Prolonged conservative care versus early surgery in patients with sciatica from lumbar disc herniation: cost utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial

Comparing Quality of Life: Discectomy Surgery versus Epidural Corticosteroid Injection for Lumbar Disc Herniation

BACKGROUND

Selecting an efficient treatment for patients with radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) unresponsive to conservative management remains a challenging task under investigation, yielding varying results. This study aims to compare the outcomes of the 2 most prevalent invasive treatments.

METHODS

In this retrospective longitudinal study, we enrolled patients with confirmed refractory symptomatic LDH who sought treatment at Valiasr Hospital and underwent either discectomy surgery or epidural steroid injection (ESI) between 2019 and 2022. The outcome measures included pain intensity using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and quality of life (QoL) using the SF-36 questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 202 individuals (112 in the discectomy group and 90 in the ESI group) consisting of 90 males and 112 females, with a mean age of 50.9 ± 13.5 years, underwent analysis. In the univariate analysis, QoL scores were significantly higher in the discectomy group (57.4 ± 2.4) compared to the ESI group (44.2 ± 2.4) (P < 0.01). Furthermore, the surgery group exhibited a significantly greater reduction in the Leg VAS score after treatment compared to the ESI group (mean difference: -2.59, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.45 to -1.70, P < 0.01). After adjusting for the most important confounding variables using multiple linear regression analysis, the association between surgery and higher QoL scores remained statistically significant (Unstandardized Coefficients B = 7.65, 95% CI: 0.55, 14.76, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that discectomy surgery has a more pronounced effect on patient outcomes and is a preferable treatment option for LDH patients.

Lumbar Laminotomy: Variables Affecting 90-day Overall Reimbursement

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar laminotomy/diskectomy is a common procedure performed to address radiculopathy that persists despite conservative treatment. Understanding cost/reimbursement variability and its drivers has the potential to help optimize related healthcare delivery. The goal of this study was to assess variability and factors associated with reimbursement through 90 days after single-level lumbar laminotomy/diskectomy.

METHODS

Lumbar laminotomies/diskectomies were isolated from the 2010 to 2021 PearlDiver M151 data set. Exclusion criteria included patients younger than 18 years; other concomitant spinal procedures; and indications of trauma, oncologic, or infectious diagnoses. Patient, surgical, and perioperative data were abstracted. These variables were examined using a multivariable linear regression model with Bonferroni correction to determine factors independently correlated with reimbursement.

RESULTS

A total of 28,621 laminotomies/diskectomies were identified. The average ± standard deviation 90-day postoperative reimbursement was $9,453.83 ± 19,343.99 and, with a non-normal distribution, the median (inner quartile range) was $3,314 ($5,460). By multivariable linear regression, variables associated with greatest increase in 90-day postoperative reimbursement were associated with admission (with the index procedure [+$11,757.31] or readmission [+$31,248.80]), followed by insurance type (relative to Medicare, commercial +$4,183.79), postoperative adverse events (+$2,006.60), and postoperative emergency department visits (+$1,686.89) ( P < 0.0001 for each). Lesser associations were with Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (+$286.67 for each point increase) and age (-$24.65 with each year increase) ( P < 0.001 and P = 0.003, respectively).

DISCUSSION

This study assessed a large cohort of lumbar laminotomies/diskectomies and found substantial variations in reimbursement/cost to the healthcare system. The largest increase in reimbursement was associated with admission (with the index procedure or readmission), followed by insurance type, postoperative adverse events, and postoperative emergency department visits. These results highlight the need to balance inpatient versus outpatient surgeries while limiting postoperative readmissions to minimize the costs associated with healthcare delivery.

Impact of evidence-based guidelines on healthcare utilisation and costs for disc related sciatica in the Netherlands: a population-based, cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of high-quality evidence supporting surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) on healthcare practice in the Netherlands by examining changes in healthcare utilisation, including the timing of surgery, and the healthcare costs for patients with LDH.

DESIGN

A retrospective, cross-sectional study was performed using population-based, longitudinal data obtained from the Dutch Healthcare Authority (2007-2020) and NIVEL's primary care (2012-2020) administrative databases.

SETTING

The study was conducted within the healthcare system of the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

We included adults (≥18 years) who visited a Dutch hospital or a general practitioner (GP) for lumbar degenerative disc disease. Patients with LDH were identified based on registered diagnosis code, type of surgery (discectomy) and age (<56 years).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the difference in the annual number of LDH procedures following the publication of evidence-based guidelines in 2009 (comparing the periods 2007-2009 to 2017-2019). Secondary outcome measures focused on the timing of surgery and associated healthcare costs. To validate the outcomes, secondary outcomes also include the number of discectomies and the number of procedures in the younger age group (discectomies, laminectomies, and fusion surgery).

RESULTS

The number of patients suffering from LDH increased from 55 581 to 68 997 (+24%) between 2007 and 2019. A decrease was observed in the annual number of LDH procedures (-18%), in the number of discectomies (-22%) and in the number of procedures for patients aged <56 years (-18%). This resulted in lower healthcare costs by €10.5 million annually. In 2012, 31% of all patients <56 years had surgery before 12 weeks from diagnosis at the GP, whereas 20% did in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare utilisation for LDH changed tremendously in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2020 and seemed to be associated with the publication and implementation of evidence-based guidelines. The observed decrease in the number of procedures has been accompanied by a corresponding reduction in healthcare costs. These findings underscore the importance of adhering to evidence-based guidelines to optimise the management of patients with LDH.

Inferior long-term outcomes after surgery for lumbar disc herniation in patients with prior lumbar spine surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous lumbar spine surgery is a frequent exclusion criterion for studies evaluating lumbar surgery outcomes. In real-life clinical settings, this patient population is important, as a notable proportion of patients evaluated for lumbar spine surgery have undergone prior lumbar surgery already previously. Knowledge about the long-term outcomes after microdiscectomy on patients with previous lumbar surgery and how they compare to those of first-time surgery is lacking.

METHODS

The original patient cohort for screening included 615 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for lumbar disc herniation, with a median follow-up time of 18.1 years. Of these patients, 89 (19%) had undergone lumbar spine surgery prior to the index surgery. Propensity score matching (based on age, sex, and follow-up time) was utilized to match two patients without prior surgery with each patient with a previous surgery. The primary outcome measure was the need for further lumbar spine surgery during the follow-up period, and the secondary outcome measures consisted of present-time patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol-5D) and present-time ability to carry out employment.

RESULTS

Patients who received previous lumbar surgeries had a higher need for further surgery (44% vs. 28%, p = 0.009) and had a shorter time to further surgery than the propensity score-matched cohort (mean Kaplan-Meier estimate, 15.7 years vs. 19.8 years, p = 0.008). Patients with prior surgery reported inferior Oswestry Disability Index scores (13.7 vs. 8.0, p = 0.036). and EQ-5D scores (0.77 vs. 0.86, p = 0.01). In addition, they had a higher frequency of receiving lumbar spine-related disability pensions than the other patients (12% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with previous lumbar surgery had inferior long-term outcomes compared to patients without prior surgery. However, the vast majority of these patients improved quickly after the index surgery. Furthermore, the difference in the patients' reported outcomes was small at the long-term follow-up, and they reported high satisfaction with the results of the study surgery. Hence, surgery for these patients should be considered if surgical indications are met, but special care needs must be accounted for when deliberating upon their indications for surgery.

COVID-19 and Spontaneous Resolution of Lumbar Disk Prolapse: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Patients Awaiting Microdiscectomy

BACKGROUND

 Between individual patients with lumbar disk prolapse (LDP), the natural course of disease is significantly variable. Spontaneous resolution is reported to occur in up to 70% of cases. However, we currently cannot predict for whom and when this will occur. Neurosurgical intervention is indicated for LDP patients with nontolerable pain after at least 8 to 12 weeks of conservative management, or significant neurologic deficit. Channeling essential resources in the National Health Service (NHS) to fight the COVID-19 pandemic led to the postponement of most elective operations, including microdiskectomy. This left many LDP patients previously considered to be surgical candidates with conservative-only options in the interim. To our knowledge, we are the first center to report the specific impact of the peri- and postpandemic period on waiting list times, delayed elective microdiskectomy, and the incidence of spontaneous LDP resolution.

METHODS

 Retrospective case series of a prospectively collected electronic departmental database identified LDP patients who would have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic at some point in their care pathway (March 2020-February 2022). Further information was obtained from electronic patient records.

RESULTS

 In total, 139 LDP patients were listed for elective microdiskectomy at the time of postponement of elective surgery. Over a third of LDP patients (n = 47, 33.8%), in shared decision with the responsible neurosurgeon, had their rescheduled microdiskectomy canceled due to clinical improvement (14.1%), radiologic regression (6.5%), or both (12.2%).

CONCLUSION

 Our single-center retrospective analysis revealed that for over a third of LDP patients, the prolonged postpandemic waiting list times for elective microdiskectomy resulted in their surgery not taking place either due to spontaneous clinical improvement or proven radiologic regression. Considering this, a prolonged conservative approach to LDP may be appropriate in some patients, allowing time for natural resolution, while avoiding perioperative risks.

Cost-utility analysis of endoscopic lumbar discectomy following a uniform clinical pathway in the Korean national health insurance system

INTRODUCTION

Full-endoscopic lumbar discectomy (FELD) is a type of minimally invasive spinal surgery for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Sufficient evidence exists to recommend FELD as an alternative to standard open microdiscectomy, and some patients prefer FELD due to its minimally invasive nature. However, in the Republic of Korea, the National Health Insurance System (NHIS) controls the reimbursement and use of supplies for FELD, but FELD is not currently reimbursed by the NHIS. Nonetheless, FELD has been performed upon patients' request, but providing FELD for patients' sake is inherently an unstable arrangement in the absence of a practical reimbursement system. The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-utility analysis of FELD to suggest appropriate reimbursements.

METHOD

This study was a subgroup analysis of prospectively collected data including 28 patients who underwent FELD. All patients were NHIS beneficiaries and followed a uniform clinical pathway. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were assessed with a utility score using the EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) instrument. The costs included direct medical costs incurred at the hospital for 2 years and the price of the electrode ($700), although it was not reimbursed. The costs and QALYs gained were used to calculate the cost per QALY gained.

RESULT

Patients' mean age was 43 years and one-third (32%) were women. L4-5 was the most common surgical level (20/28, 71%) and extrusion was the most common type of LDH (14, 50%). Half of the patients (15, 54%) had jobs with an intermediate level of activity. The preoperative EQ-5D utility score was 0.48±0.19. Pain, disability, and the utility score significantly improved starting 1 month postoperatively. The average EQ-5D utility score during 2 years after FELD was estimated as 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85). For 2 years, the mean direct costs were $3,459 and the cost per QALY gained was $5,241.

CONCLUSION

The cost-utility analysis showed a quite reasonable cost per QALY gained for FELD. A comprehensive range of surgical options should be provided to patients, for which a practical reimbursement system is a prerequisite.

Personalized Interventional Surgery of the Lumbar Spine: A Perspective on Minimally Invasive and Neuroendoscopic Decompression for Spinal Stenosis

Pain generator-based lumbar spinal decompression surgery is the backbone of modern spine care. In contrast to traditional image-based medical necessity criteria for spinal surgery, assessing the severity of neural element encroachment, instability, and deformity, staged management of common painful degenerative lumbar spine conditions is likely to be more durable and cost-effective. Targeting validated pain generators can be accomplished with simplified decompression procedures associated with lower perioperative complications and long-term revision rates. In this perspective article, the authors summarize the current concepts of successful management of spinal stenosis patients with modern transforaminal endoscopic and translaminar minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques. They represent the consensus statements of 14 international surgeon societies, who have worked in collaborative teams in an open peer-review model based on a systematic review of the existing literature and grading the strength of its clinical evidence. The authors found that personalized clinical care protocols for lumbar spinal stenosis rooted in validated pain generators can successfully treat most patients with sciatica-type back and leg pain including those who fail to meet traditional image-based medical necessity criteria for surgery since nearly half of the surgically treated pain generators are not shown on the preoperative MRI scan. Common pain generators in the lumbar spine include (a) an inflamed disc, (b) an inflamed nerve, (c) a hypervascular scar, (d) a hypertrophied superior articular process (SAP) and ligamentum flavum, (e) a tender capsule, (f) an impacting facet margin, (g) a superior foraminal facet osteophyte and cyst, (h) a superior foraminal ligament impingement, (i) a hidden shoulder osteophyte. The position of the key opinion authors of the perspective article is that further clinical research will continue to validate pain generator-based treatment protocols for lumbar spinal stenosis. The endoscopic technology platform enables spine surgeons to directly visualize pain generators, forming the basis for more simplified targeted surgical pain management therapies. Limitations of this care model are dictated by appropriate patient selection and mastering the learning curve of modern MIS procedures. Decompensated deformity and instability will likely continue to be treated with open corrective surgery. Vertically integrated outpatient spine care programs are the most suitable setting for executing such pain generator-focused programs.

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for sciatica: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of surgery compared with non-surgical treatment for sciatica.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to June 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials comparing any surgical treatment with non-surgical treatment, epidural steroid injections, or placebo or sham surgery, in people with sciatica of any duration due to lumbar disc herniation (diagnosed by radiological imaging).

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data. Leg pain and disability were the primary outcomes. Adverse events, back pain, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment were the secondary outcomes. Pain and disability scores were converted to a scale of 0 (no pain or disability) to 100 (worst pain or disability). Data were pooled using a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and certainty of evidence with the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) framework. Follow-up times were into immediate term (≤six weeks), short term (>six weeks and ≤three months), medium term (>three and <12 months), and long term (at 12 months).

RESULTS

24 trials were included, half of these investigated the effectiveness of discectomy compared with non-surgical treatment or epidural steroid injections (1711 participants). Very low to low certainty evidence showed that discectomy, compared with non-surgical treatment, reduced leg pain: the effect size was moderate at immediate term (mean difference -12.1 (95% confidence interval -23.6 to -0.5)) and short term (-11.7 (-18.6 to -4.7)), and small at medium term (-6.5 (-11.0 to -2.1)). Negligible effects were noted at long term (-2.3 (-4.5 to -0.2)). For disability, small, negligible, or no effects were found. A similar effect on leg pain was found when comparing discectomy with epidural steroid injections. For disability, a moderate effect was found at short term, but no effect was observed at medium and long term. The risk of any adverse events was similar between discectomy and non-surgical treatment (risk ratio 1.34 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.98)).

CONCLUSION

Very low to low certainty evidence suggests that discectomy was superior to non-surgical treatment or epidural steroid injections in reducing leg pain and disability in people with sciatica with a surgical indication, but the benefits declined over time. Discectomy might be an option for people with sciatica who feel that the rapid relief offered by discectomy outweighs the risks and costs associated with surgery.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021269997.

Cascade of decisions meet personal preferences in sciatica treatment decisions

STUDY DESIGN

An in-depth interview study including patients, general practitioners, neurologists and neurosurgeons.

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight in decision-making in sciatica care, by identifying patients' and physicians' preferences for treatment options, and the differences between and within both groups.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sciatica is a self-limiting condition, which can be treated both conservatively and surgically. The value of both options has been disputed, and the care pathway is known for a substantial amount of practice variation. Most Dutch patients are taken care of by general practitioners before they are referred to hospital-based neurologists, who might refer to a neurosurgeon, who can perform a surgical intervention. Dutch sciatica care thus follows the principles of stepped care, and a cascade of decisions precedes surgery. Better understanding of the decision-making within this cascade might reveal opportunities to improve shared decision-making and to reduce unwarranted practice variation.

METHODS

Interviews with 10 patients and 22 physicians were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

While physicians were confident of their clinical diagnosis, patients preferred confirmation trough imaging to exclude other possible explanations. Furthermore, many patients showed reluctance towards the use of (strong) opioids, while all physicians favoured this and underlined the benefits of opioids in the management of sciatica complaints, to buy time and to allow patients to recover naturally. Finally, individual physicians differed strongly in their opinion on benefits and optimal timing of surgical treatment and epidural injections.

CONCLUSIONS

Dutch sciatica care is characterised by a cascade of decisions preceding surgery. Preferences differ within and between patients and physicians, which adds to the practice variation. To improve decision-making, physicians and patients should invest not necessarily more in the exchange of options or preferences, but in making sure the other understands the rationale behind them.

[Comparative analysis of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, and fenestration discectomy in treatment of lumbar disc herniation]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBED), percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), and traditional fenestration discectomy (FD) in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

METHODS

The clinical data of 347 LDH patients who met the selection criteria and underwent discectomy between January 2017 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into FD group (160 cases), PELD group (86 cases), and UBED group (101 cases) according to operation methods. There was no significant difference in gender, age, surgical level distribution, disease duration, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) between groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, hospitalization stay, treatment cost, and incidence of surgery-related complications were recorded and compared between groups. The patients' pain and functional recovery were evaluated by VAS score and ODI before and after operation.

RESULTS

The operation time of FD group was significantly shorter than that of PELD group and UBED group, and the hospitalization stay was significantly longer than that of PELD group and UBED group ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference between PELD group and UBED group ( P>0.05). The treatment cost in UBED group was significantly higher than that in PELD group, and in PELD group than in FD group ( P<0.05). All the patients were followed up 6-24 months, with an average of 14.6 months. VAS score of lower extremity and ODI in 3 groups significantly improved after operation when compared with that before operation ( P<0.05). At 1 day after operation, VAS score of lower extremity of UBED group was significantly better than that in PELD group and FD group ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between PELD group and FD group ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS scores of lower extremity between the 3 groups at 1 and 3 months after operation ( P>0.05). The difference of ODI before and after operation in FD group and UBED group was slightly better than that in PELD group ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between FD group and UBED group ( P>0.05). Incidence of surgery-related complications in FD group (20.0%) was significantly higher than that in PELD group (12.8%) and UBED group (6.9%), and PELD group was significantly higher than UBED group ( P<0.05). All the incision infection occurred in FD group (12 cases), symptomatic disc cyst and myeloid hypertension-like occurred in 1 case each in PELD group.

CONCLUSION

UBED, PELD, and FD have similar effectiveness on lower extremity pain in early LDH. Compared with FD, UBED and PELD have the advantage of shorter hospitalization stay and fewer complications.

Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of Intradiscal Condoliase Injection Therapy for Lumbar Disc Herniation

Background and Objectives: Intradiscal injection of Condoliase (chondroitin sulfate ABC endolyase), a glycosaminoglycan-degrading enzyme, is employed as a minimally invasive treatment for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and represents a promising option between conservative treatment and surgical intervention. Since its 2018 approval in Japan, multiple single-site trails have highlighted its effectiveness, however, the effect of LDH types, and influences of patient age, sex, etc., on treatment success remains unclear. Moreover, data on teenagers and elderly patients has not been reported. In this retrospective multi-center study, we sought to classify prognostic factors for successful condoliase treatment for LDH and assess its effect on patients < 20 and ≥70 years old. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the records of 137 LDH patients treated through condoliase at four Japanese institutions and assessed its effectiveness among different age categories on alleviation of visual analog scale (VAS) of leg pain, low back pain and numbness, as well as ODI and JOA scores. Moreover, we divided them into either a “group-A” category if a ≥50% improvement in baseline leg pain VAS was observed or “group-N” if VAS leg pain improved <50%. Next, we assessed the differences in clinical and demographic distribution between group-A and group-N. Results: Fifty-five patients were classified as group-A (77.5%) and 16 patients were allocated to group-N (22.5%). A significant difference in Pfirrmann classification was found between both cohorts, with grade IV suggested to be most receptive. A posterior disc angle > 5° was also found to approach statical significance. In all age groups, average VAS scores showed improvement. However, 75% of adolescent patients showed deterioration in Pfirrmann classification following treatment. Conclusions: Intradiscal condoliase injection is an effective treatment for LDH, even in patients with large vertebral translation and posterior disc angles, regardless of age. However, since condoliase imposes a risk of progressing disc degeneration, its indication for younger patients remains controversial.

Microdiscectomy Is More Cost-effective Than a 6-Month Nonsurgical Care Regimen for Chronic Radiculopathy

BACKGROUND

A recent randomized controlled trial (RCT), performed by the authors, comparing early surgical microdiscectomy with 6 months of nonoperative care for chronic lumbar radiculopathy showed that early surgery resulted in improved outcomes. However, estimates of the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), which is often expressed as the cost of gaining one quality-adjusted life year (QALY), of microdiscectomy versus nonsurgical management have varied. Radiculopathy lasting more than 4 months is less likely to improve without surgical intervention and may have a more favorable ICUR than previously reported for acute radiculopathy.

QUESTION/PURPOSE

In the setting of chronic radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation, defined as symptoms and/or signs of 4 to 12 months duration, is surgical management more cost-effective than 6 months of nonoperative care from the third-party payer perspective based on a willingness to pay of less than CAD 50,000/QALY?

METHODS

A decision analysis model served as the vehicle for the cost-utility analysis. A decision tree was parameterized using data from our single-center RCT that was augmented with institutional microcost data from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative. Bottom-up case costing methodology generates more accurate cost estimates, although institutional costs are known to vary. There were no major surgical cost drivers such as implants or bone graft substitutes, and therefore, the jurisdictional variance would be minimal for tertiary care centers. QALYs derived from the EuroQoL-5D were the health outcome and were derived exclusively from the RCT data, given the paucity of studies evaluating the surgical treatment of lumbar radiculopathy lasting 4 to 12 months. Cost-effectiveness was assessed using the ICUR and a threshold of willingness to pay CAD 50,000 (USD 41,220) per QALY in the base case. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for the uncertainties within the estimate of cost utility, using both a probabilistic sensitivity analysis and two one-way sensitivity analyses with varying crossover rates after the 6-month nonsurgical treatment had concluded.

RESULTS

Early surgical treatment of patients with chronic lumbar radiculopathy (defined as symptoms of 4 to 12 months duration) was cost-effective, in that the cost of one QALY was lower than the CAD 50,000 threshold (note: the purchasing power parity conversion factor between the Canadian dollar (CAD) and the US dollar (USD) for 2019 was 1 USD = 1.213 CAD; therefore, our threshold was USD 41,220). Patients in the early surgical treatment group had higher expected costs (CAD 4118 [95% CI 3429 to 4867]) than those with nonsurgical treatment (CAD 2377 [95% CI 1622 to 3518]), but they had better expected health outcomes (1.48 QALYs [95% CI 1.39 to 1.57] versus 1.30 [95% CI 1.22 to 1.37]). The ICUR was CAD 5822 per QALY gained (95% CI 3029 to 30,461). The 2-year probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the likelihood that early surgical treatment was cost-effective was 0.99 at the willingness-to-pay threshold, as did the one-way sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Early surgery is cost-effective compared with nonoperative care in patients who have had chronic sciatica for 4 to 12 months. Decision-makers should ensure adequate funding to allow timely access to surgical care given that it is highly likely that early surgical intervention is potentially cost-effective in single-payer systems. Future work should focus on both the clinical effectiveness of the treatment of chronic radiculopathy and the costs of these treatments from a societal perspective to account for occupational absences and lost patient productivity. Parallel cost-utility analyses are critical so that appropriate decisions about resource allocation can be made.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, economic and decision analysis.

Defining the relative utility of lumbar spine surgery: A systematic literature review of common surgical procedures and their impact on health states

Degenerative lumbar spondylosis is a common indication for patients undergoing spine surgery. As healthcare costs rise, measuring quality of life (QOL) gains after surgical procedures is critical in assessing value. We set out to: 1) compare baseline and postoperative EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) scores for lumbar spine surgery and common surgical procedures to obtain post-operative quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain, and 2) establish the relative utility of lumbar spine surgery as compared to other commonly performed surgical procedures. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all studies reporting preoperative/baseline and postoperative EQ-5D scores for common surgical procedures. For each study, the number of patients included and baseline/preoperative and follow-up mean EQ-5D scores were recorded, and mean QALY gained for each intervention was calculated. A total of 67 studies comprising 95,014 patients were identified. Patients with lumbar spondylosis had the worst reported QOL at baseline compared to other surgical cohorts. The greatest QALY gain was seen in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty (0.38), knee arthroplasty (0.35) and lumbar spine surgery (0.32), nearly 2.5-fold greater QALY gained than for all other procedures. The low preoperative QOL, coupled with the improvements offered with surgery, highlight the utility and value of lumbar spine surgery compared to other common surgical procedures.

Lumbar Disc Herniation: Comparing Pain Relief After Medical and Surgical Intervention

Introduction

The most common degenerative abnormality of the lumbar spine is lumbar disc herniation. There are two options of treatment, i.e. medical and surgical. Due to the scarcity of literature, it is a need of the hour to further study and evaluate the benefits and efficacy of early surgical intervention versus conservative management of lumbar disc herniation.

Methods

This study was conducted in the neurology unit of a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan from April 2019 to March 2021. After obtaining informed consent, 250 patients with a lumbar disc herniation, between the ages of 20 and 50 years, were enrolled in the study. Out of them, 81 participants chose surgical intervention while 169 participants chose medical intervention. Before the intervention, the patient’s pain score was noted on the visual analog scale (VAS). The pain was assessed again 14 days after surgical intervention and 90 days after the start of medical intervention.

Results

There was a significant difference in the pain score in the post-intervention period in both the medical (7.01 ± 1.05 vs. 3.54 ± 0.51; p-value: <0.0001) and surgical intervention groups (6.92 ± 0.95 vs. 2.41 ± 0.42; p-value: <0.0001). Post-intervention, the VAS pain score was significantly lower in the surgical group as compared to the medical group (2.41 ± 0.42 vs. 3.54 ± 0.51; p-value: <0.0001).

Conclusion

In this study, there was a significant decline in pain in both groups; however, the reduction was more significant in the surgical group. Patients should be given both options for management of lumbar disc herniation and should be explained the pros and cons of each treatment option.

Microdiscectomy compared with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for persistent radicular pain caused by prolapsed intervertebral disc: the NERVES RCT

BACKGROUND

Sciatica is a common condition reported to affect > 3% of the UK population at any time and is most often caused by a prolapsed intervertebral disc. Currently, there is no uniformly adopted treatment strategy. Invasive treatments, such as surgery (i.e. microdiscectomy) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection, are often reserved for failed conservative treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for the management of radicular pain secondary to lumbar prolapsed intervertebral disc for non-emergency presentation of sciatica of < 12 months' duration.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised to either (1) microdiscectomy or (2) transforaminal epidural steroid injection.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised prospective trial comparing microdiscectomy with transforaminal epidural steroid injection for sciatica due to prolapsed intervertebral disc with < 1 year symptom duration.

SETTING

NHS services providing secondary spinal surgical care within the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 163 participants (aged 16-65 years) were recruited from 11 UK NHS outpatient clinics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was participant-completed Oswestry Disability Questionnaire score at 18 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcomes were visual analogue scores for leg pain and back pain; modified Roland-Morris score (for sciatica), Core Outcome Measures Index score and participant satisfaction at 12-weekly intervals. Cost-effectiveness and quality of life were assessed using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version; Hospital Episode Statistics data; medication usage; and self-reported cost data at 12-weekly intervals. Adverse event data were collected. The economic outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from the perspective of the NHS in England.

