Postoperative Recovery after Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Comparative Analysis of Age in 149 Patients during 2-year Follow-up

Spine

Volumn 40, Issue 19, 2015, Pages 1505-1515

  Scheer, Justin K ^a   Mundis, Gregory M ^b   Klineberg, Eric ^c   Hart, Robert A ^d   Deviren, Vedat ^e   Nguyen, Stacie ^b   Protopsaltis, Themistocles S ^f   Gupta, Munish ^c   Bess, Shay ^g   Shaffrey, Christopher I ^h   Schwab, Frank ^f   Lafage, Virginie ^f   Smith, Justin S ^h   Ames, Christopher P ⁱ  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SAN DIEGO CENTER FOR SPINAL DISORDERS   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f NYU HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES   (United States)

^g Rocky Mountain Hospital for Children   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

adult spinal deformity; age; area under the curve; disability; elderly; health related quality of life; HRQOL; integrated health state; recovery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF HUMANS; COBB ANGLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCOLIOSIS RESEARCH SOCIETY 22; SPINE MALFORMATION; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SPINE SURGERY; YOUNG ADULT; ADOLESCENT; ADVERSE EFFECTS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DISABILITY; NEUROSURGERY; PAIN; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCOLIOSIS; VERY ELDERLY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROSURGICAL PROCEDURES; PAIN; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SCOLIOSIS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84942415865     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001062     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Acosta FL Jr, McClendon J Jr, O'Shaughnessy BA, Morbidity and mortality after spinal deformity surgery in patients 75 years and older: complications and predictive factors. J Neurosurg Spine 2011; 15: 667-74.
2. Bess S, Boachie-Adjei O, Burton D, Pain and disability determine treatment modality for older patients with adult scoliosis, while deformity guides treatment for younger patients. Spine 2009; 34: 2186-90.
3. Daubs MD, Lenke LG, Cheh G, Adult spinal deformity surgery: complications and outcomes in patients over age 60. Spine 2007; 32: 2238-44.
4. DeWald CJ, Stanley T. Instrumentation-related complications of multilevel fusions for adult spinal deformity patients over age 65: surgical considerations and treatment options in patients with poor bone quality. Spine 2006; 31: S144-51.
5. Drazin D, Shirzadi A, Rosner J, Complications and outcomes after spinal deformity surgery in the elderly: review of the existing literature and future directions. Neurosurg Focus 2011; 31: E3.
6. Hassanzadeh H, Jain A, El Dafrawy MH, Three-column osteotomies in the treatment of spinal deformity in adult patients 60 years old and older: outcome and complications. Spine 2013; 38: 726-31.
7. Smith JS, Sansur CA, Donaldson WF 3rd, Short-term morbidity and mortality associated with correction of thoracolumbar fixed sagittal plane deformity: a report from the Scoliosis Research Society Morbidity and Mortality Committee. Spine 2011; 36: 958-64.
8. Li G, Passias P, Kozanek M, Adult scoliosis in patients over sixty-five years of age: outcomes of operative versus nonoperative treatment at a minimum two-year follow-up. Spine 2009; 34: 2165-70.
9. Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G. Degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients: dynamic stabilization without fusion versus posterior instrumented fusion. Spine J 2014; 14: 1-10.
10. Copay AG, Glassman SD, Subach BR, Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. Spine J 2008; 8: 968-74.
11. Scheer JK, Lafage V, Smith JS, Impact of age on the likelihood of reaching a minimum clinically important difference in 374 three-column spinal osteotomies: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2014; 20: 306-12.
12. Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Diab M, The minimum clinically important difference in Scoliosis Research Society-22 Appearance, Activity, And Pain domains after surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2010; 35: 2079-83.
13. Glassman SD, Copay AG, Berven SH, Defining substantial clinical benefit following lumbar spine arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90: 1839-47.
14. Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 1245-51.
15. Blondel B, Schwab F, Ungar B, Impact of magnitude and percentage of global sagittal plane correction on health-related quality of life at 2-years follow-up. Neurosurgery 2012; 71: 341-8; discussion 8.
16. O'Brien MF, Kuklo TR, Blanke K, eds. Spinal Deformity Study Group Radiographic Measurement Manual. ed. Memphis, TN: Medtronic Sofamor Danek; 2005.
17. Champain S, Benchikh K, Nogier A, Validation of new clinical quantitative analysis software applicable in spine orthopaedic studies. Eur Spine J 2006; 15: 982-91.
18. Rillardon L, Levassor N, Guigui P, Validation of a tool to measure pelvic and spinal parameters of sagittal balance. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 2003; 89: 218-27.
19. Schwab F, Ungar B, Blondel B, Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification: a validation study. Spine 2012; 37: 1077-82.
20. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Glassman SD, Risk-benefit assessment of surgery for adult scoliosis: an analysis based on patient age. Spine 2011; 36: 817-24.
21. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Glassman SD, Clinical and radiographic parameters that distinguish between the best and worst outcomes of scoliosis surgery for adults. Eur Spine J 2013; 22: 402-10.
22. Fu KM, Bess S, Shaffrey CI, Adult spinal deformity patients treated operatively report greater baseline pain and disability than patients treated nonoperatively: however, deformities differ between age groups. Spine 2014; 39: 1401-7.
23. Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine 2005; 30: 2024-9.
24. Schwab F, Lafage V, Patel A, Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient. Spine 2009; 34: 1828-33.
25. Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, Adult spinal deformity-postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine 2010; 35: 2224-31.
26. Scheer JK, Tang JA, Smith JS, Cervical spine alignment, sagittal deformity, and clinical implications: a review. J Neurosurg Spine 2013; 19: 141-59.