Abstract:Objective: Patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) and neurogenic pain may be candidates for decompression alone or short-segment fusion. In this study, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) decompression (MIS-D) and MIS short-segment fusion (MIS-SF) in patients with DLS were compared in a propensity score-matched analysis. Methods: The propensity score was calculated using 13 variables: sex, age, BMI, Charlson Comorbidity Index, smoking status, leg pain, back pain, grade 1 spondylolisthesis, lateral spondylolisthesis, multilevel spondylolisthesis, lumbar Cobb angle, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis, and pelvic tilt in a logistic regression model. One-to-one matching was performed to compare perioperative morbidity and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for patients was calculated based on cutoffs of percentage change from baseline: 42.4% for Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 25.0% for visual analog scale (VAS) low-back pain, and 55.6% for VAS leg pain. Results: A total of 113 patients were included in the propensity score calculation, resulting in 31 matched pairs. Perioperative morbidity was significantly reduced for the MIS-D group, including shorter operative duration (91 vs 204 minutes, p < 0.0001), decreased blood loss (22 vs 116 mL, p = 0.0005), and reduced length of stay (2.6 vs 5.1 days, p = 0.0004). Discharge status (home vs rehabilitation), complications, and reoperation rates were similar. Preoperative PROMs were similar, but after 3 months, improvement was significantly higher for the MIS-SF group in the VAS back pain score (-3.4 vs -1.2, p = 0.044) and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) Mental Component Summary (MCS) score (+10.3 vs +1.9, p = 0.009), and after 1 year the MIS-SF group continued to have significantly greater improvement in the VAS back pain score (-3.9 vs -1.2, p = 0.026), ODI score (-23.1 vs -7.4, p = 0.037), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey MCS score (+6.5 vs -6.5, p = 0.0374), and VR-12 MCS score (+7.6 vs -5.1, p = 0.047). MCID did not differ significantly between the matched groups for VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, or ODI scores (p = 0.38, 0.055, and 0.072, respectively). Conclusions: Patients with DLS undergoing surgery had similar rates of significant improvement after both MIS-D and MIS-SF. For matched patients, tradeoffs were seen for reduced perioperative morbidity for MIS-D versus greater magnitudes of improvement in back pain, disability, and mental health for patients 1 year after MIS-SF. However, rates of MCID were similar, and the small sample size among the matched patients may be subject to patient outliers, limiting generalizability of these results.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Mild-to-Moderate Adult Spinal Deformities: Impact on Intensive Care Unit and Hospital Stay

Comparison of two minimally invasive surgery strategies to treat adult spinal deformity

365 Outcomes of Circumferential Minimally-Invasive Technique Versus Open Technique in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery Patients Over 80 Years of Age: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Reassessment System and Staged Surgical Strategy with Minimally Invasive Techniques for Treatment of Severe Adult Spinal Deformities

Prevalence and Clinical Impact of Coronal Malalignment Following Circumferential Minimally Invasive Surgery (CMIS) for Adult Spinal Deformity Correction

Comparison of Open Surgery versus Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-severe Adult Degenerative Scoliosis

Utility of the MISDEF2 Algorithm and Extent of Fusion in Open Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery with Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Minimally invasive surgery versus standard posterior approach for Lenke Type 1–4 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a multicenter, retrospective study

Surgical Approaches and Short-Term Results of Circumferential Minimally Invasive Correction Surgery for Adult Idiopathic Scoliosis

Comparison of minimally invasive decompression alone versus minimally invasive short-segment fusion in the setting of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a propensity score-matched analysis

Postoperative Adjacent Segment Disease in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Adjacent Laminectomy for Grade I-II Spondylolisthesis and Adjacent Spinal Stenosis

The Prevalence of the Use of MIS Techniques in the Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) Amongst Members of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) in 2016.

Intraoperative fluid management in adult spinal deformity surgery: variation analysis and association with outcomes

Tube-assisted Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Decompression for Multilevel Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Prospective Comparative Study

Incremental Increase in Hospital Length of Stay Due to Complications of Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity

Analysis of Spino-Pelvic Parameters and Segmental Lordosis with L5-S1 Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion at the Bottom of a Long Construct in Circumferential Minimally Invasive Surgical Correction of Adult Spinal Deformity

Thirty-Day Outcomes From Standalone Minimally Invasive Surgery-Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Patients in an Ambulatory Surgery Center vs. Hospital Setting

The Case for Operative Efficiency in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Impact of Operative Time on Complications, Length of Stay, Alignment, Fusion Rates, and Patient-Reported Outcomes

What is the effect of preoperative depression on outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for adult spinal deformity? A prospective cohort analysis

Clinical and Radiologic Analysis of Minimally Invasive Anterior-Posterior Combined Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) versus Transforaminal Interbody Fusion

Three-column Osteotomy Surgery Versus Standard Surgical Management for the Correction of Adult Spinal Deformity: a Cohort Study