Literature DB >> 21886888

Costs and frequency of "off-label" use of INFUSE for spinal fusions at one institution in 2010.

Nancy E Epstein1, Garry S Schwall.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: INFUSE, bone morphogenetic protein-2 combined with bovine Type I collagen in the lumbar tapered fusion device (LT Cage), is used to promote anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). In spinal surgery, INFUSE is only Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approved for this "on-label" use. While the efficacy and possible complications due to INFUSE have been debated, we know less about the costs and frequency of "on-label" versus "off-label" use of INFUSE to perform spinal fusions.
METHODS: At one institution, we determined the costs (with overhead) and frequency of utilizing INFUSE "on-label" and "off-label" in performing spinal fusions during 2010.
RESULTS: During 2010, 177 spinal fusions utilized INFUSE. Ninety-six percent, or 170 of 177 spinal fusions, utilized INFUSE in an "off-label" capacity at a cost of $4,547,822. Only 4%, or seven of 177 cases, utilized INFUSE in an "on-label" capacity (ALIF); the total cost was $296,419.
CONCLUSIONS: In 2010, at one institution, 96% of the spinal fusions utilized INFUSE in an off-label capacity (cost $4,547,822), while only 4% were performed on-label (cost $296,4194).

Entities:  

Keywords:  INFUSE; cervical; lumbar; off-label; spinal fusion; surgery; thoracic

Year:  2011        PMID: 21886888      PMCID: PMC3162796          DOI: 10.4103/2152-7806.83929

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Neurol Int        ISSN: 2152-7806


INTRODUCTION

INFUSE (Medtronic, Memphis, TN, USA), a genetically engineered human bone morphogenetic protein-2, is utilized to perform both “on-label” and “off-label” spinal fusions. INFUSE, combined with a bovine Type I collagen carrier, and placed in a lumbar tapered fusion device (LT Cage), together constitute an “on-label” device approved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) for anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Although we are all “aware” that INFUSE is frequently utilized in an “off-label” capacity (not FDA approved) to perform other types of spinal fusions, here we quantify the costs and frequency of such “off-label” use at one institution in 2010.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2010, INFUSE was used in an “on-label” or “off-label” capacity in 177 spinal fusions at one institution. Patients averaged 53 years of age (range, 19–85 years), and included 84 females and 93 males. Of note, 20.9% of the patients were over 65 years old. Surgical procedures included anterior, posterior or 360-degree cervical, thoracic and/or lumbar fusions (with/without decompression).

RESULTS

Of the 177 spinal fusions that utilized INFUSE, it was used “on-label” to perform seven ALIF. It was utilized “off-label” in the remaining 170 fusions. The “off-label” cervical fusions included seven operations from three operative categories [Table 1]. The "off-label" thoracic/lumbar fusions utilizing INFUSE included 163 operations from five operative categories [Table 1]. Most of the operations (156 cases) fell into three thoracic and/or lumbar categories: 59 posterior lumbar interbody fusions, 59 posterolateral thoracic/lumbar fusions and 38 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions.
Table 1

Categories of “off-label” spinal fusions utilizing INFUSE at one institution in 2010

Categories of “off-label” spinal fusions utilizing INFUSE at one institution in 2010 INFUSE was utilized “off-label” in 96% of the cases (170 of 177 patients) at a cost of $4,547,822, whereas it was utilized “on-label” in only 4% of the cases (seven of 177 patients) at a cost of $296,419. A total of 244 INFUSE packages were utilized in 177 cases for an average of 1.38 packages/case (range 1–4). The average cost of INFUSE per operation was $26,752. Second operations, not necessarily directly attributable to INFUSE, occurred in 32 (18.8%) of 170 patients undergoing “off-label” spinal fusions [Table 1]. Two of seven “on-label” ALIF utilizing INFUSE also required secondary surgery.

