Cost-effectiveness of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylosis

Double-Plate Technique for Long-Construct Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

The standard technique for multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) uses a single plate to span multiple vertebral levels. However, the usage of single long plates is linked to potential hardware failure and screw pullout from stress overload. A single long plate is also more likely to fail at the caudal levels. Furthermore, centering a long plate spanning multiple levels requires simultaneous exposure to anatomy that may require more traction, technical expertise, and a potential increase in operative time. The use of a double-plate technique may be less technically demanding and, at the same time, allow for future revision to be confined to a shorter segment rather than requiring the removal of the entire single plate. In this study, we describe a surgical technique that involves using two plates during three or more levels of ACDF, discussing its advantages and limitations.

Cost-utility Analysis of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Spondylosis Patients Comparing Polyetheretherketone Versus Tricortical Iliac Crest Bone Graft

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a cost-utility analysis and to investigate the clinical outcomes and patient's quality of life after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to treat cervical spondylosis compared between fusion with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and fusion with tricortical iliac bone graft (IBG) in Thailand.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is one of the standard treatments for cervical spondylosis. The fusion material options include PEEK and tricortical IBG. No previous studies have compared the cost-utility between these 2 fusion material options.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with cervical spondylosis who were scheduled for ACDF at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand) during 2019-2020 were prospectively enrolled. Patients were allocated to the PEEK or IBG fusion material group according to the patient's choice of fusion material. EuroQol-5 dimensions 5 levels and relevant costs were collected during the operative and postoperative periods. A cost-utility analysis was performed using a societal perspective. All costs were converted to 2020 United States dollars (USD), and a 3% discount rate was used. The outcome was expressed as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (18 ACDF-PEEK and 18 ACDF-IBG) were enrolled. Except for Nurick grading, there was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics between groups. The average utility at 1 year after ACDF-PEEK and ACDF-IBG were 0.939 ± 0.061 and 0.798 ± 0.081, respectively ( P < 0.001). The total lifetime cost of ACDF-PEEK and ACDF-IBG was 83,572 USD and 73,329 USD, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ACDF-PEEK when compared with that of ACDF-IBG showed a gain of 4468.52 USD/quality-adjusted life-years, which is considered cost-effective at the Thailand willingness-to-pay threshold of 5115 USD/quality-adjusted life-year gained.

CONCLUSIONS

ACDF-PEEK was found to be more cost-effective than ACDF-IBG for treating cervical spondylosis in Thailand.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Positive space acquiring asymmetric membranes for guiding alveolar bone regeneration under infectious conditions

To obtain multifunctional materials suitable for guiding alveolar bone regeneration under infectious conditions, we prepared asymmetric membranes comprising space acquiring layer that involves fibroblast inhibitor poly(p-dioxanone-co-L-phenylalanine) (PDPA), an isolating dense layer that forms barrier between two layers and an osteogenesis inducing electrospinning layer which involves hydroxyapatite or hydroxyapatite & minocycline. Then the composition, crystallization, morphology, and hydrophilicity of asymmetric membranes were analyzed. Minocycline incorporated membranes controlled the expansion of Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) in vitro. Hydroxyapatite-incorporated asymmetric membranes promoted the expression of osteogenesis related genes RUNX2, OPN, ALP of MC3T3-E1 cells in vitro. The mineralization of MC3T3-E1 cells cultured with hydroxyapatite-incorporated asymmetric membranes were also promoted in vitro. Asymmetric membranes especially hydroxyapatite-incorporated ones guided the regeneration of the mandibular bone defect in vivo. Bone regeneration guided under infectious conditions was evaluated in a P. gingivalis infected alveolar bone defect model. Specifically, space acquiring layer containing asymmetric membranes effectively controlled connective tissue hyperplasia at defect sites. The excellent guided bone regeneration achieved by applying a single space acquiring layer membrane further indicates the importance of acquiring space actively to induce bone regeneration. Hydroxyapatite-minocycline incorporated symmetric membranes could simultaneously suppress alveolar bone reabsorption caused by infection and guide regeneration of defects. Therefore, the hydroxyapatite-minocycline incorporated asymmetric membrane may be more suitable to be applied in guiding regeneration of bone defects under complex infectious conditions.

Recent advances in biofunctional guided bone regeneration materials for repairing defective alveolar and maxillofacial bone: A review

The anatomy of the oral and maxillofacial sites is complex, and bone defects caused by trauma, tumors, and inflammation in these zones are extremely difficult to repair. Among the most effective and reliable methods to attain osteogenesis, the guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique is extensively applied in defective oral and maxillofacial GBR. Furthermore, endowing biofunctions is crucial for GBR materials applied in repairing defective alveolar and maxillofacial bones. In this review, recent advances in designing and fabricating GBR materials applied in oral and maxillofacial sites are classified and discussed according to their biofunctions, including maintaining space for bone growth; facilitating the adhesion, migration, and proliferation of osteoblasts; facilitating the migration and differentiation of progenitor cells; promoting vascularization; providing immunoregulation to induce osteogenesis; suppressing infection; and effectively mimicking natural tissues using graded biomimetic materials. In addition, new processing strategies (e.g., 3D printing) and new design concepts (e.g., developing bone mimetic extracellular matrix niches and preparing scaffolds to suppress connective tissue to actively acquire space for bone regeneration), are particularly worthy of further study. In the future, GBR materials with richer biological functions are expected to be developed based on an in-depth understanding of the mechanism of bone-GBR-material interactions.

Cost-effectiveness of anterior surgical decompression surgery for cervical degenerative disk disease: a systematic review of economic evaluations

PURPOSE

No clear consensus exists on which anterior surgical technique is most cost-effective for treating cervical degenerative disk disease (CDDD). One of the most common treatment options is anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF). Anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty (ACDA) was developed in an effort to reduce the incidence of clinical adjacent segment pathology and associated additional surgeries by preserving motion. This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of anterior surgical decompression techniques used to treat radiculopathy and/or myelopathy caused by CDDD.

METHODS

The search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, EconLit, NHS-EED and the Cochrane Library. Studies were included if healthcare costs and utility or effectivity measurements were mentioned.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies were included out of the 1327 identified studies. In 9 of the 13 studies directly comparing ACDA and ACDF, ACDA was the most cost-effective technique, with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio ranging from $2.900/QALY to $98.475/QALY. There was great heterogeneity between the costs of due to different in- and exclusion criteria of costs and charges, cost perspective, baseline characteristics, and calculation methods. The methodological quality of the included studies was moderate.

CONCLUSION

The majority of studies report ACDA to be a more cost-effective technique in comparison with ACDF. The lack of uniform literature impedes any solid conclusions to be drawn. There is a need for high-quality cost-effectiveness research and uniformity in the conduct, design and reporting of economic evaluations concerning the treatment of CDDD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration: CRD42020207553 (04.10.2020).

Allograft Versus Autograft in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Objective

To compare the 30-day complication rate associated with allograft versus autograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and to determine preoperative factors that may influence complication rate.

Methods

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively queried from 2014 to 2017 for all procedures with CPT codes for ACDF (22551). Patients undergoing ACDF with either autograft or allograft were matched by propensity scores based on age, sex, body mass index, and comorbidities. The incidence of adverse events in the 30-day postoperative period was compared.

Results

A total of 21,588 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following the 10:1 propensity match, 17,061 remained in the study (1,551 autograft and 15,510 allograft). The overall adverse event rate was 3.18%; 3.48% for autograft and 3.15% for allograft (P=0.494). Autograft had a significantly greater incidence of extended length of stay (>2 d) (LOS) (48.9% vs 34.8%; P<0.001). Multivariate analysis suggested that autograft selection was associated with extended LOS (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3-1.5).

Conclusion

The results of this study provide information regarding how graft selection can relate to extended hospital LOS and influence postoperative complications. Extended LOS may be associated with worse patient outcomes and increase the overall cost of care. Further study should be performed to determine which patients would benefit from autograft versus allograft with regards to long-term outcomes, in consideration of these increased short-term complications.

Cost-Effectiveness of Peptide Enhanced Bone Graft i-Factor versus Use of Local Autologous Bone in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Surgery

Study Design

We conducted decision analytical modeling using a Markov model to determine the ICER of i-factor compared to autograft in ACDF surgery.

Objective

The efficacy and safety of traditional anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery has improved with the introduction of new implants and compounds. Cost-effectiveness of these innovations remains an often-overlooked aspect of this effort. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of i-FACTOR compared to autograft for patients undergoing ACDF surgery.

Methods

The patient cohort was extracted from a prospective, multicenter randomized control trial (RCT) from twenty-two North American centers. Patients randomly received either autograft (N = 154) or i-Factor (N = 165). We analyzed various real-world scenarios, including inpatient and outpatient surgical settings as well as private versus public insurances. Two primary outcome measures were assessed: cost and utility. In the base-case analysis, both health and societal system costs were evaluated. Health-related utility outcome was expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost-effectiveness was expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

In all scenarios, i-FACTOR reduced costs within the first year by 1.4% to 2.1%. The savings proved to be incremental over time, increasing to 3.7% over an extrapolated 10 years. The ICER at 90 days was $13,333 per QALY and became negative ("dominated") relative to the control group within one year and onwards. In a threshold sensitivity analysis, the cost of i-FACTOR could theoretically be increased 70-fold and still remain cost-effective.

