The prevalence of complications associated with lumbar and thoracic spinal deformity surgery in the elderly population: a meta-analysis.
Spinal deformity surgery
complications
elderly
meta-analysis
Journal
Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)
ISSN: 2414-469X
Titre abrégé: J Spine Surg
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101685460
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Jun 2019
Historique:
entrez:
6
8
2019
pubmed:
6
8
2019
medline:
6
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The prevalence of spinal deformities increases with age, affecting between 30% and 68% of the elderly population (ages ≥65). The reported prevalence of complications associated with surgery for spinal deformities in this population ranges between 37% and 71%. Given the wide range of reported complication rates, the decision to perform surgery remains controversial. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane to identify studies reporting complications for spinal deformity surgery in the elderly population. Pooled prevalence estimates for individual complication types were calculated using the random-effects model. Of 5,586 articles, 14 met inclusion criteria. Fourteen complication types were reported, with at least 2 studies for each complication with the following pooled prevalence: reoperation (prevalence 19%; 95% CI, 9-36%; 107 patients); hardware failure (11%; 95% CI, 5-25%; 52 patients); infection (7%; 95% CI, 4-12%; 262 patients); pseudarthrosis (6%; 95% CI, 3-12%; 149 patients); radiculopathy (6%; 95% CI, 1-33%; 116 patients); cardiovascular event (5%; 95% CI, 1-32%; 121 patients); neurological deficit (5%; 95% CI, 2-15%; 248 patients); deep vein thrombosis (3%; 95% CI, 1-7%; 230 patients); pulmonary embolism (3%; 95% CI, 1-7%; 210 patients); pneumonia (3%; 95% CI, 1-11%; 210 patients); cerebrovascular or stroke event (2%; 95% CI, 0-9%; 85 patients); death (2%; 95% CI, 1-9%; 113 patients); myocardial infarction (2%; 95% CI, 1-6%; 210 patients); and postoperative hemorrhage (1%; 95% CI, 0-10%; 85 patients). Most complication types following spinal deformity surgery in the elderly had prevalence point estimates of <6%, while all were at least ≤19%. Additional studies are needed to further explore composite prevalence estimates and prevalence associated with traditional surgical approaches as compared to minimally-invasive procedures in the elderly.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The prevalence of spinal deformities increases with age, affecting between 30% and 68% of the elderly population (ages ≥65). The reported prevalence of complications associated with surgery for spinal deformities in this population ranges between 37% and 71%. Given the wide range of reported complication rates, the decision to perform surgery remains controversial.
METHODS
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane to identify studies reporting complications for spinal deformity surgery in the elderly population. Pooled prevalence estimates for individual complication types were calculated using the random-effects model.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 5,586 articles, 14 met inclusion criteria. Fourteen complication types were reported, with at least 2 studies for each complication with the following pooled prevalence: reoperation (prevalence 19%; 95% CI, 9-36%; 107 patients); hardware failure (11%; 95% CI, 5-25%; 52 patients); infection (7%; 95% CI, 4-12%; 262 patients); pseudarthrosis (6%; 95% CI, 3-12%; 149 patients); radiculopathy (6%; 95% CI, 1-33%; 116 patients); cardiovascular event (5%; 95% CI, 1-32%; 121 patients); neurological deficit (5%; 95% CI, 2-15%; 248 patients); deep vein thrombosis (3%; 95% CI, 1-7%; 230 patients); pulmonary embolism (3%; 95% CI, 1-7%; 210 patients); pneumonia (3%; 95% CI, 1-11%; 210 patients); cerebrovascular or stroke event (2%; 95% CI, 0-9%; 85 patients); death (2%; 95% CI, 1-9%; 113 patients); myocardial infarction (2%; 95% CI, 1-6%; 210 patients); and postoperative hemorrhage (1%; 95% CI, 0-10%; 85 patients).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Most complication types following spinal deformity surgery in the elderly had prevalence point estimates of <6%, while all were at least ≤19%. Additional studies are needed to further explore composite prevalence estimates and prevalence associated with traditional surgical approaches as compared to minimally-invasive procedures in the elderly.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31380476
doi: 10.21037/jss.2019.03.06
pii: jss-05-02-223
pmc: PMC6626743
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
223-235Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Apr 15;26(8):973-83
pubmed: 11317124
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 May 1;30(9):1082-5
pubmed: 15864163
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Feb;443:75-93
pubmed: 16462430
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Apr 15;31(8):941-7
pubmed: 16622386
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Sep 15;32(20):2238-44
pubmed: 17873817
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Jul;56(7):1318-27
pubmed: 18503519
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Apr 15;34(8):832-9
pubmed: 19365253
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 May 1;36(10):817-24
pubmed: 20683385
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Apr 20;36(9):731-6
pubmed: 20881515
Neurosurgery. 2010 Dec;67(6):1609-21; discussion 1621
pubmed: 21107191
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011 Aug;24(6):368-75
pubmed: 21150667
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2011 Jun;49(6):317-22
pubmed: 21887387
J Neurosurg Spine. 2011 Dec;15(6):667-74
pubmed: 21888481
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Jul 15;37(16):E978-84
pubmed: 22343274
Eur Spine J. 2012 Nov;21(11):2165-9
pubmed: 22539156
J Clin Imaging Sci. 2012;2:39
pubmed: 22919553
Clin Spine Surg. 2016 Oct;29(8):314-7
pubmed: 23059705
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014 Feb;27(1):29-39
pubmed: 23429305
J Clin Invest. 2013 Mar;123(3):958-65
pubmed: 23454758
Neurosurg Focus. 2013 Aug;35(2):E4
pubmed: 23905955
J Clin Neurosci. 2013 Nov;20(11):1558-63
pubmed: 23906522
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Aug 7;95(15):1413-9
pubmed: 23925747
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014 Jul;24 Suppl 1:S21-30
pubmed: 24801680
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Feb;220(2):136-48.e1
pubmed: 25535170
Spine J. 2015 Jul 01;15(7):1536-44
pubmed: 25681581
J Orthop Sci. 2015 Jul;20(4):609-16
pubmed: 25963608
Eur Spine J. 2016 Mar;25(3):819-27
pubmed: 26155895
Surg Endosc. 2016 May;30(5):1762-70
pubmed: 26194260
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Jan;41(1):62-8
pubmed: 26689395
J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Nov;25(5):610-619
pubmed: 27314551
J Clin Neurosci. 2016 Dec;34:158-161
pubmed: 27612671
Spine Deform. 2015 Sep;3(5):502-511
pubmed: 27927538
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Oct 15;42(20):1559-1569
pubmed: 28399551
J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Nov;27(5):534-539
pubmed: 28820363
World Neurosurg. 2017 Nov;107:471-476
pubmed: 28826716
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Sep 15;42(18):1420-1425
pubmed: 28902101
J Spine Surg. 2017 Sep;3(3):358-363
pubmed: 29057343
J Neurosurg Spine. 2018 Jan;28(1):103-108
pubmed: 29125432
Phys Ther. 1988 Oct;68(10):1513-6
pubmed: 3174833
Control Clin Trials. 1986 Sep;7(3):177-88
pubmed: 3802833
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1982 Jul-Aug;7(4):355-9
pubmed: 6215719
Biometrics. 1994 Dec;50(4):1088-101
pubmed: 7786990
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997 Jan;79(1):48-52
pubmed: 9020444
Stroke. 1997 Jul;28(7):1507-17
pubmed: 9227708
BMJ. 1998 Feb 7;316(7129):469; author reply 470-1
pubmed: 9492685