Mirza Sohail K, Deyo Richard A, Heagerty Patrick J, Konodi Mark A, Lee Lorri A, Turner Judith A, Goodkin Robert
Department of Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, Center for Cost and Outcomes Research, and University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Nov 15;33(24):2651-61; discussion 2662. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818dad07.
Prospective cohort study.
To create and validate an index describing the extent of spine surgical intervention to allow fair comparisons of complication rates among patients treated by different surgeons, devices, or hospitals.
Safety comparisons in spine surgery are limited by lack of methods that adjust for important variations in the surgical "case-mix." Among other factors, the magnitude of an operation is likely to have a substantial influence on the likelihood of complications.
We created a spine surgery invasiveness index defined as the sum, across all vertebral levels, of 6 possible interventions on each operated vertebra: anterior decompression, anterior fusion, anterior instrumentation, posterior decompression, posterior fusion, and posterior instrumentation. We assessed the validity of this index by examining its association with blood loss and surgery duration in 1723 spine surgeries, adjusting for important factors including age, gender, body mass index, diagnosis, neurologic deficit, revision surgery, and vertebral level of surgery.
Blood loss increased by 11.5% and surgery duration increased by 12.8 minutes for each unit increase in the invasiveness index. The invasiveness index explained 44% of the variation in blood loss and 52% of the variation in surgery duration. For specific surgical components, blood loss increased by 9.4% and surgery duration by 11.4 minutes for each vertebral level of anterior decompression, 19.4% and 33.8 minutes for each segment of anterior instrumentation, 12.9% and 22.7 minutes for each level of posterior decompression, and 25.1% and 18.8 minutes for each segment of posterior instrumentation.
An "invasiveness" index based on the number of vertebrae decompressed, fused, or instrumented showed the expected associations with both blood loss and surgery duration. This quantitative description of surgery invasiveness may be useful to adjust for surgical variations when making safety comparisons in spine surgery.
前瞻性队列研究。
创建并验证一个描述脊柱手术干预程度的指数,以便能公平比较不同外科医生、器械或医院治疗的患者之间的并发症发生率。
脊柱手术中的安全性比较因缺乏针对手术“病例组合”重要差异的调整方法而受到限制。在其他因素中,手术规模可能对并发症发生的可能性有重大影响。
我们创建了一个脊柱手术侵袭性指数,定义为对每个手术椎体的6种可能干预措施(前侧减压、前路融合、前路内固定、后侧减压、后路融合和后路内固定)在所有椎体节段的总和。我们通过检查其与1723例脊柱手术中的失血量和手术时长的关联来评估该指数的有效性,并对包括年龄、性别、体重指数、诊断、神经功能缺损、翻修手术和手术椎体节段等重要因素进行了调整。
侵袭性指数每增加一个单位,失血量增加11.5%,手术时长增加12.8分钟。侵袭性指数解释了失血量变化的44%和手术时长变化的52%。对于特定的手术组成部分,每一个椎体节段的前侧减压,失血量增加9.4%,手术时长增加11.4分钟;每一段前路内固定,失血量增加19.4%且手术时长增加33.8分钟;每一个椎体节段的后侧减压,失血量增加12.9%且手术时长增加22.7分钟;每一段后路内固定,失血量增加25.1%且手术时长增加18.8分钟。
基于减压、融合或内固定椎体数量的“侵袭性”指数显示出与失血量和手术时长的预期关联。这种对手术侵袭性的定量描述在脊柱手术安全性比较中对调整手术差异可能是有用的。