TY - JOUR
T1 - Variation in surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in Canada
T2 - surgeon assessment of stability and impact on treatment
AU - Glennie, R. Andrew
AU - Bailey, Christopher S.
AU - Abraham, Edward
AU - Manson, Neil
AU - Casha, Steve
AU - Thomas, Kenneth
AU - Paquet, Jerome
AU - McIntosh, Greg
AU - Hall, Hamiton
AU - Fisher, Charles G.
AU - Rampersaud, Y. Raja
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Introduction: Controversy exists regarding the optimal surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS). Not all DS patients are the same, and the degree to which inherent stability may dictate treatment is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the variability in surgical approach relative to surgeon classified stability. The secondary objective was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) across different surgical techniques and grades of stability. Methods: Patients prospectively enrolled from eleven tertiary care institutions and followed from 2015 to 2019. The surgical technique was at the surgeon’s discretion. Surgeons were asked to grade the degree of instability based on the degenerative spondylolisthesis instability classification system (DSIC). DSIC categorizes three different types (I-stable, II-potentially unstable, and III-unstable). One-year changes in PROs were compared between each group. Multivariable regression was used to identify any characteristics that explained variability in treatment. Results: There were 323 patients enrolled in this study. Surgeons’ stability classification versus procedure [decompression alone (D)/decompression and posterolateral fusion (D-PL)/and decompression with posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (D-PLIF/TLIF)] were as follows: type I (n = 91): D-41%/D-PL-13%/D-PLIF/TLIF-46%; type II (n = 175): D-23%/D-PL-17%/D-PLIF/TLIF-60%; and type III (n = 57):(D-0%/D-PL-14%/D-PLIF/TLIF-86%). Type I patients undergoing D-PL had some improvements in EQ-5D and NRS versus those undergoing D-PLIF/TLIF but otherwise there were no other significant differences between groups. Regression analysis demonstrated advanced age (OR = 1.06, CI 1.02–10.12) and type I (OR = 2.61, CI 1.17–5.81) were associated with receiving decompression surgery alone. Conclusions: There exists considerable variation in surgical management of DS in Canada. Given similar PROs in two of the three groups, there is potential to tailor surgical intervention and improve resource utilization.
AB - Introduction: Controversy exists regarding the optimal surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS). Not all DS patients are the same, and the degree to which inherent stability may dictate treatment is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the variability in surgical approach relative to surgeon classified stability. The secondary objective was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) across different surgical techniques and grades of stability. Methods: Patients prospectively enrolled from eleven tertiary care institutions and followed from 2015 to 2019. The surgical technique was at the surgeon’s discretion. Surgeons were asked to grade the degree of instability based on the degenerative spondylolisthesis instability classification system (DSIC). DSIC categorizes three different types (I-stable, II-potentially unstable, and III-unstable). One-year changes in PROs were compared between each group. Multivariable regression was used to identify any characteristics that explained variability in treatment. Results: There were 323 patients enrolled in this study. Surgeons’ stability classification versus procedure [decompression alone (D)/decompression and posterolateral fusion (D-PL)/and decompression with posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (D-PLIF/TLIF)] were as follows: type I (n = 91): D-41%/D-PL-13%/D-PLIF/TLIF-46%; type II (n = 175): D-23%/D-PL-17%/D-PLIF/TLIF-60%; and type III (n = 57):(D-0%/D-PL-14%/D-PLIF/TLIF-86%). Type I patients undergoing D-PL had some improvements in EQ-5D and NRS versus those undergoing D-PLIF/TLIF but otherwise there were no other significant differences between groups. Regression analysis demonstrated advanced age (OR = 1.06, CI 1.02–10.12) and type I (OR = 2.61, CI 1.17–5.81) were associated with receiving decompression surgery alone. Conclusions: There exists considerable variation in surgical management of DS in Canada. Given similar PROs in two of the three groups, there is potential to tailor surgical intervention and improve resource utilization.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85111499139&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85111499139&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00586-021-06928-8
DO - 10.1007/s00586-021-06928-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 34327542
AN - SCOPUS:85111499139
SN - 0940-6719
VL - 30
SP - 3709
EP - 3719
JO - European Spine Journal
JF - European Spine Journal
IS - 12
ER -