RESULTS

Eighty-three participants were allocated to transforaminal epidural steroid injection and 80 participants were allocated to microdiscectomy, using an online randomisation system. At week 18, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores had decreased, relative to baseline, by 26.7 points in the microdiscectomy group and by 24.5 points in the transforaminal epidural steroid injection. The difference between the treatments was not statistically significant (estimated treatment effect -4.25 points, 95% confidence interval -11.09 to 2.59 points). Nor were there significant differences between treatments in any of the secondary outcomes: Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores, visual analogue scores for leg pain and back pain, modified Roland-Morris score and Core Outcome Measures Index score up to 54 weeks. There were four (3.8%) serious adverse events in the microdiscectomy group, including one nerve palsy (foot drop), and none in the transforaminal epidural steroid injection group. Compared with transforaminal epidural steroid injection, microdiscectomy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £38,737 per quality-adjusted life-year gained and a probability of 0.17 of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

LIMITATIONS

Primary outcome data was invalid or incomplete for 24% of participants. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness to assumptions made regarding missing data. Eighteen per cent of participants in the transforaminal epidural steroid injection group subsequently received microdiscectomy prior to their primary outcome assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, the NErve Root Block VErsus Surgery trial is the first trial to evaluate the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy and transforaminal epidural steroid injection. No statistically significant difference was found between the two treatments for the primary outcome. It is unlikely that microdiscectomy is cost-effective compared with transforaminal epidural steroid injection at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for sciatica secondary to prolapsed intervertebral disc.

FUTURE WORK

These results will lead to further studies in the streamlining and earlier management of discogenic sciatica.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04820368 and EudraCT 2014-002751-25.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Pain Assessment after Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate the long term effects of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), applied after recurrent lumbar disc herniation (rLDH), on pain relief and clinical outcome improvement.

Methods

The current study is a retrospective study. We observed 22 cases from 85 patients that had undergone PLIF during February 2003 to October 2012 and all patients were followed for at least 5 years. The average age of those patients were 53 years, among them there were eight men and 14 women. Plain radiography and dynamic plain films were obtained, pre‐operation, for every patient. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) was conducted to confirm the diagnosis of rLDH before the operation. All surgeries were performed from posterior approach by the same surgeon using PLIF. Quality of life (QOL) and clinical outcomes were assessed by Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before revision surgery and at 1 week, 3 months, 12 months, and 24 months postoperative. These were also examined every time they came back to the hospital for a review.

Results

All patients were discharged and no serious comorbidities occurred. Three cases with wound infections and one case with dural laceration were cured and discharged. The end point of follow‐up was August 2018 and the mean follow‐up after revision surgery was 85 months. There were significant differences in NRS. It decreased from 7.32 ± 1.17 to 2.77 ± 1.31 (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative NRS score was 2.27 ± 1.48 (P < 0.05), 1.90 ± 1.51 (P < 0.05), and 2.36 ± 1.36 (P < 0.05) at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. There were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in ODI scores. The average JOA score improved from 5.00 ± 1.08 to 8.18 ± 1.59 (P < 0.05) 1 week after revision surgery. RR was between 50% and 70%. Overall satisfaction rates were beyond 80%. Only one patient required subsequent lumber surgery during the follow‐up period.

Conclusion

If surgical indications are mastered, undergoing PLIF after rLDH may induce efficient pain relief and major improvements in clinical outcome scores, as well as quality of life scores.

Surgery for extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation: a single center comparative observational study

BACKGROUND

Surgery on extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation (ELDH) is a commonly performed procedure. Operating on this type of herniation is known to come with more difficulties than on the frequently seen paramedian lumbar disc herniation (PLDH). However, no comparative data are available on the effectiveness and safety of this operation. We sought out to compare clinical outcomes at 1 year following surgery for ELDH and PLDH.

METHODS

Data were collected through the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery (NORspine). The primary outcome measure was change at 1 year in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcome measures were quality of life measured with EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D); and numeric rating scales (NRSs).

RESULTS

Data of a total of 1750 patients were evaluated in this study, including 72 ELDH patients (4.1%). One year after surgery, there were no differences in any of the patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) between the two groups. PLDH and ELDH patients experienced similar changes in ODI (- 30.92 vs. - 34.00, P = 0.325); EQ-5D (0.50 vs. 0.51, P = 0.859); NRS back (- 3.69 vs. - 3.83, P = 0.745); and NRS leg (- 4.69 vs. - 4.46, P = 0.607) after 1 year. The proportion of patients achieving a clinical success (defined as an ODI score of less than 20 points) at 1 year was similar in both groups (61.5% vs. 52.7%, P = 0.204).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients operated for ELDH reported similar improvement after 1 year compared with patients operated for PLDH.

Cost-effectiveness Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Spine Surgery

Because of the rising health care costs in the United States, there has been a focus on value-based care and improving the cost-effectiveness of surgical procedures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can not only give physicians and health care providers immediate feedback on the well-being of the patients but also be used to assess health and determine outcomes for surgical research purposes. Recently, PROMs have become a prominent tool to assess the cost-effectiveness of spine surgery by calculating the improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of a procedure per QALY gained is an essential metric to determine cost-effectiveness in universal health care systems. Common patient-reported outcome questionnaires to calculate QALY include the EuroQol-5 dimensions, the SF-36, and the SF-12. On the basis of the health-related quality of life outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of various spine surgeries can be determined, such as cervical fusions, lumbar fusions, microdiscectomies. As the United States attempts to reduce costs and emphasize value-based care, PROMs may serve a critical role in spine surgery moving forward. In addition, PROM-driven QALYs may be used to analyze novel spine surgical techniques for value-based improvements.

Association of Cost and Medical Service Satisfaction with Korean and Conventional Medicine Use before and after Surgery in Postsurgical Patients: A Questionnaire Survey of Korean Patients with Postsurgical Pain Visiting Korean Medicine Hospitals

This study aimed to assess the costs, health status, and medical service satisfaction with Korean and conventional medicine use before and after surgery of patients visiting Korean medicine hospitals for postsurgical musculoskeletal pain. The study population comprised patients who visited KM hospitals for the first time between June and November 2017 for persistent or recurrent pain and discomfort after low back, neck, shoulder, or knee surgery. Various validated questionnaires were used to collect data. A total of 100 participants were enrolled, and the majority had undergone low back surgery (n = 82). The participants had received 1.3 ± 0.7 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations and 2.4 ± 2.8 X-rays before surgery. Conventional interventions used before surgery were physical therapy (43%), medications (34%), and injections (28%), in descending order, while 48% of patients reported having received acupuncture 51.3 ± 81.1 times. The mean satisfaction score for surgery was 5.5 ± 2.8 points based on a 9-point Likert scale, while that for KM-based interventions was 6.3 ± 1.7 points. With respect to health-related information, the mean scores were 6.0 ± 2.2 points on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), 0.6 ± 0.2 points on the 5-Level EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-5L), and 15.3 ± 10.2 on Beck's Depression Index II (BDI-II). The mean score on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in patients with low back pain was 40.1 ± 19.2 points. Work impairment, as measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: General Health (WPAI-GH), was 62.5 ± 47.8%, while activity impairment was 5.9 ± 2.6%. Participants tended to show low satisfaction regarding surgery and high preference for KM-based interventions. In particular, low back surgery patients reported high ODI scores, indicating high dysfunctional levels and poor prognosis after surgery. It can be inferred that it is therefore important to provide appropriate presurgical and postsurgical care for patients with musculoskeletal pain to improve pain, function, and quality of life.

Surgical Management of Lumbar Radiculopathy: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Lumbar radiculopathy is characterized by radiating pain with or without motor weakness or sensory disturbances; the point prevalence ranges from 1.6 to 13.4%. The objective of this review was to determine the efficacy, safety, and cost of surgical versus nonsurgical management of symptomatic lumbar radiculopathy in adults.

METHODS

We searched PubMed from January 1, 2007, to April 10, 2019 with hand searches of systematic reviews for studies prior to 2007. One reviewer extracted data and a second checked for accuracy. Two reviewers completed independent risk of bias and strength of evidence ratings.

RESULTS

We included seven RCTs (N = 1158) and three cost-effectiveness analysis. Surgery reduced leg pain by 6 to 26 points more than nonsurgical interventions as measured on a 0- to 100-point visual analog scale of pain at up to 26 weeks follow-up; differences between groups did not persist at 1 year or later. The evidence was somewhat mixed for function and disability in follow-up through 26 weeks (standardized mean difference [SMD] - 0.16 (95% CI, - 0.30 to - 0.03); minimal differences were observed at 2 years (SMD - 0.06 (95% CI, - 0.20 to 0.07). There were similar improvements in quality of life, neurologic symptoms, and return to work. No surgical deaths occurred and surgical morbidity was infrequent. The incidence of reoperations ranged from 0 to 10%. The average cost per quality-adjusted life year gained from a healthcare payor perspective ranged from $51,156 to $83,322 for surgery compared to nonsurgical interventions.

DISCUSSION

Most findings are based on a body of RCT evidence graded as low to very low certainty. Compared with nonsurgical interventions, surgery probably reduces pain and improves function in the short- and medium-term, but this difference does not persist in the long-term. Although surgery appears to be safe, it may or may not be cost-effective depending on a decision maker's willingness to pay threshold.

