BACKGROUND: To compare the differences in the thirty-day postoperative outcomes between cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: Patients undergoing primary single-level ACDF and CDA from 2010-2014 were identified by unique Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes within the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Primary outcomes included surgical and medical complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), unplanned readmission, return to operating room, and mortality all occurring within 30 days of the initial procedure. Patients were propensity score-matched to reduce selection bias and differences in preoperative characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression models were utilized to determine associations between covariates and primary outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Propensity score-matching produced a cohort of 1,305 patients with 652 (50.0%) ACDF and 653 (50.0%) CDA patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the development of major surgical or medical complications between the groups. ACDF patients experienced a significantly longer LOS (2.3±14.8 vs. 1.1±1.0 days, P=0.034) and unplanned hospital readmission (1.8% vs. 0.2%, P=0.002). For ACDF patients, increased LOS [odds ratios (OR), 4.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-13.73; P=0.017] and increased readmission (OR, 12.17; 95% CI, 1.16-127.23; P=0.037) persisted in the multivariate model. Elevated ASA classification, preoperative anemia and elevated white blood cell count (WBC) were also associated with a significantly increased LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Although ACDF and CDA can be indicated for similar cervical pathologies, the latter can be performed safely and effectively with comparable perioperative risk of major complications. The increased readmission rate and LOS for patients undergoing ACDF may have significant impact on patient cost and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: To compare the differences in the thirty-day postoperative outcomes between cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). METHODS: Patients undergoing primary single-level ACDF and CDA from 2010-2014 were identified by unique Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes within the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Primary outcomes included surgical and medical complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), unplanned readmission, return to operating room, and mortality all occurring within 30 days of the initial procedure. Patients were propensity score-matched to reduce selection bias and differences in preoperative characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression models were utilized to determine associations between covariates and primary outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Propensity score-matching produced a cohort of 1,305 patients with 652 (50.0%) ACDF and 653 (50.0%) CDA patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the development of major surgical or medical complications between the groups. ACDF patients experienced a significantly longer LOS (2.3±14.8 vs. 1.1±1.0 days, P=0.034) and unplanned hospital readmission (1.8% vs. 0.2%, P=0.002). For ACDF patients, increased LOS [odds ratios (OR), 4.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-13.73; P=0.017] and increased readmission (OR, 12.17; 95% CI, 1.16-127.23; P=0.037) persisted in the multivariate model. Elevated ASA classification, preoperative anemia and elevated white blood cell count (WBC) were also associated with a significantly increased LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Although ACDF and CDA can be indicated for similar cervical pathologies, the latter can be performed safely and effectively with comparable perioperative risk of major complications. The increased readmission rate and LOS for patients undergoing ACDF may have significant impact on patient cost and outcomes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Disc arthroplasty; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF); the American College of Surgeon’s National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database
Authors: Toon F M Boselie; Paul C Willems; Henk van Mameren; Rob A de Bie; Edward C Benzel; Henk van Santbrink Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Lukas P Staub; Christoph Ryser; Christoph Röder; Anne F Mannion; Jeffrey G Jarvik; Max Aebi; Emin Aghayev Journal: Spine J Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Praveen V Mummaneni; Beejal Y Amin; Jau-Ching Wu; Erika D Brodt; Joseph R Dettori; Rick C Sasso Journal: Evid Based Spine Care J Date: 2012-02
Authors: Austen David Katz; Junho Song; Daniel Bowles; Terence Ng; Eric Neufeld; Sayyida Hasan; Dean Perfetti; Nipun Sodhi; David Essig; Jeff Silber; Sohrab Virk Journal: J Craniovertebr Junction Spine Date: 2022-09-14
Authors: Venkat Boddapati; Nathan J Lee; Justin Mathew; Meghana M Vulapalli; Joseph M Lombardi; Marc D Dyrszka; Zeeshan M Sardar; Ronald A Lehman; K Daniel Riew Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2020-07-24
Authors: Nathan J Lee; Andrei F Joaquim; Venkat Boddapati; Justin Mathew; Paul Park; Jun S Kim; Zeeshan M Sardar; Ronald A Lehman; K Daniel Riew Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2021-01-19