Laminectomy with fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy is associated with higher early morbidity and risk of perioperative complications compared with laminectomy alone: a retrospective study in the United States.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Abhinav Sharma, Paramveer Birring, Nischal Acharya, Manaav Mehta, Nicole Goldenhersh, Michael Steinhaus, Zorica Buser, Hao-Hua Wu, Sohaib Hashmi, Don Young Park, Yu-Po Lee, Nitin Bhatia
{"title":"Laminectomy with fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy is associated with higher early morbidity and risk of perioperative complications compared with laminectomy alone: a retrospective study in the United States.","authors":"Abhinav Sharma, Paramveer Birring, Nischal Acharya, Manaav Mehta, Nicole Goldenhersh, Michael Steinhaus, Zorica Buser, Hao-Hua Wu, Sohaib Hashmi, Don Young Park, Yu-Po Lee, Nitin Bhatia","doi":"10.31616/asj.2024.0350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We present data assessing the differences in 30-day morbidity, mortality, and postoperative complications between the two surgical remedy options.</p><p><strong>Overview of literature: </strong>The choice between decompression with fusion or decompression alone for the management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) remains controversial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program database was queried for adults ≥18 years diagnosed with spondylosis with cervical myelopathy (10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases [ICD-10]: M47.12) or spinal stenosis of the cervical region (ICD-10: M48.02) who underwent laminectomy (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] 63001, 63015, 63045) with or without fusion (CPT 22600) between 2015 and 2020. Patients were stratified into fusion and non-fusion cohorts for comparative review. Estimated 30-day mortality and morbidity, postoperative complications, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification were evaluated using chi-square and analysis of variance tests, and results were further stratified according to ASA classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 6,412 patients, 3,355 (52%) received laminectomy without fusion, and 3,057 (48%) experienced laminectomy with fusion. Patients undergoing decompression with fusion had higher mean morbidity (estimated probability 0.073 vs. 0.064, p<0.001), unplanned reoperations (4.2% vs. 2.7%, p<0.002), unplanned readmissions (7.6% vs. 6.3%, p<0.014), mean length of stay (5.0±8.9 days vs. 3.4±7.2 days, p<0.001), deep wound infections (0.8% vs. 0.4%, p<0.022), and bleeding risk necessitating transfusion (3.8% vs. 1.6%, p<0.001). Stratification by ASA scores demonstrated an overall higher rate of 30-day postoperative complications with increasing ASA scores in both cohorts, However, the decompression with fusion cohort showed a greater relative increase in complications compared to the decompression-alone cohort with each ASA group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Decompression with fusion is correlated with higher estimated morbidity, unplanned reoperations and readmissions, and 30-day complications postoperatively. Decompression alone is an appealing procedure option for CSM, particularly for patients with higher ASA scores and those at greater risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":8555,"journal":{"name":"Asian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2024.0350","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: A retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: We present data assessing the differences in 30-day morbidity, mortality, and postoperative complications between the two surgical remedy options.

Overview of literature: The choice between decompression with fusion or decompression alone for the management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) remains controversial.

Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program database was queried for adults ≥18 years diagnosed with spondylosis with cervical myelopathy (10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases [ICD-10]: M47.12) or spinal stenosis of the cervical region (ICD-10: M48.02) who underwent laminectomy (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] 63001, 63015, 63045) with or without fusion (CPT 22600) between 2015 and 2020. Patients were stratified into fusion and non-fusion cohorts for comparative review. Estimated 30-day mortality and morbidity, postoperative complications, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification were evaluated using chi-square and analysis of variance tests, and results were further stratified according to ASA classification.

Results: Of the 6,412 patients, 3,355 (52%) received laminectomy without fusion, and 3,057 (48%) experienced laminectomy with fusion. Patients undergoing decompression with fusion had higher mean morbidity (estimated probability 0.073 vs. 0.064, p<0.001), unplanned reoperations (4.2% vs. 2.7%, p<0.002), unplanned readmissions (7.6% vs. 6.3%, p<0.014), mean length of stay (5.0±8.9 days vs. 3.4±7.2 days, p<0.001), deep wound infections (0.8% vs. 0.4%, p<0.022), and bleeding risk necessitating transfusion (3.8% vs. 1.6%, p<0.001). Stratification by ASA scores demonstrated an overall higher rate of 30-day postoperative complications with increasing ASA scores in both cohorts, However, the decompression with fusion cohort showed a greater relative increase in complications compared to the decompression-alone cohort with each ASA group.

Conclusions: Decompression with fusion is correlated with higher estimated morbidity, unplanned reoperations and readmissions, and 30-day complications postoperatively. Decompression alone is an appealing procedure option for CSM, particularly for patients with higher ASA scores and those at greater risk.

与单纯椎板切除术相比,椎板切除术融合治疗脊髓型颈椎病的早期发病率和围手术期并发症风险更高:美国的一项回顾性研究。
研究设计:回顾性队列研究。目的:我们提供的数据评估了两种手术治疗方案在30天发病率、死亡率和术后并发症方面的差异。文献综述:选择减压融合或单独减压治疗脊髓型颈椎病(CSM)仍然存在争议。方法:在美国外科医师学会国家质量改进计划数据库中查询2015年至2020年期间接受椎板切除术(现行手术术语[CPT] 63001, 63015, 63045)或不融合(CPT 22600)的诊断为颈椎病合并颈椎病(第十版国际疾病分类[ICD-10]: M47.12)或颈椎区椎管狭窄(ICD-10: M48.02)的成人≥18岁。患者被分为融合组和非融合组进行比较评价。采用卡方检验和方差分析对30天死亡率和发病率、术后并发症以及美国麻醉医师学会(ASA)分类进行评估,并根据ASA分类对结果进行进一步分层。结果:在6412例患者中,3355例(52%)行无融合椎板切除术,3057例(48%)行融合椎板切除术。行减压融合患者的平均发病率较高(估计概率为0.073 vs. 0.064)。结论:减压融合与较高的估计发病率、计划外再手术和再入院以及术后30天并发症相关。单独减压是CSM的一种有吸引力的手术选择,特别是对于ASA评分较高和风险较高的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asian Spine Journal
Asian Spine Journal ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
108
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信