Value of single-level circumferential fusion: a 10-year prospective outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis comparing posterior facet versus pedicle screw fixation

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and economic outcomes of facet versus pedicle screw instrumentation for single-level circumferential lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

Outcomes included self-assessment of back and leg pain, pain drawing, ODI, pain medication usage, and procedure success. The CEA was based on the 10-year data collected, and the base-case was from a US payer perspective. Costs included the index surgery, additional surgeries, outpatient/ED visits, and medications. To determine quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), ODI scores were used to predict SF-6D utilities. Sensitivity analyses were performed from a modified payer perspective including device costs and from a societal perspective including productivity loss. Discounted and undiscounted incremental costs and QALYs were calculated. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate the distribution of incremental costs and effects.

RESULTS

Clinical improvement was significant from pre-op to 10-year follow-up for both groups (p < 0.01 for all outcomes scales). Outcomes were significantly better for back pain and ODI for the facet versus pedicle group at all follow-up periods > 1 year (p < 0.05). In the CEA base-case, facets had more QALYs (0.68) and lower costs (- $8650) per person compared with pedicle screws. Therefore, facets were dominant (i.e., provided cost savings and greater QALYs) compared with pedicle screws. Facets had a 97% probability of being below a willingness-to-pay threshold of $20,000 per QALY gained and were estimated to be dominant over pedicle screws in 84% of the simulations.

CONCLUSION

One-level circumferential spinal fusion using facet screws was clinically superior and provided cost savings compared with pedicle screw instrumentation in the USA.

The Long-term Reoperation Rate Following Surgery for Lumbar Herniated Intervertebral Disc Disease: A Nationwide Sample Cohort Study With a 10-year Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of a nationwide sample database.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study was to compare the long-term incidence of reoperation for lumbar herniated intervertebral disc disease (HIVD) after major surgical techniques (open discectomy, OD; laminectomy; percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, PELD; fusion).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

HIVD is a major spinal affliction; if the disease is intractable, surgery is recommended. Considering both the aging of patients and the chronicity of lumbar degenerative disease, the effect of surgical treatment for the lumbar spine should be durable for as long as possible.

METHODS

The National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC) of Republic of Korea was utilized to establish a cohort of adult patients (N = 1856) who underwent first surgery for lumbar HIVD during 2005 to 2007. Patients were followed for 8 to 10 years. Considering death before reoperation as a competing event, reoperation hazards were compared among surgical techniques using the Fine and Gray regression model after adjustment for age, gender, Charlson comorbidity score, osteoporosis, diabetes, the severity of disability, insurance type, and hospital type.

RESULTS

The overall cumulative incidences of reoperation were 4% at 1 year, 6% at 2 years, 8% at 3 years, 11% at 5 years, and 16% at 10 years. The cumulative incidences of reoperation were 16%, 14%, 16%, and 10% after OD, laminectomy, PELD, and fusion, respectively, at 10 years postoperation, with no difference among the surgical techniques. However, the distribution of reoperation types was significantly different according to the first surgical technique (P < 0.01). OD was selected as the reoperation surgical technique in 80% of patients after OD and in 81% of patients after PELD.

CONCLUSION

The probability of reoperation did not differ among OD, laminectomy, PELD, and fusion during the 10-year follow-up period. However, OD was the most commonly used technique in reoperation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Systematic review of prognostic factors for work participation in patients with sciatica

Sciatica impacts on the ability to work and may lead to a reduced return to work. This study reviewed and summarised prognostic factors of work participation in patients who received conservative or surgical treatment for clinically diagnosed sciatica. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO until January 2018. Cohort studies, using a measure of work participation as outcome, were included. Two independent reviewers performed study inclusion and used the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool for risk of bias assessment and GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence. Based on seven studies describing six cohorts (n=1408 patients) that assessed 21 potential prognostic factors, favourable factors for return to work (follow-up ranging from 3 months to 10 years) included younger age, better general health, less low back pain or sciatica bothersomeness, better physical function, negative straight leg raise-test, physician expecting surgery to be beneficial, better pain coping, less depression and mental stress, less fear of movement and low physical work load. Study results could not be pooled. Using GRADE, the quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low, with downgrading mainly for a high risk of bias and imprecision. Several prognostic factors like pain, disability and psychological factors were identified and reviewed, and these could be targeted using additional interventions to optimise return to work. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016042497.

Trends in Incidence and Treatment of Herniated Lumbar Disc in Republic of Korea : A Nationwide Database Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the incidence and analyze trends of the herniated lumbar disc (HLD) based on a national database in the Republic of Korea (ROK) from January 2008 to December 2016.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of data obtained from the national health-claim database provided by the National Health Insurance Service for 2008-2016 using the International Classification of Diseases. The crude incidence and age-standardized incidence of HLD were calculated, and additional analysis was conducted according to age and sex. Changes in trends in treatment methods and some treatments were analyzed using the Korean Classification of Diseases procedure codes.

RESULTS

The number of patients diagnosed with HLD was 472245 in 2008 and increased to 537577 in 2012; however, it decreased to 478697 in 2016. The pattern of crude incidence and the standardized incidence were also similar. Overall, the incidence of HLD increased annually for the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 70s until 2012 and then decreased. However, the incidence of HLD for the 80s continued to increase. The crude incidence of HLD in female patients exceeded that of male patients in their middle age (30s or 40s) and was 1.5-1.6 times higher than in male patients in their 60s. The total number of open discectomy (OD) increased from 71598 in 2008 to 93942 in 2012 and then decreased to 85846 in 2016. The rate of younger patients (the 20s, 30s, and 40s) who underwent OD was decreased, and the rate of younger patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy was increased. However, the rate of older patients (the 70s and 80s) who underwent OD was continuously increased.

CONCLUSION

This nationwide data on HLD from 2008 to 2016 in the ROK demonstrated that the crude incidence and the standardized incidence increased until 2012 and then decreased. The annual crude incidence was different according to age and sex. These findings may be considered when deciding future health policy, especially in countries with a similar national health insurance system (or with plans to adopt).

Systematic Review of Decision Analytic Modelling in Economic Evaluations of Low Back Pain and Sciatica

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) and sciatica place significant burden on individuals and healthcare systems, with societal costs alone likely to be in excess of £15 billion. Two recent systematic reviews for LBP and sciatica identified a shortage of modelling studies in both conditions.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to document existing model-based economic evaluations for the treatment and management of both conditions; critically appraise current modelling techniques, analytical methods, data inputs, and structure, using narrative synthesis; and identify unresolved methodological problems and gaps in the literature.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted whereby 6512 records were extracted from 11 databases, with no date limits imposed. Studies were abstracted according to a predesigned protocol, whereby they must be economic evaluations that employed an economic decision model and considered any management approach for LBP and sciatica. Study abstraction was initially performed by one reviewer who removed duplicates and screened titles to remove irrelevant studies. Overall, 133 potential studies for inclusion were then screened independently by other reviewers. Consensus was reached between reviewers regarding final inclusion.

RESULTS

Twenty-one publications of 20 unique models were included in the review, five of which were modelling studies in LBP and 16 in sciatica. Results revealed a poor standard of modelling in both conditions, particularly regarding modelling techniques, analytical methods, and data quality. Specific issues relate to inappropriate representation of both conditions in terms of health states, insufficient time horizons, and use of inappropriate utility values.

CONCLUSION

High-quality modelling studies, which reflect modelling best practice, as well as contemporary clinical understandings of both conditions, are required to enhance the economic evidence for treatments for both conditions.

Cost-utility Analysis for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: Conservative Treatment Versus Discectomy Versus Discectomy With Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

This study was an ambispective long-term cost-utility analysis with retrospective chart review and included the prospective completion of health questionnaires by patients.

OBJECTIVE

This was a cost-utility analysis, comparing conservative treatment, discectomy, and discectomy with spinal fusion for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation after a previous discectomy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar disc herniation is an important health problem, with recurrence rates ranging from 5% to 15%. Management of recurrences is controversial due to a lack of high-level evidence. Cost-effectiveness analyses are useful when making clinical decisions. There are economic assessments for first herniations, but not in the context of recurrent lumbar disc herniations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients with disc herniation recurrence underwent conservative treatment (n=11), discectomy (n=20), or discectomy with fusion (n=19), and they completed the Short-Form 36, EuroQol-5D, and Oswestry Disability Index.Baseline case quality-adjusted life year (QALY) values, cost-utility ratios, and incremental cost-utility ratios were calculated on the basis of the SF-36. Direct health costs were calculated by applying the health care system perspective. Both QALY and costs were discounted at a rate of 3%. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted for uncertainty variables, such as other health surveys or 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Cost-utility analysis of conservative treatment versus discectomy showed that the former is dominant, mainly because it is significantly more economical (&OV0556;904 vs. &OV0556;6718, P<0.001), while health results were very similar (3.48 vs. 3.18, P=0.887). Cost-utility analysis of discectomy versus discectomy with fusion revealed that discectomy is dominant, showing a trend to be both more economical (&OV0556;6718 vs. &OV0556;9364, P=0.054) and more effective (3.18 vs. 1.92 QALY, P=0.061).