DISCUSSION

We examined the use of INFUSE to perform spinal fusions in one institution during 1 year. Although INFUSE is only “marketed” by the company for “on-label” use, we found at our institution that 170 (96%) of 177 cases were performed “off-label” at a cost of $4,547,822. In fact, only seven (4%) of 177 cases were performed “on label” for ALIF alone, at a cost of $296,419. Of note, the average cost of INFUSE was $26,752 per operation, while the average range of costs for alternative bone graft supplements (e.g., demineralized bone matrix and Beta TriCalcium Phosphate [Vitoss: OrthoVita, Malvern, PA, USA]) per operation would range from $2,672 to $4,000 (with overhead). Although we cannot directly link the requirement for second spinal operations to the use of INFUSE in this study, other studies have done so.[1-6] In particular, these studies have suggested that INFUSE leads to higher rates of hematomas/seromas, neurological deficits, soft-tissue swelling, ectopic bone formation, and vertebral osteolysis. The reoperation rate of 18.2% in the current study was larger than that reported in most of these studies. Future cost-benefit analyses comparing INFUSE to less-expensive bone graft expanders are warranted for both “on-label” and “off-label” use.
  6 in total

1.  Vertebral osteolysis originating from subchondral cyst end plate defects in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using rhBMP-2. Report of two cases.

Authors:  Sarah Balseiro; Eric W Nottmeier
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2010-05-20       Impact factor: 4.166

2.  Adverse effects associated with high-dose recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 use in anterior cervical spine fusion.

Authors:  Lisa B E Shields; George H Raque; Steven D Glassman; Mitchell Campbell; Todd Vitaz; John Harpring; Christopher B Shields
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Perioperative complications of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 on an absorbable collagen sponge versus iliac crest bone graft for posterior cervical arthrodesis.

Authors:  Charles H Crawford; Leah Y Carreon; Mark D McGinnis; Mitchell J Campbell; Steven D Glassman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 4.  Occipitocervical fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2: adverse effects due to tissue swelling and seroma.

Authors:  Kiarash Shahlaie; Kee D Kim
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Neurologic impairment from ectopic bone in the lumbar canal: a potential complication of off-label PLIF/TLIF use of bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2).

Authors:  David A Wong; Anant Kumar; Sanjay Jatana; Gary Ghiselli; Katherine Wong
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 4.166

6.  Pros, cons, and costs of INFUSE in spinal surgery.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2011-01-24
  6 in total
  9 in total

1.  A Prospective, Randomized Study Evaluating Clinical and Radiographic Efficacy of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Performed Using a Truss Technology-Based Interbody Fusion Device With Homologous Bone or Bone Marrow Aspirate.

Authors:  Benjamin Chatterjee; Michael Rauschmann; Christoph Fleege; Mohammad Arabmotlagh; Sven Schmidt; Kimberly Martin; Marcus Rickert
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12-29

2.  Effects of Tunable Keratin Hydrogel Erosion on Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2 Release, Bioactivity, and Bone Induction.

Authors:  David Joshua Cohen; Sharon L Hyzy; Salma Haque; Lucas C Olson; Barbara D Boyan; Justin M Saul; Zvi Schwartz
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 3.845

3.  Spine surgery in geriatric patients: Sometimes unnecessary, too much, or too little.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2011-12-31

4.  Operative costs, reasons for operative waste, and vendor credit replacement in spinal surgery.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein; Rita Roberts; John Collins
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2015-05-07

Review 5.  Lower complication and reoperation rates for laminectomy rather than MI TLIF/other fusions for degenerative lumbar disease/spondylolisthesis: A review.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2018-03-07

6.  Nursing review of cervical laminectomy and fusion.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2017-12-11

7.  Multiple operations on the same patient.

Authors:  Fred L Cohen; Gary W Roberts
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2012-07-17

8.  How much medicine do spine surgeons need to know to better select and care for patients?

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2012-11-26

9.  Complications due to the use of BMP/INFUSE in spine surgery: The evidence continues to mount.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2013-07-09
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.