Search

BackgroundLumbar fusion (LF) is commonly performed to manage lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) that has failed conservative measures. However, lumbar disc replacement (LDR) procedures are increasingly prevalent and designed to preserve motion in carefully selected patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), queried from 2010 to 2019 to identify patients undergoing single and double-level LF or LDR with a diagnosis of LDDD using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9th (ICD-9) and 10th (ICD-10) revision diagnostic and procedure codes. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a ratio of 2:1 was performed. All cost estimates reflect reported hospital costs adjusted to December 2019 United States Dollars.ResultsA total of 1,129,121 LF cases (99.3%) and 8,049 LDR cases (0.7%) were identified, with 364,637 (32.3%) and 712 (8.8%) comprising two-level surgeries, respectively. 1,712 LDRs were performed in 2010 (1.27% of all), decreasing to 565 in 2013 (0.52%), and increased slightly to 870 in 2019 (0.74%). LDR patients were significantly more likely to be younger (mean age 41.2 vs. 57.1, P<0.001) and healthier (mean ECI 0.88 vs. 1.80, P<0.001). On matched analysis, LDR hospital costs were $4,529 less (P<0.001) and length of stay was 0.65 days shorter (P<0.001) than LF patients. LDR patients had lower rates of any complication (7.0% vs. 13.2%, P<0.001), neurologic complication (3.0% vs. 4.2%, P=0.006), and blood transfusion (3.1% vs. 8.1%, P<0.001) compared to LF patients.ConclusionsThe prevalence of LDR procedures decreased from 2010-2017 but began to increase again in 2018 and 2019. Single-level LDR was associated with reduced costs and length of stay (LOS), and lower rates of blood transfusion compared to LF in patients with LDDD.

Objective: To estimate the budget impact (BI) of introducing local autograft (LA) combined with demineralized bone matrix (LA + DBM) in lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) procedures to treat lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) in Spain. Methods: A decision tree model was developed to evaluate the 4-year BI associated with introducing LA + DBM putty to replace currently available grafting methods, including iliac crest bone graft (ICBG), LA alone, and LA combined with beta-tricalcium phosphate (LA + ceramics), with 30%, 40%, and 30% market shares, respectively. The analysis was conducted for a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients with LDDD receiving LSF, assuming LA + DBM would replace 100% of the standard of care mix. The fusion rates extracted from the literature were validated by an expert panel. Costs ((sic)2017) were obtained from different Spanish sources. Budget impact and incremental cost per successful fusion were calculated from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS). Results: Over 4 years, replacing currently available options with LA + DBM for 100 patients resulted in an additional cost of (sic)12,330 ((sic)123/patient), and an additional 14 successful fusions, implying a cost of (sic)881 per additional successful fusion. When costs of productivity loss were included, the introduction of LA + DBM resulted in cost savings of (sic)70,294 ((sic)703/patient). Limitations: The lack of high-quality, homogeneous, head-to-head research studying the efficacy of grafting procedures available to patients undergoing LSF, in addition to a lack of long-term follow-up in existing studies. Therefore, the number of fusions occurring within the model's time horizon may be underestimated. Conclusions: Acquisition costs of DBM were partially offset by costs of failed fusions, adverse events and reoperation when switching 100 hypothetical LDDD patients undergoing LSF procedures from standard of care grafting methods to LA + DBM from the perspective of the Span

Без аннотации., Без анотації., The diagnosis of the cause of recurrence back pain and sciatica after surgical remove of the lumbar disc herniation by clinic and neurologic examination is complicated. The discography can evaluate significance of the disc condition, but can’t demonstrate the change of spinal canal and its content. Magnetic resonance is an optimal method of diagnosis, but expensive for investigation. Computed tomography is considered as valuable method. There are some causes, which create difficulties on present showing of CT for distinguishing true recurrence of herniation from isolated epidural scar, for these purposes, we are elaborating differential characteristics.