Literature DB >> 28315803

Cranioplasty Complications and Costs: A National Population-Level Analysis Using the MarketScan Longitudinal Database.

Amy Li1, Tej Deepak Azad2, Anand Veeravagu2, Inderpreet Bhatti2, Chao Long3, John K Ratliff2, Gordon Li4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To characterize cranioplasty complications and costs at a population level using a longitudinal national claims database.
METHODS: We identified patients undergoing cranioplasty between 2007 and 2014 in the MarketScan national database. We evaluated age, autograft usage, cranioplasty size, and cranioplasty timing stratified by postoperative outcomes. We further analyzed associated costs. A subset analysis of adult patients with emergent indications, including stroke and trauma, was performed.
RESULTS: We identified 8275 patients (mean age 44.0 years ± 20.0, 45.2% male), including 13.8% children (<18 years old), 76.0% adults (18-64 years old), and 10.2% elderly adults (≥65 years old). Overall complication rate was 36.6%, mortality rate was 0.5%, and 30-day readmission rate was 12.0%. Elderly patients had the highest complication rate (P < 0.0001). Large cranioplasties (>5 cm) had higher complication rates than small cranioplasties (≤5 cm; P = 0.047). In patients with emergent indications (n = 1282), size did not influence complications, although large cranioplasties showed higher infection risk (P = 0.02). Autograft use did not affect outcomes but was associated with higher complication risk, including infections, in the subset with emergent indications (P < 0.001, P = 0.001). Late (>90 days) cranioplasty timing had higher complication rates in the overall cohort and the subset with emergent indications (P < 0.001, P < 0.001). Index costs of care were mainly driven by hospital payments in both the overall cohort and the cohort with emergent indications.
CONCLUSIONS: A high complication rate is associated with cranioplasty in the United States. Older age, large cranioplasties, and delayed cranioplasties increased complication risk overall. Among patients with emergent indications, complications were associated with delayed time to cranioplasty and autograft usage.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complication; Cost; Cranioplasty; MarketScan; Population; Timing

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28315803     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.03.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  12 in total

1.  Management and prevention of cranioplasty infections.

Authors:  Paolo Frassanito; Flavia Fraschetti; Federico Bianchi; Francesca Giovannenze; Massimo Caldarelli; Giancarlo Scoppettuolo
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 1.475

2.  Timing of Cleft Palate Repair in Patients With and Without Robin Sequence.

Authors:  Gary B Skolnick; Matthew R Keller; Ethan J Baughman; Dennis C Nguyen; Katelin B Nickel; Sybill D Naidoo; Margaret A Olsen; Kamlesh B Patel
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 1.046

Review 3.  The Materials Utilized in Cranial Reconstruction: Past, Current, and Future.

Authors:  Haley Meyer; Syed I Khalid; Amir H Dorafshar; Richard W Byrne
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2020-09-04       Impact factor: 0.558

4.  Effect of patient age on glioblastoma perioperative treatment costs: a value driven outcome database analysis.

Authors:  Brandon A Sherrod; Nicholas T Gamboa; Christopher Wilkerson; Herschel Wilde; Mohammed A Azab; Michael Karsy; Randy L Jensen; Sarah T Menacho
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 5.  * Calvarial Defects: Cell-Based Reconstructive Strategies in the Murine Model.

Authors:  Matthew P Murphy; Natalina Quarto; Michael T Longaker; Derrick C Wan
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 3.273

Review 6.  Consensus statement from the International Consensus Meeting on the Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in the Management of Traumatic Brain Injury : Consensus statement.

Authors:  Peter J Hutchinson; Angelos G Kolias; Tamara Tajsic; Amos Adeleye; Abenezer Tirsit Aklilu; Tedy Apriawan; Abdul Hafid Bajamal; Ernest J Barthélemy; B Indira Devi; Dhananjaya Bhat; Diederik Bulters; Randall Chesnut; Giuseppe Citerio; D Jamie Cooper; Marek Czosnyka; Idara Edem; Nasser M F El-Ghandour; Anthony Figaji; Kostas N Fountas; Clare Gallagher; Gregory W J Hawryluk; Corrado Iaccarino; Mathew Joseph; Tariq Khan; Tsegazeab Laeke; Oleg Levchenko; Baiyun Liu; Weiming Liu; Andrew Maas; Geoffrey T Manley; Paul Manson; Anna T Mazzeo; David K Menon; Daniel B Michael; Susanne Muehlschlegel; David O Okonkwo; Kee B Park; Jeffrey V Rosenfeld; Gail Rosseau; Andres M Rubiano; Hamisi K Shabani; Nino Stocchetti; Shelly D Timmons; Ivan Timofeev; Chris Uff; Jamie S Ullman; Alex Valadka; Vicknes Waran; Adam Wells; Mark H Wilson; Franco Servadei
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 2.216

Review 7.  Nanoparticles and Nanostructured Surface Fabrication for Innovative Cranial and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Authors:  Simona Cavalu; Iulian Vasile Antoniac; Aurel Mohan; Florian Bodog; Cristian Doicin; Ileana Mates; Mihaela Ulmeanu; Roman Murzac; Augustin Semenescu
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 3.623

8.  Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Cranioplasty Implants.

Authors:  Adam Binhammer; Josie Jakubowski; Oleh Antonyshyn; Paul Binhammer
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 0.947

9.  Determinants of 30-day Morbidity in Adult Cranioplasty: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis of 697 Cases.

Authors:  Rachel E Armstrong; Marco F Ellis
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2019-12-11

10.  In situ bone regeneration of large cranial defects using synthetic ceramic implants with a tailored composition and design.

Authors:  Omar Omar; Thomas Engstrand; Lars Kihlström Burenstam Linder; Jonas Åberg; Furqan A Shah; Anders Palmquist; Ulrik Birgersson; Ibrahim Elgali; Michael Pujari-Palmer; Håkan Engqvist; Peter Thomsen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.