Communicating hydrocephalus, a long-term complication of dural tear during lumbar spine surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. 157-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
David T. Endriga ◽  
John R. Dimar ◽  
Leah Y. Carreon
2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tetsuya Tanaka ◽  
Taichi Saito ◽  
Isao Saikawa ◽  
Tsutomu Irie ◽  
Junya Ogata ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
O Ayling ◽  
C FIsher

Background: Peri-operative adverse events (AE) lead to patient disappointment and greater costs. There is a paucity of data on how AEs affect long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine peri-operative AEs and their impact on outcome after lumbar spine surgery. Methods: 3556 consecutive patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disorders enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network were analyzed. AEs were defined using the validated Spine AdVerse Events Severity system. Outcomes at 3,12, and 24 months post-operatively included the Owestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-12 Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) scales, visual analog scale (VAS) leg and back, Euroqol-5D (EQ5D), and satisfaction. Results: Adverse events occurred in 767 (21.6%) patients, 85 (2.4%) suffered major AEs. Patients with major AEs had worse OD (physical disability) scores and did not reach minimum clinically important differences at 2 years (no AE 25.7±19.2, major: 36.4±19.1, p<0.001). Major AEs were associated with worse ODI (physical disability) scores on multivariable linear regression (p=0.011). Conclusions: Major AEs after lumbar spine surgery lead to worse functional outcomes and lower satisfaction. This highlights the need to implement strategies aimed at reducing adverse events.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. S96-S97
Author(s):  
Roland Duculan ◽  
Manuela Rigaud ◽  
Frank P. Cammisa ◽  
Andrew A. Sama ◽  
Alexander P. Hughes ◽  
...  

Neurosurgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 89 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S95-S95
Author(s):  
Oliver G S Ayling ◽  
Tamir Ailon ◽  
John T Street ◽  
Nicolas Dea ◽  
Greg McIntosh ◽  
...  

Spine ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 443-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
A ALEXANDER M JONES ◽  
J L STAMBOUGH ◽  
R A BALDERSTON ◽  
R H ROTHMAN ◽  
R E BOOTH

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-40
Author(s):  
Abdelaal Abdelbaky ◽  
Walid Younes ◽  
Mohammed Adawi

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Park ◽  
Alessandra N. Garcia ◽  
Chad Cook ◽  
Christopher I. Shaffrey ◽  
Oren N. Gottfried

OBJECTIVEObese body habitus is a challenging issue to address in lumbar spine surgery. There is a lack of consensus on the long-term influence of BMI on patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction. This study aimed to examine the differences in patient-reported outcomes over the course of 12 and 24 months among BMI classifications of patients who underwent lumbar surgery.METHODSA search was performed using the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Spine Registry from 2012 to 2018 to identify patients who underwent lumbar surgery and had either a 12- or 24-month follow-up. Patients were categorized based on their BMI as normal weight (≤ 25 kg/m2), overweight (25–30 kg/m2), obese (30–40 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (> 40 kg/m2). Outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP), and patient satisfaction was measured at 12 and 24 months postoperatively.RESULTSA total of 31,765 patients were included. At both the 12- and 24-month follow-ups, those who were obese and morbidly obese had worse ODI, VAS-BP, and VAS-LP scores (all p < 0.01) and more frequently rated their satisfaction as “I am the same or worse than before treatment” (all p < 0.01) compared with those who were normal weight. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the BMI cutoffs for predicting worsening disability and surgery dissatisfaction were 30.1 kg/m2 and 29.9 kg/m2 for the 12- and 24-month follow-ups, respectively.CONCLUSIONSHigher BMI was associated with poorer patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction at both the 12- and 24-month follow-ups. BMI of 30 kg/m2 is the cutoff for predicting worse patient outcomes after lumbar surgery.


2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aladine A. Elsamadicy ◽  
Hanna Kemeny ◽  
Owoicho Adogwa ◽  
Eric W. Sankey ◽  
C. Rory Goodwin ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEIn spine surgery, racial disparities have been shown to impact various aspects of surgical care. Previous studies have associated racial disparities with inferior surgical outcomes, including increased complication and 30-day readmission rates after spine surgery. Recently, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction measures have been proxies for overall quality of care and hospital reimbursements. However, the influence that racial disparities have on short- and long-term PROs and patient satisfaction after spine surgery is relatively unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of racial disparities on 3- and 12-month PROs and patient satisfaction after elective lumbar spine surgery.METHODSThis study was designed as a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. The medical records of adult (age ≥ 18 years) patients who had undergone elective lumbar spine surgery for spondylolisthesis (grade 1), disc herniation, or stenosis at a major academic institution were included in this study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, postoperative complications, and 30-day readmission rates were collected. Patients had prospectively collected outcome and satisfaction measures. Patient-reported outcome instruments—Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale for back pain (VAS-BP), and VAS for leg pain (VAS-LP)—were completed before surgery and at 3 and 12 months after surgery, as were patient satisfaction measures.RESULTSThe authors identified 345 medical records for 53 (15.4%) African American (AA) patients and 292 (84.6%) white patients. Baseline patient demographics and comorbidities were similar between the two cohorts, with AA patients having a greater body mass index (33.1 ± 6.6 vs 30.2 ± 6.4 kg/m2, p = 0.005) and a higher prevalence of diabetes (35.9% vs 16.1%, p = 0.0008). Surgical indications, operative variables, and postoperative variables were similar between the cohorts. Baseline and follow-up PRO measures were worse in the AA cohort, with patients having a greater baseline ODI (p < 0.0001), VAS-BP score (p = 0.0002), and VAS-LP score (p = 0.0007). However, mean changes from baseline to 3- and 12-month PROs were similar between the cohorts for all measures except the 3-month VAS-BP score (p = 0.046). Patient-reported satisfaction measures at 3 and 12 months demonstrated a significantly lower proportion of AA patients stating that surgery met their expectations (3 months: 47.2% vs 65.5%, p = 0.01; 12 months: 35.7% vs 62.7%, p = 0.007).CONCLUSIONSThe study data suggest that there is a significant difference in the perception of health, pain, and disability between AA and white patients at baseline and short- and long-term follow-ups, which may influence overall patient satisfaction. Further research is necessary to identify patient-specific factors associated with racial disparities that may be influencing outcomes to adequately measure and assess overall PROs and satisfaction after elective lumbar spine surgery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document