ArticleBrain & spine2024
Prospective insights into spinal surgery outcomes and adverse events: A comparative study between patients 65-79 years vs. ≥80 years from a German tertiary center.
Article in Brain & spine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex-specific disparities in postoperative adverse events following intracranial tumor surgery: insights from a tertiary neurosurgical center.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Observational
- Neurosurgical management of brain metastases in the elderly: a prospective study on adverse event prevalence and predictors.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Towards a multi-source assessment of outcome data in spine surgery.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In light of an aging global population, understanding adverse events (AEs) in surgeries for older adults is crucial for optimal outcomes and patient safety. Research question: Our study compares surgical outcomes and AEs in patients aged 65-79 with those aged ≥80, focusing on clinical outcomes, morbidity and mortality rates, and age-related risk factors for AEs. Material and methods: Our study, from January 2019 to December 2022, involved patients aged 65-79 and ≥ 80 undergoing spinal surgery. Each patient was evaluated for AEs post-discharge, defined as negative clinical outcomes within 30 days post-surgery. Patients were categorized based on primary spinal diagnoses: degenerative, oncological, traumatic, and infectious. Results: We enrolled 546 patients aged 65-79 and 184 octogenarians. Degenerative diseases were most common in both groups, with higher infection and tumor rates in the younger cohort. Octogenarians had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index and longer ICU/hospital stays. Surgery-related AE rates were 8.1% for 65-79-year-olds and 15.8% for octogenarians, with mortality around 2% in both groups. Discussion and conclusion: Our prospective analysis shows octogenarians are more susceptible to surgical AEs, linked to greater health complexities. Despite higher AEs in older patients, low mortality rates across both age groups highlight the safety of spinal surgery. Tracking AEs is crucial for patient communication and impacts healthcare accreditation and funding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.