Literature DB >> 24979276

National trends in the use of fusion techniques to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Christopher K Kepler1, Alexander R Vaccaro, Alan S Hilibrand, D Greg Anderson, Jeffrey A Rihn, Todd J Albert, Kristen E Radcliff.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective review.
OBJECTIVE: (1) To describe change in treatment patterns for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). (2) To report regional variation in treatment of DS. (3) To describe variation in surgeon-reported outcomes for DS based on treatment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal stenosis associated with DS is commonly treated with decompression and fusion but little is known about the optimal fusion technique. During a 6-month period, American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery step II candidates submit procedure lists; these lists have been stored in an electronic database since 1999.
METHODS: The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery database was retrospectively queried to identify patients who underwent surgery for DS from 1999 to 2011. Included patients underwent uninstrumented fusion, fusion with posterior instrumentation, fusion using interbody device, or decompression without fusion. Utilization of these procedures was analyzed by year and geographic region.
RESULTS: The study period included 5639 cases; the annual number of cases doubled during the study period. The percentage of cases treated with interbody fusion (IF) increased significantly throughout the study period, from 13.6% (1999-2001) to 32% (2009-2011) (P<0.001). The percentage of DS cases treated with posterolateral fusion peaked in 2003 then decreased as the rate of IF increased. In 2011, the rates of posterolateral fusion (40%) and posterolateral fusion with IF (37%) were nearly identical. The Northwest had the highest rate of IF (41%), >10% higher than any other region (P<0.001) and more than 23% higher than the Southeast (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Despite little evidence guiding treatment strategy for DS, national treatment patterns have changed dramatically during the past 13 years. The rapid adoption of IF and substantial regional variation in treatment utilization patterns raises questions about drivers of change including perceptions about associated fusion rates, the importance of sagittal balance and differential reimbursement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24979276     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000486

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  34 in total

1.  Advanced Multi-Axis Spine Testing: Clinical Relevance and Research Recommendations.

Authors:  Timothy P Holsgrove; Nikhil R Nayak; William C Welch; Beth A Winkelstein
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-07-17

2.  Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.

Authors:  M L Dijkerman; G M Overdevest; W A Moojen; C L A Vleggeert-Lankamp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Minimally invasive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Niels A Van der Gaag
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-09-22

4.  Fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis: how to reconcile conflicting evidence.

Authors:  Adam M Pearson
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-06

5.  Surgery for spinal stenosis: more thought, less metal?

Authors:  Ralph J Mobbs; Kevin Phan
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-06

Review 6.  Interbody Fusion Techniques in the Surgical Management of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Peter B Derman; Todd J Albert
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-12

7.  Natural hydroxyapatite as a bone graft extender for posterolateral spine arthrodesis.

Authors:  Christophe Garin; Séverine Boutrand
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  A retrospective review comparing two-year patient-reported outcomes, costs, and healthcare resource utilization for TLIF vs. PLF for single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Elliott Kim; Silky Chotai; David Stonko; Joseph Wick; Alex Sielatycki; Clinton J Devin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  The effectiveness of decompression alone compared with additional fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a pragmatic comparative non-inferiority observational study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Ivar M Austevoll; Rolf Gjestad; Jens Ivar Brox; Tore K Solberg; Kjersti Storheim; Frode Rekeland; Erland Hermansen; Kari Indrekvam; Christian Hellum
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Management of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Analysis of a Questionnaire Study, Correlation With a National Sample, and Perioperative Outcomes of Treatment Options.

Authors:  Patawut Bovonratwet; Matthew L Webb; Nathaniel T Ondeck; Jonathan J Cui; Ryan P McLynn; Praveen Kadimcherla; David H Kim; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-04-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.