Cost-utility Analysis for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: Conservative Treatment Versus Discectomy Versus Discectomy With Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN

This study was an ambispective long-term cost-utility analysis with retrospective chart review and included the prospective completion of health questionnaires by patients.

OBJECTIVE

This was a cost-utility analysis, comparing conservative treatment, discectomy, and discectomy with spinal fusion for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation after a previous discectomy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar disc herniation is an important health problem, with recurrence rates ranging from 5% to 15%. Management of recurrences is controversial due to a lack of high-level evidence. Cost-effectiveness analyses are useful when making clinical decisions. There are economic assessments for first herniations, but not in the context of recurrent lumbar disc herniations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients with disc herniation recurrence underwent conservative treatment (n=11), discectomy (n=20), or discectomy with fusion (n=19), and they completed the Short-Form 36, EuroQol-5D, and Oswestry Disability Index.Baseline case quality-adjusted life year (QALY) values, cost-utility ratios, and incremental cost-utility ratios were calculated on the basis of the SF-36. Direct health costs were calculated by applying the health care system perspective. Both QALY and costs were discounted at a rate of 3%. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted for uncertainty variables, such as other health surveys or 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Cost-utility analysis of conservative treatment versus discectomy showed that the former is dominant, mainly because it is significantly more economical (&OV0556;904 vs. &OV0556;6718, P<0.001), while health results were very similar (3.48 vs. 3.18, P=0.887). Cost-utility analysis of discectomy versus discectomy with fusion revealed that discectomy is dominant, showing a trend to be both more economical (&OV0556;6718 vs. &OV0556;9364, P=0.054) and more effective (3.18 vs. 1.92 QALY, P=0.061).

CONCLUSIONS

This cost-utility analysis showed that conservative treatment is more cost-effective than discectomy in patients with lumbar disc herniation recurrence. In cases of recurrence in which conservative treatment is not feasible, and another surgery must be performed for the patient, discectomy is a more cost-effective surgical alternative than discectomy with fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.