Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Mar;3(1):31-37.
doi: 10.21037/jss.2017.03.09.

Impact of surgical approach on complication rates after elective spinal fusion (≥3 levels) for adult spine deformity

Affiliations

Impact of surgical approach on complication rates after elective spinal fusion (≥3 levels) for adult spine deformity

Aladine A Elsamadicy et al. J Spine Surg. 2017 Mar.

Abstract

Background: While there are variations in techniques and surgical approaches to spinal fusion, there is not a defined consensus on a recommended surgical approach. The aim of this study is to determine if there was a difference in intra- and post-operative complication rates between different surgical approaches after elective spinal fusion (≥3 levels) for adult spine deformity.

Methods: The medical records of 443 adult spine deformity patients undergoing elective spinal fusion (≥3) at a major academic institution from 2005 to 2015 were reviewed. We identified 96 (21.7%) anterior only, 225 (50.8%) posterior only, and 122 (27.5%) combined anterior/posterior approaches taken for spinal fusion (anterior: n=96; posterior: n=225). Patient demographics, comorbidities, anatomical location, and complication rates were collected for each patient. The primary outcome investigated in this study was the rate of intra- and post-operative complications.

Results: Patient demographics and comorbidities were similar between all groups. The posterior approach had significantly higher EBL (P<0.0001) and number of PRBC blood transfusions (P<0.002), while the combined approach had a higher operative time (P<0.0001). The posterior approach had a significantly higher rate of intraoperative durotomies than anterior and combined (anterior: 0% vs. posterior: 11.1% vs. combined: 4.1%, P<0.0001). There was no significant difference in the rate 30-day readmissions between the cohorts (anterior: 10.4% vs. posterior: 12.8% vs. combined: 13.1%, P=0.80).

Conclusions: Our study suggests that posterior approaches to spinal fusion may lead to a higher incidence of complications compared to anterior or combined anterior/posterior approaches.

Keywords: Adult spinal deformity; outcomes; spinal fusion; surgical approach.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rajaee SS, Bae HW, Kanim LE, et al. Spinal fusion in the United States: analysis of trends from 1998 to 2008. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:67-76. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31820cccfb - DOI - PubMed
    1. Scaduto AA, Gamradt SC, Yu WD, et al. Perioperative complications of threaded cylindrical lumbar interbody fusion devices: anterior versus posterior approach. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:502-7. 10.1097/00024720-200312000-00003 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rushton PR, Grevitt MP, Sell PJ. Anterior or posterior surgery for right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)? A prospective cohorts' comparison using radiologic and functional outcomes. J Spinal Disord Tech 2015;28:80-8. 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182693e33 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Freudenberger C, Lindley EM, Beard DW, et al. Posterior versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion with anterior tension band plating: retrospective analysis. Orthopedics 2009;32:492. 10.3928/01477447-20090527-12 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pradhan BB, Nassar JA, Delamarter RB, et al. Single-level lumbar spine fusion: a comparison of anterior and posterior approaches. J Spinal Disord Tech 2002;15:355-61. 10.1097/00024720-200210000-00003 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources