Trends in Short Construct Lumbar Fusions Over the Past Decade at a Single Institution. Issue 6 (15th March 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lambrechts, Mark J.; Siegel, Nicholas; Issa, Tariq Z.; Karamian, Brian A.; Bodnar, John G.; Canseco, Jose A.; Woods, Barrett I.; Kaye, I. David; Hilibrand, Alan S.; Schroeder, Gregory D.; Vaccaro, Alexander R.; Kepler, Christopher K.
• Is Part Of: Spine. Volume 48:Issue 6(2023)
• Page Start: 391
• Page End: 399
• Publication Date: 2023-03-15
• Subjects: lumbar spine -- fusion -- anterior lumbar interbody fusion -- posterolateral fusion -- transforaminal lumbar fusion -- patient-reported outcomes; Spine -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Spine -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Spine -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.73005
• DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004548
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0362-2436

Abstract

Abstract : Study Design: Retrospective cohort Objective: (1) To compare the rates of fusion techniques over the last decade; (2) to identify whether surgeon experience affects a surgeon's preferred fusion technique; (3) to evaluate differences in complications, readmissions, mortality, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) based on fusion technique. Summary of Background Data: Database studies indicate the number of lumbar fusions have been steadily increasing over the last two decades; however, insufficient granularity exists to detect if surgeons' preferences are altered based on additive surgical experience. Methods: A retrospective review of continuously collected patients undergoing lumbar fusion at a single urban academic center was performed. Rates of lumbar fusion technique: posterolateral decompression fusion (PLDF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (ALIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion + PLDF (LLIF) were recorded. Inpatient complications, 90-day readmission, and inpatient mortality were compared with χ 2 test and Bonferroni correction. The Δ 1-year PROMs were compared with the analysis of variance. Results: Of 3938 lumbar fusions, 1647 (41.8%) were PLDFs, 1356 (34.4%) were TLIFs, 885 (21.7%) were ALIFs, and 80 (2.0%) were lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Lumbar fusion rates increased but interbody fusion rates (2012: 57.3%; 2019: 57.6%) were stable across the study period. Surgeons with <10 years of experience performed more PLDFs and less ALIFs, whereas surgeons with >10 years' experience used ALIFs, TLIFs, and PLDFs at similar rates. Patients were more likely to be discharged home over the course of the decade (2012: 78.4%; 2019: 83.8%, P <0.001). No differences were observed between the techniques in regard to inpatient mortality ( P =0.441) or Δ (postoperative minus preoperative) PROMs. Conclusions: Preferred lumbar fusion technique varies by surgeon preference, but typically remains stable over the course of a decade. The preferred fusion technique did not correlate with differences in PROMs, inpatient mortality, and patient complication rates. Levels of Evidence: 3—treatment.