Lambrechts Mark James, Tran Khoa, Conaway William, Karamian Brian Abedi, Goswami Karan, Li Sandi, O'Connor Patrick, Brush Parker, Canseco Jose, Kaye Ian David, Woods Barrett, Hilibrand Alan, Schroeder Gregory, Vaccaro Alexander, Kepler Christopher
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Asian Spine J. 2023 Apr;17(2):313-321. doi: 10.31616/asj.2022.0262. Epub 2023 Jan 31.
A retrospective cohort study.
To determine whether the 11-item modified frailty index (mFI) is associated with readmission rates, complication rates, revision rates, or differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients undergoing posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF).
mFI incorporates preexisting medical comorbidities and dependency status to determine physiological reserve. Based on previous literature, it may be used as a predictive tool for identifying postoperative clinical and surgical outcomes.
Patients undergoing elective PCDF at our urban academic medical center from 2014 to 2020 were included. Patients were categorized by mFI scores (0-0.08, 0.09-0.17, 0.18-0.26, and ≥0.27). Univariate statistics compared demographics, comorbidities, and clinical/surgical outcomes. Multiple linear regression analysis evaluated the magnitude of improvement in PROMs at 1 year.
A total of 165 patients were included and grouped by mFI scores: 0 (n=36), 0.09 (n=62), 0.18 (n=42), and ≥0.27 (n=30). The severe frailty group (mFI ≥0.27) was significantly more likely to be diabetic (p <0.001) and have a greater Elixhauser comorbidity index (p =0.001). They also had worse baseline Physical Component Score-12 (PCS-12) (p =0.011) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) (p =0.012) scores and worse 1-year postoperative PCS-12 (p =0.008) and mJOA (p =0.001) scores. On regression analysis, an mFI score of 0.18 was an independent predictor of greater improvement in ΔVisual Analog Scale neck (β =-2.26, p =0.022) and ΔVAS arm (β =-1.76, p =0.042). Regardless of frailty status, patients had similar 90-day readmission rates (p =0.752), complication rates (p =0.223), and revision rates (p =0.814), but patients with severe frailty were more likely to have longer hospital length of stay (p =0.006) and require non-home discharge (p <0.001).
Similar improvements across most PROMs can be expected irrespective of the frailty status of patients undergoing PCDF. Complication rates, 90-day readmission rates, and revision rates are not significantly different when stratified by frailty status. However, patients with severe frailty are more likely to have longer hospital stays and require non-home discharge.
一项回顾性队列研究。
确定11项改良衰弱指数(mFI)是否与接受颈椎后路减压融合术(PCDF)患者的再入院率、并发症发生率、翻修率或患者报告结局指标(PROMs)差异相关。
mFI纳入了既往存在的内科合并症和依赖状况以确定生理储备。基于既往文献,它可用作识别术后临床和手术结局的预测工具。
纳入2014年至2020年在我们城市学术医疗中心接受择期PCDF的患者。患者按mFI评分(0 - 0.08、0.09 - 0.17、0.18 - 0.26和≥0.27)分类。单变量统计比较人口统计学、合并症及临床/手术结局。多元线性回归分析评估1年时PROMs的改善幅度。
共纳入165例患者并按mFI评分分组:0(n = 36)、0.09(n = 62)、0.18(n = 42)和≥0.27(n = 30)。严重衰弱组(mFI≥0.27)患糖尿病的可能性显著更高(p < 0.001)且埃利克斯豪泽合并症指数更高(p = 0.001)。他们的基线躯体成分评分-12(PCS - 12)(p = 0.011)和改良日本骨科协会(mJOA)(p = 0.012)评分也更差,术后1年的PCS - 12(p = 0.008)和mJOA(p = 0.001)评分更差。回归分析显示,mFI评分为0.18是视觉模拟量表颈部评分变化量(ΔVAS颈部)(β = -2.26,p = 0.022)和ΔVAS手臂评分变化量(β = -1.76,p = 0.042)改善更大的独立预测因素。无论衰弱状态如何,患者的90天再入院率(p = 0.752)、并发症发生率(p = 0.223)和翻修率(p = 0.814)相似,但严重衰弱患者住院时间更长的可能性更大(p = 0.006)且需要非家庭出院(p < 0.001)。
无论接受PCDF患者的衰弱状态如何,大多数PROMs有望得到相似程度的改善。按衰弱状态分层时,并发症发生率、90天再入院率和翻修率无显著差异。然而,严重衰弱患者住院时间更有可能更长且需要非家庭出院。