Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Temporal analysis of complication rates of cervical spine surgery for degenerative spine disease between younger and older cohorts using the CSORN registry: Is age just a number?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study design

An ambispective review of consecutive cervical spine surgery patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) between January 2015 and September 2019.

Purpose

To compare complication rates of degenerative cervical spine surgery over time between older (> 65) and younger age groups (< 65).

Summary of background data

More elderly people are having spinal surgery. Few studies have examined the temporal nature of complications of cervical spine surgery by patient age groups.

Methods

Adverse events were collected prospectively using adverse event forms. Binary logistic regression analysis was utilized to assess associations between risk modifiers and adverse events at the intra-, peri-operative and 3 months post-surgery.

Results

Of the 761 patients studied (age < 65, n = 581 (76.3%) and 65 + n = 180 (23.7%), the intra-op adverse events were not significantly different; < 65 = 19 (3.3%) vs 65 +  = 11 (6.1%), p < 0.087. Peri-operatively, the < 65 group had significantly lower percentage of adverse events (65yrs (11.2%) vs. 65 +  = (26.1%), p < 0.001). There were no differences in rates of adverse events at 3 months post-surgery (< 65 = 39 (6.7%) vs. 65 +  = 12 (6.7%), p < 0.983). Less blood loss (OR = 0.99, p < 0.010) and shorter length of hospital stay (OR = 0.97, p < 0.025) were associated with not having intra-op adverse events. Peri-operatively, > 1 operated level (OR = 1.77, p < 0.041), shorter length of hospital stay (OR = 0.86, p < 0.001) and being younger than 65 years (OR = 2.11, p < 0.006) were associated with not having adverse events.

Conclusion

Following degenerative cervical spine surgery, the older and younger age groups had significantly different complication rates at peri-operative time points, and the intra-operative and 3-month post-operative complication rates were similar in the groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jeong GK, Bendo JA (2004). Spinal disorders in the elderly. Clin Orthop Relat Res 110–125.

  2. Cheng JS, Chambless LB, McGirt MJ (2011). Trends in geriatric low back pain. AANS Neurosurgeon 20(2). http://www.aansneurosurgeon.org/200811/6/807.

  3. Saleh A, Thirukumaran C, Mesfin A, Molinari R (2017) Complications and readmission after lumbar spine surgery in elderly patients: an analysis of 2320 patients. Spine J 17(8):1106–1112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR, Glassman SD, Johnson JR (2003) Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:2089–2092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD, Bigos SJ, Ciol MA (1992) Morbidity and mortality in association with operations on the lumbar spine. The influence of age, diagnosis, and procedure. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74(4):536–543

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fehlings GM, Tetreault L, Nater A et al (2015) The aging of the global population: the changing epidemiology of disease and spinal disorders. Neurosurgery 77(4):S1–S5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Saklad M (1941) Grading of patients for surgical procedures. Anesthesiology 2(3):281–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Daabiss M (2011) American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status classification. Indian J Anaesth 55:111–115

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Wolters U, Wolf T, Stutzer H, Schroder T (1996) ASA classification and perioperative variables as predictors of postoperative outcome. Br J Anaesth 77(2):217–222

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alomari S, Liu A, Westbroek E et al (2021) Influence of sex on early outcomes of elective lumbar fusions: an updated propensity-matched and subgroup analysis. World Neurosurg 150:e388–e399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2021.03.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang MC, Chan L, Maiman DJ et al (2007) Complications and mortality associated with cervical spine surgery for degenerative disease in the United States. Spine 32:342–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nakashima H, Tetreault LA, Nagoshi N et al (2016) Does age affect surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy? results from the prospective, multicenter aospine international study on 479 patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 87(7):734–740

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ondeck NT, Bohl DD, Bovonratwet P et al (2018) general health adverse events within 30 days following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in us patients: a comparison of spine surgeons’ perceptions and reported data for rates and risk factors. Global Spine J 8(4):345–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pastorelli F, Di Silvestre M, Plasmati R et al (2011) The prevention of neural complications in the surgical treatment of scoliosis: the role of the neurophysiological intraoperative monitoring. Eur Spine J 20(1):105–114

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Mattei TA (2013) Does ‘age’ really matter? Important considerations regarding clinical outcomes in spine surgery in the elderly population. Spine J 13(8):992

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Boakye M, Patil CG, Santerelli J et al (2008) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: complications and outcomes after spinal fusion. Neurosurgery 62(2):455–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lad SP, Patil CG, Berta S et al (2009) National trends in spinal fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Surg Neurol 71(1):66–69

