Literature DB >> 20515357

An analysis of the differences in the acute hospitalization charges following minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Michael Y Wang1, Matthew D Cummock, Yong Yu, Rikin A Trivedi.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Minimally invasive spine (MIS) procedures are increasingly being recognized as equivalent to open procedures with regard to clinical and radiographic outcomes. These techniques are also believed to result in less pain and disability in the immediate postoperative period. There are, however, little data to assess whether these procedures produce their intended result and even fewer objective data to demonstrate that they are cost effective when compared with open surgery.
METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of hospital charges for 1- and 2-level MIS and open posterior interbody fusion for lumbar spondylotic disease, disc degeneration, and spondylolisthesis treated at a single academic medical center. Patients presenting with bilateral neurological symptoms were treated with open surgery, and those with unilateral symptoms were treated with MIS. Overall hospital charges and surgical episode-related charges, length of stay (LOS), and discharge status were obtained from the hospital finance department and adjusted for multi-/single-level surgeries.
RESULTS: During a 14-month period, 74 patients (mean age 55 years) were treated. The series included 59 single-level operations (75% MIS and 25% open), and 15 2-level surgeries (53% MIS and 47% open). The demographic profile, including age and Charlson Comorbidity Index, were similar between the 4 groups. The mean LOS for patients undergoing single-level surgery was 3.9 and 4.8 days in the MIS and open cases, respectively (p = 0.017). For those undergoing 2-level surgery, the mean LOS was 5.1 for MIS versus 7.1 for open surgery (p = 0.259). With respect to hospital charges, single-level MIS procedures were associated with an average of $70,159 compared with $78,444 for open surgery (p = 0.027). For 2-level surgery, mean charges totalled $87,454 for MIS versus $108,843 for open surgery (p = 0.071). For single-level surgeries, 5 and 20% of patients undergoing MIS and open surgery, respectively, were discharged to inpatient rehabilitation. For 2-level surgeries, the rates were 13 and 29%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: While hospital setting, treatment population, patient selection, and physician expectation play major roles in determining hospital charges and LOS, this pilot study at an academic teaching hospital shows trends for quicker discharge, reduced hospital charges, and lower transfer rates to inpatient rehabilitation with MIS. However, larger multicenter studies are necessary to validate these findings and their relevance across diverse US practice environments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20515357     DOI: 10.3171/2009.12.SPINE09621

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  36 in total

1.  Learning curves of basic laparoscopic psychomotor skills in SINERGIA VR simulator.

Authors:  L F Sánchez-Peralta; F M Sánchez-Margallo; J L Moyano-Cuevas; J B Pagador; S Enciso; E J Gómez-Aguilera; J Usón-Gargallo
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Direct lateral access lumbar and thoracolumbar fusion: preliminary results.

Authors:  Pedro Berjano; Massimo Balsano; Josip Buric; Mary Petruzzi; Claudio Lamartina
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Minimal-invasive stabilization and circumferential spinal cord decompression in metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC).

Authors:  Nils Hansen-Algenstaedt; Reginald Knight; Jörg Beyerlein; Roland Gessler; Lothar Wiesner; Christian Schaefer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Cost-utility of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; Jarred A Hogan; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Economic impact of minimally invasive lumbar surgery.

Authors:  Christoph P Hofstetter; Anna S Hofer; Michael Y Wang
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-03-18

Review 6.  Role of minimally invasive surgery for adult spinal deformity in preventing complications.

Authors:  Chun-Po Yen; Yusef I Mosley; Juan S Uribe
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-09

7.  Minimal-invasive TLIF.

Authors:  Nils Hansen-Algenstaedt; Melanie Liem; SalahAddeen O Khalifah; Ansgar Ilg; Alf Giese
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  MIS revision of de novo scoliosis and stenosis, following open spinal instrumentation.

Authors:  Nils Hansen-Algenstaedt; SalahAddeen Khalifah; Melanie Liem; Johannes Holz; Alf Giese
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christina L Goldstein; Kevin Macwan; Kala Sundararajan; Y Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Comparison of minimally invasive fusion and instrumentation versus open surgery for severe stenotic spondylolisthesis with high-grade facet joint osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Eleftherios Archavlis; Mario Carvi y Nievas
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.