Conclusion

The novel i-FACTOR is not only cost-effective compared to autograft in ACDF surgery but is the dominant economic strategy.

Achieving Value in Spine Surgery: 10 Major Cost Contributors

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVES

The increasing cost of healthcare overall and for spine surgery, coupled with the growing burden of spine-related disease and rising demand have necessitated a shift in practice standards with a new emphasis on value-based care. Despite multiple attempts to reconcile the discrepancy between national recommendations for appropriate use and the patterns of use employed in clinical practice, resources continue to be overused-often in the absence of any demonstrable clinical benefit. The following discussion illustrates 10 areas for further research and quality improvement.

METHODS

We present a narrative review of the literature regarding 10 features in spine surgery which are characterized by substantial disproportionate costs and minimal-if any-clear benefit. Discussion items were generated from a service-wide poll; topics mentioned with great frequency or emphasis were considered. Items are not listed in hierarchical order, nor is the list comprehensive.

RESULTS

We describe the cost and clinical data for the following 10 items: Over-referral, Over-imaging & Overdiagnosis; Advanced Imaging for Low Back Pain; Advanced imaging for C-Spine Clearance; Advanced Imaging for Other Spinal Trauma; Neuromonitoring for Cervical Spine; Neuromonitoring for Lumbar Spine/Single-Level Surgery; Bracing & Spinal Orthotics; Biologics; Robotic Assistance; Unnecessary perioperative testing.

CONCLUSIONS

In the pursuit of value in spine surgery we must define what quality is, and what costs we are willing to pay for each theoretical unit of quality. We illustrate 10 areas for future research and quality improvement initiatives, which are at present overpriced and underbeneficial.

Effect of Titanium Miniplate Fixation on Hinge Fracture and Hinge Fracture Displacement Following Cervical Open-Door Laminoplasty

BACKGROUND

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy is a neuromotor disorder responsible for functional limitations and decreased daily activities. Expansive open-door laminoplasty is the widely accepted procedure for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Among the various fixation procedures to secure the open lamina, miniplate fixation provides better clinical and radiological outcomes. However, the immediate effects on hinge fracture and hinge fracture displacement following miniplate fixation have not been proven until now. The purpose of our study was to elucidate the impact of cervical open-door angle on the status of spinal cord expansion and hinge fracture, hinge fracture displacement, and the role of implants used during surgery.

METHODS

For this retrospective study, 122 patients who had undergone surgery from September 2016 to November 2017 with preoperative and postoperative radiographs were enrolled. Clinical and radiological outcomes were assessed before and after surgery.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographics, surgery time, blood loss, medical comorbidities, or perioperative and postoperative complications between 2 groups. The recovery rate and Nurick score before and at the follow-up show no statistical significance between the 2 groups, P value > .05 (P = .672) and P > .05 (P = .553), respectively. The statistical analysis shows that the mean hinge fracture in the miniplate group with a cervical open angle >30° was 2.42 ± 1.68 and with a <30° open angle, 0.05 ± 0.23; whereas, in the anchor group the mean hinge fracture in >30° cervical open angle was 2.227 ± 2.50 and in <30° was 0.409 ± 0.503. The results revealed statistical significance between 2 implant groups, P = .024 in the aspect of hinge fracture displacement and implant used.

CONCLUSION

Laminoplasty by titanium miniplate fixation holds the laminae securely, prevents hinge fracture displacement, and promotes spinal cord expansion better than suture anchor fixation.

Nanostructured Biomaterials for Bone Regeneration

This review article addresses the various aspects of nano-biomaterials used in or being pursued for the purpose of promoting bone regeneration. In the last decade, significant growth in the fields of polymer sciences, nanotechnology, and biotechnology has resulted in the development of new nano-biomaterials. These are extensively explored as drug delivery carriers and as implantable devices. At the interface of nanomaterials and biological systems, the organic and synthetic worlds have merged over the past two decades, forming a new scientific field incorporating nano-material design for biological applications. For this field to evolve, there is a need to understand the dynamic forces and molecular components that shape these interactions and influence function, while also considering safety. While there is still much to learn about the bio-physicochemical interactions at the interface, we are at a point where pockets of accumulated knowledge can provide a conceptual framework to guide further exploration and inform future product development. This review is intended as a resource for academics, scientists, and physicians working in the field of orthopedics and bone repair.

Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in U.S. Spine Surgery

BACKGROUND

Increasing costs put the value of spine surgery under scrutiny. In health economics, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) are used to compare the value of competing procedures. However, inconsistent methodology prevents standardization and implementation of recommendations. The goal of this study is to perform a systematic review of all U.S. CEAs in spine surgery reported to date, highlight their strengths and weaknesses, and define metrics essential for high-quality CEAs.

METHODS

We followed AMSTAR systematic review methods, identifying all U.S. spine surgery CEAs reported to March 2019 with a structured, reproducible search of PubMed, Embase, and the Tufts CEA Registry.

RESULTS

We identified 40 CEA studies. Twelve (30%) used outcome data from a randomized controlled trial. To calculate costs, 22 (55%) used allowed charges but costing methods were often unclear or imprecise. Studies applying discounting had mean follow-up of 5.92 years compared with 3.00 years for studies without. Eleven of 15 (73%) cervical studies compared cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, finding cervical disc arthroplasty to be cost-effective (<$100,000/quality-adjusted life year) for 1-level and 2-level procedures. Eleven of 25 lumbar studies (44%) compared operative with nonoperative interventions for intervertebral disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and lumbar spondylolisthesis. Lumbar studies comparing surgical with nonoperative intervention found surgery at least cost-effective for intervertebral disc herniation and lumbar stenosis, but cost-effective only for lumbar spondylolisthesis at 4 years follow-up. Most studies (70%) lacked appropriate sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Costing methodology remains obscure and inconsistent and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio results incomparable. The language of costing methodology must be standardized and sensitivity analyses of outcome and cost inputs mandatory for publication.

Drivers of Variability in 90-Day Cost for Elective Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Cervical Degenerative Disease

BACKGROUND

Value-based episode of care reimbursement models is being investigated to curb unsustainable health care costs. Any variation in the cost of index spine surgery can affect the payment bundling during the 90-d global period.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the drivers of variability in cost for patients undergoing elective anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine disease.

METHODS

Four hundred forty-five patients undergoing elective ACDF for cervical spine degenerative diagnoses were included in the study. The direct 90-d cost was derived as sum of cost of surgery, cost associated with postdischarge utilization. Multiple variable linear regression models were built for total 90-d cost.

RESULTS

The mean 90-d direct cost was $17685 ± $5731. In a multiple variable linear regression model, the length of surgery, number of levels involved, length of hospital stay, preoperative history of anticoagulation medication, health-care resource utilization including number of imaging, any complications and readmission encounter were the significant contributor to the 90-d cost. The model performance as measured by R2 was 0.616.

CONCLUSION

There was considerable variation in total 90-d cost for elective ACDF surgery. Our model can explain about 62% of these variations in 90-d cost. The episode of care reimbursement models needs to take into account these variations and be inclusive of the factors that drive the variation in cost to develop a sustainable payment model. The generalized applicability should take in to account the differences in patient population, surgeons' and institution-specific differences.

Effect of Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Severity Classifications on Satisfaction With Outcomes 12 Months After Elective Surgery for Cervical Spine Myelopathy

STUDY DESIGN

This study retrospectively analyzes prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

Here, we aim to determine the influence of preoperative and 12-month modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) on satisfaction and understand the change in mJOA severity classification after surgical management of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

DCM is a progressive degenerative spine disease resulting from cervical cord compression. The natural progression of DCM is variable; some patients experience periods of stability, while others rapidly deteriorate following disease onset. The mJOA is commonly used to grade and categorize myelopathy symptoms, but its association with postoperative satisfaction has not been previously explored.

METHODS

The quality and outcomes database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing elective surgery for DCM. Patients were divided into mild (≥14), moderate (9 to 13), or severe (<9) categories on the mJOA scores. A McNemar-Bowker test was used to assess whether a significant proportion of patients changed mJOA category between preoperative and 12 months postoperative. A multivariable proportional odds ordinal logistic regression model was fitted with 12-month satisfaction as the outcome of interest.

RESULTS

We identified 1963 patients who underwent elective surgery for DCM and completed 12-months follow-ups. Comparing mJOA severity level preoperatively and at 12 months revealed that 55% remained in the same category, 37% improved, and 7% moved to a worse category. After adjusting for baseline and surgery-specific variables, the 12-month mJOA category had the highest impact on patient satisfaction (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patient satisfaction is an indispensable tool for measuring quality of care after spine surgery. In this sample, 12-month mJOA category, regardless of preop mJOA, was significantly correlated with satisfaction. Given these findings, it is important to advise patients of the probability that surgery will change their mJOA severity classification and the changes required to achieve postoperative satisfaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Is correction of segmental kyphosis necessary in single-level anterior cervical fusion surgery? An observational study

Background

This study was conducted to determine whether sagittal lordotic alignment and clinical outcomes could be improved by the correction of segmental kyphosis after single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery.

