Search

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efffectiveness of a titanium vertebral augmentation device (SpineJack system) in terms of back pain, radiological outcomes, and economic burden compared with nonsurgical management (NSM) (bracing) for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures. Complications were also evaluated for both treatment methods., Methods: A prospective multicenter randomized study was performed at 9 French sites. Patients (n = 100) with acute traumatic Magerl type A1 and A3.1 vertebral fractures were enrolled and randomized to treatment with the SpineJack system or NSM consisting of bracing and administration of pain medication. Participants were monitored at admission, during the procedure, and at 1, 12, and 24 months after treatment initiation. Primary outcomes included visual analog scale back pain score, and secondary outcomes included disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D score), radiological measures (vertebral kyphosis angle [VKA] and regional traumatic angulation [RTA]), and economic outcomes (costs, procedures, hours of help, and time to return to work)., Results: Ninety-five patients were included in the analysis, with 48 in the SpineJack group and 47 in the NSM group. Back pain improved significantly for all participants with no significant differences between groups. ODI and EQ-5D scores improved significantly between baseline and follow-up (1, 12, and 24 months) for all participants, with the SpineJack group showing a larger improvement than the NSM group between baseline and 1 month. VKA was significantly lower (p < 0.001) (i.e., better) in the SpineJack group than in the NSM group at 1, 12, and 24 months of follow-up. There was no significant change over time in RTA for the SpineJack group, but the NSM group showed a significant worsening in RTA over time. SpineJack treatment was associated with higher costs than NSM but involved a shorter hospital stay, fewer medical visits, and fewer hours of nursing care. Time to return to work was significantly shorter for the SpineJack group than for the NSM group. There were no significant differences in complications between the two treatments., Conclusions: Overall, there was no statistical difference in the primary outcomes between the SpineJack treatment group and the NSM group. In terms of secondary outcomes, SpineJack treatment was associated with better radiological outcomes, shorter hospital stays, faster return to work, and fewer hours of nursing care.

OBJECTIVE The cost of spine management is rising. As diagnostic imaging accounts for approximately 10% of total patient care spending, there is interest in determining if economies could be made with regard to the routine consultation of radiology for image interpretation. In the context of spine trauma, both the spine surgeon and the radiologist interpret perioperative imaging. Authors of the present study investigated the impact of radiologist interpretation of perioperative imaging from patients with traumatic single-level thoracolumbar fractures given that spine surgeons are expected to be comfortable interpreting pathologies of the musculoskeletal system. METHODS The authors conducted a retrospective review of all patients presenting with a single-level thoracolumbar fracture treated at the McGill University Health Centre in the period from January 2003 to December 2010. The time between image capture and radiologist interpretation as well as the number of extraskeletal and/or incidental findings was extracted from the radiology reports on all perioperative images including radiographic, fluoroscopic, and CT images. The cost of interpretation was obtained from the provincial health insurance entity of Quebec. RESULTS Eighty-two patients met the study inclusion criteria. Radiologists took a median of 1 day (IQR 0-5.5 days) to interpret preoperative radiographs. Intraoperative fluoroscopic images and postoperative radiographs were read by the radiologist a median of 19 days (IQR 4-56.75 days) and 34 days (IQR 1-137.5 days) after capture, respectively (p < 0.05). Preoperative radiologist dictations reported extraskeletal and/or incidental findings for 8.1% of radiographs; there were no intraoperative or postoperative extraskeletal findings beyond those previously reported on the preoperative radiographs. Radiologists took a median of 1 day (IQR 0-1 day) to read both preoperative and postoperative CT scans; extraskeletal and/or incidental findings were present in 46.2% of preoperative reports and 4.5% of postoperative reports. There were no intraoperative or postoperative radiological findings that provoked reoperation. A total of 66 intraoperative fluoroscopy images and 225 postoperative radiographs were read for a cost of $1399.20 and $1867.50 (Canadian dollars), respectively, for radiologist interpretation. This cost amounted to 40.3% of all perioperative image interpretation spending. CONCLUSIONS In the management of single-level thoracolumbar fractures, radiologists add information to the diagnostic picture when interpreting preoperative radiographs and perioperative CT scans; however, the interpretation of intraoperative fluoroscopic images and postoperative radiographs comes with significant delay, does not add additional information, and represents an area of potential cost and professional-resource reduction.

