Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: Spinal orthoses have been generally used in the management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in the elderly population with purported positive biomechanical and functional effects. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of the literature examining the role of spinal orthoses in osteoporotic elderly patients who sustain low energy trauma vertebral fractures. Methods: A systematic literature review adherent to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. Methodical searches utilizing MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Databases was performed. Results: Of the 2019 articles initially retrieved, 7 published articles (4 randomized controlled trials and 3 prospective cohort studies) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Five studies reported improvement in quantitative measurements of spinal column stability when either a rigid or semirigid orthosis was used, while 1 study was equivocal. The studies also showed the translation of biomechanical benefit into significant functional improvement as manifested by improved postural stability and reduced body sway. Subjective improvement in pain scores and quality of life was also noted with bracing. Conclusion: The use of spinal orthoses in neurologically intact elderly patients aged 60 years and older with osteoporotic compression vertebral fractures results in improved biomechanical vertebral stability, reduced kyphotic deformity, enhanced postural stability, greater muscular strength and superior functional outcomes.

Study Design: This was an ambispective clinical quality registry study. Objective: To evaluate utility of 11-variable modified Frailty Index (mFI) in predicting postoperative outcomes among patients ≥80 years undergoing spinal surgery. Methods: Consecutive patients ≥80 years who underwent spinal surgery between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2018, were included. Primary outcome measure was rate of major complication. Secondary outcome measures were (1) overall complication rate, (2) surgical site infection, and (3) 6-month mortality. Results: A total of 121 operations were performed. Demographic metrics were (1) age (mean ± SD) = 83.1 ± 2.8 years and (2) mFI (mean ± SD) = 2.1 ± 1.4 variables. As mFI increased from 0 to ≥4 variables, risk of major complication increased from 18.2% to 40.0% ( P = .014); overall complication increased from 45.5% to 70.0% ( P = .032); surgical site infection increased from 0.0% to 25.0% ( P = .007). There were no significant changes in risk of 6-month mortality across mFIs ( P = .115). Multivariate analysis showed that a higher mFI score of ≥3 variables was associated with a significantly higher risk of (1) major complication ( P = .025); (2) overall complication ( P = .015); (3) surgical site infection ( P = .007); and (4) mortality ( P = .044). Conclusions: mFI scores of ≥3/11 variables were associated with a higher risk of postoperative morbidity in patients aged ≥80 years undergoing spinal surgery. The mFI-associated risk stratification provides a valuable adjunct in surgical decision making for this rapidly growing subpopulation of patients.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort. Objectives: To validate the 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI) as a perioperative risk stratification tool in elderly patients undergoing spine surgery. Methods: All consecutive cases of spine surgery in patients aged 65 years or older between July 2016 and June 2018 at a state-wide trauma center were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome was post-operative major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo Classification ≥ III). Secondary outcome measures included the rate of all complications, 6-month mortality and surgical site infection. Results: A total of 348 cases were identified. The major complication rate was significantly lower in patients with an mFI of 0 compared to ≥ 0.45 (18.3% versus 42.5%, P = .049). As the mFI increased from 0 to ≥ 0.45 there was a stepwise increase in risk of major complications ( P < .001). Additionally, 6-month mortality rate was considerably lower when the mFI was 0 rather than ≥ 0.27 (4.2% versus 20.4%, P = .007). Multivariate analysis demonstrated an mFI ≥ 0.27 was significantly associated with an increased incidence of major complication (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.46-5.35, P = .002), all complication (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.70-15.11, P < .001), 6-month mortality (OR 7.39, 95% CI 2.55-21.43, P < .001) and surgical site infection (OR 4.43, 95% CI 1.71-11.51, P = .002). The American Society of Anesthesiologists’ (ASA) index did not share a stepwise relationship with any outcome. Conclusion: The mFI is significantly associated in a gradated fashion with increased morbidity and mortality. Patients with an mFI ≥ 0.27 are at greater risk of major complications, all-complications, 6-monthy mortality, and surgical site infection.