Patients and methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent single-level ACDF surgery in our hospital between January 2014 and February 2017. Basic characteristics of patients included age at surgery, gender, diagnosis, duration of symptoms, and location of target level. Pre- and postoperative radiographs at the 6-month follow-up were used to evaluate the following parameters, such as segmental angle, C2–C7 angle, T1 slope, and C2–C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Postoperative clinical outcomes were assessed by the Neck Disability Index and VAS. According to the segmental angle of postoperative radiographs, patients were divided into noncorrection group and correction group.

Results

A total of 181 patients (99 males and 82 females) were analyzed in our study. There were 32 patients in the noncorrection group and 149 patients in the correction group. There was no significant difference in demographic and clinical data between the two groups before surgery. However, patients in the correction group showed larger C2–C7 angle and lower C2–C7 SVA after surgery in comparison with those in the noncorrection group. Besides, changes in the segmental angle were positively correlated with changes in C2–C7 angle and negatively correlated with changes in C2–C7 SVA.

Conclusion

Surgical correction of segmental kyphosis in single-level cervical surgery contributed to balanced cervical alignment in comparison with those without satisfactory correction. However, we could not demonstrate that the correction of segmental alignment is associated with a better recovery in clinical outcomes.

Comparing Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Either Primary or Revision Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

Compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcome metrics in patients undergoing primary and revision anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is associated with significant improvements in HRQOL outcome metrics. However, 2.9% of patients per year will develop symptomatic adjacent segment disease and there is a paucity of literature on HRQOL outcomes after revision ACDF.

METHODS

Patients were identified who underwent either a primary or revision ACDF, and who had both preoperative and a minimum of 1-year postoperative HRQOL outcome data. Pre- and postoperative Short Form 12 Physical Component Score (SF12 PCS), Short Form 12 Mental Component Score (SF12 MCS) Visual Analog Scale for neck pain (VAS-Neck), VAS-Arm, and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 360 patients (299 primary, 61 revision) were identified. Significant improvement in SF12 PCS, NDI, VAS-Neck, and VAS-Arm was seen in both groups; however, only a significant improvement in SF12 MCS was seen in the primary group. When comparing the results of a primary versus a revision surgery, the SF12 PCS score was the only outcome with a significantly different net improvement in the primary group (7.23 ± 9.72) compared to the revision group (2.9 ± 11.07; P = 0.006) despite similar baseline SF12 PCS scores. The improvement in each of the other reported HRQOL outcomes did not significantly vary between surgical groups.

CONCLUSION

A revision ACDF for cervical radiculopathy or myelopathy leads to a significant improvement in the HRQOL outcome, and with the exception of the SF12 PCS, these results are similar to those of patients undergoing a primary ACDF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

ACDF vs TDR for patients with cervical spondylosis - an 8 year follow up study

Background

ACDF has been considered as the gold standard in the treatment of single level cervical disk protrusion. However, it may cause adjacent level degeneration due to regional biomechanical changes. TDR has been applied with satisfactory results for over a decade, but there is no consensus if TDR is safer and more efficient than ACDF. The current study was carried out to compare the efficiency and safety of TDR and ACDF in the treatment of patients with single level cervical disk protrusion.

Methods

One hundred forty-five consecutive patients who underwent either TDR or ACDF in our center were included in the current study. Time of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, VAS arm and neck pain scores, ROM, ODI, SF36 and Patient satisfaction were compared before the surgery, after the surgery, and during follow up 1, 3, 5, 8 years after the surgery.

Results

The time of surgery was 64.6 ± 20.7 min in the ACDF group and 69.4 ± 19.3 min in the TDR group; intraoperative hemorrhage was 67.2 ± 14.3 ml in ACDF group and 70.7 ± 18.6 ml in TDR group. There were no significant differences between two groups concerning time of surgery and intraoperative blood loss. No differences were found concerning patient satisfaction between the two groups during the follow up (P > 0.05). Significant differences were found between the groups concerning VAS arm and neck pain scores, ROM, ODI and SF36 after the surgery and during the 8 year follow up.

Conclusion

TDR may be a more effective approach than ACDF for treating patients with single level cervical disk protrusion.

Keywords

Cervical disk herniation, ACDF, TDR, Retrospective study

Patterns of healthcare resource utilization prior to anterior cervical decompression and fusion in patients with radiculopathy

Objective

To assess patterns of healthcare resource utilization prior to anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) in patients diagnosed with radiculopathy with a retrospective cohort study design.

Background

ACDF is associated with improvement in quality of life among patients with cervical radiculopathy. However, little is known regarding utilization of healthcare services and total cost of care before ACDF surgery in the United States.

Methods

We analyzed a group of patients who received ACDF for radiculopathy during 2009-2011 using a healthcare database of over 20 million patients of all ages. Patients with fewer than two years of data prior to ACDF procedure were excluded. Inclusion criteria included patients with a diagnosis of disc displacement/degeneration and radiculopathy. All charges related to healthcare administration within two years prior to surgery were recorded and analyzed.

Results

Sixteen hundred seventy six patients met the inclusion criteria. Seventy-three percent of patients were in the 40-59 year age range; 55% were women and 45% were men. In the two years preceding the surgery, 34% of patients received prescription NSAIDs, and 98% received prescription narcotics for total charges of $101,188 ($174.46/patient) and $222,860 ($134.82/patient) respectively. Total pain-related interventions over two years (oral pharmacotherapy and injections) were charged at $4,368,900 at an average of $2,606/treatment. Total outpatient charges including physician office visits, other outpatient visits and emergency room visits amounted to $25,450,012. Mean total outpatient charges over the two years preceding ACDF was $15,556 per patient for 26,397 episodes of care. Injectable corticosteroids were provided for 84.7% of patients and charges related to this treatment totaled $1,137 per patient.

Conclusions

In the two years prior to ACDF, healthcare resource utilization is extremely high. Given that these patients ultimately undergo surgical intervention, opportunities to reduce charges of conservative care exist.

Spinal Surgeon Variation in Single-Level Cervical Fusion Procedures: A Cost and Hospital Resource Utilization Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative costs and outcomes of patients undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusions (ACDF) at both a service (orthopedic vs. neurosurgical) and individual surgeon level.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Hospital systems are experiencing significant pressure to increase value of care by reducing costs while maintaining or improving patient-centered outcomes. Few studies have examined the cost-effectiveness cervical arthrodesis at a service level.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent a primary 1-level ACDF by eight surgeons (four orthopedic and four neurosurgical) at a single academic institution between 2013 and 2015 was performed. Patients were identified by Diagnosis-Related Group and procedural codes. Patients with the ninth revision of the International Classification of Diseases coding for degenerative cervical pathology were included. Patients were excluded if they exhibited preoperative diagnoses or postoperative social work issues affecting their length of stay. Comparisons of preoperative demographics were performed using Student t tests and chi-squared analysis. Perioperative outcomes and costs for hospital services were compared using multivariate regression adjusted for preoperative characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients diagnosed with cervical degeneration underwent single-level ACDF; 44 and 93 were performed by orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons, respectively. There was no difference in patient demographics. ACDF procedures performed by orthopedic surgeons demonstrated shorter operative times (89.1 ± 25.5 vs. 96.0 ± 25.5 min; P = 0.002) and higher laboratory costs (Δ+$6.53 ± $5.52 USD; P = 0.041). There were significant differences in operative time (P = 0.014) and labor costs (P = 0.034) between individual surgeons. There was no difference in total costs between specialties or individual surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Surgical subspecialty training does not significantly affect total costs of ACDF procedures. Costs can, however, vary between individual surgeons based on operative times. Variation between individual surgeons highlights potential areas for improvement of the cost effectiveness of spinal procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Multivariate analysis of airway obstruction and reintubation after anterior cervical surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 774 patients

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

PURPOSE

To explore the risk factors for reintubation after airway obstruction following anterior cervical surgery.

STUDY BACKGROUND

Anterior cervical surgery is an effective surgical therapy for cervical spine disorders. As the anterior approach is adopted more frequently, some rare postoperative complications come under the spotlight, among which, airway obstruction is extremely detrimental. However, the risk factors and the pathogenesis of the airway obstruction still remain unknown. Therefore, finding out the incidence rate and the risk factors of airway obstruction after anterior cervical surgery weighs significantly on preventing airway obstruction.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the history and follow-up data of 774 patients who underwent anterior cervical surgery during January 2007 and June 2016. The patients were divided into two groups according to the occurrence of airway obstruction complication. Patients' age, sex, smoking history, drinking history, the presence of diabetes, body mass index (BMI), course of disease, surgical method, the location of the surgical segment, operation duration and the number of surgical segments were recorded and analyzed. Univariate analysis was conducted for the foregoing factors which might associate with concurrent airway obstruction, to screen out statistically significant factors, followed by a multivariate logistic regression analysis to analyze the relationship between these factors and the incidence rate of reintubation for airway obstruction after anterior cervical surgery.

