Decompression With or Without Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis A Cost Minimization Analysis

被引:13
|
作者
Ziino, Chason [1 ]
Mertz, Kevin [1 ]
Hu, Serena [1 ]
Kamal, Robin [1 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Dept Orthoped Surg, 300 Pasteur Dr,Room R144,M-C 5341, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
cost minimization analysis; cost; decompression; fusion; lumbar stenosis; spine surgery; DEGENERATIVE SPINE DISEASE; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; MANAGEMENT; SURGERY; UTILITY; TRENDS; LAMINECTOMY; THROMBOSIS; FRACTURES; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000003250
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Retrospective database review. Objective. Compare 1-year episode of care costs between single-level decompression and decompression plus fusion for lumbar stenosis. Summary of Background Data. Lumbar stenosis is the most common indication for surgery in patients over 65. Medicare direct hospital costs for lumbar surgery reached $1.65 billion in 2007. Despite stenosis being a common indication for surgery, there is debate as to the preferred surgical treatment. Cost-minimization analysis is a framework that identifies potential cost savings between treatment options that have similar outcomes. We performed a cost-minimization analysis of decompression versus decompression with fusion for lumbar stenosis from the payer perspective. Methods. An administrative claims database of privately insured patients (Humana) identified patients who underwent decompression (n = 5349) or decompression with fusion (n = 8540) for lumbar stenosis with and without spondylolisthesis and compared overall costs. All patients were identified and costs identified for a 1-year period. Complication rates and costs were described using summary statistics. Results. Mean treatment costs at 1 year after surgery were higher for patients who underwent decompression and fusion compared to patients who underwent decompression alone ($20,892 for fusion vs. $6329 for decompression; P < 0.001). Facility costs (P < 0.001), surgeon costs (P < 0.001), and physical therapy costs (P < 0.001) were higher in the fusion group. Cost differences related to infection or durotomy reached significance (P < 0.04). No difference in cost was identified for supplies. Conclusion. Decompression had significantly lower costs for the treatment of lumbar stenosis, including treatment for postoperative complications. If cost minimization is the primary goal, decompression is favored for surgical treatment of lumbar stenosis. Other factors including shared decision-making directed toward patient's values, patient-reported outcomes, and preferences should also be recognized as drivers of healthcare decisions.
引用
收藏
页码:325 / 332
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Lumbar spinal stenosis, outcome after decompression without fusion. Long term results
    Avila, J
    Gazcon, G
    Contreras, J
    11TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF NEUROLOGICAL SURGERY, VOLS 1 AND 2, 1997, : 1349 - 1352
  • [22] Decompression with fusion versus decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chen, Bo
    Lv, Yao
    Wang, Zhi-Cui
    Guo, Xiu-Cheng
    Chao, Chu-Zhang
    MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (38) : E21973
  • [23] Decompression Versus Decompression and Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis in a Workers' Compensation Setting
    Tye, Erik Y.
    Anderson, Joshua
    Haas, Arnold
    Percy, Rick
    Woods, Stephen T.
    Ahn, Nicholas
    SPINE, 2017, 42 (13) : 1017 - 1023
  • [24] Evaluation of the Therapeutic Effect of Decompression with or without Fusion on Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Caused by Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Guo, Jie
    Fan, Yonggang
    Diao, Han
    Fan, Jigeng
    Zhang, Jiawei
    Li, Jianwei
    Xiao, Donglun
    Su, Runbang
    Zhang, Ying
    Sun, Tianwei
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2025, 194
  • [25] Analysis of the Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Lumbar Decompression without Fusion in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis
    Gadiya, Akshay Dharamchand
    Borde, Mandar Deepak
    Kumar, Nishant
    Patel, Priyank Mangaldas
    Nagad, Premik Bhupendra
    Bhojraj, Shekhar Yeshwant
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2020, 14 (01) : 9 - 16
  • [26] Decompression, fusion, and instrumentation surgery for complex lumbar spinal stenosis
    Hansraj, KK
    O'Leary, PF
    Cammisa, FP
    Hall, JC
    Fras, CI
    Cohen, MS
    Dorey, FJ
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2001, (384) : 18 - 25
  • [27] Pre- and postoperative MRI analysis of central decompression in MIS fusion with lumbar stenosis
    Marie-Hardy, Laura
    Khalife, Marc
    Upex, Peter
    Riouallon, Guillaume
    Wolff, Stephane
    ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH, 2023, 109 (02)
  • [28] A cost-utility analysis between decompression only and fusion surgery for elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and sagittal imbalance
    Won, Young Il
    Kim, Chi Heon
    Park, Hee-Pyoung
    Chung, Sun Gun
    Yuh, Woon Tak
    Kwon, Shin Won
    Yang, Seung Heon
    Lee, Chang-Hyun
    Choi, Yunhee
    Park, Sung Bae
    Rhee, John M.
    Kim, Kyoung-Tae
    Chung, Chun Kee
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [29] A cost-utility analysis between decompression only and fusion surgery for elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and sagittal imbalance
    Young Il Won
    Chi Heon Kim
    Hee-Pyoung Park
    Sun Gun Chung
    Woon Tak Yuh
    Shin Won Kwon
    Seung Heon Yang
    Chang-Hyun Lee
    Yunhee Choi
    Sung Bae Park
    John M. Rhee
    Kyoung-Tae Kim
    Chun Kee Chung
    Scientific Reports, 12
  • [30] Decompression Surgery Alone Versus Decompression Plus Fusion in Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Ulrich, Nils H.
    Burgstaller, Jakob M.
    Pichierri, Giuseppe
    Wertli, Maria M.
    Farshad, Mazda
    Porchet, Francois
    Steurer, Johann
    Held, Ulrike
    SPINE, 2017, 42 (18) : E1077 - E1086