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
. 2023 Feb;17(1):75-85.
doi: 10.31616/asj.2021.0523. Epub 2022 Dec 23.

Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity between Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Performed in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings

Junho Song  1 , Austen David Katz  1 , Dean Perfetti  1 , Alan Job  1 , Matthew Morris  1 , Sohrab Virk  1 , Jeff Silber  1 , David Essig  1
Affiliations

Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity between Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Performed in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings

Junho Song et al. Asian Spine J. 2023 Feb.

Abstract

Study design: A retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: To compare 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity for patients undergoing posterior cervical decompression and fusion (PCDF) in inpatient vs. outpatient settings.

Overview of literature: PCDF has recently been increasingly performed in outpatient settings, often utilizing minimally invasive techniques. However, literature evaluating short-term outcomes for PCDF is scarce. Moreover, no currently large-scale database studies have compared short-term outcomes between PCDF performed in the inpatient and outpatient settings.

Methods: Patients who underwent PCDF from 2005 to 2018 were identified using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Regression analysis was utilized to compare primary outcomes between surgical settings and evaluate for predictors thereof.

Results: We identified 8,912 patients. Unadjusted analysis revealed that outpatients had lower readmission (4.7% vs. 8.8%, p =0.020), reoperation (1.7% vs. 3.8%, p =0.038), and morbidity (4.5% vs. 11.2%, p <0.001) rates. After adjusting for baseline differences, readmission, reoperation, and morbidity no longer statistically differed between surgical settings. Outpatients had lower operative time (126 minutes vs. 179 minutes) and levels fused (1.8 vs. 2.2) (p <0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that age (p =0.008; odds ratio [OR], 1.012), weight loss (p =0.045; OR, 2.444), and increased creatinine (p <0.001; OR, 2.233) independently predicted readmission. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of ≥3 predicted reoperation (p =0.028; OR, 1.406). Rehabilitation discharge (p <0.001; OR, 1.412), ASA-class of ≥3 (p =0.008; OR, 1.296), decreased hematocrit (p <0.001; OR, 1.700), and operative time (p <0.001; OR, 1.005) predicted morbidity.

Conclusions: The 30-day outcomes were statistically similar between surgical settings, indicating that PCDF can be safely performed as an outpatient procedure. Surrogates for poor health predicted negative outcomes. These results are particularly important as we continue to shift spinal surgery to outpatient centers. This importance has been highlighted by the need to unburden inpatient sites, particularly during public health emergencies, such as the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Keywords: Cervical vertebrae; Inpatients; Outpatients; Posterior cervical decompression and fusion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

David Essig receives consulting fees for Stryker and DePuy. Jeff Silber receives teaching fees for Stryker. For all remaining authors, no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Reasons for reoperation among inpatient vs. outpatient posterior cervical decompression and fusion.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Salzmann SN, Derman PB, Lampe LP, et al. Cervical spinal fusion: 16-year trends in epidemiology, indications, and in-hospital outcomes by surgical approach. World Neurosurg. 2018;113:e280–95. - PubMed
    1. Boehm H, Greiner-Perth R, El-Saghir H, Allam Y. A new minimally invasive posterior approach for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy: surgical technique and preliminary results. Eur Spine J. 2003;12:268–73. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gologorsky Y. Outpatient spine surgery: transition to the ambulatory surgery center. World Neurosurg. 2018;114:369–70. - PubMed
    1. Maruo K, Tachibana T, Arizumi F, Kusuyama K, Kishima K, Yoshiya S. Clinical outcomes after posterior cervical decompression and fusion surgery for destructive spondyloarthropathy in patients undergoing long-term hemodialysis: a matched case-control study. J Orthop Sci. 2019;24:404–8. - PubMed
    1. Youssef JA, Heiner AD, Montgomery JR, et al. Outcomes of posterior cervical fusion and decompression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J. 2019;19:1714–29. - PubMed