Dataset Information

Baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Correlate Weakly With Radiographic Parameters: A Multicenter, Prospective NIH Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis Study of 286 Patients.

ABSTRACT: Prospective, cross-sectional study.The aim of the study was to determine which radiographic parameters drive patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in primary presentation adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS).Previous literature suggests correlations between PROs and sagittal plane deformity (sagittal vertical axis [SVA], pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis [PI-LL] mismatch, pelvic tilt [PT]). Prior work included revision and primary adult spinal deformity patients. The present study addresses only primary presentation ASLS.Prospective baseline data were analyzed on 286 patients enrolled in an NIH RO1 clinical trial by nine centers from 2010 to 2014.40 to 80 years old, lumbar Cobb (LC) 30° or higher and Scoliosis Research Society-23 score 4.0 or less in Pain, Function or Self-Image domains, or Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 20 or higher. Patients were primary presentation (no prior spinal deformity surgery) and had complete baseline data: standing coronal/sagittal 36" radiographs and PROs (ODI, Scoliosis Research Society-23, Short Form-12). Correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate relations between radiographic parameters and PROs for the study population and a subset of patients with ODI 40 or higher. Analysis of variance was used to identify differences in PROs for radiographic modifier groups.Mean age was 60.3 years. Mean spinopelvic parameters were: LL?=?-39.2°; SVA?=?3.1 cm; sacral slope?=?32.5°; PT?=?23.9°; PI-LL mismatch?=?16.8°. Only weak correlations (0.2-0.4) were identified between population sacral slope, SVA and SVA modifiers, and SRS function. SVA and SVA modifiers were weakly associated with ODI. Although there were more correlations in subset analysis of high-symptom patients, all were weak. Analysis of variance identified significant differences in ODI reported by SVA modifier groups.In primary presentation patients with ASLS and a subset of "high-symptom" patients (ODI???40), only weak associations between baseline PROs and radiographic parameters were identified. For this patient population, these results suggest regional radiographic parameters (LC, LL, PT, PI-LL mismatch) are not drivers of PROs and cannot be used to extrapolate effect on patient-perceived pathology.2.

SUBMITTER: Chapman TM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5119760 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Correlate Weakly With Radiographic Parameters: A Multicenter, Prospective NIH Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis Study of 286 Patients.

Chapman Todd M TM Baldus Christine R CR Lurie Jon D JD Glassman Steven D SD Schwab Frank J FJ Shaffrey Christopher I CI Lafage Virginie V Boachie-Adjei Oheneba O Kim Han J HJ Smith Justin S JS Crawford Charles H CH Lenke Lawrence G LG Buchowski Jacob M JM Edwards Charles C Koski Tyler T Parent Stefan S Lewis Stephen S Kang Daniel G DG McClendon Jamal J Metz Lionel L Zebala Lukas P LP Kelly Michael P MP Spratt Kevin F KF Bridwell Keith H KH

Spine 20161101 22

<h4>Study design</h4>Prospective, cross-sectional study.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of the study was to determine which radiographic parameters drive patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in primary presentation adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS).<h4>Summary of background data</h4>Previous literature suggests correlations between PROs and sagittal plane deformity (sagittal vertical axis [SVA], pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis [PI-LL] mismatch, pelvic tilt [PT]). Prior work included revision and ...[more]

