P295. Teriparatide use in osteopenic patients undergoing lumbar fusion
Ameer Tabbaa
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.06.418
IF: 4.297
2024-08-20
The Spine Journal
Abstract:BACKGROUND CONTEXT While Teriparatide use for osteoporotic patients has been well established, it has not been thoroughly examined among osteopenic patients and those with unremarkable bone health. Patients have shown improved functional outcomes and lower failure rates for lumbar fusion when placed on Teriparatide, but most studies place a generalization on patients with poor bone health. As a result, there is no consensus whether Teriparatide use can specifically improve lumbar fusion success rates in osteopenic patients. PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to compare readmissions, revisions, and complication rates across osteoporotic, osteopenic, and normal bone health patients undergoing primary lumbar fusion with and without Teriparatide. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING N/A PATIENT SAMPLE N/A OUTCOME MEASURES N/A METHODS A PearlDiver Database search query was conducted using International Classifcation of Diseases (ICD) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to find patients undergoing primary lumbar fusion with and without Teriparatide, and subclassifying these groups by bone health. This resulted in 4,931 patients who underwent lumbar fusion while previously being on Teriparatide, of which 4,136 were osteoporotic, 239 were osteopenic, and 556 had appropriate bone health. These patients were matched by age, gender, Elixhauser comorbidity index (ECI), obesity, and bisphosphonate use in a 1:5 ratio to lumbar fusion patients who were not using Teriparatide. This resulted in 1,195 osteopenics, 20,680 osteoporotics, and 2,780 appropriate bone health patients in the non-Teriparatide groups. Chi-square analysis was used to compare baseline demographics between operative groups, as well as medical complication, 90-day postoperative readmission, and 2-year revision rates. Logarithmic regression analysis was used to analyze associations between Teriparatide use and associated outcomes. RESULTS Within the teriparatide group, both osteopenic and normal bone health patients had significantly lower rates of 90-day medical complications than the osteoporotic patients (p<0.001). Osteopenic and osteoporotic patients on Teriparatide had similar 90-day readmission rates (23.1% vs 25.1%, respectively, p=0.6239) and 2-year revision rates (35.6% vs 36.8%, p=0.7991). When comparing osteopenic patients using and not using Teriparatide, both groups demonstrated similar medical complication rates, but the Teriparatide group demonstrated lower 90-day readmission rates compared to their non-Teriparatide counterparts (23.1% vs 31.4%, p=0.0099). Logistic regression analysis revealed a lower risk of revisions when osteopenic patients use Teriparatide as opposed to without (OR: 1.54; 99% CI:1.29-1.84; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Osteopenic patients using Teriparatide displayed lower medical complication rates compared to osteoporotic patients using Teriparatide, while displaying similar 90-day readmission and 2-year revision rates. Osteopenic patients displayed lower readmission rates and were associated with smaller revision rates following lumbar fusion when on Teriparatide compared to those not using Teriparatide. Surgeons should consider early supplementation of Teriparatide for potential osteopenic lumbar fusion candidates prior to patients reaching osteoporotic status. FDA Device/Drug Status This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
clinical neurology,orthopedics