» Articles » PMID: 34246252

Reoperations After Fusion Surgeries for Degenerative Spinal Diseases Depending on Cervical and Lumbar Regions: a National Database Study

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology
Date 2021 Jul 11
PMID 34246252
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Reoperation is one of the key factors affecting postoperative clinical outcomes. The reoperation rates of cervical surgeries might be different from those of lumbar surgeries due to the anatomical and biomechanical differences. However, there has been no study to compare the reoperation rate between them. The purpose is to compare reoperation rates after fusion surgeries for degenerative spinal diseases depending on the anatomic region of cervical and lumbar spines.

Method: We used the Korean Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service national database. Subjects were included if they had any of the primary procedures of fusion combined with the procedure of decompression procedures under the diagnosis of degenerative diseases (n = 42,060). We assigned the patients into two groups based on anatomical regions: cervical and lumbar fusion group (n = 11,784 vs 30,276). The primary endpoint of reoperation was the repeat of any aforementioned fusion procedures. Age, gender, presence of diabetes, associated comorbidities, and hospital types were considered potential confounding factors.

Results: The reoperation rate was higher in the patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery than in the patients who underwent cervical fusion surgery during the entire follow up period (p = 0.0275). A similar pattern was found during the late period (p = 0.0468). However, in the early period, there was no difference in reoperation rates between the two groups. Associated comorbidities and hospital type were noted to be risk factors for reoperation.

Conclusions: The incidence of reoperation was higher in the patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery than those who underwent cervical fusion surgery for degenerative spinal diseases.

Citing Articles

Association Between Preoperative Cannabis Use and Increased Rate of Revision Surgery Following Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chaliparambil R, Mittal M, Gibson W, Ahuja C, Dahdaleh N, El Tecle N Cureus. 2024; 16(6):e61828.

PMID: 38975423 PMC: 11227316. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.61828.


Treatment of unstable C1 semi-ring fractures with direct C1 pedicle screw fixation using a navigational template: A case report and literature review.

Dong W, Chu Z, Hu Y Medicine (Baltimore). 2023; 102(20):e33800.

PMID: 37335724 PMC: 10194690. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000033800.


Comparison of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined with Posterior Decompression (OLIF-PD) and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) in the Treatment of Adjacent Segmental Disease(ASD).

Zhang B, Hu Y, Kong Q, Feng P, Liu J, Ma J J Pers Med. 2023; 13(2).

PMID: 36836602 PMC: 9966658. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13020368.

References
1.
King Jr J, Abbed K, Gould G, Benzel E, Ghogawala Z . Cervical spine reoperation rates and hospital resource utilization after initial surgery for degenerative cervical spine disease in 12,338 patients in Washington State. Neurosurgery. 2009; 65(6):1011-22. DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000360347.10596.BD. View

2.
Kim C, Chung C, Park C, Choi B, Hahn S, Kim M . Reoperation rate after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis: a nationwide cohort study. Spine J. 2013; 13(10):1230-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.069. View

3.
Boakye M, Patil C, Ho C, Lad S . Cervical corpectomy: complications and outcomes. Neurosurgery. 2008; 63(4 Suppl 2):295-301. DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000327028.45886.2E. View

4.
Lubelski D, Healy A, Silverstein M, Abdullah K, Thompson N, Riew K . Reoperation rates after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy: a propensity-matched analysis. Spine J. 2015; 15(6):1277-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.026. View

5.
Martin B, Mirza S, Comstock B, Gray D, Kreuter W, Deyo R . Reoperation rates following lumbar spine surgery and the influence of spinal fusion procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(3):382-7. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000254104.55716.46. View