RESULTS

14 of 744 patients developed postoperative airway obstruction followed by reintubation, which makes the incidence rate of 1.81% (14/774) for patients having airway obstruction after anterior cervical surgery. Among the 14 patients, 12 (85.7%) developed airway obstruction within 48 h after surgery, and 2 (14.3%) postoperative showed delayed airway obstruction in 9-11d after surgery. All of them had reintubation. The results of univariate analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences in age, smoking history, body mass index (BMI), surgical method, the location of the surgical segment, operation duration and the number of surgical segments between the two groups (P < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR = 2.038, 95% CI = 1.045-4.012), smoking (OR = 1.502, 95% CI = 1.012-2.375), BMI (OR = (OR = 1.807, 95% CI = 1.126-2.842), operation duration (OR = 2.503, 95% CI = 1.580-3.966), surgical method (OR = 3.386, 95% CI = 1.036-3.625), the location of the surgical segment (OR = 2.391, 95% CI = 1.085-5.159) and the number of surgical segments (OR = 2.512, 95% CI = 1.564-3.768) were the risk factors for airway obstruction and reintubation after anterior cervical surgery (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, smoking, obesity, the number of surgical segments, surgical method and surgical segment location are the important factors which may induce airway obstruction after anterior cervical surgery and therefore led to the decision of reintubations.

Cost Utility Analysis of Cervical Therapeutic Medial Branch Blocks in Managing Chronic Neck Pain

Background: Controlled diagnostic studies have established the prevalence of cervical facet joint pain to range from 36% to 67% based on the criterion standard of ≥ 80% pain relief. Treatment of cervical facet joint pain has been described with Level II evidence of effectiveness for therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks and radiofrequency neurotomy and with no significant evidence for intraarticular injections. However, there have not been any cost effectiveness or cost utility analysis studies performed in managing chronic neck pain with or without headaches with cervical facet joint interventions. Study Design: Cost utility analysis based on the results of a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of cervical therapeutic medial branch blocks in managing chronic neck pain. Objectives: To assess cost utility of therapeutic cervical medial branch blocks in managing chronic neck pain. Methods: A randomized trial was conducted in a specialty referral private practice interventional pain management center in the United States. This trial assessed the clinical effectiveness of therapeutic cervical medial branch blocks with or without steroids for an established diagnosis of cervical facet joint pain by means of controlled diagnostic blocks. Cost utility analysis was performed with direct payment data for the procedures for a total of 120 patients over a period of 2 years from this trial based on reimbursement rates of 2016. The payment data provided direct procedural costs without inclusion of drug treatments. An additional 40% was added to procedural costs with multiplication of a factor of 1.67 to provide estimated total costs including direct and indirect costs, based on highly regarded surgical literature. Outcome measures included significant improvement defined as at least a 50% improvement with reduction in pain and disability status with a combined 50% or more reduction in pain in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores. Results: The results showed direct procedural costs per one-year improvement in quality adjusted life year (QALY) of United States Dollar (USD) of $2,552, and overall costs of USD $4,261. Overall, each patient on average received 5.7 ± 2.2 procedures over a period of 2 years. Average significant improvement per procedure was 15.6 ± 12.3 weeks and average significant improvement in 2 years per patient was 86.0 ± 24.6 weeks. Limitations: The limitations of this cost utility analysis are that data are based on a single center evaluation. Only costs of therapeutic interventional procedures and physician visits were included, with extrapolation of indirect costs. Conclusion: The cost utility analysis of therapeutic cervical medial branch blocks in the treatment of chronic neck pain non-responsive to conservative management demonstrated clinical effectiveness and cost utility at USD $4,261 per one year of QALY.

Effect of an Annular Closure Device (Barricaid) on Same-Level Recurrent Disk Herniation and Disk Height Loss After Primary Lumbar Discectomy: Two-year Results of a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether an annular closure device could be implanted safely to reduce same-level recurrent disk herniation, or attenuate disk height loss and improve the outcome after lumbar discectomy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Same-level recurrent disk herniation, disk height loss, and progressive degeneration are common complications and sequelae after lumbar discectomy. Techniques to reduce these consequences may improve outcomes.

METHODS

Forty-six consecutive patients undergoing lumbar discectomy for single-level herniated disk at 2 institutions were followed prospectively with clinical and radiographic evaluations at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months (control cohort). A second consecutive cohort of 30 patients undergoing 31 lumbar discectomies with implantation of an annular closure device was followed similarly. Incidence of recurrent disk herniation, disk height loss, the leg and back pain visual analog scale (VAS), and the Oswestry Disability Index were assessed at each follow-up.

RESULTS

Cohorts were well matched at baseline. By 2 years of follow-up, symptomatic recurrent same-level disk herniation occurred in 3 (6.5%) patients in the control cohort versus 0 (0%) patients in the annular repair cohort (P=0.27). A trend of greater preservation of disk height was observed in the annular repair versus the control cohort 3 months (7.9 vs. 7.27 mm, P=0.08), 6 months (7.81 vs. 7.18 mm, P=0.09), and 12 months (7.63 vs. 6.9 mm, P=0.06) postoperatively. The annular closure cohort reported less leg pain (VAS-LP: 5 vs. 16, P<0.01), back pain (VAS-BP: 13 vs. 22, P<0.05), and disability (Oswestry Disability Index: 16 vs. 22, P<0.05) 1 year postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of a novel annular repair device was associated with greater maintenance of disk height and improved 1-year leg pain, back pain, and low-back disability. Recurrent disk herniation did not occur in any patient after annular repair. Closure of annular defect after lumbar discectomy may help preserve the physiological disk function and prevent long-term disk height loss and associated back and leg pain.

Impact of old age on patient-report outcomes and cost utility for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery for degenerative spine disease

PURPOSE

With growing older population and increasing rates of cervical spinal surgery, it is vital to understand the value of cervical surgery in this population. We set forth to determine the cost utility following anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative disease in older patients.

METHODS

Patients undergoing ACDF for degenerative diseases were enrolled into prospective longitudinal registry. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded at baseline, 1-year, and 2-year postoperatively. Two-year medical resource utilization, missed work, and health-state values [quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] were assessed to compute cost per QALY gained. Patients were dichotomized based on age: <65 years (younger) and ≥65 years (older) to compare the cost utility in these age groups.

RESULTS

Total 218 (87%) younger patients and 33 (13%) older patients who underwent ACDF were analyzed. Both the groups demonstrated a significant improvement in PROs 2-year following surgery. The older patients had a lower mean cumulative gain in QALYs compared to younger patients at 1 year (0.141 vs. 0.28, P = 0.05) and 2 years (0.211 vs. 0.424, P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the mean total 2-year cost between older [$21,041 (95% CI $18,466-$23,616)] and younger [$22,669 (95% CI $$21,259-$24,079)] patients (P = 0.27). Two-year cost per QALY gained in older vs. younger patients was ($99,720/QALYs gained vs. ($53,464/QALYs gained, P = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

ACDF surgery provided a significant gain in health-state utility in older patients with degenerative cervical pathology, with a mean cumulative 2-year cost per QALY gained of $99,720/QALY. While older patients have a slightly higher cost utility compared to their younger counterparts, surgery in the older cohort does provide a significant improvement in pain, disability, and quality-of-life outcomes.

Effect of obesity on cost per quality-adjusted life years gained following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in elective degenerative pathology

BACKGROUND

Obese patients have greater comorbidities along with higher risk of complications and greater costs after spine surgery, which may result in increased cost and lower quality of life compared with their non-obese counterparts.

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to determine cost-utility following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in obese patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This study analyzed prospectively collected data.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing elective ACDF for degenerative cervical pathology at a single academic institution were included in the study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were the outcome measures.

METHODS

One- and two-year medical resource utilization, missed work, and health state values (QALYs) were assessed. Two-year resource use was multiplied by unit costs based on Medicare national payment amounts (direct cost). Patient and caregiver workday losses were multiplied by the self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate (indirect cost). Total cost (direct+indirect) was used to compute cost per QALY gained. Patients were defined as obese for body mass index (BMI) ≥35 based on the WHO definition of class II obesity. A subgroup analysis was conducted in morbidly obese patients (BMI≥40).