PMID: 27831984

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness of operative compared with nonoperative treatment at initial presentation (no prior fusion) for adult lumbar scoliosis has not, to our knowledge, been evaluated in controlled trials. The goals of this study were to evaluate the effects of operative and nonoperative treatment and to assess the benefits of these treatments to help treating physicians determine whether patients are better managed operatively or nonoperatively.MethodsPatients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (aged 40 to 80 years, with a coronal Cobb angle measurement of ≥30° and an Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score of ≥20 or Scoliosis Research Society [SRS]-22 score of ≤4.0) from 9 North American centers were enrolled in concurrent randomized or observational cohorts to evaluate operative versus nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were differences in the mean change from baseline in the SRS-22 subscore and ODI at 2-year follow-up. For the randomized cohort, the initial sample-size calculation estimated that 41 patients per group (82 total) would provide 80% power with alpha equal to 0.05, anticipating 10% loss to follow-up and 20% nonadherence in the nonoperative arm. However, an interim sample-size calculation estimated that 18 patients per group would be sufficient.ResultsSixty-three patients were enrolled in the randomized cohort: 30 in the operative group and 33 in the nonoperative group. Two hundred and twenty-three patients were enrolled in the observational cohort: 112 in the operative group and 111 in the nonoperative group. The intention-to-treat analysis of the randomized cohort found that, at 2 years of follow-up, outcomes did not differ between the groups. Nonadherence was high in the randomized cohort (64% nonoperative-to-operative crossover). In the as-treated analysis of the randomized cohort, operative treatment was associated with greater improvement at the 2-year follow-up in the SRS-22 subscore (adjusted mean difference, 0.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.5 to 1.0]) and in the ODI (adjusted mean difference, -16 [95% CI, -22 to -10]) (p < 0.001 for both). Surgery was also superior to nonoperative care in the observational cohort at 2 years after treatment on the basis of SRS-22 subscore and ODI outcomes (p < 0.001). In an overall responder analysis, more operative patients achieved improvement meeting or exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in the SRS-22 subscore (85.7% versus 38.7%; p < 0.001) and the ODI (77.4% versus 38.3%; p < 0.001). Thirty-four revision surgeries were performed in 24 (14%) of the operative patients.ConclusionsOn the basis of as-treated and MCID analyses, if a patient with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis is satisfied with current spine-related health, nonoperative treatment is advised, with the understanding that improvement is unlikely. If a patient is not satisfied with current spine health and expects improvement, surgery is preferred.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:ObjectiveAdult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) is a widespread and debilitating subset of adult spinal deformity. Although many patients benefit from operative treatment, surgery entails substantial cost and risk for adverse events. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are patient-centered tools used to evaluate the appropriateness of surgery and to assist in the shared decision-making process. Framing realistic patient expectations should include the possible functional limitation to improvement inherent in surgical intervention, such as multilevel fusion to the sacrum. The authors' objective was to predict postoperative ASLS PROMs by using clustering analysis, generalized longitudinal regression models, percentile analysis, and clinical improvement analysis of preoperative health-related quality-of-life scores for use in surgical counseling.MethodsOperative results from the combined ASLS cohorts were examined. PROM score clustering after surgery investigated limits of surgical improvement. Patients were categorized by baseline disability (mild, moderate, moderate to severe, or severe) according to preoperative Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Responder analysis for patients achieving improvement meeting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) standards was performed using both fixed-threshold and patient-specific values (MCID = 30% of remaining scale, SCB = 50%). Best (top 5%), worst (bottom 5%), and median scores were calculated across disability categories.ResultsA total of 171/187 (91%) of patients with ASLS achieved 2-year follow-up. Patients rarely achieved a PROM ceiling for any measure, with 33%-43% of individuals clustering near 4.0 for SRS domains. Patients with severe baseline disability (< 2.0) SRS-pain and SRS-function scores were often left with moderate to severe disability (2.0-2.9), unlike patients with higher (≥ 3.0) initial PROM values. Patients with mild disability according to baseline SRS-function score were unlikely to improve. Crippling baseline ODI disability (> 60) commonly left patients with moderate disability (median ODI = 32). As baseline ODI disability increased, patients were more likely to achieve MCID and SCB (p < 0.001). Compared to fixed threshold values for MCID and SCB, patient-specific values were more sensitive to change for patients with minimal ODI baseline disability (p = 0.008) and less sensitive to change for patients with moderate to severe SRS subscore disability (p = 0.01).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that ASLS surgeries have a limit to possible improvement, probably due to both baseline disability and the effects of surgery. The most disabled patients often had moderate to severe disability (SRS < 3, ODI > 30) at 2 years, emphasizing the importance of patient counseling and expectation management.

Project description:Study designA post hoc analysis.ObjectiveAdvances in machine learning (ML) have led to tools offering individualized outcome predictions for adult spinal deformity (ASD). Our objective is to examine the properties of these ASD models in a cohort of adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) patients.Summary of background dataML algorithms produce patient-specific probabilities of outcomes, including major complication (MC), reoperation (RO), and readmission (RA) in ASD. External validation of these models is needed.MethodsThirty-nine predictive factors (12 demographic, 9 radiographic, 4 health-related quality of life, 14 surgical) were retrieved and entered into web-based prediction models for MC, unplanned RO, and hospital RA. Calculated probabilities were compared with actual event rates. Discrimination and calibration were analyzed using receiver operative characteristic area under the curve (where 0.5=chance, 1=perfect) and calibration curves (Brier scores, where 0.25=chance, 0=perfect). Ninety-five percent confidence intervals are reported.ResultsA total of 169 of 187 (90%) surgical patients completed 2-year follow up. The observed rate of MCs was 41.4% with model predictions ranging from 13% to 68% (mean: 38.7%). RO was 20.7% with model predictions ranging from 9% to 54% (mean: 30.1%). Hospital RA was 17.2% with model predictions ranging from 13% to 50% (mean: 28.5%). Model classification for all three outcome measures was better than chance for all [area under the curve=MC 0.6 (0.5-0.7), RA 0.6 (0.5-0.7), RO 0.6 (0.5-0.7)]. Calibration was better than chance for all, though best for RA and RO (Brier Score=MC 0.22, RA 0.16, RO 0.17).ConclusionsASD prediction models for MC, RA, and RO performed better than chance in a cohort of adult lumbar scoliosis patients, though the homogeneity of ASLS affected calibration and accuracy. Optimization of models require samples with the breadth of outcomes (0%-100%), supporting the need for continued data collection as personalized prediction models may improve decision-making for the patient and surgeon alike.

