Shahzad Hania, Saade Aziz, Tse Shannon, Simister Samuel K, Azhar Hamza, Le Hai, Khan Safdar N
Department of Orthopaedics, UC Davis Health, Sacramento, CA, USA.
The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
J Orthop. 2024 Jun 13;57:44-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.06.012. eCollection 2024 Nov.
The rise in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) cases has led to a significant increase in fusion surgeries, which incur substantial hospitalization costs and often necessitate chronic opioid use for pain management. Recent evidence suggests that single-level low-grade DLS outcomes are comparable whether a fusion procedure or decompression alone is performed, sparking debate over the cost-effectiveness of these procedures, particularly with the advent of minimally invasive techniques reducing the morbidity of fusion. This study aims to compare chronic opioid utilization and associated costs between decompression alone and decompression with instrumented fusion for single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
Using data from the PearlDiver database, a retrospective database analysis was conducted. We analyzed records of Medicare and Medicaid patients undergoing lumbar fusion or decompression from 2010 to 2022. Patient cohorts were divided into decompression alone (DA) and decompression with instrumented fusion (DIF). Chronic opioid use, pain clinic visits, and total costs were compared between the two groups at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years post-surgery.
Does DIF offer a more cost-effective approach to managing DLS in terms of chronic opioid use in single-level DLS patients.
The study revealed comparable chronic opioid use and pain clinic visits between DA and DIF groups at 90 days and 1 year. However, total costs associated with opioid prescriptions as well as surgical aftercare were significantly higher in the DIF group at 90 days (p < 0.05), 1 year (p < 0.05), and 2 years (p < 0.05) post-surgery compared to the DA group.
This study highlights the higher costs associated with DIF up to 2 years post-surgery despite comparable symptom improvement when compared to DA and DIF at the 1-year interval. DA emerges as a more financially favorable option, challenging the notion of fusion's cost-offsetting benefits. While further investigation is needed to understand underlying cost drivers and optimize outcomes, our findings emphasize the necessity of integrating clinical and economic factors in the management of single-level DLS.
退行性腰椎滑脱(DLS)病例的增加导致融合手术显著增多,这带来了高昂的住院费用,且常常需要长期使用阿片类药物来控制疼痛。最近的证据表明,对于单节段低度DLS,无论进行融合手术还是单纯减压手术,其疗效相当,这引发了关于这些手术成本效益的争论,尤其是随着微创技术的出现降低了融合手术的发病率。本研究旨在比较单节段退行性腰椎滑脱单纯减压与减压联合器械融合术后慢性阿片类药物的使用情况及相关费用。
利用PearlDiver数据库的数据进行回顾性数据库分析。我们分析了2010年至2022年接受腰椎融合或减压手术的医疗保险和医疗补助患者的记录。患者队列分为单纯减压组(DA)和减压联合器械融合组(DIF)。比较两组患者术后90天、1年和2年的慢性阿片类药物使用情况、疼痛门诊就诊次数和总费用。
就单节段DLS患者的慢性阿片类药物使用而言,DIF是否为管理DLS提供了一种更具成本效益的方法。
研究显示,DA组和DIF组在术后90天和1年的慢性阿片类药物使用情况和疼痛门诊就诊次数相当。然而,与DA组相比,DIF组术后90天(p < 0.05)、1年(p < 0.05)和2年(p < 0.05)与阿片类药物处方以及术后护理相关的总费用显著更高。
本研究强调,与DA组相比,DIF组术后2年内成本更高,尽管在术后1年时症状改善情况相当。DA组是更具经济优势的选择,这对融合手术成本抵消效益的观念提出了挑战。虽然需要进一步研究以了解潜在的成本驱动因素并优化结果,但我们的研究结果强调了在单节段DLS管理中整合临床和经济因素的必要性。