A perioperative cost analysis comparing single-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Spine Journal

Volumn 14, Issue 8, 2014, Pages 1694-1701

  Singh, Kern ^a   Nandyala, Sreeharsha V ^a   Marquez Lara, Alejandro ^a   Fineberg, Steven J ^a   Oglesby, Mathew ^a   Pelton, Miguel A ^a   Andersson, Gunnar B ^a   Isayeva, Darya ^a   Jegier, Briana J ^a   Phillips, Frank M ^a  

^a RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Costs; Minimally invasive spine surgery; Outcomes; Payments; Reimbursements; TLIF

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANESTHESIA; ARTICLE; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HOSPITAL CHARGE; HOSPITAL LABORATORY; HOSPITAL PHARMACY; HOSPITALIZATION COST; HUMAN; INVASIVE PROCEDURE; LENGTH OF STAY; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; OPERATION DURATION; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PHYSIOTHERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SINGLE LEVEL MINIMALLY INVASIVE TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; SINGLE LEVEL OPEN TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; SPEECH THERAPY; SPINE FUSION; SPINE IMPLANT; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST; ECONOMICS; HOSPITAL COST; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC DEGENERATION; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MIDDLE AGED; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; TIME;

ADULT; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HOSPITAL COSTS; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC DEGENERATION; LENGTH OF STAY; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL FUSION; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84905511752     PISSN: 15299430     EISSN: 18781632     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.053     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. S. Dagenais, S. Haldeman, and P.B. Polatin 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
2. I. Korthals-de Bos, M. van Tulder, and H. van Dieten et al. Economic evaluations and randomized trials in spinal disorders: principles and methods Spine 29 2004 442 448
3. S.D. Glassman, L.Y. Carreon, and M. Djurasovic et al. Lumbar fusion outcomes stratified by specific diagnostic indication Spine J 9 2009 13 21
4. P.S. Kalanithi, C.G. Patil, and M. Boakye National complication rates and disposition after posterior lumbar fusion for acquired spondylolisthesis Spine 34 2009 1963 1969
5. R.A. Deyo, S.K. Mirza, and B.I. Martin et al. Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults JAMA 303 2010 1259 1265
6. J.N. Weinstein, J.D. Lurie, and P.R. Olson et al. United States' trends and regional variations in lumbar spine surgery: 1992-2003 Spine 31 2006 2707 2714
7. B.I. Martin, J.A. Turner, and S.K. Mirza et al. Trends in health care expenditures, utilization, and health status among US adults with spine problems, 1997-2006 Spine 34 2009 2077 2084
8. B.H. Guiot, L.T. Khoo, and R.G. Fessler A minimally invasive technique for decompression of the lumbar spine Spine 27 2002 432 438
9. J.W. German, and K.T. Foley Minimal access surgical techniques in the management of the painful lumbar motion segment Spine 30 2005 S52 S59
10. K.M. Scheufler, H. Dohmen, and V.I. Vougioukas Percutaneous transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar instability Neurosurgery 60 2007 203 212 discussion 212-3
11. F. Shunwu, Z. Xing, and Z. Fengdong et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases Spine 35 2010 1615 1620
12. P.C. McAfee, F.M. Phillips, and G. Andersson et al. Minimally invasive spine surgery Spine 35 2010 S271 S273
13. H.E. Smith, J.A. Rihn, and D.S. Brodke et al. Spine care: evaluation of the efficacy and cost of emerging technology Am J Med Qual 24 2009 25S 31S
14. B. Ozgur, E.C. Benzel, and S.R. Garfin Minimally invasive spine surgery: a practical guide to anatomy and techniques 2009 Springer Dordrecht, The Netherlands
15. M.Y. Wang, M.D. Cummock, and Y. Yu et al. An analysis of the differences in the acute hospitalization charges following minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion J Neurosurg Spine 12 2010 694 699
16. C.W. Peng, W.M. Yue, and S.Y. Poh et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion Spine 34 2009 1385 1389
17. D.C. Cherkin, R.A. Deyo, and J.D. Loeser et al. An international comparison of back surgery rates Spine 19 1994 1201 1206
18. V.M. Taylor, R.A. Deyo, and D.C. Cherkin et al. Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations Spine 19 1994 1207 1212 discussion 1213
19. V.V. Patel, S. Estes, and E.M. Lindley et al. Lumbar spinal fusion versus anterior lumbar disc replacement: the financial implications J Spinal Disord Tech 21 2008 473 476
20. T.S. Whitecloud 3rd, W.W. Roesch, and J.E. Ricciardi Transforaminal interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior interbody fusion of the lumbar spine: a financial analysis J Spinal Disord 14 2001 100 103
21. H. Xue, Y. Tu, and M. Cai Comparison of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar diseases Spine J 12 2012 209 215
22. R.E. Isaacs, V.K. Podichetty, and P. Santiago et al. Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation J Neurosurg Spine 3 2005 98 105
23. D. Lau, J.G. Lee, and S.J. Han et al. Complications and perioperative factors associated with learning the technique of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) J Clin Neurosci 18 2011 624 627
24. M. Morino, L. Pellegrino, and C. Giaccone et al. Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication Br J Surg 93 2006 553 558
25. B.J. Park, and R.M. Flores Cost comparison of robotic, video-assisted thoracic surgery and thoracotomy approaches to pulmonary lobectomy Thorac Surg Clin 18 2008 297 300 [vii]