Literature DB >> 31297377

Outcomes and cost-minimization analysis of cement spacers versus expandable cages for posterior-only reconstruction of metastatic spine corpectomies.

Yusef Jordan1, Jacob M Buchowski1, Mahati Mokkarala1, Colleen Peters1, David B Bumpass2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of the thoracolumbar spine after tumor corpectomy can be accomplished using either an expandable metallic cage (EC) or a polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement spacer. Few studies have compared the relative successes between these two forms of reconstructions in the management of metastatic spine disease (MSD). The purpose of this study was to compare both the outcomes and costs of EC and PMMA spacers in the treatment of MSD. We hypothesized that the rate of complications and revision surgery when using PMMA spacers to reconstruct the spine after corpectomy for MSD would be equivalent to use of an EC, with lower implant and operating room (OR) costs.
METHODS: A single surgeon performed 65 vertebral corpectomies for MSD requiring anterior column reconstruction from 2007-2014. Charts were retrospectively reviewed and no patients were excluded. All resections were single-stage resections/reconstructions of the vertebral body through a posterior-only approach. Outcomes evaluated included perioperative complications, intraoperative time, postoperative survival, subsequent reoperations, and changes in radiographic spinal alignment.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were treated with PMMA spacers; 29 were treated with EC. Baseline age, BMI, comorbidities, and disease severity as measured by Tokuhashi scores were equivalent between treatment groups. The cohorts had no significant differences in operative complications, blood loss, postoperative survival, number of subsequent reoperations, or changes in radiographic alignment. PMMA patients had a significantly shorter mean operative duration (328.6 vs. 241.1 min, P<0.001). Institutional implant cost savings were $4,355 favoring the PMMA cohort ($75 for cement vs. $5,000 for cage). Mean OR time savings were calculated to be $2,001 less for the PMMA cohort. Total cost minimization per PMMA case was thus $6,356, which was robust in 2-way sensitivity analyses varying both implant costs and time costs by 30%.
CONCLUSIONS: In the largest series of posterior-only corpectomies for MSD reconstructed with PMMA, PMMA intervertebral spacers provided equivalent stability and longevity to EC, at a fraction of the cost. PMMA showed excellent durability while minimizing costs by $6,356 per case, an important consideration as reimbursement pressures increasingly influence surgical decision making.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Metastatic spine disease (MSD); corpectomy; expandable cage (EC); polymethylmethacrylate spacer (PMMA spacer)

Year:  2019        PMID: 31297377      PMCID: PMC6595212          DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.05.07

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Transl Med        ISSN: 2305-5839


  14 in total

Review 1.  Metastatic disease in the thoracic and lumbar spine: evaluation and management.

Authors:  Peter S Rose; Jacob M Buchowski
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.020

2.  A revised scoring system for preoperative evaluation of metastatic spine tumor prognosis.

Authors:  Yasuaki Tokuhashi; Hiromi Matsuzaki; Hiroshi Oda; Masashi Oshima; Junnosuke Ryu
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Corpectomy in destructive thoracolumbar spine disease: Cost-effectiveness of 3 different techniques and implications for cost reduction of delivered care.

Authors:  Eleftherios Archavlis; Nikos Papadopoulos; Peter Ulrich
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Surgical strategy for spinal metastases.

Authors:  K Tomita; N Kawahara; T Kobayashi; A Yoshida; H Murakami; T Akamaru
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Comparing vertebral body reconstruction implants for the treatment of thoracic and lumbar metastatic spinal tumors: a consecutive case series of 37 patients.

Authors:  Sharad Rajpal; Roy Hwang; Thomas Mroz; Michael P Steinmetz
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2012-04

6.  Comparison of polymethylmethacrylate versus expandable cage in anterior vertebral column reconstruction after posterior extracavitary corpectomy in lumbar and thoraco-lumbar metastatic spine tumors.

Authors:  Mohammed Eleraky; Ioannis Papanastassiou; Nam D Tran; Elias Dakwar; Frank D Vrionis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-03-10       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Posterior-only approach for lumbar vertebral column resection and expandable cage reconstruction for spinal metastases.

Authors:  Rahul Jandial; Brandon Kelly; Mike Yue Chen
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2013-05-17

8.  The use of an expandable cage for corpectomy reconstruction of vertebral body tumors through a posterior extracavitary approach: a multicenter consecutive case series of prospectively followed patients.

Authors:  Francis H Shen; Ian Marks; Christopher Shaffrey; Jean Ouellet; Vincent Arlet
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2007-06-21       Impact factor: 4.166

9.  Posterior placement of an expandable cage for lumbar vertebral body replacement in oncologic surgery by posterior simple approach: technical note.

Authors:  Nelson Alberto Morales Alba
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Thoracic kyphotic deformity reduction with a distractible titanium cage via an entirely posterior approach.

Authors:  Daniel M Sciubba; Gary L Gallia; Matthew J McGirt; Graeme F Woodworth; Ira M Garonzik; Timothy Witham; Ziya L Gokaslan; Jean-Paul Wolinsky
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 4.654

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  [Intraoperative and late complications after spinal tumour resection and dorsoventral reconstruction].

Authors:  A Thomas; T Hollstein; S Zwingenberger; K-D Schaser; A C Disch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.087

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.