Value and cost in less invasive spinal fusion surgery: lessons from a community hospital

SAS Journal

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 37-40

  Deluzio, Kevin J ^a   Lucio, John C ^b   Rodgers, W B ^c  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Medical Affairs   (United States)

^c Spine Midwest Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COHORT ANALYSIS; COMMUNITY HOSPITAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EDITORIAL; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITAL BILLING; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LENGTH OF STAY; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; PATIENT SELECTION; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SPINE FUSION; SURGICAL APPROACH; TREATMENT RESPONSE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77952505634     PISSN: 19359810     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.esas.2010.03.004     Document Type: Editorial

References (35)

1. Sackett D.L., Rosenberg W.M., Gray J.A., Haynes R.B., and Richardson W.S. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 312 (1996) 71-72
2. Dagenais S., Haldeman S., and Polatin P.B. It is time for physicians to embrace cost effectiveness and cost utility analysis research in the treatment of spinal pain. Spine J 5 (2005) 357-360
3. Korthals-de Bois I., van T.M., van D.H., and Bouter L. Economic evaluations and randomized trials in spinal disorders: principles and methods. Spine 29 (2004) 442-448
4. Laupacis A., Feeny D., Detsky A.S., and Tugwell P.X. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization?. Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ 146 (1992) 473-481
5. Laupacis A., Bourne R., Rorabeck C., et al. The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75 (1993) 1619-1626
6. Laupacis A., Bourne R., Rorabeck C., et al. Costs of elective total hip arthroplasty during the first year. Cemented versus noncemented. J Arthroplasty 9 (1994) 481-487
7. Lavernia C.J., Guzman J.F., and Gachupin-Garcia A. Cost-effectiveness and quality of life in knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 345 (1997) 134-139
8. Rorabeck C.H., and Murray P. The cost benefit of total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 19 (1996) 777-779
9. Pearson A.M., Lurie J.D., Blood E.A., et al. Spine patient outcomes research trial: radiographic predictors of clinical outcomes after operative or nonoperative treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine 33 (2008) 2759-2766
10. Weinstein J.N., Lurie J.D., Tosteson T.D., et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) Observational cohort. JAMA 296 (2006) 2451-2459
11. Weinstein J.N., Tosteson T.D., Lurie J.D., et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA 296 (2006) 2441-2450
12. Weinstein J.N., Lurie J.D., Tosteson T.D., et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 356 (2007) 2257-2270
13. Weinstein J.N., Tosteson T.D., Lurie J.D., et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med 358 (2008) 794-810
14. Weinstein J.N., Lurie J.D., Tosteson T.D., et al. Surgical compared with nonoperative treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. four-year results in the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) randomized and observational cohorts. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91 (2009) 1295-1304
15. Tosteson A.N., Lurie J.D., Tosteson T.D., et al. Surgical treatment of spinal stenosis with and without degenerative spondylolisthesis: cost-effectiveness after 2 years. Ann Intern Med 149 (2008) 845-853
16. Rodgers W.B., Cox C.S., and Gerber E.J. Experience and early results with a minimally invasive technique for anterior column support through extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF®). US Musculoskeletal Rev 2 (2007) 28-32
17. Rodgers W.B., Cox C.S., and Gerber E.J. Minimally invasive treatment (XLIF) of adjacent segment disease after prior lumbar fusions. Int J Minimal Invasive Spinal Technol 3 (2009) 1-7
18. Rodgers WB, Cox CS, Gerber EJ. Early complications of extreme lateral interbody fusion in the obese. J Spinal Disord Tech (In press).
19. Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson JR. Fusion after minimally disruptive ALIF: analysis of XLIF by computed tomography. Submitted for Publication.
20. Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ. Clinical and radiographic outcome in less invasive lumbar fusion: XLIF at one year follow-up. Submitted for Publication.
21. Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson JR. Grade 2 spondylolisthesis at L4-5 treated by XLIF: safety and mid-term results in the "Worst Case Scenario." Submitted for Publication.
22. Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson JR. Lumbar fusion in octogenarians: the promise of minimally invasive surgery. Submitted for Publication.
23. Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson JR. Intraoperative and early postoperative complications in extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF): An analysis of 600 cases. Submitted for Publication.
24. Asgarzadie F., and Khoo L.T. Minimally invasive operative management for lumbar spinal stenosis: overview of early and long-term outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am 38 (2007) 387-399
25. Eck J.C., Hodges S., and Humphreys S.C. Minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15 (2007) 321-329
26. Hermantin F.U., Peters T., Quartararo L., and Kambin P. A prospective, randomized study comparing the results of open discectomy with those of video-assisted arthroscopic microdiscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81 (1999) 958-965
27. Kaiser M.G., Haid Jr. R.W., Subach B.R., Miller J.S., Smith C.D., and Rodts Jr. G.E. Comparison of the mini-open versus laparoscopic approach for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective review. Neurosurgery 51 (2002) 97-103
28. Kim J.S., Kang B.U., Lee S.H., et al. Mini-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented by percutaneous pedicle screw fixation: a comparison of surgical outcomes in adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech 22 (2009) 114-121
29. Lee S.H., Kang B.U., Ahn Y., et al. Operative failure of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy: a radiologic analysis of 55 cases. Spine 31 (2006) E285-E290
30. Podichetty V.K., Spears J., Isaacs R.E., Booher J., and Biscup R.S. Complications associated with minimally invasive decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 19 (2006) 161-166
31. Rahman M., Summers L.E., Richter B., Mimran R.I., and Jacob R.P. Comparison of techniques for decompressive lumbar laminectomy: the minimally invasive versus the "classic" open approach. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 51 (2008) 100-105
32. Seldomridge J.A., and Phillips F.M. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Am J Orthop 34 (2005) 224-232
33. Rampersaud Y.R., Gray R., Fehlings M., Lewis S., and Massicotte E. Direct economic impact of posterior minimally invasive compared to conventional open fusion procedures for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Society of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery, 3rd Annual Meeting. Las Vegas, NV (2009 Oct 9)
34. Glassman S.D., Carreon L.Y., Djurasovic M., et al. Lumbar fusion outcomes stratified by specific diagnostic indication. Spine J 9 (2009) 13-21
35. Kalanithi P.S., Patil C.G., and Boakye M. National complication rates and disposition after posterior lumbar fusion for acquired spondylolisthesis. Spine 34 (2009) 1963-1969