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marquez-Lara A, Nandyala SV, Fineberg SJ, Singh K (2014) Current trends in demographics, practice, and in-hospital outcomes in cervical spine surgery: a national database analysis between 2002 and 2011. Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) 39(6):476–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Campbell PG, Malone J, Yadla S et al (2011) Comparison of ICD-9—based, retrospective, and prospective assessments of perioperative complications: assessment of accuracy in reporting. J Neurosurg Spine 14:16–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang MC, Chan L, Maiman DJ et al (2007) Complications and mortality associated with cervical spine surgery for degenerative disease in the United States. Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) 32(3):342–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bernstein DN, Thirukumaran C, Saleh A et al (2017) Complications and readmission after cervical spine surgery in elderly patients: an analysis of 1786 patients. World Neurosurg 103:859–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hartig D, Batke J, Dea N et al (2015) Adverse events in surgically treated cervical spondylopathic myelopathy: a prospective validated observational study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40(5):292–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Li D, Yuan Y et al (2018) Functional versus chronological age: geriatric assessments to guide decision making in older patients with cancer. Lancet Oncol 19(6):e305–e316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rothrock RJ, Steinberger JM, Badgery H et al (2019) Frailty status as a predictor of 3-month cognitive and functional recovery following spinal surgery: a prospective pilot study. Spine J 19(1):104–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. James LA, Levin MA, Lin HM, Deiner SG (2019) Association of preoperative frailty with intraoperative hemodynamic instability and postoperative mortality. Anesth Analg 128(6):1279–1285

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Velanovich V, Antoine H, Swartz A et al (2013) Accumulating deficits model of frailty and postoperative mortality and morbidity: its application to a national database. J Surg Res 183(1):104–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Di Capua J, Somani S, Kim JS et al (2017) Elderly age as a risk factor for 30-day postoperative outcomes following elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Global Spine J 7(5):425–431

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Harris OA, Runnels JB, Matz PG (2001) Clinical factors associated with unexpected critical care management and prolonged hospitalization after elective cervical spine surgery. Crit Care Med 29(10):1898–1902

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Veronesi F, Borsari V, Martini L et al (2021) The impact of frailty on spine surgery: systematic review on 10 years clinical studies. Aging Dis 12(2):625–645

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Alsubaie H, Goldenberg M, Grantcharov T (2019) Quantifying recall bias in surgical safety: a need for a modern approach to morbidity and mortality reviews. Can J Surg 62(1):39–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge CSORN contributors and staff for making available this data for our review

Funding

No funding was used for the execution of this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Winnipeg Spine Program, Health Sciences Centre, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada

    Uchenna Ajoku, Michael G. Johnson & Michael Goytan

  2. Canadian Spine Outcome Research Network, 10 Armstrong Crescent, PO Box 1053, Markdale, ON, N0C 1H0, Canada

    Greg McIntosh

  3. University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Ken Thomas & Peter Lewkonia

  4. London Health Science Centre Combined Neurosurgical and Orthopaedic Spine Program, Schulich School of Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada

    Christopher S. Bailey

  5. Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Hamilton Hall

  6. Combined Neurosurgical and Orthopedic Spine Program, Department of Orthopedics Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Charles G. Fisher, Nicolas Dea & Raphaele Charest-Morin

  7. Canada East Spine Centre, Saint John Orthopedics, Dalhousie Medicine New Brunswick, Saint John Campus, Saint John, NB, Canada

    Neil Manson & Edward Abraham

  8. Divisions of Orthopaedic and Neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Y. Raja Rampersaud

  9. Department of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    Sean Christie

  10. McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Michael H. Weber

  11. Canada East Spine Centre, Division of Neurosurgery, Zone 2, Horizon Health Network, Saint John, NB, Canada

    Najmedden Attabib & André le Roux

  12. The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Philippe Phan

  13. Centre de Recherche CHU de Quebec, CHU de Quebec-Universite Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Jerome Paquet

Authors
  1. Uchenna Ajoku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael G. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Greg McIntosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ken Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christopher S. Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hamilton Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Charles G. Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Neil Manson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Y. Raja Rampersaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Nicolas Dea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Sean Christie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Edward Abraham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Michael H. Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Raphaele Charest-Morin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Najmedden Attabib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. André le Roux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Philippe Phan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Jerome Paquet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Peter Lewkonia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Michael Goytan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Greg McIntosh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ajoku, U., Johnson, M.G., McIntosh, G. et al. Temporal analysis of complication rates of cervical spine surgery for degenerative spine disease between younger and older cohorts using the CSORN registry: Is age just a number?. Eur Spine J 32, 3583–3590 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07882-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07882-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation