English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Being able to quantify the invasiveness of a surgical procedure is important to weigh up its associated risks, since invasiveness governs the blood loss, operative time and likelihood of complications. Mirza et al. (Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:2651–2661, 2008) published an invasiveness index for spinal surgery. We evaluated the validity of a modified version of the Mirza invasiveness index (mMII), adapted for use with registry data. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed with data acquired from the Spine Tango registry including 21,634 patients. The mMII was calculated as the sum of six possible interventions on each vertebral level: decompression, fusion and stabilization either on anterior or posterior structures. The association between the mMII and blood loss, operative time and complications was evaluated using multiple regression, adjusting for possible confounders. Results The mean (± SD) mMII was 3.9 ± 5.0 (range 0–40). A 1-point increase in the mMII was associated with an additional blood loss of 12.8% (95% CI 12.6–13.0;  p  &lt; 0.001) and an increase of operative time of 10.4 min (95% CI 10.20–10.53;  p  &lt; 0.001). The  R  2  for the blood loss model was of 43% and for operative time, 47%. The mean mMII was significantly ( p  &lt; 0.001) higher in patients with surgical complications (4.5 ± 5.6) and general medical complications (6.5 ± 7.0) compared to those without (3.8 ± 4.9). Our results were comparable to those reported in the original publication of Mirza et al. Conclusion The mMII appeared to be a valid measure of surgical invasiveness in our study population. It can be used in predictor models and to adjust for surgical case-mix when comparing outcomes in different studies or different hospitals/surgeons in a registry.

Validation of a surgical invasiveness index in patients with lumbar spinal disorders registered in the Spine Tango registry