Duration of Surgery and Intraoperative Blood Pressure Management Are Modifiable Risk Factors for Postoperative Neurocognitive Disorders After Spine Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective quasi-experimental observational study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether duration of surgery is a modifiable risk factor for postoperative delirium (POD) after spine surgery and explore further modifiable risk factors. In addition, we sought to investigate the association between POD and postoperative cognitive dysfunction and persistent neurocognitive disorders. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Advances in spine surgery enable technically safe interventions in elderly patients with disabling spine disease. The occurrence of POD and delayed neurocognitive complications ( e.g. postoperative cognitive dysfunction/persistent neurocognitive disorder) remain a concern since these contribute to inferior functional outcomes and long-term care dependency after spine surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective single-center study recruited patients aged 60 years or above and scheduled for elective spine surgery between February 2018 and March 2020. Functional (Barthel Index, BI) and cognitive outcomes [Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) test battery; telephone Montréal Cognitive Assessment] were assessed at baseline, three (V3), and 12 months postoperatively. The primary hypothesis was that the duration of surgery predicts POD. Multivariable predictive models of POD included surgical and anesthesiological parameters. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of patients developed POD (n=22/99). In a multivariable model, duration of surgery [OR adj =1.61/h (95% CI, 1.20-2.30)], age [OR adj =1.22/yr (95% CI, 1.10-1.36)], and baseline deviations of intraoperative systolic blood pressure [25th percentile: OR adj =0.94/mm Hg (95% CI, 0.89-0.99); 90th percentile: OR adj =1.07/mm Hg (95% CI, 1.01-1.14)] were significantly associated with POD. Postoperative cognitive scores generally improved (V3, ΔCERAD total z -score: 0.22±0.63). However, this positive group effect was counteracted by POD [beta: -0.87 (95% CI, -1.31 to 0.42)], older age [beta: -0.03/yr (95% CI, -0.05 to 0.01)], and lack of functional improvement [ΔBI; beta: -0.04/point (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.02)]. Cognitive scores at twelve months remained inferior in the POD group, adjusted for baseline cognition/age. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified distinct neurocognitive effects after spine surgery, which are influenced by perioperative risk factors. Potential cognitive benefits are counteracted by POD, rendering its prevention critical in an aging population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".