Dataset Information

Hypovitaminosis D and Cervical Disk Herniation among Adults Undergoing Spine Surgery.

ABSTRACT: Study Design Single-center, retrospective study. Objective Suboptimal concentrations of vitamin D have been linked to hip and knee osteoarthritis in large, population-based cohort studies. We sought to examine the association of vitamin D levels with intervertebral disk disease. Methods From January 2010 through May 2011, 91 consecutive, eligible adult spine surgery patients who had undergone cervical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and preoperative serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (s25D) measurement were retrospectively included. MRI was read for C2-T1 disk herniation and degeneration (grades I to V). Logistic regressions were performed. Results Compared with the 384 disks of nondeficient patients, 162 disks of vitamin D-deficient (< 20 ng/mL) patients were more frequently herniated (40% versus 27%, p = 0.004); deficiency was not predictive of individual disk grade (unadjusted odds ratio [uOR] = 0.98, p = 0.817). On regression analysis, deficiency was associated with increased number of herniations per patient (uOR = 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22 to 3.87, p = 0.009; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.11 to 4.03, p = 0.023). When disks were analyzed individually, and levels (e.g., C5 to C6), additionally controlled for, deficiency correlated with greater likelihood of herniation per disk (uOR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.22 to 2.66, p = 0.003; aOR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.25 to 3.41, p = 0.005). Conclusion Among adults undergoing spine surgery at our institution, vitamin D deficiency was associated with cervical disk herniation. Considering the current epidemics of vitamin D insufficiency and neck pain, further investigation is warranted, as these data were retrospectively collected and subject to sampling bias.

SUBMITTER: Stoker GE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3854581 | biostudies-other | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Retrospective administrative database analysis.To determine the impact of glycemic control on perioperative complications and outcomes in patients undergoing degenerative cervical spine surgery.Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a highly prevalent systemic disease that has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality after spine surgery. Few studies have demonstrated negative effects on patients with DM who undergo cervical spine procedures; however, whether glycemic control influences surgical outcome is still unknown.The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried from 2002 to 2011. Patients who underwent cervical spine surgery for degenerative conditions were identified using the International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, codes. Three surgical cohorts were chosen: controlled diabetic, uncontrolled diabetic, and patients without diabetes. Patient demographics, surgical procedures, perioperative complications and postoperative outcomes were assessed.The prevalence of controlled and uncontrolled diabetic patients undergoing degenerative cervical spine surgery had been increasing significantly from 2002 to 2011. Compared with patients without diabetes, uncontrolled diabetic patients had significantly increased odds of respiratory, cardiac, and genitourinary complications. Uncontrolled diabetic patients also had significantly increased risk of pulmonary embolism and postoperative infection. Uncontrolled diabetic patients had increased risk of inpatient mortality (odds ratio = 6.39, 95% confidence interval = 4.09-10.00, P < 0.0001) and increased mean length of stay (almost 5 d) compared with nondiabetic patients. Similarly, controlled diabetic patients increased the odds of perioperative complications; however not nearly to the same degree. Controlled diabetic patients extended the mean length of stay by almost a day (P < 0.0001) and significantly increased costs compared with nondiabetic patients.Poor glycemic control increases the odds of inpatient mortality and perioperative complications in patients undergoing degenerative cervical spine surgery. Controlling DM before degenerative cervical spine surgery may lead to better outcomes and decreased costs.Therapeutic Level 3.

Project description:ContextFor patients with lumbar disk herniation, the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) randomized trial intent-to-treat analysis showed small but not statistically significant differences in favor of diskectomy compared with usual care. However, the large numbers of patients who crossed over between assigned groups precluded any conclusions about the comparative effectiveness of operative therapy vs usual care.ObjectiveTo compare the treatment effects of diskectomy and usual care.Design, setting, and patientsProspective observational cohort of surgical candidates with imaging-confirmed lumbar intervertebral disk herniation who were treated at 13 spine clinics in 11 US states and who met the SPORT eligibility criteria but declined randomization between March 2000 and March 2003.InterventionsStandard open diskectomy vs usual nonoperative care.Main outcome measuresChanges from baseline in the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) bodily pain and physical function scales and the modified Oswestry Disability Index (American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons/MODEMS version).ResultsOf the 743 patients enrolled in the observational cohort, 528 patients received surgery and 191 received usual nonoperative care. At 3 months, patients who chose surgery had greater improvement in the primary outcome measures of bodily pain (mean change: surgery, 40.9 vs nonoperative care, 26.0; treatment effect, 14.8; 95% confidence interval, 10.8-18.9), physical function (mean change: surgery, 40.7 vs nonoperative care, 25.3; treatment effect, 15.4; 95% CI, 11.6-19.2), and Oswestry Disability Index (mean change: surgery, -36.1 vs nonoperative care, -20.9; treatment effect, -15.2; 95% CI, -18.5. to -11.8). These differences narrowed somewhat at 2 years: bodily pain (mean change: surgery, 42.6 vs nonoperative care, 32.4; treatment effect, 10.2; 95% CI, 5.9-14.5), physical function (mean change: surgery, 43.9 vs nonoperavtive care 31.9; treatment effect, 12.0; 95% CI; 7.9-16.1), and Oswestry Disability Index (mean change: surgery -37.6 vs nonoperative care -24.2; treatment effect, -13.4; 95% CI, -17.0 to -9.7).ConclusionsPatients with persistent sciatica from lumbar disk herniation improved in both operated and usual care groups. Those who chose operative intervention reported greater improvements than patients who elected nonoperative care. However, nonrandomized comparisons of self-reported outcomes are subject to potential confounding and must be interpreted cautiously.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000410.

Project description:ContextLumbar diskectomy is the most common surgical procedure performed for back and leg symptoms in US patients, but the efficacy of the procedure relative to nonoperative care remains controversial.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of surgery for lumbar intervertebral disk herniation.Design, setting, and patientsThe Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial, a randomized clinical trial enrolling patients between March 2000 and November 2004 from 13 multidisciplinary spine clinics in 11 US states. Patients were 501 surgical candidates (mean age, 42 years; 42% women) with imaging-confirmed lumbar intervertebral disk herniation and persistent signs and symptoms of radiculopathy for at least 6 weeks.InterventionsStandard open diskectomy vs nonoperative treatment individualized to the patient.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were changes from baseline for the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey bodily pain and physical function scales and the modified Oswestry Disability Index (American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons MODEMS version) at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 and 2 years from enrollment. Secondary outcomes included sciatica severity as measured by the Sciatica Bothersomeness Index, satisfaction with symptoms, self-reported improvement, and employment status.ResultsAdherence to assigned treatment was limited: 50% of patients assigned to surgery received surgery within 3 months of enrollment, while 30% of those assigned to nonoperative treatment received surgery in the same period. Intent-to-treat analyses demonstrated substantial improvements for all primary and secondary outcomes in both treatment groups. Between-group differences in improvements were consistently in favor of surgery for all periods but were small and not statistically significant for the primary outcomes.ConclusionsPatients in both the surgery and the nonoperative treatment groups improved substantially over a 2-year period. Because of the large numbers of patients who crossed over in both directions, conclusions about the superiority or equivalence of the treatments are not warranted based on the intent-to-treat analysis.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000410.

Dataset Information

Hypovitaminosis D and Cervical Disk Herniation among Adults Undergoing Spine Surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets