Back-to-Back Surgeries in AIS Patients Can be Performed Safely Without Compromising Radiographic or Perioperative Outcomes: A 10-year Review

• Published in: Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976) Vol. 45; no. 1; p. 26
• Main Authors: Sarwahi, Vishal, Galina, Jesse, Wendolowski, Stephen, Ganz, Maximillian, Hasan, Sayyida, Katyal, Chhavi, Moguilevitch, Marina, DiMauro, Jon-Paul, Lo, Yungtai, Amaral, Terry D
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.01.2020
• Subjects: Adolescent; Female; Humans; Male; Reproducibility of Results; Retrospective Studies; Scoliosis - surgery; Spinal Fusion - adverse effects; Surgeons - standards; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1528-1159
• DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003172

A retrospective chart review of prospectively collected data. The aim of this study was to determine whether back-to-back scoliosis surgeries can be performed safely without compromising outcomes and the reproducibility of the practice between institutions. During the summer, spinal surgeons will often book multiple cases in one day. The complexity and demands of spinal fusion surgery call into question the safety. Change of operating room staff including anesthesiologists, nurses, and neurologists may introduce new risks. From 2009 to 2018, index AIS surgeries were included. In Groups 1, 2, and 3, surgeries were performed by a single surgeon. In Group 4, they were performed by other institutional surgeons. Group 1: first surgery of the day, Group 2: second surgery of the day, Group 3: only surgery of the day, Group 4: only surgery of the day by different institutional surgeon. Additional analysis was done to determine reproducibility after a surgeon was moved from Institution 1 to Institution 2. Five hundred sixty-seven AIS patients were analyzed. Group 1 patients had similar radiographic outcomes compared with Group 2 (P > 0.05). Surgical time was similar (P = 0.51), but significantly more levels fused (P = 0.01). Compared with Group 3, Group 2 had a smaller preoperative Cobb (P = 0.02), shorter surgeries (P < 0.001), and length of stay (P = 0.04) but similar complication rate (P = 1). Compared with Group 4, Group 2 had smaller preoperative Cobb (P < 0.001), shorter surgery, and lower complication rate (P = 0.03). When determining reproducibility, institution 2 patients had significantly less blood loss, shorter surgeries, and shorter lengths of stay (P < 0.05). Although long and involved, back-to-back AIS surgeries do not compromise radiographic or perioperative outcomes. Changes in operating team do not appear to impact safety, efficiency, or outcomes. This study also found that the practice is reproducible between institutions. 3.