RESULTS

There were significant improvements in pain (neck pain or arm pain), disability (Neck Disability Index), and quality of life (EuroQol-5D and Short Form-12) at 2 years after surgery (p<.001). There was no significant difference in post-discharge health-care resource utilization, direct cost, indirect cost, and total cost between obese and non-obese patients at postoperative 1-year and 2-year follow-up. Mean 2-year direct cost for obese patients was $19,225±$8,065 and $17,635±$6,413 for non-obese patients (p=.14). There was no significant difference in the mean total 2-year cost between obese ($23,144±$9,216) and non-obese ($22,183±$10,564) patients (p=.48). Obese patients had a lower mean cumulative gain in QALYs versus non-obese patients at 2-years (0.34 vs. 0.42, p=.32). Two-year cost-utility in obese ($68,070/QALY) versus non-obese patients ($52,816/QALY) was not significantly different (p=.11). Morbidly obese patients had lower QALYs gained (0.17) and higher cost per QALYs gained ($138,094/QALY) at 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion provided a significant gain in health state utility in obese patients, with a mean 2-year cost-utility of $68,070 per QALYs gained, which can be considered moderately cost-effective. Morbidly obese patients had lower cost-effectiveness; however, surgery does provide a significant improvement in outcomes. Obesity, and specifically morbid obesity, should to be taken into consideration as physician and hospital reimbursements move toward a bundled model.

Costs and readmission rates for the resection of primary and metastatic spinal tumors: a comparative analysis of 181 patients

OBJECTIVE

Because the surgical strategies for primary and metastatic spinal tumors are different, the respective associated costs and morbidities associated with those treatments likely vary. This study compares the direct costs and 90-day readmission rates between the resection of extradural metastatic and primary spinal tumors. The factors associated with cost and readmission are identified.

METHODS

Adults (age 18 years or older) who underwent the resection of spinal tumors between 2008 and 2013 were included in the study. Patients with intradural tumors were excluded. The direct costs of index hospitalization and 90-day readmission hospitalization were evaluated. The direct costs were compared between patients who were treated surgically for primary and metastatic spinal tumors. The independent factors associated with costs and readmissions were identified using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 181 patients with spinal tumors were included (63 primary and 118 metastatic tumors). Overall, the mean index hospital admission cost for the surgical management of spinal tumors was $52,083. There was no significant difference in the cost of hospitalization between primary ($55,801) and metastatic ($50,098) tumors (p = 0.426). The independent factors associated with higher cost were male sex (p = 0.032), preoperative inability to ambulate (p = 0.002), having more than 3 comorbidities (p = 0.037), undergoing corpectomy (p = 0.021), instrumentation greater than 7 levels (p < 0.001), combined anterior-posterior approach (p < 0.001), presence of a perioperative complication (p < 0.001), and longer hospital stay (p < 0.001). The perioperative complication rate was 21.0%. Of this cohort, 11.6% of patients were readmitted within 90 days, and the mean hospitalization cost of that readmission was $20,078. Readmission rates after surgical treatment for primary and metastatic tumors were similar (11.1% vs 11.9%, respectively) (p = 0.880). Prior hospital stay greater than 15 days (OR 6.62, p = 0.016) and diagnosis of lung metastasis (OR 52.99, p = 0.007) were independent predictors of readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary and metastatic spinal tumors are comparable with regard to the direct costs of the index surgical hospitalization and readmission rate within 90 days. The factors independently associated with costs are related to preoperative health status, type and complexity of surgery, and postoperative course.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion for Adjacent Segment Disease: Clinical Outcomes and Cost Utility of Surgical Intervention

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

Determine clinical outcomes and cost utility of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of adjacent segment disease (ASD).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The incidence of symptomatic ASD after ACDF has been estimated to occur in up to 26% of patients. Commonly, these patients will undergo an additional ACDF procedure. However, there are currently no studies available that adequately describe the clinical outcomes or cost utility of performing ACDF for ASD.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 40 patients undergoing ACDF for ASD was performed. Baseline and 2-year neck and arm pain (NRS-NP, NRS-AP), neck disability index (NDI), physical and mental quality of life (SF-12 PCS & MCS), and Zung depression score (ZDS) were assessed. Two-year total neck-related medical resource utilization, amount of missed work, and health-state values were determined. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated from EQ-5D assessments with US valuation. Comprehensive costs (indirect, direct, and total cost) and the value (cost-per-QALY gained) of performing ACDF for ASD were assessed.

RESULTS

Performing ACDF to treat ASD resulted in significant improvements (P<0.05) in NRS-NP, NRS-AP, NDI, SF-12 PCS, and ZDS outcome measures. Patient-reported health states also significantly improved, with a mean cumulative 2-year gain of 0.54 QALYs. The mean 2-year cost of surgery was $32,616 (direct cost: $25,391; indirect cost: $7225). ACDF for the treatment of ASD was associated with a mean 2-year cost per QALY gained of $60,526.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing ACDF for ASD resulted in significant improvements in patient pain, disability, and quality of life. Further, the mean 2-year cost-per-QALY was determined to be $60,526, which suggests surgical intervention to be cost effective. This study is the first to provide evidence that performing an ACDF for ASD is both clinically and cost effective.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Practice Patterns Among Greek Spinal Surgeons

Background

A web-based survey was conducted among Greek spinal surgeons to outline the current practice trends in regard to the surgical management of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine pathology. Various practice patterns exist in the surgical management of patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy for degenerative pathology. No consensus exists regarding the type of the employed graft, the necessity of implanting a plate, the prescription of an external orthotic device, and the length of the leave of absence in these patients.

Methods

A specially designed questionnaire was used for evaluating the criteria for surgical intervention, the frequency of fusion employment, the type of the graft, the frequency of plate implantation, the employment of an external spinal orthosis (ESO), the length of the leave of absence, and the prescription of postoperative physical therapy. Physicians’ demographic factors were assessed including residency and spinal fellowship training, as well as type and length in practice.

Results

Eighty responses were received. Neurosurgeons represented 70%, and orthopedic surgeons represented 30%. The majority of the participants (91.3%) considered fusion necessary. Allograft was the preferred type of graft. Neurosurgeons used a plate in 42.9% of cases, whereas orthopedic surgeons in 100%. An ESO was recommended for 87.5% of patients without plates, and in 83.3% of patients with plates. The average duration of ESO usage was 4 weeks. Physical therapy was routinely prescribed postoperatively by 75% of the neurosurgeons, and by 83.3% of the orthopedic surgeons. The majority of the participants recommended 4 weeks leave of absence.

Conclusions

The vast majority of participants considered ACDF a better treatment option than an ACD, and preferred an allograft. The majority of them employed a plate, prescribed an ESO postoperatively, and recommended physical therapy to their patients.

Variations in cost calculations in spine surgery cost-effectiveness research

OBJECT

Cost-effectiveness research in spine surgery has been a prominent focus over the last decade. However, there has yet to be a standardized method developed for calculation of costs in such studies. This lack of a standardized costing methodology may lead to conflicting conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of an intervention for a specific diagnosis. The primary objective of this study was to systematically review all cost-effectiveness studies published on spine surgery and compare and contrast various costing methodologies used.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness literature related to spine surgery. All cost-effectiveness analyses pertaining to spine surgery were identified using the cost-effectiveness analysis registry database of the Tufts Medical Center Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy, and the MEDLINE database. Each article was reviewed to determine the study subject, methodology, and results. Data were collected from each study, including costs, interventions, cost calculation method, perspective of cost calculation, and definitions of direct and indirect costs if available.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven cost-effectiveness studies on spine surgery were included in the present study. Twenty-seven (73%) of the studies involved the lumbar spine and the remaining 10 (27%) involved the cervical spine. Of the 37 studies, 13 (35%) used Medicare reimbursements, 12 (32%) used a case-costing database, 3 (8%) used cost-to-charge ratios (CCRs), 2 (5%) used a combination of Medicare reimbursements and CCRs, 3 (8%) used the United Kingdom National Health Service reimbursement system, 2 (5%) used a Dutch reimbursement system, 1 (3%) used the United Kingdom Department of Health data, and 1 (3%) used the Tricare Military Reimbursement system. Nineteen (51%) studies completed their cost analysis from the societal perspective, 11 (30%) from the hospital perspective, and 7 (19%) from the payer perspective. Of those studies with a societal perspective, 14 (38%) reported actual indirect costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in cost have a direct impact on the value equation for concluding whether an intervention is cost-effective. It is essential to develop a standardized, accurate means of calculating costs. Comparability and transparency are essential, such that studies can be compared properly and policy makers can be appropriately informed when making decisions for our health care system based on the results of these studies.

Cost-utility analyses in spine care: a qualitative and systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review was performed to identify US-based cost-utility analyses (CUA) studies in spine care and to critically evaluate the quality of the available literature.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There has been a recent trend in the United States toward increased publication of economic analyses in spine care. The cost-effectiveness of spine interventions and the quality of published literature is not well understood.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was conducted to identify cost analyses in spine care. Articles were excluded on the basis of the following criteria: nonspine care, nonoperative, non-US based, nonclinical, and not CUA. Of the 424 screened articles, 20 met inclusion criteria. Quality of studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument.

