Literature DB >> 24088964

Impact of nonoperative treatment, vertebroplasty, and kyphoplasty on survival and morbidity after vertebral compression fracture in the medicare population.

Andrew T Chen1, David B Cohen, Richard L Skolasky.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The treatment of vertebral compression fractures with vertebral augmentation procedures is associated with acute pain relief and improved mobility, but direct comparisons of treatments are limited. Our goal was to compare the survival rates, complications, lengths of hospital stay, hospital charges, discharge locations, readmissions, and repeat procedures for Medicare patients with new vertebral compression fractures that had been acutely treated with vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty, or nonoperative modalities.
METHODS: The 2006 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review File database was used to identify 72,693 patients with a vertebral compression fracture. Patients with a previous vertebral compression fracture, those who had had a vertebral augmentation procedure in the previous year, those with a diagnosis of malignant neoplasm, and those who had died were excluded, leaving 68,752 patients. The patients were stratified into nonoperative treatment (55.6%), vertebroplasty (11.2%), and kyphoplasty (33.2%) cohorts. Survival rates were compared with use of Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression. Results were adjusted for potential confounding variables. Secondary parameters of interest were analyzed with the chi-square test (categorical variables) and one-way analysis of variance (continuous variables), with the level of significance set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: The estimated three-year survival rates were 42.3%, 49.7%, and 59.9% for the nonoperative treatment, vertebroplasty, and kyphoplasty groups, respectively. The adjusted risk of death was 20.0% lower for the kyphoplasty group than for the vertebroplasty group (hazard ratio = 0.80, 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 0.84). Patients in the kyphoplasty group had the shortest hospital stay and the highest hospital charges and were the least likely to have had pneumonia and decubitus ulcers during the index hospitalization and at six months postoperatively. However, kyphoplasty was more likely to result in a subsequent augmentation procedure than was vertebroplasty (9.41% compared with 7.89%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Vertebral augmentation procedures appear to be associated with longer patient survival than nonoperative treatment does. Kyphoplasty tends to have a more striking association with survival than vertebroplasty does, but it is costly and may have a higher rate of subsequent vertebral compression fracture. These provocative findings may reflect selection bias and should be addressed in a prospective, direct comparison of methods to treat vertebral compression fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24088964     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.K.01649

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  36 in total

Review 1.  Health economic aspects of vertebral augmentation procedures.

Authors:  F Borgström; D P Beall; S Berven; S Boonen; S Christie; D F Kallmes; J A Kanis; G Olafsson; A J Singer; K Åkesson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Reply to "At what price decreased mortality risk?"

Authors:  K L Ong; D P Beall; M Frohbergh; E Lau; J A Hirsch
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 3.  Utilization of Vertebral Augmentation Procedures in the USA: a Comparative Analysis in Medicare Fee-for-Service Population Pre- and Post-2009 Trials.

Authors:  Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Jaya Sanapati; Vidyasagar Pampati; Alan D Kaye; Joshua A Hirsch
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2020-04-14

4.  Safety and clinical performance of kyphoplasty and SpineJack(®) procedures in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a pilot, monocentric, investigator-initiated study.

Authors:  D C Noriega; R H Ramajo; I S Lite; B Toribio; R Corredera; F Ardura; A Krüger
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 5.  Current Concepts in the Management of Vertebral Compression Fractures.

Authors:  Dylan Hoyt; Ivan Urits; Vwaire Orhurhu; Mariam Salisu Orhurhu; Jessica Callan; Jordan Powell; Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Alan D Kaye; Rachel J Kaye; Omar Viswanath
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2020-03-20

6.  Racial and health insurance disparities of inpatient spine augmentation for osteoporotic vertebral fractures from 2005 to 2010.

Authors:  C N Gu; W Brinjikji; A M El-Sayed; H Cloft; J S McDonald; D F Kallmes
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 7.  Vertebral Augmentation Involving Vertebroplasty or Kyphoplasty for Cancer-Related Vertebral Compression Fractures: An Economic Analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2016-05-01

8.  A randomized trial comparing balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty for vertebral compression fractures due to osteoporosis.

Authors:  M Dohm; C M Black; A Dacre; J B Tillman; G Fueredi
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 3.825

9.  Kyphoplasty patient-centered outcomes via questionnaire.

Authors:  Daniel Carr; Richard Cook; Doris Tong; Matthew Bahoura; Jennifer Kanack; Alicja Sobilo; Stephanie Falatko; Beverly C Walters; Ryan Barrett
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-06

10.  Review of Vertebral Augmentation: An Updated Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness.

Authors:  Douglas Beall; Morgan P Lorio; B Min Yun; Maria J Runa; Kevin L Ong; Christopher B Warner
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.