Project description:BackgroundFinding an optimal treatment strategy for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients remains challenging because of its intrinsic complexity. For mild to moderate scoliosis patients with lower skeletal growth potential (Risser 3-5), most clinicians agree with observation treatment; however, the curve progression that occurs during puberty, the adolescent period, and even in adulthood, remains a challenging issue for clinicians. The aim of the study is to investigate the efficacy of Schroth exercise in AIS patients with lower skeletal growth potential (Risser 3-5) and moderate scoliosis (Cobb angle 20°-40°).MethodsFrom 2015 to 2017, data of 64 patients diagnosed with AIS in Peking University Third Hospital were reviewed. Forty-three patients underwent Schroth exercise were classified as Schroth group, and 21 patients underwent observation were classified as observation group. Outcomes were measured by health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and radiographic parameters. HRQOL was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back, Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) patient questionnaire. Radiographic spinopelvic parameters were obtained from anteroposterior and lateral X-rays. The pre-treatment and post-treatment HRQOL and radiographic parameters were tested to validate Schroth exercise efficacy. The inter-rater reliability of the radiographic parameters was tested using the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The paired t test was used to examine HRQOL and radiographic parameters. Clinical relevance between C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and thoracic kyphosis was analyzed using Spearman correlation.ResultsIn Schroth group, VAS back score, SRS-22 pain, and SRS-22 self-image domain were significantly improved from pre-treatment 3.0 ± 0.8, 3.6 ± 0.5, and 3.5 ± 0.7 to post-treatment 1.6 ± 0.6 (t = 5.578, P = 0.013), 4.0 ± 0.3 (t = -3.918, P = 0.001), and 3.7 ± 0.4 (t = -6.468, P < 0.001), respectively. No significant improvements of SRS-22 function domain (t = -2.825, P = 0.088) and mental health domain (t = -3.174, P = 0.061) were observed. The mean Cobb angle decreased from 28.9 ± 5.5° to 26.3 ± 5.2° at the final follow-up, despite no statistical significance was observed (t = 1.853, P = 0.102). The mean C2-C7 SVA value decreased from 21.7 ± 8.4 mm to 17.0 ± 8.0 mm (t = -1.224 P = 0.049) and mean T1 tilt decreased from 4.9 ± 4.2 ° to 3.5 ± 3.1° (t = 2.913, P = 0.011). No significant improvement of radiographic parameters and HRQOL were observed in observation group.ConclusionsFor AIS patients with a Risser 3-5 and a Cobb angle 20°-40°, Schroth exercises improved HRQOL and halted curve progression during the follow-up period. Both cervical spine alignment and shoulder balance were also significantly improved after Schroth exercises. We recommend Schroth exercises for patients with AIS.

Project description:Study designA prospective study with randomized and observational cohorts.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine baseline variables affecting adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) decision making to participate in randomization (RAND), observational nonsurgical (OBS-NS), or observational surgical (OBS-S) cohorts.Summary of background dataMultiple factors play a key role in a patient's decision to be randomized or to choose an OBS-NS or OBS-S course for ASLS. Studies evaluating these factors are limited.MethodsEligible candidates (patients with ASLS and no prior spinal fusion deformity surgery) from 9 centers participated in a RAND, OBS-NS, or OBS-S cohort study. Baseline variables (demographics, socioeconomics, patient-reported outcomes [PROs], Functional Treadmill Test, radiographs) were analyzed.ResultsTwo hundred ninety-five patients were enrolled: 67 RAND, 115 OBS-NS, 113 OBS-S. Subanalysis of older patients (60-80 years) found 54% of OBS-NS had college degrees compared with 82% of RAND and 71% of OBS-S (P = 0.010). Patients deciding to be part of a RAND cohort have similar clinical characteristics to the OBS-S cohort. OBS-S had more symptomatic spinal stenosis (57% vs. 39%, P = 0.029) and worse scores than OBS-NS on the basis of PROs (Back Pain Numerical Rating Scale [NRS 6.3 vs. 5.5, P = 0.007]; Scoliosis Research Society [SRS] Pain [2.8 vs. 3.0, P = 0.018], Function [3.1 vs. 3.4, P = 0.019] and Self-Image [2.7 vs. 3.1, P = 0.002]; Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) [36.9 vs. 31.8, P = 0.029]; post-Treadmill back [5.8 vs. 4.4, P = 0.002] and leg [4.3 vs. 3.1, P = 0.037] pain NRS and larger lumbar coronal Cobb angles (56.5 degrees vs. 48.8 degrees, P < 0.001). RAND had more baseline motor deficits (10.4% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.036) and worse scores than OBS-NS on the basis of ODI (38.8 vs. 31.8, P = 0.006), SRS Function [3.1 vs. 3.4, P = 0.034], and Self-Image [2.7 vs. 3.1, P = 0.007].ConclusionPatients with worse PROs, more back pain, more back and leg pain with ambulation, and larger lumbar Cobb angles are more inclined to select surgical over nonsurgical management.

