Comparative charge analysis of one- and two-level lumbar total disc arthroplasty versus circumferential lumbar fusion

Spine

Volumn 32, Issue 25, 2007, Pages 2905-2909

  Levin, David A ^a   Bendo, John A ^a,b   Quirno, Martin ^a   Errico, Thomas ^a   Goldstein, Jeffrey ^a   Spivak, Jeffrey ^a  

^a NYU HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial disc; Charge; Lumbar fusion; Lumbar spine; Total disc arthroplasty

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANESTHESIST; ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL CHARGE; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; IMPLANT; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DEGENERATION; LENGTH OF STAY; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR DISK; MALE; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICAL RECORD; MEDICARE; OPERATING ROOM; OPERATION DURATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SPINE FUSION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STUDENT T TEST; SURGEON; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEE; HOSPITAL COST; HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT; INSTRUMENTATION; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; REIMBURSEMENT; SPINE DISEASE; TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; ANESTHESIA DEPARTMENT, HOSPITAL; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEES AND CHARGES; FEMALE; HOSPITAL COSTS; HUMANS; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; LENGTH OF STAY; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MEDICARE; MIDDLE AGED; OPERATING ROOMS; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL DISEASES; SPINAL FUSION; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 39049161109     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815b84ae     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Andersson GB. Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain. Lancet 1999;354:581-5.
2. Andersson GB. The epidemiology of spinal disorders. In: Frymoyer JW, ed. The Adult Spine: Principles and Practice, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997:93-141.
3. Praemer A, Furnes S, Rice DP. Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United States. Rosemont, IL: AAUS; 1992:1-99.
4. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, et al. Low-back pain hospitalization: recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine 1994;19:1207-13.
5. Hart LG, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC. Physician office visits for low back pain. Spine 1995;20:11-9.
6. Brodsky AE. Post-laminectomy and post-fusion stenosis of the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop 1976;130-9.
7. Lee CKPJ, Langrana NA. Scientific basis: relative efficacy of the artificial disc versus spinal fusion. Clinical Efficacy and Outcome in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain. New York: Raven Press; 1992:237-44.
8. Lehman TR, Spratt KF, Tozzi JE, et al. Long-term follow-up of lower lumbar fusion patients. Spine 1987;12:97-104.
9. Harris RI, Wiley JJ. Acquired spondylosis as a sequel to spine fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1963;45:1159-70.
10. Zigler JE. Lumbar spine arthroplasty using the ProDisc II. Spine J 2004;(suppl):260-7.
11. Zigler JE, Burd TA, Vaialle EN, et al. Lumbar spine arthroplasty. Early results using the ProDisc II: a prospective randomized trial of arthroplasty versus fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:352-61.
12. Delamarter RB, Bae HW, Pradhan BB. Clinical results of ProDisc-II lumbar total disc arthroplasty: report from the United States clinical trial. Orthop Clin North Am 2005;36:301-13.
13. Blumenthal S, McAfee PC, Guyer RD, et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the ChariteTM artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: I. Evaluation of clinical outcomes. Spine 2005;30:1565-75.
14. McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Eng MM, et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the ChariteTM artificial disc versus lumbar fusion: II. Evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes. Spine 2005;30:1576-83.
15. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, et al. The treatment of disabling single level lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the ProDisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2 year minimum follow-up. Spine 2005;30:2230-6.
16. Huang RC, Lim MR, Girardi FP, et al. The prevalence of contraindications to total disc replacement in a cohort of lumbar surgical patients. Spine 2004;29:2538-41.
17. Kiviluoto O, Santavirta S, Salenius P, et al. Postero-lateral spine fusion: a 1-4-year follow-up of 80 consecutive patients. Acta Orthop Scand 1985;56:152-4.
18. Jackson RK, Boston DA, Edge AJ. Lateral mass fusion: a prospective study of a consecutive series with long-term follow-up. Spine 1985;10:828-32.
19. O'Beime J, O'Neill D, Gallagher J, et al. Spinal fusion for back pain: a clinical and radiological review. J Spinal Disord 1992;5:32-8.
20. Stauffer RN, Coventry MB. Posterolateral lumbar-spine fusion: analysis of Mayo Clinic Series. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1972;54:1195-204.
21. Simon SR. Kinesiology. In: Simon SR, ed. Orthopedic Basic Science. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1994:519-622.
22. Benzel E. Biomechanics of Spine Stabilization. Rolling Meadows, IL: American Association of Neurological Surgeons; 2001.
23. Lee CK. Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine 1988;13:375-7.
24. Eck JC, Humphreys SC, Hodges SD. Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion: a review of clinical, biomechanical, and radiologic studies. Am J Orthop 1999;28:336-40.
25. Etebar S, Cahill DW. Risk factors for adjacent-segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability. J Neurosurg 1999;90(suppl 4):163-9.
26. Ackerman SJ, Mafilios MS, Polly D. Economic evaluation of bone morphogenetic protein versus autogenous iliac crest bone graft in single-level anterior lumbar fusion: an evidence-based modeling approach. Spine 2002;27(suppl 16):94-9.
27. Zheng F, Cammisa FP Jr, Sandhu HS, et al. Factors predicting hospital stay, operative time, blood loss, and transfusion in patients undergoing revision posterior lumbar spine decompression, fusion, and segmental instrumentation. Spine 2002;27:818-24.
28. Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, et al. The treatment of disabling multilevel lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the ProDisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2 year minimum follow-up. Spine 2005;30:2192-9.
29. van Ooij A, Oner FC, Verbout AJ. Complications of artificial disc replacement: a report of 27 patients with the SB Charite disc. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16:369-83.
30. Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Bhatia NN, et al. Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:1497-503.
31. Zeegers WS, Bohnen LM, Laaper M, et al. Artificial disc replacement with the modular type SB Charite III: 2-year results in 50 prospectively studied patients. Eur Spine J 1999;8:210-7.
32. Huang RC, Tropiano P, Marnay T, et al. Range of motion and adjacent level degeneration after lumbar total disc replacement. Spine J 2006;6:242-7.
33. Burkus JK, Dorchak JD, Sanders DL. Radiographic assessment of interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2. Spine 2003;28:372-7.
34. Burkus JK, Transfeldt EE, Kitchel SH, et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine 2002;27:2396-408.
35. Boden SD, Zdeblick TA, Sandhu HS, et al. The use of rhBMP-2 in interbody fusion cages. Definitive evidence of osteoinduction in humans: a preliminary report. Spine 2000;25:376-81.