Utility and costs of radiologist interpretation of perioperative imaging in patients with traumatic single-level thoracolumbar fractures

Formal Radiologist Interpretations of Intraoperative Spine Radiographs Have Low Clinical Value

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical relevance, usefulness, and financial implications of intraoperative radiograph interpretation by radiologists in spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Due to rising health care costs, spine surgery is under scrutiny to maximize value-based care. Formal radiographic analysis remains a potential source of unnecessary health care costs, especially for intraoperative radiographs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on all adult elective spine surgeries at a single institution between July 2020 and July 2021. Demographic and radiographic data were collected, including intraoperative localization and post-instrumentation radiographs. Financial data were obtained through the institution's price estimator. Radiographic characteristics included time from radiographic imaging to completion of radiologist interpretation report, completion of radiologist interpretation report before the conclusion of surgical procedure, clinical relevance, and clinical usefulness. Reports were considered clinically relevant if the spinal level of the procedure was described and clinically useful if completed before the conclusion of the procedure and deemed clinically relevant.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty-one intraoperative localization and post-instrumentation radiographs from 360 patients revealed a median delay of 128 minutes between imaging and completion of the interpretive report. Only 38.9% of reports were completed before the conclusion of surgery. There were 79.4% deemed clinically relevant and only 33.5% were clinically useful. Localization reports were completed more frequently before the conclusion of surgery (67.2% vs. 34.4%) but with lower clinical relevance (90.1% vs. 98.5%) and clinical usefulness (60.3% vs. 33.6%) than post-instrumentation reports. Each patient was charged $32 to $34 for the interpretation fee, cumulating a minimum total cost of $15,392.

CONCLUSIONS

Formal radiographic interpretation of intraoperative spine radiographs was of low clinical utility for spine surgeons. Institutions should consider optimizing radiology workflows to improve timeliness and clinical relevance or evaluate the necessity of reflexive consultation to radiology for intraoperative imaging interpretation to ensure that value-based care is maximized during spine surgeries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The Clinical Effect of Manual Reduction Combined with Internal Fixation Through Wiltse Paraspinal Approach in the Treatment of Thoracolumbar Fracture

Objective

To evaluate the clinical outcome of manual reduction combined with pedicle fixation through Wiltse paraspinal approach (WPA) in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures.

Methods

From May 2017 to May 2019, 48 thoracolumbar fractures patients without neurological symptoms were enrolled in this study. Forty‐eight patients were randomly divided into two groups based on the different surgical treatment. Group 1 was manual reduction combined with pedicle screw fixation through Wiltse paraspinal approach treatment group. Group 2 was pedicle screw fixation through traditional posterior approach treatment group. The operation time (OT), intraoperative blood loss (BL), postoperative drainage (PD), time of brace (TB) and the cobb angle recovery of the injured kyphosis in the prone position were obtained and compared between the two groups, respectively. Comparison of cobb angle changes, serum creatine kinase (CK) level, pain visual analogue score (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and multifidus cross‐sectional (MCS) area changes were achieved between the two groups, respectively.

Results

Forty‐eight patients were enrolled in this study and each group had 24 patients. There was no significant difference between the two groups in patient's age, height, weight, and body mass index (BMI). There were 20 males and four females in group 1. The mean age, height, weight, and BMI of patients were 61.99 ± 11.00 years (range, 42–75 years), 175.21 ± 4.49 cm, 76.71 ± 4.87 kg, and 24.98 ± 1.03 kg/m² in group 1, respectively. Group 2 had 18 males and six females, and the mean age, height, weight, and BMI of patients were 57.95 ± 9.22 years (range, 44–77 years), 176.37 ± 4.56 cm, 77.42 ± 4.61 kg, and 24.87 ± 1.10 kg/m² in group 2, respectively. The mean bleeding volume of group 1 was significantly less than group 2 (64.13 ± 9.77 ml and 152.13 ± 10.73 ml, respectively) (P < 0.05). The mean operation time, postoperative drainage, and time of brace were 62.95 ± 9.80 min, 66.25 ± 12.75 ml, and 3.62 ± 0.97 days in group 1, respectively, and they were significantly better than those of group 2 (69.29 ± 6.82min, 162.96 ± 14.55ml and 7.88 ± 1.94 days, respectively) (P < 0.05). The mean multifidus cross‐sectional area was significantly smaller than per‐operation after surgery in two groups (P < 0.05). The mean creatine kinase of group 1 was 403.13 ± 39.78 U/L and 292.12 ± 45.81 U/L at 1 and 3 days after surgery, respectively, which was significantly smaller than those in group 2 (654.25 ± 53.13 U/L and 467.67 ± 44.25 U/L, respectively) (P < 0.05). The Oswestry disability index of group 1 were significantly better than those in group 2 especially at 1 month and final follow‐up after surgery (P < 0.05). Moreover, group 1 also had better outcomes in postoperative Cobb angle change than those in group 2, with significant difference on intra‐operation, 1 day and 1 month post‐operation (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

In short, this operation is suitable for thoracolumbar fractures without neurologic symptoms. Preoperative manual reduction had advantages of restoring the height of injured vertebrae. Wiltse intermuscular approach can reduce intraoperative blood loss, shorten operation time, and reduce paraspinal muscle damage. Using the traditional posterior approach, it is easy for surgeons to grasp this technique and it should be recommended as conforming with the minimally invasive approach of recent years.

Achieving Value in Spine Surgery: 10 Major Cost Contributors

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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