CONCLUSIONS

This cost-utility analysis showed that conservative treatment is more cost-effective than discectomy in patients with lumbar disc herniation recurrence. In cases of recurrence in which conservative treatment is not feasible, and another surgery must be performed for the patient, discectomy is a more cost-effective surgical alternative than discectomy with fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Trends in High-Impact Neurosurgical Randomized Controlled Trials Published in General Medical Journals: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The neurosurgery literature lacks a comprehensive report of neurosurgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in general medical journals. RCTs published in these journals have high visibility and impact on decision-making by general medical practitioners and health care policymakers.

METHODS

A systematic review of neurosurgical RCTs in the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association, The BMJ, and Annals of Internal Medicine was completed.

RESULTS

There were 78 neurosurgical RCTs published in the selected high-impact journals from 2000 to 2017. The most common study topics were neurovascular (n = 39, 50%) and spine (n = 24, 30.8%). Of these RCTs, 44 (56.4%) compared operative with nonoperative management. For studies published before 2017, the mean number of citations was 899. Approximately half of the studies showed superiority of operative management over nonoperative management in the intent to treat primary outcome of interest (n = 24, 54.5%). However, stratified by subsubspecialty, 7 (87.5%) of the functional RCTs, 9 (50%) of the neurovascular RCTs, 1 (50%) of the trauma RCTs, and 7 (43.8%) of the spinal RCTs demonstrated superiority of operative management over nonoperative management. Additionally, there were large subspecialty differences in study characteristics, such as rate of double blinding, proportion of patient enrollment from patients screened, and proportion of crossover from nonsurgical to surgical arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurosurgical RCTs in general medical journals have large subspecialty differences in characteristics such as crossovers from nonsurgical to surgical treatment arms and the proportion of studies demonstrating benefit of operative intervention over nonoperative management.

Determinants and Variations of Hospital Costs in Patients With Lumbar Radiculopathy Hospitalized for Spinal Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine hospital costs related to surgery for lumbar radiculopathy and identify determinants of intramural costs based on minimal hospital and claims data.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Costs related to the initial hospitalization of patients undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy make up the major part of direct health care expenditure in this population. Identifying factors influencing intramural costs can be beneficial for health care policy makers, and clinicians working with patients with lumbar radiculopathy.

METHODS

The following data were collected from the University Hospital Brussels data warehouse for all patients undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy in 2016 (n = 141): age, sex, primary diagnosis, secondary diagnoses, type of surgery, severity of illness (SOI), admission and discharge date, type of hospital admission, and all claims incurred for the particular hospital stay. Descriptive statistics for total hospital costs were performed. Univariate analyses were executed to explore associations between hospital costs and all other variables. Those showing a significant association (P < 0.05) were included in the multivariate general linear model analysis.

RESULTS

Mean total hospital costs were &OV0556; 5016 ± 188 per patient. Costs related to the actual residence (i.e., "hotel costs") comprised 53% of the total hospital costs, whereas 18% of the costs were claimed for the surgical procedure. Patients with moderate/major SOI had 44% higher hospital costs than minor SOI (P = 0.01). Presence of preadmission comorbidities incurred 46% higher costs (P = 0.03). Emergency procedures led to 72% higher costs than elective surgery (P < 0.001). Patients receiving spinal fusion had 211% higher hospital costs than patients not receiving this intervention (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Hospital costs in patients receiving surgery for lumbar radiculopathy are influenced by SOI, the presence of preadmission comorbidities, type of hospital admission (emergency vs. elective), and type of surgical procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Multicentre randomised controlled trial to investigate usefulness of the rapid diagnostic βLACTA test performed directly on bacterial cell pellets from respiratory, urinary or blood samples for the early de-escalation of carbapenems in septic intensive care unit patients: the BLUE-CarbA protocol

INTRODUCTION

The dramatic increase of the incidence of infections caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-PE) has led to an increase of 50% of carbapenem consumption all around Europe in only 5 years. This favours the spread of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (GNB), causing life-threatening infections. In order to limit use of carbapenems for infections actually due to ESBL-PE, health authorities promote the use of rapid diagnostic tests of bacterial resistance. The objective of this work conducted in the intensive care unit (ICU) is to determine whether an early de-escalation of empirical carbapenems guided by the result of the βLACTA test is not inferior to the reference strategy of de-escalating carbapenems after the antibiogram result has been rendered.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre randomised controlled open-label non-inferiority clinical trial will include patients suffering from respiratory and/or urinary and/or bloodstream infections documented with GNB on direct examination and empirically treated with carbapenems. Empirical carbapenems will be adapted before the second dose depending on the results of the βLACTA test performed directly on the microbiological sample (intervention group) or after 48-72 hours depending on the definite antibiogram (control group). The primary outcome will combine 90-day mortality and percentage of infection recurrence during the ICU stay. The secondary outcomes will include the number of carbapenems defined daily doses and carbapenem-free days after inclusion, the proportion of new infections during ICU stay, new colonisation of patients' digestive tractus with multidrug-resistant GNB, ICU and hospital length of stay and cost-effectiveness ratio.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol has been approved by the ethics committee of Paris-Ile-de-France IV, and will be carried out according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The results of this study will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03147807.

Septoplasty versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum in adults: A modelling study of cost-effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to demonstrate how decision-analytic modelling can help to determine circumstances under which surgery may become cost-effective, using septoplasty as an example.

DESIGN

We developed a decision-analytic model comparing septoplasty to non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum. Based on the estimated cost difference between both treatments, we calculated the minimal (a) gain in quality-adjusted life-years, or (b) reduction in productivity losses needed for septoplasty to be cost-effective. Input was derived from literature and publicly available data sources. The time horizon of our model was one year, and the willingness-to-pay per quality-adjusted life-year was €20 000, in accordance with current guidelines.

RESULTS

The cost difference between septoplasty and non-surgical management for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum was €2227 per patient from a healthcare perspective (including direct healthcare costs) and €3288 per patient from an extended perspective (additionally including travel expenses and productivity losses due to poor health). In comparison with non-surgical management, septoplasty needed to gain 0.11 to 0.16 QALYs or save 13 sick days for nasal obstruction. The longer septoplasty's effect lasts, the more time it will have to compensate its extra costs.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the known cost difference between treatments can be used as the starting point to determine beneficial effects needed for cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions. The effect required by septoplasty from a healthcare perspective seems potentially achievable, meaning that it would be useful to perform an RCT assessing the actual benefits of septoplasty.

What are the Rates, Reasons, and Risk Factors of 90-day Hospital Readmission After Lumbar Discectomy?: An Institutional Experience

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To report the rate, reasons, and risk factors for 90-day readmissions after lumbar discectomy at an academic medical center.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Several studies have reported complications and readmissions after spine surgery; however, only one previous study has focused specifically on lumbar discectomy. As the patient profile and morbidity of various spine procedures is different, focus on procedure-specific complications and readmissions will be beneficial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent lumbar discectomy for unrelieved symptoms of prolapsed intervertebral disk and had at least 90 days of follow-up at an academic institution (2013-2014) were included. Retrospective review of electronic medical record was performed to record demographic and clinical profile of patients. Details of lumbar discectomy, index hospital stay, discharge disposition, hospital readmission within 90 days, reason for readmission and treatment given have been reported. Risk factors for hospital readmission were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 356 patients with a mean age of 45.0±13.8 years were included. The 90-day readmission rate was 5.3% (19/360) of which two-third patients were admitted within 30 days giving a 30-day readmission rate of 3.7% (13/356). The top 2 primary reasons for readmission included back and/or leg pain, numbness, or tingling (42.9%), and persistent cerebrospinal fluid leak or seroma (25.0%). On adjusted analysis, risk factors associated with higher risk of readmission included incidental durotomy [odds ratio (OR), 26.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 5.3-129.9] and discharge to skilled nursing facility/inpatient rehabilitation (OR, 25.2; 95% CI, 2.7-235.2). Increasing age was a negative predictor of readmission (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Incidental durotomy, younger age, and discharge to nursing facility were associated with higher risk of 90-day hospital readmission after lumbar discectomy. As compared with extensive spine procedures, patient comorbidity burden may not be as significant in predicting readmission after this relatively less invasive procedure.

Combining multiple imputation and bootstrap in the analysis of cost-effectiveness trial data

In healthcare cost-effectiveness analysis, probability distributions are typically skewed and missing data are frequent. Bootstrap and multiple imputation are well-established resampling methods for handling skewed and missing data. However, it is not clear how these techniques should be combined. This paper addresses combining multiple imputation and bootstrap to obtain confidence intervals of the mean difference in outcome for two independent treatment groups. We assessed statistical validity and efficiency of 10 candidate methods and applied these methods to a clinical data set. Single imputation nested in the bootstrap percentile method (with added noise to reflect the uncertainty of the imputation) emerged as the method with the best statistical properties. However, this method can require extensive computation times and the lack of standard software makes this method not accessible for a larger group of researchers. Using a standard unpaired t-test with standard multiple imputation without bootstrap appears to be a robust alternative with acceptable statistical performance for which standard multiple imputation software is available.

Increased Volume of Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Changes in Surgical Methods and Outcomes: A Nationwide Cohort Study with a 5-Year Follow-Up

OBJECTIVE

Examining spine surgery patterns over time is crucial to provide insights into variations and changes in clinical decision making. Changes in the number of surgeries, surgical methods, reoperation rates, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed for all patients who underwent surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis in 2003 (2003 cohort) and 2008 (2008 cohort).

