Infection risk for primary and revision instrumented lumbar spine fusion in the Medicare population Clinical article

被引:110
|
作者
Kurtz, Steven M. [1 ]
Lau, Edmund [2 ]
Ong, Kevin L. [1 ]
Carreon, Leah [3 ]
Watson, Heather [2 ]
Albert, Todd [4 ]
Glassman, Steven [3 ]
机构
[1] Exponent Inc, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[2] Exponent Inc, Menlo Pk, CA USA
[3] Norton Leatherman Spine Ctr, Louisville, KY USA
[4] Rothman Inst Jefferson, Philadelphia, PA USA
关键词
infection; lumbar fusion; Medicare; SURGICAL SITE INFECTION; IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; IMPLANT REMOVAL; WOUND-INFECTION; SURGERY; RATES; MANAGEMENT; INDEX;
D O I
10.3171/2012.7.SPINE12203
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Object. This retrospective analysis of Medicare administrative data was performed to evaluate the risk of infection following instrumented lumbar fusion over a 10-year follow-up period in the Medicare population. Although infection can be a devastating complication, due to its rarity it is difficult to characterize infection risk except in large patient populations. Methods. Using ICD-9-CM and CPT4 procedure codes, the Medicare 5% analytical research files for inpatient, outpatient, and physician carrier claims were checked to identify patients who were treated between 1997 and 2009 with lumbar spine fusion in which cages or posterior instrumentation were used. Patients younger than 65 years old were excluded. Patients were followed continuously by using the matching denominator file until they withdrew from Medicare or died. The authors identified 15,069 patients with primary fusion procedures and 605 with revision of instrumented lumbar fusion. Infections were identified by the related ICD-9 codes (998.59 or 996.67) after fusion. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression were performed to determine adjusted infection risk for each type of spine procedure (primary vs revision) and surgical approach (anterior, posterior, combined anteroposterior), accounting for patient (for example, age, sex, comorbidities/Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI], and state buy-in) and hospital (census region) characteristics. Results. At 10 years, the overall infection incidence, including superficial and deep infections. was 8.5% in primary procedures and 12.2% in revisions. Among the factors considered, infection risk within 10 years was most influenced by comorbidities: for a CCI of 5 versus 0, the adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) was 2.48 (95% CI 1.93-3.19, p <0.001); for >= 9 versus 2-3 fused vertebrae, the AHR was 2.39 (95% CI 1.20-4.76, p <0.001); for revision versus primary fusion procedures, the AHR was 1.66(95% CI 1.28-2.15, p <0.001). Other significant predictors of 10-year infection risk included diagnosis of obesity (p <0.001); state buy-in-a proxy for socioeconomic status (p = 0.02); age (p = 0.003); surgical approach (p = 0.03); census region (p = 0.02); and the year of the index procedure (p = 0.03). Conclusions. Patient comorbidities were the greatest predictor of infection risk for the Medicare population. The high incidence of infection following instrumented fusion warrants increased focus on infection risk mitigation, especially for patients with comorbid conditions. (http://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2012.7.SPINE12203)
引用
收藏
页码:342 / 347
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Risk of infection following posterior instrumented lumbar fusion for degenerative spine disease in 817 consecutive cases Clinical article
    Chaichana, Kaisorn L.
    Bydon, Mohamad
    Santiago-Dieppa, David R.
    Hwang, Lee
    McLoughlin, Gregory
    Sciubba, Daniel M.
    Wolinsky, Jean-Paul
    Bydon, Ali
    Gokaslan, Ziya L.
    Witham, Timothy
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2014, 20 (01) : 45 - 52
  • [2] Incidence and risk of delayed surgical site infection following instrumented lumbar spine fusion
    Lewkonia, Peter
    DiPaola, Christian
    Street, John
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2016, 23 : 76 - 80
  • [3] Percutaneous endoscopic debridement and drainage for the treatment of instrumented lumbar spine infection
    Yang, Shih-Chieh
    Chiu, Yen-Chun
    Chen, Hung-Shu
    Kao, Yu-Hsien
    Jou, I-Ming
    Tu, Yuan-Kun
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2019, 27 (03)
  • [4] Differentiating minimum clinically important difference for primary and revision lumbar fusion surgeries Clinical article
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    Bratcher, Kelly R.
    Canan, Chelsea E.
    Burke, Lauren O.
    Djurasovic, Mladen
    Glassman, Steven D.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2013, 18 (01) : 102 - 106
  • [5] Reoperation Rates Following Instrumented Lumbar Spine Fusion
    Irmola, Tero Matti
    Hakkinen, Arja
    Jarvenpaa, Salme
    Marttinen, Ilkka
    Vihtonen, Kimmo
    Neva, Marko
    SPINE, 2018, 43 (04) : 295 - 301
  • [6] Neurologic Disease Is a Risk Factor for Revision After Lumbar Spine Fusion
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Carreon, Leah Y.
    Dimar, John R., II
    Gum, Jeffrey L.
    Djurasovic, Mladen
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2019, 9 (06) : 630 - 634
  • [7] Comparative in-hospital morbidity and mortality after revision versus primary thoracic and lumbar spine fusion
    Ma, Yan
    Passias, Peter
    Gaber-Baylis, Licia K.
    Girardi, Federico P.
    Memtsoudis, Stavros G.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2010, 10 (10) : 881 - 889
  • [8] Instrumented posterior interbody fusion in degenerative and multioperated lumbar spine
    Doria C.
    Lisai P.
    Meloni G.B.
    Pala P.P.
    Serra M.
    Fabbriciani C.
    Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2004, 5 (1) : 20 - 25
  • [9] Long-term outcomes of revision fusion for lumbar pseudarthrosis Clinical article
    Adogwa, Owoicho
    Parker, Scott L.
    Shau, David
    Mendelhall, Stephen K.
    Cheng, Joseph
    Aaronson, Oran
    Devin, Clinton J.
    McGirt, Matthew J.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2011, 15 (04) : 393 - 398
  • [10] Radiographic spine adipose index: an independent risk factor for deep surgical site infection after posterior instrumented lumbar fusion
    Gupta, Vikesh Kumar
    Zhou, Yuxuan
    Manson, Jonathan Francis
    Watt, James Peter
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2021, 21 (10) : 1711 - 1717