matching, there were 118 patients in the ODI ≤41 and 377 patients in the ODI >41 cohort. The ODI >41 cohort saw greater postoperative inpatient VAS pain score and narcotic consumption on days 0/1 (P < 0.018, all). PROMs differed between cohorts: PROMIS-PF, SF-12 PCS, ODI, VAS back/leg at all postoperative time points and SF-12 MCS at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year (P < 0.045, all). Patients in the ODI >41 cohort demonstrated greater proportion achieving MCID for ODI at all postoperative time points and for SF-12 MCS 6-week/12-week/6-month/1-year (P < 0.040, all). The ODI ≤41 cohort demonstrated greater MCID achievement for overall PROMIS-PF and SF-12 PCS 6 months (P < 0.047, all). Postoperative satisfaction was greater in the ODI ≤41 cohort for VAS leg 6 weeks/12 weeks, VAS back 6 weeks/12 weeks, and ODI all postoperative time points (P < 0.048, all). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative disability associated with worse postoperative PROMs and patient satisfaction for disability, back/leg pain at multiple time points. MCID achievement rates across cohorts were similar for most PROMs at most postoperative time points. Patients with severe disability may have unrealistic expectations for surgical benefits, influencing corresponding postoperative satisfaction.

Single-level TLIF Versus LLIF at L4-5: A Comparison of Patient-reported Outcomes and Recovery Ratios.

INTRODUCTION: Both transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are suitable for achievement of lumbar arthrodesis. Comparative studies have observed complications and outcomes without stratification by lumbar level. This study aims to assess patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and recovery in TLIF and LLIF at L4-5. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary, elective, single-level, TLIF or LLIF procedures at L4-5 were grouped. Demographics, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative complication rates were collected. PROMs included Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function, visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index, and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Summary, and Mental Component Summary and were collected at preoperative, 6-week, 12-week, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year time points. Delta values and recovery ratios (RRs) were calculated for all PROMs at all time points. Demographics, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative complications were compared using chi-squared and Student t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Differences in mean PROMs, delta values, and RR at each time point were evaluated using unpaired Student's t-test. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty TLIF and 46 LLIF patients were included. Most (54.3%) were men, mean age 56.3 years, and mean body mass index 30.8 kg/m2. Body mass index and insurance significantly differed (P ≤ 0.045, all). TLIF showed significantly greater mean operative time, length of stay, and postoperative narcotic consumption (P < 0.033, all) and greater postoperative nausea/vomiting (P = 0.004). No preoperative PROMs significantly differed. TLIF cohort had significantly greater VAS back at 6 months and VAS leg at 12 weeks and 6 months (P < 0.034, all). No mean delta PROMs or RRs significantly differed. DISCUSSION: LLIF demonstrated significantly reduced length of stay, postoperative narcotic consumption, and postoperative nausea/vomiting and significantly improved VAS back at 6 months and VAS leg at 12 weeks and 6 months versus TLIF. Although 2-year PROMs and RRs did not significantly differ, our findings may suggest improved midterm follow-up pain scores for LLIF patients.