RESULTS

Evidence for the cost-effectiveness of operative spinal intervention is varied. The majority of available studies report favorable cost-effectiveness ratios, however, a few studies suggest that certain operative interventions are not cost-effective. Average Quality of Health Economic Studies score of all included studies was 75.1 (60-93). The quality of evidence is variable and there are a number of weaknesses in the available literature, most significant of which is that few studies adopt a long-term time horizon or have sufficient follow-up (N = 3/20). High Quality of Health Economic Studies scoring studies were more likely to have sensitivity analysis (P = 0.016), societal cost perspective (P = 0.014), and a funding disclosure (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

There is a small but rapidly growing body of US-based CUA in spine care. The quality of CUA evidence is variable but there are significant opportunities to strengthen future CUA studies in spine. This study highlights the need for more attention to CUA research and the quality of these studies in spine care.

Anterior surgical management of single-level cervical disc disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis with decision analysis and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (with autograft, allograft, or spacers), anterior cervical discectomy without fusion (ACD), and cervical disc replacement (CDR) for the treatment of 1-level cervical disc disease.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is debate as to the optimal anterior surgical strategy to treat single-level cervical disc disease. Surgical strategies include 3 techniques of anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (autograft, allograft, or spacer-assisted fusion), ACD, and CDR. Several controlled trials have compared these treatments but have yielded mixed results. Decision analysis provides a structure for making a quantitative comparison of the costs and outcomes of each treatment.

METHODS

A literature search was performed and yielded 156 case series that fulfilled our search criteria describing nearly 17,000 cases. Data were abstracted from these publications and pooled meta-analytically to estimate the incidence of various outcomes, including index-level and adjacent-level reoperation. A decision analytic model calculated the expected costs in US dollars and outcomes in quality-adjusted life years for a typical adult patient with 1-level cervical radiculopathy subjected to each of the 5 approaches.

RESULTS

At 5 years postoperatively, patients who had undergone ACD alone had significantly (P < 0.001) more quality-adjusted life years (4.885 ± 0.041) than those receiving other treatments. Patients with ACD also exhibited highly significant (P < 0.001) differences in costs, incurring the lowest societal costs ($16,558 ± $539). Follow-up data were inadequate for comparison beyond 5 years.

CONCLUSION

The results of our decision analytic model indicate advantages for ACD, both in effectiveness and costs, over other strategies. Thus, ACD is a cost-effective alternative to anterior cervical discectomy with fusion and CDR in patients with single-level cervical disc disease. Definitive conclusions about degenerative changes after ACD and adjacent-level disease after CDR await longer follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a cost analysis

Object

Patients suffering from cervical radiculopathy in whom a course of nonoperative treatment has failed are often candidates for a single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF). The objective of this analysis was to identify any significant cost differences between these surgical methods by comparing direct costs to the hospital. Furthermore, patient-specific characteristics were also considered for their effect on component costs.

Methods

After obtaining approval from the medical center institutional review board, the authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional comparative cohort study, with a sample of 101 patients diagnosed with cervical radiculopathy and who underwent an initial single-level ACDF or minimally invasive PCF during a 3-year period. Using these data, bivariate analyses were conducted to determine significant differences in direct total procedure and component costs between surgical techniques. Factorial ANOVAs were also conducted to determine any relationship between patient sex and smoking status to the component costs per surgery.

Results

The mean total direct cost for an ACDF was $8192, and the mean total direct cost for a PCF was $4320. There were significant differences in the cost components for direct costs and operating room supply costs. It was found that there was no statistically significant difference in component costs with regard to patient sex or smoking status.

Conclusions

In the management of single-level cervical radiculopathy, the present analysis has revealed that the average cost of an ACDF is 89% more than a PCF. This increased cost is largely due to the cost of surgical implants. These results do not appear to be dependent on patient sex or smoking status. When combined with results from previous studies highlighting the comparable patient outcomes for either procedure, the authors' findings suggest that from a health care economics standpoint, physicians should consider a minimally invasive PCF in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy.

Cost-effective studies in spine surgeries: a narrative review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Although the pathologic processes that affect the spine remain largely unchanged, our techniques to correct them continue to evolve with the development of novel medical and surgical interventions. Although the primary purpose of new technologies is to improve patients' quality of life, the economic impact of such therapies must be considered.

PURPOSE

To review the available peer-reviewed literature on spine surgery that addresses the cost-effectiveness of various treatments and technologies.

STUDY DESIGN

A narrative literature review.

METHODS

Articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012 were selected from two Pubmed searches using keywords cost-effectiveness AND spine (216 articles) and cost analysis AND spine (358 articles). Relevant articles on cost analyses and cost-effectiveness were selected by the authors and reviewed.

RESULTS

Cervical and lumbar surgeries (anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, standard open lumbar discectomy, and standard posterior lumbar laminectomy) are reasonably cost effective at 2 years after the procedure (<100,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life years gained) and become more cost effective with time because of sustained clinical improvements with relatively low additional incurred costs. The usage of transfusion avoidance technology is not cost effective because of the low risk of complications associated with allogenic transfusions. Although intraoperative neuromonitoring and imaging modalities are both cost saving and cost-effective, their cost-effectiveness is largely dependent on the baseline rate of neurologic complications and implant misplacement, respectively. More rigorous studies are needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of recombinant bone morphogenetic protein.

CONCLUSIONS

An ideal new technology should be able to achieve maximal improvement in patient health at a cost that society is willing to pay. The cost-effectiveness of technologies and treatments in spine care is dependent on their durability and the rate and severity of the baseline clinical problem that the treatment was designed to address.

The role of decision analytic modeling in the health economic assessment of spinal intervention

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

OBJECTIVE

To review the common tenets, strengths, and weaknesses of decision modeling for health economic assessment and to review the use of decision modeling in the spine literature to date.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

For the majority of spinal interventions, well-designed prospective, randomized, pragmatic cost-effectiveness studies that address the specific decision-in-need are lacking. Decision analytic modeling allows for the estimation of cost-effectiveness based on data available to date. Given the rising demands for proven value in spine care, the use of decision analytic modeling is rapidly increasing by clinicians and policy makers.

METHODS

This narrative review discusses the general components of decision analytic models, how decision analytic models are populated and the trade-offs entailed, makes recommendations for how users of spine intervention decision models might go about appraising the models, and presents an overview of published spine economic models.

RESULTS

A proper, integrated, clinical, and economic critical appraisal is necessary in the evaluation of the strength of evidence provided by a modeling evaluation. As is the case with clinical research, all options for collecting health economic or value data are not without their limitations and flaws. There is substantial heterogeneity across the 20 spine intervention health economic modeling studies summarized with respect to study design, models used, reporting, and general quality. There is sparse evidence for populating spine intervention models. Results mostly showed that interventions were cost-effective based on $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year threshold. Spine care providers, as partners with their health economic colleagues, have unique clinical expertise and perspectives that are critical to interpret the strengths and weaknesses of health economic models.

CONCLUSION

Health economic models must be critically appraised for both clinical validity and economic quality before altering health care policy, payment strategies, or patient care decisions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Biological substitutes/extenders for spinal arthrodesis: which agents are cost-effective?

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lumbar or cervical spinal arthrodesis using biological substitutes and extenders compared with iliac crest autograft for the treatment of degenerative spinal conditions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The cost-effectiveness of using bone graft substitutes and extenders for spinal fusion compared with using iliac crest autograft is not yet well established.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Collaboration Library, EMBASE, the CRD (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination) database, and Tuft's CEA registry for literature published through December 2013 was performed to identify full formal economic analyses comparing the use of biological grafts with iliac crest bone graft in spinal fusion for thoracolumbar or cervical degenerative, deformity, and traumatic spinal conditions. Economic outcomes such as cost per improved outcome or cost per quality-adjusted life year were reported in the context of the model type, analytic perspective clinical comparisons, and sensitivity analyses employed.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 88 citations, and 6 full economic analyses ultimately met our inclusion criteria. For the comparison of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 to iliac crest bone graft in the lumbar spine, data from 4 cost-effectiveness studies and 1 cost-utility study provided discordant conclusions that varied with type of data used, cost-measurement methods, and study design. In the cervical spine, one study suggested that from a societal perspective, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with allograft is similarly cost-effective as ACDF with autograft.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that compared with use of iliac crest bone graft in lumbar spinal fusion, use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein is not cost-effective from a payer perspective with higher upfront costs, but it may be cost-effective from a societal perspective due to a decrease in lost productivity. The data in this study also suggest that from a societal perspective, ACDF with allograft is similarly cost-effective to ACDF with autograft.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Setting the equation: establishing value in spine care

STUDY DESIGN

Topic review.

OBJECTIVE

Describe value measurement in spine care and discuss the motivation for, methods for, and limitations of such measurement.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spinal disorders are common and are an important cause of pain and disability. Numerous complementary and competing treatment strategies are used to treat spinal disorders, and the costs of these treatments is substantial and continue to rise despite clear evidence of improved health status as a result of these expenditures.

METHODS

The authors present the economic and legislative imperatives forcing the assessment of value in spine care. The definition of value in health care and methods to measure value specifically in spine care are presented. Limitations to the utility of value judgments and caveats to their use are presented.

