Logo image
Does Velocity of Return-to-Work Differ Between Circumferential Minimally-Invasive and Open Surgery to Treat Adult Spinal Deformity?
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Does Velocity of Return-to-Work Differ Between Circumferential Minimally-Invasive and Open Surgery to Treat Adult Spinal Deformity?

Mohamed Macki, Michael E. Tawil, Nima Alan, Nathan Han, Marc Prablek, Vivian P. Le, Alexander Aabedi, Paul Park, Juan S. Uribe, Jay D. Turner, …
Spine (Philadelphia, Pa. 1976), Vol.51(5), pp.E123-E130
03/01/2026
PMID: 40985506

Abstract

Clinical Neurology Life Sciences & Biomedicine Neurosciences & Neurology Orthopedics Science & Technology
Study Design.Retrospective matched cohort study.Objective.We sought to compare circumferential minimally-invasive surgery (cMIS) to open deformity correction surgery on patients' timing of return to work.Summary of Background Data.Adult spinal deformity (ASD) impacts functional ability and quality of life, often influencing patients' ability to work. Surgical correction can improve alignment and symptoms; however, recovery timelines may vary depending on surgical technique.Methods.Prospectively collected data from the International Spine Study Group (ISSG) multicenter database was queried for ASD correction. Patients were evaluated in two cohorts: cMIS or open surgery. Propensity scoring matched age, body mass index, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, and sagittal vertical axis. All patients had at least two years of follow-up. The cohorts were compared at six weeks, one year, and two years.Results.Of 173 matched patients (85 open, 88 cMIS), there were no significant differences in age, sex, or ASA classification. The average age was 68.2 years with >= 3 levels fused. The open group had significantly more direct posterior decompressions, a higher median number of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions, longer surgery time, greater blood loss, and longer hospital stay. The cMIS group had a higher median number of lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Baseline work status did not differ significantly: disabled (4.7% vs. 6.8%), working(20.0% vs. 21.5%), retired (71.7% vs. 67.0%), not working (3.5% vs. 4.5%). At six weeks, working patients were similar (14.1% vs. 15.9%, P=0.741); at one year, significantly more cMIS patients returned to work (10.5% vs. 21.5%, P=0.049). At two years, more cMIS patients had returned to work (14.1% vs. 19.3%), but this was not significant (P=0.277).Conclusion.Patients undergoing cMIS surgery returned to work at a higher rate between six weeks and one year postoperatively. At two years, return-to-work remained higher for cMIS but this difference was no longer statistically significant.

Metrics

1 Record Views

Details

Logo image