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
  • [31] Analysis of Lumbar Sagittal Curvature in Spinal Decompression and Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients under Roussouly Classification
    Zhang, Guoqiang
    Yang, Yong
    Hai, Yong
    Li, Jinjun
    Xie, Xuehu
    Feng, Shitong
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 2020
  • [32] Consideration of foraminal stenosis in decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for claudication secondary to lumbar spinal stenosis
    Tee, Jin
    Li, Charles
    Chan, Patrick
    Etherington, Greg
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2020, 20 (05): : 830 - 830
  • [33] Posterior Decompression and Fusion in Patients with Multilevel Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis: A Comparison of Segmental Decompression and Wide Decompression
    Seong, Yoon Jae
    Lee, Jung Sub
    Suh, Kuen Tak
    Kim, Jeung Il
    Lim, Jong Min
    Goh, Tae Sik
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2011, 5 (02) : 100 - 106
  • [34] Effectiveness of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wenli Chang
    Peizhi Yuwen
    Yanbing Zhu
    Ning Wei
    Chen Feng
    Yingze Zhang
    Wei Chen
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2017, 137 : 637 - 650
  • [35] Effectiveness of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chang, Wenli
    Yuwen, Peizhi
    Zhu, Yanbing
    Wei, Ning
    Feng, Chen
    Zhang, Yingze
    Chen, Wei
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2017, 137 (05) : 637 - 650
  • [36] Decompression versus decompression plus fusion for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Huang, Peng
    Liu, Zhenxiu
    Liu, Hong
    Yu, Yaqiong
    Huang, Liqun
    Lu, Min
    Jin, Xiaohong
    PAIN PRACTICE, 2023, 23 (04) : 390 - 398
  • [37] Minimally invasive lumbar decompression for lumbar stenosis: review of clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness
    Johans, S. J.
    Amin, B. Y.
    Mummaneni, P. V.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGICAL SCIENCES, 2015, 59 (01) : 37 - 45
  • [38] Effect of fusion following decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis and systematic review
    Liang, Lin
    Jiang, Wei-Min
    Li, Xue-Feng
    Wang, Heng
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2015, 8 (09): : 14615 - 14624
  • [39] Incidence of Revision Surgery After Decompression With vs Without Fusion Among Patients With Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Ulrich, Nils H.
    Burgstaller, Jakob M.
    Valeri, Fabio
    Pichierri, Giuseppe
    Betz, Michael
    Fekete, Tamas F.
    Wertli, Maria M.
    Porchet, Francois
    Steurer, Johann
    Farshad, Mazda
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2022, 5 (07) : E2223803
  • [40] Outcomes after decompression surgery without fusion for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and substantial low back pain
    Masuda, Soichiro
    Kanba, Yusuke
    Kawai, Jun
    Ikeda, Noboru
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2020, 29 (01) : 147 - 152