RESULTS

Examples of value calculations in spine care are presented and critiqued. Methods to improve and broaden the measurement of value across spine care are suggested, and the role of prospective registries in measuring value is discussed.

CONCLUSION

Value can be measured in spine care through the use of appropriate economic measures and patient-reported outcomes measures. Value must be interpreted in light of the perspective of the assessor, the duration of the assessment period, the degree of appropriate risk stratification, and the relative value of treatment alternatives.

Cost-utility analysis modeling at 2-year follow-up for cervical disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A single-center contribution to the randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with cervical disc herniations resulting in radiculopathy or myelopathy from single level disease have traditionally been treated with Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF), yet Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA) is a new alternative. Expert suggestion of reduced adjacent segment degeneration is a promising future result of CDA. A cost-utility analysis of these procedures with long-term follow-up has not been previously reported.

METHODS

We reviewed single institution prospective data from a randomized trial comparing single-level ACDF and CDA in cervical disc disease. Both Medicare reimbursement schedules and actual hospital cost data for peri-operative care were separately reviewed and analyzed to estimate the cost of treatment of each patient. QALYs were calculated at 1 and 2 years based on NDI and SF-36 outcome scores, and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) analysis was performed to determine relative cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Patients of both groups showed improvement in NDI and SF-36 outcome scores. Medicare reimbursement rates to the hospital were $11,747 and $10,015 for ACDF and CDA, respectively; these figures rose to $16,162 and $13,171 when including physician and anesthesiologist reimbursement. The estimated actual cost to the hospital of ACDF averaged $16,108, while CDA averaged $16,004 (p = 0.97); when including estimated physicians fees, total hospital costs came to $19,811 and $18,440, respectively. The cost/QALY analyses therefore varied widely with these discrepancies in cost values. The ICERs of ACDF vs CDA with Medicare reimbursements were $18,593 (NDI) and $19,940 (SF-36), while ICERs based on actual total hospital cost were $13,710 (NDI) and $9,140 (SF-36).

CONCLUSIONS

We confirm the efficacy of ACDF and CDA in the treatment of cervical disc disease, as our results suggest similar clinical outcomes at one and two year follow-up. The ICER suggests that the non-significant added benefit via ACDF comes at a reasonable cost, whether we use actual hospital costs or Medicare reimbursement values, though the actual ICER values vary widely depending upon the CUA modality used. Long term follow-up may illustrate a different profile for CDA due to reduced cost and greater long-term utility scores. It is crucial to note that financial modeling plays an important role in how economic treatment dominance is portrayed.

Evaluation of conservative treatment and timing of surgical intervention for mild forms of cervical spondylotic myelopathy

The optimal management approach for patients with mild forms of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM) has not been well established. The aim of the present study was to investigate the outcome of conservative treatment, identify prognostic factors and provide evidence for the timing of surgical intervention. A total of 90 patients with MCSM attending hospital between February 2007 and January 2009 were prospectively enrolled. Initially, all patients received conservative treatment and were followed up periodically. When a deterioration in myelopathy was clearly identified, surgical treatment was conducted. Clinical and radiological factors correlating with the deterioration were examined, and final clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score. At the end of January 2012, follow-ups of >3 years were completed. Seventy-eight patients were available for data analysis. Only 21 patients (26.9%) deteriorated and underwent surgery thereafter (group A), while the remaining 57 patients (73.1%) were treated conservatively throughout (group B). Statistical analysis revealed that segmental instability and cervical spinal stenosis were adverse factors for the prognosis of conservative treatment. Although the JOA scores of the patients in group A declined initially, following surgical intervention, no significant differences were identified in JOA scores between the two groups at the time of the final follow-up (P=0.46). In summary, conservative treatment is effective in MCSM patients. Patients with segmental instability and cervical spinal stenosis have a tendency to deteriorate, but conservative treatment remains the recommendation for the first action. If the myelopathy deteriorates during conservative treatment, timely surgical intervention is effective.

Cost-effectiveness of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion five years after surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort. OBJECTIVE.: The purpose of this study is to determine the cost per quality-adjusted life year (cost/QALY) gained for single-level instrumented anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) over 5 years.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Economic value is an increasingly important component of health care policy decision making.

METHODS

Control patients who had undergone ACDF with complete 5-year follow-up data who were part of the Investigational Device Exemption trials for cervical disc arthroplasty were identified. Direct costs for each intervention reported as part of the trial were determined using the 2012 Medicare Fee schedule. Health utility was determined using the Short Form-6D, calculated by transformation from the Short Form-36.

RESULTS

There were 352 patients (182 women, 170 men), mean age was 44.6 years (22-73 yr). Cost per patient for the index ACDF was $15,714. Over 5 years, 41 repeat ACDFs, 15 posterior fusions, 6 foraminotomies, 2 implant removals, 2 hematoma evacuations, and 1 esophageal fistula repair were performed. Mean QALY gained in each year of follow-up was 0.16, 0.18, 0.17, 0.18, and 0.18 for a cumulative 0.88 QALY gain over 5 years. The resultant cost/QALY gain at 1 year was $104,831; $53,074 at year 2; $37,717 at year 3; $28,383 at year 4; and $23,460 at year 5. In this cohort, 11 nerve releases and 26 rotator cuff repairs were done within 5 years after the index ACDF. Subanalysis to include upper extremity procedures was performed. The cost/QALY gained at 1 year including upper extremity procedures was $106,256; $54,622 at year 2; $38,836 at year 3; $29,454 at year 4; and $24,479 at year 5.

CONCLUSION

Increasing health care costs call for demonstration of cost-effectiveness in order to justify payment for interventions, including ACDFs. This study indicates that at 5-year follow-up, single-level instrumented ACDF is both effective and durable resulting in a favorable cost/QALY gained as compared to other widely accepted health care interventions.

Is anterior cervical fusion with a porous tantalum implant a cost-effective method to treat cervical disc disease with radiculopathy?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative cost-effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF) using a porous tantalum implant compared with autograft with plating, for single-level cervical disc disease with radiculopathy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF with autograft as an interbody spacer is a generally accepted method to treat degenerated cervical discs with radiculopathy. Concerns about donor site morbidity and the structural characteristics of autograft stimulated investigations of alternative materials. Techniques may differ in their operative risks, complications, outcomes, and resource use.

METHODS

A retrospective review of clinical outcomes and total cost of illness for 5 years postsurgery was performed for 61 consecutive patients enrolled for this study. Twenty-eight patients were treated with single-level ACDF using either a stand-alone, porous tantalum implant, without graft inside the implant, and 33 patients received autograft and plating. A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the 2 ACDF treatment methods was conducted. This article reports clinical assessments, quality adjusted life years gained, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis.

RESULTS

Patients in both cohorts reported improved clinical outcomes, including neck disability index, visual analogue scale, Short-Form 36, Odom's clinical assessment, and patient satisfaction at 5 years postindex surgery. The mean cost of illness for the study period, including preoperative through 5 years postoperative assessments, was 6806 per patient treated with tantalum and 10,143 per patient receiving autograft and plate. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained were 9.41 and 7.14 for the tantalum and control cohorts, respectively. The cost per QALY for the tantalum group was 723 and 1420 for the control group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ACDF with a porous tantalum implant compared with ACDF with autograft and plate was -1473 per patient per year for the duration of this study.

CONCLUSION

This cost-effectiveness analysis reports favorable results for ACDF procedures utilizing a tantalum implant. The data reported suggest that using porous tantalum as a stand-alone device is less costly and more effective than autograft and plate in ACDF procedures.

Cost-utility analysis in spine care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Despite the importance of the information provided by cost-utility analyses (CUAs), there has been a lack of these types of studies performed in the area of spinal care.

PURPOSE

To systematically review cost-utility studies published on spinal care between 1976 and 2010.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

All CUAs pertaining to spinal care published between 1976 and 2010 were identified using the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) registry database (Tufts Medical Center, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy) and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED). The keywords used to search both the registry databases were the following: spine, spinal, neck, back, cervical, lumbar, thoracic, and scoliosis. Search of the CEA registry provided a total of 28 articles, and the NHS EED yielded an additional 5, all of which were included in this review. Each article was reviewed for the study subject, methodology, and results. Data contained within the databases for each of the 33 articles were recorded, and the manuscripts were reviewed to provide insight into the funding source, analysis perspective, discount rate, and cost-utility ratios.

RESULTS

There was wide variation among the 33 studies in methodology. There were 17 operative, 13 nonoperative, and 3 imaging studies. Study subjects included lumbar spine (n=27), cervical spine (n=4), scoliosis (n=1), and lumbar and cervical spine (n=1). Twenty-three of the studies were based on the clinical data from prospective randomized studies, 7 on decision models, 2 on prospective observational data, and 1 on a retrospective case series. Sixty cost-utility ratios were reported in the 33 articles. Of the ratios, 19 of 60 (31.6%) were cost saving, 27 of 60 (45%) were less than $100,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain, and 14 of 60 (23.3%) were greater than $100,000/QALY gain. Only four of 33 (12%) studies contained the four key criteria of cost-effectiveness research recommended by the US Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-three CUA studies and 60 cost-utility ratios have been published on various aspects of spinal care over the last 30 years. Certain aspects of spinal care have been shown to be cost effective. Further efforts, however, are needed to better define the value of many aspects of spinal care. Future CUA studies should consider societal cost perspective and carefully consider the durability of clinical benefit in determining a study time horizon.