METHODS

The national health insurance database was used to create the 2003 cohort (n = 10,990) and 2008 cohort (n = 27,942). The surgical methods were classified into decompression and fusion surgery. The cumulative reoperation probability between those surgeries was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method in the 2003 cohort and 2008 cohort. Comparison of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios showed the additional direct cost of a 1% change in the reoperation probability.

RESULTS

The surgical volume increased 2.54-fold in the 2008 cohort. The age-adjusted number of surgeries per 1 million people increased 2.6-fold (from 154 in the 2003 cohort to 399 in the 2008 cohort) in aged patients and 1.9-fold (from 154 in the 2003 cohort to 291 in the 2008 cohort) in patients 20-59 years old in the 2008 cohort. The proportion of fusion surgeries increased from 20.3% in the 2003 cohort to 37.0% in the 2008 cohort. In total, the 5-year reoperation probabilities increased from 8.1% in the 2003 cohort to 11.2% in the 2008 cohort. Fusion decreased the reoperation probability by 1% at the cost of 1,711 U.S. dollars.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased numbers of spinal surgeries, fusion surgeries, and surgeries in older patients in a recent cohort were noteworthy. However, the increased surgical volume and fusion surgeries did not reduce the reoperation rate.

Increased Volume of Lumbar Surgeries for Herniated Intervertebral Disc Disease and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Nationwide Cohort Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of a nationwide database.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to summarize the use of surgical methods for lumbar herniated intervertebral disc disease (HIVD) at two different time periods under the national health insurance system. The secondary objective was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis by utilizing incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The selection of surgical method for HIVD may or may not be consistent with cost effectiveness under national health insurance system, but this issue has rarely been analyzed.

METHODS

The data of all patients who underwent surgeries for HIVD in 2003 (n = 17,997) and 2008 (n = 38,264) were retrieved. The surgical methods included open discectomy (OD), fusion surgery, laminectomy, and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). The hospitals were classified as tertiary-referral hospitals (≥300 beds), medium-sized hospitals (30-300 beds), or clinics (<30 beds). ICER showed the difference in the mean total cost per 1% decrease in the reoperation probability among surgical methods. The total cost included the costs of the index surgery and the reoperation.

RESULTS

In 2008, the number of surgeries increased by 2.13-fold. The number of hospitals increased by 34.75% (731 in 2003 and 985 in 2008). The proportion of medium-sized hospitals increased from 62.79% to 70.86%, but the proportion of surgeries performed at those hospitals increased from 61.31% to 85.08%. The probability of reoperation was highest after laminectomy (10.77%), followed by OD (10.50%), PELD (9.20%), and fusion surgery (7.56%). The ICERs indicated that PELD was a cost-effective surgical method. The proportion of OD increased from 71.21% to 84.12%, but that of PELD decreased from 16.68% to 4.57%.

CONCLUSION

The choice of surgical method might not always be consistent with cost-effectiveness strategies, and a high proportion of medium-sized hospitals may be responsible for this change.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

A 90-day Bundled Payment for Primary Single-level Lumbar Discectomy/Decompression: What Does "Big Data" Say?

Episode-based bundling may become the major form of reimbursement for many elective spine procedures. As the amount for a 90-day episode of care is not known for a lumbar discectomy, we analyzed the previous reimbursements from Commercial payers (2007-Q2 2015), Medicare Advantage (2007-Q2 2015), and Medicare (2005-2012) for a primary single-level lumbar discectomy/decompression. Distribution of payments among various service providers was studied and a 90-day bundle was simulated. Depending on the payer type, the average facility costs constituted 59.7% to 73.6% of total payments, followed by surgeon's fees, which accounted for 13.7% to 18.5%. Postacute services made up 8.8% to 15.8% of the total reimbursement. Surgeries performed in the inpatient setting were significantly more expensive as compared with surgeries performed in the outpatient setting (P<0.01). The average 90-day bundle amount was estimated at $11,091, $6571, and $6239 for Commercial payers, Medicare Advantage, and Medicare, respectively. Overall, service providers in the Southern region were reimbursed the lowest from Commercial payers and Medicare, compared with other regions. Postacute services are not as major cost drivers after discectomy as after total joint arthroplasty or hip fracture repair.

Lumbar Microdiscectomy in Obese Patients: A Multicenter Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between obesity and outcomes after microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

The primary outcome measure was change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 1 year after surgery. Obesity was defined as body mass index (BMI) ≥30. Prospective data were retrieved from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery.

RESULTS

We enrolled 4932 patients, 4018 nonobese and 914 obese. For patients with complete 1-year follow-up (n = 3381) the mean improvement in ODI was 31.2 points (95% confidence interval 30.4-31.9, P < 0.001). Improvement in ODI was 31.4 points in nonobese and 30.1 points in obese patients (P = 0.182). Obese and nonobese patients were as likely to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (84.2 vs. 82.7%, P = 0.336) in ODI (≥10 points improvement). Obesity was identified as a negative predictor for ODI improvement in a multiple regression analysis (BMI 30-34.99; P < 0.001, BMI ≥35; P = 0.029). Obese and nonobese patients experienced similar improvement in Euro-Qol-5 scores (0.48 vs. 0.49 points, P = 0.441) as well as back pain (3.7 vs. 3.5 points, P = 0.167) and leg pain (4.7 vs. 4.8 points, P = 0.654), as measured by the Numeric Rating Scale. Duration of surgery was shorter for nonobese patients (55.7 vs. 65.3 minutes, P ≤ 0.001). Nonobese patients experienced fewer complications compared with obese patients (6.1% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.017). Obese patients had slightly longer hospital stays (2.0 vs. 1.8 days, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Although they had more minor complications, obese individuals experienced improvement after lumbar microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation similar to that of nonobese individuals.

Management of Symptomatic Lumbar Disk Herniation: An International Perspective

: The diversity among the current international practice patterns and the discrepancy between the eminence-based medicine and the evidence-based medicine in the treatment of lumbar disk herniation is presented. Minimally invasive techniques were expected to give the lowest postoperative low back pain, however, also to give the highest risk of recurrent disk herniation.

STUDY DESIGN

A questionnaire survey.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the current practice patterns of surgeons regarding both the surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar disk herniation (LDH) worldwide and to compare this with the current literature.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sciatica is a common diagnosis in the general population. Sciatica is most frequently caused by LDH. Multiple surgical techniques and treatment modalities are available to treat LDH, albeit some with small effect sizes or without compelling evidence.

METHODS

A survey including questions on the application of physical examination, expectations regarding different surgical and nonsurgical techniques, factors influencing the outcome of surgery were distributed among members of AOSpine International and the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and seventeen surgeons from 89 countries completed the questionnaire. These surgeons perform a total of 62.477 discectomies yearly. Pain medication and steroid injections were expected to be the most effective nonsurgical treatments. The severity of pain and/ or disability and failure of conservative therapy were the most important indications for surgery. A period of 1 to 2 months of radiculopathy was regarded as a minimum for indicating surgery. Unilateral transflaval discectomy was the procedure of choice among the majority and was expected to be the most effective technique with the lowest complication risk. Surgeons performing more lumbar discectomies, with more clinical experience and those located in Asia, were more likely to offer minimally invasive surgical techniques.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that current international practice patterns for LDH surgery are diverse. There seems to be a discrepancy between preferred surgical techniques and the attitudes of surgeons worldwide and the evidence. Further research should focus on developing international guidelines to reduce practice variety and offer patients the optimal treatment for LDH.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Percutaneous laser disc decompression versus microdiscectomy for sciatica: Cost utility analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial

Background Percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) for patients with lumbar disc herniation is believed to be cheaper than surgery. However, cost-effectiveness has never been studied. Materials and Methods A cost utility analysis was performed alongside a randomized controlled trial comparing PLDD and conventional surgery. Patients reported their quality of life using the EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D), 36-item short form health survey (SF-36 and derived SF-6D) and a visual analogue scale (VAS). Using cost diaries patients reported health care use, non-health care use and hours of absenteeism from work. The 1-year societal costs were compared with 1-year quality adjusted life years (QALYs) based on the United States (US) EQ-5D. Sensitivity analyses were carried out on the use of different utility measures (Netherland (NL) EQ-5D, SF-6D, or VAS) and on the perspective (societal or healthcare). Results On the US EQ-5D, conventional surgery provided a non-significant gain in QALYs of 0.033 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.026 to 0.093) in the first year. PLDD resulted in significantly lower healthcare costs (difference €1771, 95% CI €303 to €3238) and non-significantly lower societal costs (difference €2379, 95% CI -€2860 to €7618). For low values of the willingness to pay for a QALY, the probability of being cost-effective is in favor of PLDD. For higher values of the willingness to pay, between €30,000 and €70,000, conventional microdiscectomy becomes favorable. Conclusions From a healthcare perspective PLDD, followed by surgery when needed, results in significantly lower 1-year costs than conventional surgery. From a societal perspective PLDD appears to be an economically neutral innovation.