Object: The objective of this study was to investigate a national health care database and analyze demographics, hospital charges, and treatment trends of patients diagnosed with lumbar spine fractures in the US over a 5-year period., Methods: Clinical data were derived from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 2003 through 2007. The NIS is maintained by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and represents a 20% random stratified sample of all discharges from nonfederal hospitals within the US. Patients with lumbar spine fractures were identified using the appropriate ICD-9-CM code. Data on the number of vertebral body augmentation procedures were also retrieved. National estimates of discharges, hospital charges, discharge patterns, and treatment with spinal fusion trends were retrieved and analyzed., Results: More than 190,000 records of patients with lumbar spine fractures were abstracted from the database. During the 5-year period, there was a 17% increase in hospitalizations for lumbar spine fractures. This was associated with a 27% increase in hospital charges and a 55% increase in total national charges (both adjusted for inflation). The total health care bill associated with lumbar spine fractures in 2007 exceeded 1 billion US dollars. During this same time period, there was a 24% increase in spinal fusions for lumbar fractures, which was associated with a 15% increase in hospital charges. The ratio of spinal fusions to hospitalizations (surgical rate) during this period, however, was stable with an average of 7.4% over the 5-year period. There were an estimated 13,000 vertebral body augmentation procedures for nonpathological fractures performed in 2007 with a total national bill of 450 million US dollars., Conclusions: An increasing trend of hospitalizations, surgical treatment, and charges associated with lumbar spine fractures was observed between 2003 and 2007 on a national level. This trend, however, does not appear to be as steep as that of surgical utilization in degenerative spine disease. Furthermore, the ratio of spinal fusions to hospitalizations for lumbar fractures appears to be stable, possibly indicating no significant changes in indications for surgical intervention over the time period studied.

OBJECT The objective of this work was to search a national health care database of patients diagnosed with cervical spine fractures in the US to analyze discharge, demographic, and hospital charge trends over a 10-year period. METHODS Clinical data were derived from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 1997 through 2006. The NIS is maintained by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and represents a 20% random stratified sample of all discharges from nonfederal hospitals within the US. Patients with cervical spine fractures with and without spinal cord injury (SCI) were identified using the appropriate ICD-9-CM codes. The volume of discharges, length of stay (LOS), hospital charges, total national charges, discharge pattern, age, and sex were analyzed. National estimates were calculated using the HCUPnet tool. RESULTS Approximately 200,000 hospitalizations were identified. In the non-SCI group, there was a 74% increase in hospitalizations and charges between 1997 and 2006, but LOS changed minimally. There was no appreciable change in the rate of in-hospital mortality (< 3%), but discharges home with home health care and to skilled rehabilitation or nursing facilities increased slightly. In the SCI group, hospitalizations and charges increased by 29 and 38%, respectively. There were no significant changes in LOS or discharge status in this group. Spinal cord injury was associated with increases in LOS, charges, and adverse outcomes compared with fractures without SCI. Total national charges associated with both groups combined exceeded $1.3 billion US in 2006. CONCLUSIONS During the studied period, increases in hospitalizations and charges were observed in both the SCI and non-SCI groups. The percentage increase was higher in the non-SCI group. Although SCI was associated with higher adverse outcomes, there were no significant improvements in immediate discharge status in either group during the 10 years analyzed.

Object: The authors undertook a retrospective cohort study of patients with T11-L2 thoracolumbar burst fractures who underwent decompression and the placement of instrumentation via the anterolateral or posterior approach., Methods: There were 63 thoracolumbar burst fractures in 45 male and 18 female patients. The instrumentation was placed posteriorly in 25 patients and anterolaterally in 38. The mean follow-up duration after discharge from the hospital was 1.8 years (range 6 months-8 years). The mean preoperative Frankel scores in the anterolateral and posterior groups were 3.7 +/- 1.1 and 3.5 +/- 1.4, respectively (p = 0.4155). Preoperative angular deformity in the anterolateral and posterior groups measured 11.9 +/- 9.7 and 4.1 +/- 7.1 degrees, respectively (p = 0.0007). Postoperatively, angular deformity had been corrected to 2.0 +/- 7.9 and 3.4 +/- 7.5 degrees in both groups, respectively (p = 0.565). The follow-up Frankel scores had improved to 4.2 +/- 0.8 and 4.0 +/- 1.4 (p = 0.461). At the latest follow-up examination, angular deformity had progressed to 4.5 +/- 9.3 degrees in the anterolateral group and to 9.8 +/- 9.4 degrees in the posterior group (p = 0.024). dollar 18,270 +/- 6980), there was no intergroup difference in total cost of hospitalization., Conclusions: Rigid guidelines for the selection of anterior or posterior approaches are lacking. Evaluation of the authors' results and those of others shows that angular deformity is more successfully corrected and maintained when the anterior approach is used.