Project description:Study Design Retrospective study. Objective Cervical scoliosis is a rare condition that can arise from various etiologies. Few reports on the surgical management of cervical scoliosis exist. Our objective was to evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes following surgical management of cervical scoliosis. Methods We evaluated our cervical spine surgical database for patients with cervical scoliosis (Cobb angle > 10 degrees) from 2005 to 2010. Demographic data including age, gender, diagnoses, and primary versus revision surgery was collected. Surgical data including procedure (anterior versus posterior), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of surgery, length of hospitalization, and complications was recorded. Preoperative and postoperative Cobb angle measurements and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores were recorded. Results Cervical scoliosis was identified in 18 patients. We excluded 5, leaving 5 men and 8 women with an average age of 50.7 (median 52, range 25 to 65). The average follow-up was 40 months (median 36.5, range 5 to 87). An anterior-only approach was used in 6 cases (average 4 levels fused), 5 cases were posterior-only approach (average 8.7 levels fused), and 2 cases were combined anterior-posterior approach. The EBL was an average of 286 mL (median 150, range 50 to 900), the average surgical time was 266 minutes (median 239, range 136 to 508), and the average hospital stay was 2.7 days (median 2, range 1 to 7). Complications occurred in 7 patients, and 2 developed adjacent segment pathology. The average coronal Cobb angle preoperatively was 35.1 degrees (median 31, range 13 to 63) and corrected was 15.7 degrees (median 10.5, range 2 to 59) postoperatively (p < 0.005). The average NDI preoperatively was 24.9 (median 26, range 6 to 37) and was reduced to 17.8 (median 18, range 7 to 30) postoperatively (p < 0.02). Conclusion Surgical management of cervical scoliosis can result in deformity correction and improvement in patient outcomes. Higher rates of complications may be encountered.

Project description:Study designA retrospective analysis of prospective, multicenter National Institute of Health clinical trial.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the rate of neurologic complications and impact of new neurologic deficits on 1-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs).Summary of background dataThere are limited studies evaluating the impact of new neurologic deficits on PROs following surgery for primary presentation adult lumbar scoliosis.MethodsPatients were divided into two groups: new postoperative neurological deficit (Def) or no deficit (NoDef). Preoperative and 1-year follow-up PROs were analyzed [Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form-12 Physical/Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS/MCS), and back/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)].ResultsOne hundred forty-one patients: 14 Def (9.9%), 127 NoDef (90.1%). No differences were observed in demographic, radiographic, or PRO data between groups preoperatively. Def group had longer surgical procedures (8.3 vs. 6.9 hours, P = 0.030), greater blood loss (2832 vs. 2606 mL, P = 0.022), and longer hospitalizations (10.6 vs. 7.8 days, P = 0.004). NoDef group reported significant improvement in all PROs from preop to 1-year postoperative. Def group only had improvement in SRS Pain (2.7 preop to 3.4 postop, P = 0.037) and self-image domains (2.7 to 3.6, p = 0.004), and NRS back pain (6.6 to 3.2, P = 0.004) scores with significant worsening of NRS leg pain (4.1 to 6.1, P = 0.045). Group comparisons of 1-year postop PROs found that Def group reported more NRS leg pain (6.1 vs. 1.7, P < 0.001) and worse outcomes than NoDef group for ODI (35.7 vs. 23.1, P = 0.016) and PCS (32.6 vs. 41.9, P = 0.007).ConclusionWe found a 9.9% rate of new neurologic deficits following surgery for symptomatic primary presentation adult lumbar scoliosis, much higher than previous studies. Most neurologic deficits improved by 1-year follow-up, but appeared to have a dramatic negative impact on PROs, with increased postoperative leg pain and greater patient-perceived pathology reported in patients experiencing neurological deficits compared with those who did not.Level of evidence3.

Dataset Information

Baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Correlate Weakly With Radiographic Parameters: A Multicenter, Prospective NIH Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis Study of 286 Patients.

Publications

Baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Correlate Weakly With Radiographic Parameters: A Multicenter, Prospective NIH Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis Study of 286 Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets