Schadler Paul, Derman Peter, Lee Lily, Do Huong, Girardi Federico P, Cammisa Frank P, Sama Andrew A, Shue Jennifer, Koutsoumbelis Stelios, Hughes Alexander P
Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Global Spine J. 2018 Aug;8(5):471-477. doi: 10.1177/2192568217738766. Epub 2017 Dec 10.
Retrospective case-control study.
Few studies have compared the costs of single-level (1) posterior instrumented fusion alone (PSF), (2) posterior interbody fusion with PSF (PLIF), and (3) lateral interbody fusion with PSF (circumferential LLIF). The purpose of this study was to compare costs associated with these procedures.
Charts were reviewed and patients followed-up with a telephone questionnaire. Medicare reimbursement data was used for cost estimation from the payer's perspective. Multivariate survival analysis was performed to assess time to elevated resource use (greater than 90% of study patients or $68 672).
A total of 337 patients (PSF, 45; PLIF, 222; circumferential LLIF, 70) were included (63% follow-up at 6 years). PSF and circumferential LLIF patients were 3 times more likely to reach the cutoff value compared with PLIF patients ( = .017).
Circumferential LLIF and PSF patients were more likely to have higher resource use than PLIF patients and thus incur greater costs at 6-year follow-up.
回顾性病例对照研究。
很少有研究比较单节段(1)单纯后路器械融合术(PSF)、(2)后路椎体间融合术联合PSF(PLIF)和(3)外侧椎体间融合术联合PSF(环形LLIF)的成本。本研究的目的是比较与这些手术相关的成本。
查阅病历并通过电话问卷对患者进行随访。从支付方的角度使用医疗保险报销数据进行成本估算。进行多变量生存分析以评估资源使用增加的时间(超过90%的研究患者或68672美元)。
共纳入337例患者(PSF组45例;PLIF组222例;环形LLIF组70例)(6年随访率为63%)。与PLIF组患者相比,PSF组和环形LLIF组患者达到临界值的可能性高3倍(P = 0.017)。
在6年随访中,环形LLIF组和PSF组患者比PLIF组患者更有可能有更高的资源使用,因此产生更高的成本。