Comparative effectiveness research in spine surgery

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has impending significance for the field of spine surgery. This article outlines the rationale for comparative effectiveness research and reviews recommended priorities of spinal surgery emphasis. It also examines recent key studies of CER in the spine surgery literature and associated cost-effectiveness studies. It concludes with a discussion of the direction of CER in the spine surgery community.

Inclusion of asymptomatic degenerative discs in a two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a decision analysis

OBJECTIVE

To perform a decision analysis model to compare single-level fusion versus two-level fusion in patients with an asymptomatic disc adjacent to a symptomatic disc.

METHODS

Probabilities and utilities of alternative outcomes in the decision tree were assigned based on systematic review of the literature and expert opinion. Rollback analysis determined the optimal treatment. Sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulations were performed to identify effects of varying model parameters.

RESULTS

Rollback analysis provided expected values of 0.92 versus 0.84 in favor of observation as the optimal decision. Sensitivity analysis identified the probability of developing adjacent segment disease (ASD) and the likelihood of surgery given a diagnosis of ASD as the most critical parameters influencing the decision. Observation was the preferred strategy at all values of probability of ASD < 100%. At a probability of ASD of 100%, fusion was the preferred strategy only when the probability of surgery for ASD was ≥ 66% or the utility assigned to successful nonoperative management was ≤ 0.84.

CONCLUSIONS

Observation was the preferred strategy for management of asymptomatic adjacent degenerative discs (AADDs) given the probabilities and utilities used in the decision analysis model. The study was limited by unavailability of precise estimates of the probability of development of ASD and the probability of surgery after diagnosis of ASD, the most critical factors influencing the decision. However, the conclusions were robust given wide ranges used for these parameters in the sensitivity analysis.

Asymptomatic same-site recurrent disc herniation after lumbar discectomy: results of a prospective longitudinal study with 2-year serial imaging

STUDY DESIGN

This is a prospective cohort study with serial imaging.

OBJECTIVE

We set out to determine the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic same-level recurrent disc herniation and assess their effect on 2-year outcome.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The reported incidence of symptomatic same-level recurrent disc herniation after lumbar discectomy varies widely in retrospective studies. To date, the incidence of radiographic same-level recurrent disc herniation has not been studied prospectively with sequential imaging. Furthermore, the clinical relevance of recurrent disc herniation on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after discectomy remains unknown, particularly in patients with poorly specific pain after surgery.

METHODS

One hundred eight patients undergoing lumbar discectomy for a single-level herniated disc at five institutions were prospectively observed for 2 years. Computed tomography (CT) and MRI of the lumbar spine were obtained every 3 months to assess reherniation and disc height loss. Leg and back pain visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and quality of life (SF-36 physical component) were assessed 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery.

RESULTS

No patients demonstrated residual disc on postoperative MRI. By 2 years after discectomy, 25 (23.1%) patients had demonstrated radiographic evidence of recurrent disc herniation at the level of prior discectomy on serial imaging (mean ± SD, 11.8 ± 8.3 months after surgery). Radiographic disc herniation was asymptomatic in 14 (13%) patients and symptomatic in 11 (10.2%) patients. The occurrence of symptomatic recurrent disc herniation was associated with worse 2-year leg pain (VAS-LP, P=0.002) and disability (ODI, P=0.036) but not quality of life (SF-36) or disc height loss. The occurrence of asymptomatic reherniation was not associated with disc height loss or any outcome measure (VAS, ODI, and SF-36) by 2 years.

CONCLUSION

Nearly one-fourth of patients undergoing lumbar discectomy demonstrated radiographic evidence of recurrent disc herniation at the level of prior surgery, the majority of which were asymptomatic. Asymptomatic disc herniation was not associated with clinical consequences by 2 years. Clinically silent recurrent disc herniation is common after lumbar discectomy. When obtaining MRI evaluation within the first 2 years of discectomy, providers should expect that radiographic evidence of reherniation may be encountered and that treatment should be considered only when correlating radicular symptoms exist.

Cost-effectiveness of image-guided spine surgery

Objective:

To determine if image-guided spine surgery is cost effective.

Methods:

A prospective case series of the first 100 patients undergoing thoracolumbar pedicle screw instrumentation under image-guidance was compared to a retrospective control group of the last 100 patients who underwent screw placement prior to the use of image-guidance. The image-guidance system was NaviVision (Vector Vision-BrainLAB) and Arcadis Orbic (Siemens).

Results:

The rate of revision surgery was reduced from 3% to 0% with the use of image guidance (p=0.08). The cost savings of image guidance for the placement of pedicle screws was $71,286 per 100 cases. Time required for pedicle screw placement with image guidance was 20 minutes for 2 screws, 29 minutes for 4 screws, 38 minutes for 6 screws, and 50 min for 8 screws. Cost savings for the time required for placement of pedicle screws with image guidance can be estimated by subtracting the time required with currently used techniques without image guidance from the above averages, then multiplying by $93 per minute. The approximate costs of the navigation system is $475,000 ( $225,000 for Vector Vision-BrainLAB and $250,000 for Arcadis Orbic-Siemens).

Conclusion:

Image guidance for the placement of pedicle screws may be cost effective in spine practices with heavy volume, that perform surgery in difficult cases, and that require long surgical times for the placement of pedicle screws.

Neck pain patients' preference scores for their current health

Purpose

To elicit neck pain (NP) patients’ preference scores for their current health, and investigate the association between their scores and NP disability.

Methods

Rating scale scores (RSs) and standard gamble scores (SGs) for current health were elicited from chronic NP patients (n = 104) and patients with NP following a motor vehicle accident (n = 116). Patients were stratified into Von Korff Pain Grades: Grade I (low-intensity pain, few activity limitations); Grade II (high-intensity pain, few activity limitations); Grade III (pain with high disability levels, moderate activity limitations); and Grade IV (pain with high disability levels, several activity limitations). Multivariable regression quantified the association between preference scores and NP disability.

Results

Mean SGs and RSs were as follows: Grade I patients: 0.81, 0.76; Grade II: 0.70, 0.60; Grade III: 0.64, 0.44; Grade IV: 0.57, 0.39. The association between preference scores and NP disability depended on type of NP and preference-elicitation method. Chronic NP patients’ scores were more strongly associated with depressive symptoms than with NP disability. In both samples, NP disability explained little more than random variance in SGs, and up to 51% of variance in RSs.

Conclusion

Health-related quality-of-life is considerably diminished in NP patients. Depressive symptoms and preference-elicitation methods influence preference scores that NP patients assign to their health.

Usefulness of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage with plate augmentation for anterior arthrodesis in traumatic cervical spine injury

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Even though many clinical reports about cages have been documented in patients with degenerative disorders, reports were scarce for traumatic injury cases, and those cases using metal cages were restricted to only one-level injury.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the usefulness of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage and plate construction in anterior interbody fusions (AIF) for traumatic cervical spine injuries by analyzing radiographic changes and clinical outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Fifty-eight patients (91 levels) underwent cage and plate construction for treatment of traumatic cervical spine injury.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The fusion rate, fusion time, changes of Cobb angle, subsidence rate, and adjacent level changes were assessed as a radiographic outcome. Clinical analysis includes the recovery rate on the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale and the presence of the complications.

METHODS

We evaluated 58 patients (91 levels) who underwent surgery and had at least 24 months in follow-up study. Radiographic evaluation included the assessment of interbody fusion rate, fusion time, changes of Cobb angle, subsidence rate, and adjacent level changes. Clinical assessment was done by analyzing recovery state of ASIA impairment scale from preoperative period to the last follow-up and by evaluating complications.

RESULTS

Fifty-four cases showed bony fusion within 3 months after the surgery. The mean Cobb angle between the vertebral bodies was 2.54 degrees before operation, 9.13 degrees after operation, and 8.39 degrees at the latest follow-up. The mean intervertebral disc height was increased by 3.01 mm after the operation, but the mean height was 2.17 mm shorter at the last follow-up than after postoperation. In terms of clinical results, five Grade A cases and one Grade B case as assessed by the ASIA impairment scale were unchanged until the last follow-up. Twenty-three cases of Grade C, 16 cases of Grade D, and 13 cases of Grade E improved to seven cases, 26 cases, and 19 cases, respectively. Three cases went through additional surgery, two posterior fusions for delayed union and posterior instability and one AIF for adjacent level disease.

CONCLUSION

The PEEK cage and additional plate fixation is a surgical procedure that decreases donor site morbidity, obtains high fusion rate with rigid fixation, and provides satisfactory clinical outcome for traumatic cervical spine injuries, regardless of the numbers of the involved levels.