Impact of congestive heart failure on patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion for adult spine deformity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT Background: With the increasing amount of elective spine fusion patients presenting with cardiac disease and congestive heart failure, it is becoming difficult to assess when it is safe to proceed with surgery. Assessing the severity of heart failure (HF) through ejection fraction may provide insight into patients’ short- and long-term risks. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the severity of HF on perioperative outcomes of spine fusion surgery patients. Study Design/Setting: This was a retrospective cohort study of the PearlDiver database. Patient Sample: We enrolled 670,526 patients undergoing spine fusion surgery. Outcome Measures: Thirty-day and 90-day complication rates, discharge destination, length of stay (LOS), physician reimbursement, and hospital costs. Methods: Patients undergoing elective spine fusion surgery were isolated and stratified by preoperative HF with preserved ejection fraction (P-EF) or reduced ejection fraction (R-EF) (International Classification of Diseases-9: 428.32 [chronic diastolic HF] and 428.22 [chronic systolic HF]). Means comparison tests (Chi-squared and independent samples t-tests, as appropriate) compared differences in demographics, diagnoses, comorbidities, procedural characteristics, LOS, 30-day and 90-day complication outcomes, and total hospital charges between those diagnosed with P-EF and those not R-EF. Binary logistic regression assessed the odds of complication associated with HF, controlling for levels fused (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval]). Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Results: Totally 670,526 elective spine fusion patients were included. Four thousand and seventy-seven were diagnosed with P-EF and 2758 R-EF. Overall, P-EF patients presented with higher rates of morbid obesity, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension (all P < 0.001). In relation to No-HF, P-EF patients had higher rates of 30-day major complications including pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarctions (MI), sepsis, and death (all P < 0.001). Furthermore, P-EF was associated significantly with increased odds of pneumonia (OR: 2.07 [1.64–2.56], P < 0.001) and sepsis (OR: 2.09 [1.62–2.66], P < 0.001). Relative to No-HF, R-EF was associated with significantly higher odds of MI (OR: 3.66 [2.34–5.47]), CVA (OR: 2.70 [1.67–4.15]), and pneumonia (OR: 1.85 [1.40–2.40]) (all P < 0.001) postoperative within 30 days. Adjusting for prior history of MI, CAD, and the presence of a pacemaker R-EF was a significant predictor of an MI 30 days postoperatively (OR: 2.2 [1.14–4.32], P = 0.021). Further adjusting for history of CABG or stent placement, R-EF was associated with higher odds of CVA (OR: 2.11 [1.09–4.19], P = 0.028) and MI (OR: 2.27 [1.20–4.43], P = 0.013). Conclusions: When evaluating the severity of HF before spine surgery, R-EF was associated with a higher risk of major complications, especially the occurrence of a myocardial infarction 30 days postoperatively. During preoperative risk assessment, congestive HF should be considered thoroughly when thinking of postoperative outcomes with emphasis on R-EF.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».