Study Design. Retrospective cohort study.Objective. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the modified frailty index (mFI-5) in a population of patients undergoing spine surgery. Summary of Background Data. The original modified frailty index (mFI-11) published as an American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 11-factor index was modified to mFI-5 after variables were removed from recent renditions. Methods. Surgical spine patients were isolated using current procedural terminology codes. mFI-11 (11) and mFI-5 (5) were calculated from 2005 to 2012. mFI was determined by dividing the factors present by available factors. To assess correlation, Spearman rho was used. Predictive values of indices were generated by binary logistic regression. Patients were stratified into groups by mFI-5: not frail (NF, <0.3), mildly frail (MF, 0.3-0.5), severely frail (SF, >0.5). Means comparison tests analyzed frailty and clinical outcomes.Results. After calculating the mFI-5 and the mFI-11, Spearman rho between the two indices was 0.926(P < 0.001). Each index established significant (all P < 0.001) predictive values for unplanned readmission (11 ¼ odds ratio [

Summary of Background Data. The impact of not achieving ideal realignment in the global alignment and proportion (GAP) score in adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction on clinical outcomes is understudied at present. Objective. To identify the clinical impact of failing to achieve GAP proportionality in ASD surgery. Study Design. Retrospective cohort. Methods. Operative ASD patients with fusion to S1/pelvis and with pre-(BL) and 2-year (2Y) data were included. Patients were assessed for matching their 6-week (6W) age-adjusted alignment goals.1 Patients were stratified by age-adjusted match at 6W postoperatively (Matched) and 6W GAP proportionality (proportioned: GAP-P; moderately disproportioned: GAP-MD; severely disproportioned: GAP-SD). Groups were assessed for differences in demographics, surgical factors, radiographic parameters, and complications occurring by 2Y. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess independent effects of not achieving GAP proportionality on postoperative outcomes for Matched and Unmatched patients. Results. Included: One hundred twenty three ASD patients. At baseline, 39.8% were GAP-SD, and 12.2% GAP-SD at 6W. Of 123 patients, 51.2% (n =63) had more than or equal to one match at 6W. GAP-SD rates did not differ by being Matched or Unmatched (P = 0.945). GAP-SD/Unmatched patients had higher rates of reoperation, implant failure, and PJF by 2Y postop (all P <0.05). Regressions controlling for age at BL, levels fused, and CCI, revealed 6W GAP-SD/Unmatched patients had higher odds of reoperation (OR: 54 [3.2–899.9]; P =0.005), implant failure (OR: 6.9 [1.1–46.1]; P =0.045), and PJF (OR: 30.1 [1.4–662.6]; P =0.031). Compared to GAP-P or GAP-MD patients, GAP-SD/ Matched patients did not have higher rates of reoperation, implant failure, or junctional failure (all P >0.05). The regression results for both Matched and Unmatched cohorts were consistent when proportionality was substituted by the continuous GAP score. Conclusion. In ASD patients who meet age-adjusted realignment goals, GAP proportionality does not significantly alter complication rates. However, GAP proportionality remains an important consideration in patients with sub-optimal age- adjusted alignment. In these cases, severe global disproportion is associated with higher rates of reoperation, implant failure, rod fracture, and junctional failure.

Study Design. Retrospective review of a prospectively enrolled multicenter Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) database. Objective. Investigate invasiveness and outcomes of ASD surgery by frailty state. Summary of Background Data. The ASD Invasiveness Index incorporates deformity-specific components to assess correction magnitude. Intersections of invasiveness, surgical outcomes, and frailty state are understudied. Methods. ASD patients with baseline and 3-year (3Y) data were included. Logistic regression analyzed the relationship between increasing invasiveness and major complications or reoperations and meeting minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for health-related quality-of-life measures at 3Y. Decision tree analysis assessed invasiveness risk-benefit cutoff points, above which experiencing complications or reoperations and not reaching MCID were higher. Significance was set to P < 0.05. Results. Overall, 195 of 322 patients were included. Baseline demographics: age 59.9 AE 14.4, 75% female, BMI 27.8 AE 6.2, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.7 AE 1.7. Surgical information: 61% osteotomy, 52% decompression, 11.0 AE 4.1 levels fused. There were 98 not frail (NF), 65 frail (F), and 30 severely frail (SF) patients. Relationships were found between increasing invasiveness and experiencing a major complication or reoperation for the entire cohort and by frailty group (all P < 0.05). Defining a favorable outcome as no major complications or reoperation and meeting MCID in any health-related quality of life at 3Y established an invasiveness cutoff of 63.9. Patients below this threshold were 1.8[1.38-2.35] (P < 0.001) times more likely to achieve favorable outcome. For NF patients, the cutoff was 79.3 (2.11[1.39-3.20] (P < 0.001), 111 for F (2.62 [1.70-4.06] (P < 0.001), and 53.3 for SF (2.35[0.78-7.13] (P ¼ 0.13). Conclusion. Increasing invasiveness is associated with increased odds of major complications and reoperations. Riskbenefit cutoffs for successful outcomes were 79.3 for NF, 111 for F, and 53.3 for SF patients. Above these, increasing invasiveness has increasing risk of major complications or reoperations and not meeting MCID at 3Y.

Objective: To prioritize the cervical parameter targets for alignment.Methods: Included: cervical deformity (CD) patients (C2–7 Cobb angle > 10°, cervical lordosis > 10°, cervical sagittal vertical axis [cSVA] > 4 cm, or chin-brow vertical angle > 25°) with full baseline (BL) and 1-year (1Y) radiographic parameters and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores; patients with cervical [C] or cervicothoracic [CT] Primary Driver Ames type. Patients with BL Ames classified as low CD for both parameters of cSVA ( < 4 cm) and T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (TS–CL) ( < 15°) were excluded. Patients assessed: meeting minimum clinically important differences (MCID) for NDI ( < -15 ΔNDI). Ratios of correction were found for regional parameters categorized by primary Ames driver (C or CT). Decision tree analysis assessed cutoffs for differences associated with meeting NDI MCID at 1Y.Results: Seventy-seven CD patients (mean age, 62.1 years; 64% female; body mass index, 28.8 kg/m2). Forty-one point six percent of patients met MCID for NDI. A backwards linear regression model including radiographic differences as predictors from BL to 1Y for meeting MCID for NDI demonstrated an R2 of 0.820 (p = 0.032) included TS–CL, cSVA, McGregor’s slope (MGS), C2 sacral slope, C2–T3 angle, C2–T3 SVA, cervical lordosis. By primary Ames driver, 67.5% of patients were C, and 32.5% CT. Ratios of change in predictors for MCID NDI patients for C and CT were not significant between the 2 groups (p > 0.050). Decision tree analysis determined cutoffs for radiographic change, prioritizing in the following order: ≥ 42.5° C2–T3 angle, > 35.4° cervical lordosis, < -31.76° C2 slope, < -11.57-mm cSVA, < -2.16° MGS, > -30.8-mm C2–T3 SVA, and ≤ -33.6° TS–CL.Conclusion: Certain ratios of correction of cervical parameters contribute to improving neck disability. Prioritizing these radiographic alignment parameters may help optimize patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing CD surgery.