One-year outcomes of early-crossover patients in a cohort receiving nonoperative care for lumbar disc herniation

OBJECTIVE

The authors comprehensively studied the recovery course and 1-year outcomes of early-crossover patients who were randomized to the nonoperative care arm of the Leiden–The Hague Spine Intervention Prognostic Study. The primary goal was to gain insight into the differences in the recovery patterns of early-crossover patients and those treated nonoperatively; secondary goals were to identify predictors of good 1-year outcomes, and to understand when and why patients were likely to cross over.

METHODS

Individual EuroQol-5D scores were obtained at baseline and at 2, 4, 8, 12, 26, 38, and 52 weeks for 142 patients. Early-crossover patients were defined as those electing to undergo surgery during the first 12 weeks of treatment. Crossover and noncrossover groups were compared using Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney, and chi-square tests. Linear mixed-effects models were used to examine the growth trajectories of crossover and noncrossover groups. Recursive partitioning trees were used to model crossover events and the timing of crossover decisions. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of good 1-year outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 142 patients randomized to receive prolonged nonoperative care, 136 were selected for the study. In this cohort, 43/136 (32%) opted for surgery, and 31/43 (72%) of crossover events occurred before the 12-week time point. Early-crossover patients had significantly greater functional impairment at Week 2 than noncrossover patients (p = 0.031), but experienced greater recovery by 26 weeks and better 1-year outcomes (p = 0.045). Patients who did not experience an improvement in their symptoms between 2 and 8 weeks were more likely to cross over (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.2–10.1; p = 0.01). Recursive partitioning trees were able to identify crossover patients with 76% accuracy. Regression models suggested that better recovery at 26 weeks (p < 0.01) was predictive of good 1-year outcome; declining health status between Weeks 4 and 8 was negatively predictive of good outcome (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to comprehensively analyze the recovery and outcomes of crossover patients, and compare them to nonoperatively treated patients. The results suggest that patients who have a low EuroQol-5D score during the early weeks of treatment and who do not respond to nonoperative care during the first few weeks of treatment are most likely to cross over. Early-crossover patients experience a greater rate of recovery and more frequently have a good 1-year outcome when compared with nonoperatively treated patients. The current results motivate a broader investigation into the timing of surgery and the identification of patient populations that will be most benefited by early surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation.

Surgical versus non-operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of surgical versus non-operative treatment on the physical function and safety of patients with lumbar disc herniation.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were searched from initiation to 15 May 2017.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials that evaluated surgical versus non-operative treatment for patients with lumbar disc herniation were selected. The primary outcomes were pain and side-effects. Secondary outcomes were function and health-related quality of life. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled mean difference with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

A total of 19 articles that involved 2272 participants met the inclusion criteria. Compared with non-operative treatment, surgical treatment was more effective in lowering pain (short term: mean difference = -0.94, 95% confidence interval = -1.87 to -0.00; midterm: mean difference = -1.59, 95% confidence interval = -2.24 to -9.94), improving function (midterm: mean difference = -7.84, 95% confidence interval = -14.00 to -1.68; long term: mean difference = -12.21, 95% confidence interval = -23.90 to -0.52) and quality of life. The 36-item Short-Form Health Survey for physical functions (short term: mean difference = 6.25, 95% confidence interval = 0.43 to 12.08) and bodily pain (short term: mean difference = 5.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.40 to 10.45) was also utilized. No significant difference was observed in adverse events (mean difference = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.28 to 2.38).

CONCLUSION

Low-quality evidence suggested that surgical treatment is more effective than non-operative treatment in improving physical functions; no significant difference was observed in adverse events. No firm recommendation can be made due to instability of the summarized data.

Lumbar microdiscectomy for sciatica in adolescents: a multicentre observational registry-based study

Background

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is rare in the adolescent population. Factors predisposing to LDH in adolescents differ from adults with more cases being related to trauma or structural malformations. Further, there are limited data on patient-reported outcomes after lumbar microdiscectomy in adolescents. Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes at 1 year following single-level lumbar microdiscectomy in adolescents (13–19 years old) compared to younger adults (20–50 years old) with LDH.

Methods

Data were collected through the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. Patients were eligible if they had radiculopathy due to LDH, underwent single-level lumbar microdiscectomy between January 2007 and May 2014, and were between 13 and 50 years old at time of surgery. The primary endpoint was change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 1 year after surgery. Secondary endpoints were generic quality of life (EuroQol five dimensions [EQ-5D]), back pain numerical rating scale (NRS), leg pain NRS and complications.

Results

A total of 3,245 patients were included (97 patients 13–19 years old and 3,148 patients 20–50 years old). A significant improvement in ODI was observed for the whole population, but there was no difference between groups (0.6; 95% CI, −4.5 to 5.8; p = 0.811). There were no differences between groups concerning EQ-5D (−0.04; 95% CI, −0.15 to 0.07; p = 0.442), back pain NRS (−0.4; 95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4; p = 0.279), leg pain NRS (−0.4; 95% CI, −1.2 to 0.5; p = 0.374) or perioperative complications (1.0% for adolescents, 5.1% for adults, p = 0.072).

Conclusions

The effectiveness and safety of single-level microdiscectomy are similar in adolescents and the adult population at 1-year follow-up.

[Lumbar disc herniation: Natural history, role of physical examination, timing of surgery, treatment options and conflicts of interests]

INTRODUCTION

Indication for surgery in lumbar disc herniation (LDH) varies widely depending on the geographical area.

DEVELOPMENT

A literature review is presented on the natural history, role of physical examination, timing of surgery, evidence-based treatment, and conflicts of interests in LDH. Surgery is shown to provide significant faster relief of pain compared to conservative therapy, although the effect fades after a year. There is no treatment modality better than the rest in terms of pain control and neurological recovery, nor is there a surgical technique clearly superior to simple discectomy. The lack of sound scientific evidence on the surgical indication may contribute to its great geographical variability.

CONCLUSIONS

Since LDH has a favourable natural history, neuroimaging and surgery should not be considered until after a 6-week period. It is necessary to specify and respect the surgical indications for LDH, avoiding conflicts of interests.

Sciatica caused by disc herniation: Why is Chymopapain Chemonucleolysis denied to our patients?

BACKGROUND

This study was undertaken to assess the long term outcome on the quality of life of patients with sciatica following treatment with chemonucleolysis, and to assess the complications.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review carried out in a consecutive group of patients suffering from sciatica treated by chemonucleolysis. Patients were followed up by questionnaires to obtain Macnab score; satisfaction, SF 36, and case note review for complications and repeat spinal surgery.

RESULTS

Six hundred and five patients (56% males, 44% females) treated over a ten year period from 1991 to 2000 were followed up. Average age was 47 years (range 17 - 88 years). The duration of symptoms prior to treatment averaged 10 months (range 1 - 20 months) and the herniation was confirmed by Myelogram (7%), CT Scan (34%), or MRI (59%). There were 578 single level and 27 double levels treated. Eighty five percent of herniations were typical single level, and 15% were atypical that is: patients with dominant back pain with sciatica, recurrent herniations following surgery at the same level, recurrent herniations at another level following chemonucleolysis, double levels treated patients with mainly neurological deficits and one cauda equina syndrome. Average follow up was 62 months (range 12 - 123) with a 78% satisfaction rate, with a 14% surgical intervention rate made up of 9% decompression, 1% repeat chemonucleolysis at another level and 4% fusion rate. SF-36 scores generally correlated with age and sex on scores for the normal local population.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a retrospective study and showed that chemonucleolysis was effective with a high satisfaction rate. It restores quality of life close to that expected in the population, and is safe with no complications related to the procedure. It is a cost effective daycase procedure with a lasting result.

The Short-Term Effect of Integrated Complementary and Alternative Medicine Treatment in Inpatients Diagnosed with Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation: A Prospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the short-term effect of hospital-based intensive nonsurgical treatment in lumbar intervertebral disc herniation (IDH) inpatients admitted to an integrated hospital that offers both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and conventional medicine treatment.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

SETTINGS

A private Korean medicine hospital inpatient setting in Korea.

PATIENTS

A total of 524 inpatients diagnosed with lumbar IDH admitted from June 1, 2012, to May 31, 2013.

INTERVENTIONS

The participants received treatment according to a CAM treatment protocol (herbal medicine, acupuncture, bee venom pharmacopuncture, and Chuna manipulation) and conventional medicine treatment as needed.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Numeric rating scale (NRS) of low back pain (LBP) and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and patient global impression of change. The study also assessed whether improvement was obtained over minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in LBP or leg pain.

RESULTS

The average hospital stay was 24.4 ± 13.2 days. The majority of patients received CAM treatment and a few selected conventional medicine, such as pain killers (22.7%; 4.2 ± 3.0 administrations) or nerve blocks (14.1%; 1.4 ± 0.7 sessions). At discharge, the average reduction in NRS was 3.18 ± 2.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.99-3.38) for LBP and 2.61 ± 2.60 (95% CI, 2.38-2.83) for leg pain the average reduction in ODI was 19.45 ± 19.53 (95% CI, 17.77-21.12). Two-hundred and seventy patients (51.5%) showed improvement over MCID in both NRS and ODI, 150 (28.6%) in either NRS or ODI, and 104 (19.8%) in neither.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated CAM treatment during hospitalization was effective for patients with lumbar IDH who had severe LBP and disability. However, these results must be investigated further to assess whether the effects surpass those seen with placebo and are cost-effective.