Cauda Equina Syndrome: Cost Burden After Spinal Decompression.

STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a rare neurologic condition with potentially devastating consequences. The objective of this study was to compare the 2-year postoperative cost-associated treatments after posterior spinal decompression between patients with and without CES. METHODS: By analyzing a commercial insurance claims database, patients who underwent posterior spinal decompression with a concurrent diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis, radiculopathy, or disk herniation in 2017 were identified and included in the study. The primary outcome was the cost of payments for identified treatments in the 2-year period after surgery. Treatments included were (1) physical therapy (PT), (2) pain medication, (3) injections, (4) bladder management, (5) bowel management, (6) sexual dysfunction treatment, and (7) psychological treatment. RESULTS: In total, 3,140 patients (age, 55.3 ± 12.0 years; male, 62.2%) were included in the study. The average total cost of treatments identified was $2,996 ± 6,368 per patient. The overall cost of identified procedures was $2,969 ± 6,356 in non-CES patients, compared with $4,535 ± 6,898 in patients with CES ( P = 0.079). Among identified treatments, only PT and bladder management costs were significantly higher for patients with CES (PT: +115%, P < 0.001; bladder management: +697%, P < 0.001). The difference in overall cost was significant between patients (non-CES: $1,824 ± 3,667; CES: $3,022 ± 4,679; P = 0.020) in the first year. No difference was found in the second year. DISCUSSION: A short-term difference was observed in costs occurring in the first postoperative year. Cost of treatments was similar between patients apart from PT and bladder management.

Health Care Costs Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion or Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.

STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To describe the postoperative costs associated with both anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) in the two-year period following surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CDA has become an increasingly common alternative to ACDF for the treatment of cervical disc disorders. Although a number of studies have compared clinical outcomes between both procedures, much less is known about the postoperative economic burden of each procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: By analyzing a commercial insurance claims database (Marketscan, Merative), patients who underwent one-level or two-level ACDF and CDA procedures between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017 were identified and included in the study. The primary outcome was the cost of payments for postoperative management in the two-year period following ACDF or CDA. Identified postoperative interventions included in the study were: (i) physical therapy, (ii) pain medication, (iii) injections, (iv) psychological treatment, and (iv) subsequent spine surgeries. RESULTS: Totally, 2304 patients (age: 49.0±9.4 yr; male, 50.1%) were included in the study. In all, 1723 (74.8%) patients underwent ACDF, while 581 (25.2%) underwent CDA. The cost of surgery was similar between both groups (ACDF: $26,819±23,449; CDA: $25,954±20,620; P =0.429). Thirty-day, 90-day, and two-year global costs were all lower for patients who underwent CDA compared with ACDF ($31,024 vs. $34,411, $33,064 vs. $37,517, and $55,723 vs. $68,113, respectively). CONCLUSION: Lower two-year health care costs were found for patients undergoing CDA compared with ACDF. Further work is necessary to determine the drivers of these findings and the associated longer-term outcomes.

Natural History of Colorectal Polyps Undergoing Longitudinal in Vivo CT Colonography Surveillance.

Background The natural history of colorectal polyps is not well characterized due to clinical standards of care and other practical constraints limiting in vivo longitudinal surveillance. Established CT colonography (CTC) clinical screening protocols allow surveillance of small (6-9 mm) polyps. Purpose To assess the natural history of colorectal polyps followed with CTC in a clinical screening program, with histopathologic correlation for resected polyps. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, CTC was used to longitudinally monitor small colorectal polyps in asymptomatic adult patients from April 1, 2004, to August 31, 2020. All patients underwent at least two CTC examinations. Polyp growth patterns across multiple time points were analyzed, with histopathologic context for resected polyps. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of advanced histopathology. Results In this study of 475 asymptomatic adult patients (mean age, 56.9 years ± 6.7 [SD]; 263 men), 639 unique polyps (mean initial diameter, 6.3 mm; volume, 50.2 mm3) were followed for a mean of 5.1 years ± 2.9. Of these 639 polyps, 398 (62.3%) underwent resection and histopathologic evaluation, and 41 (6.4%) proved to be histopathologically advanced (adenocarcinoma, high-grade dysplasia, or villous content), including two cancers and 38 tubulovillous adenomas. Advanced polyps showed mean volume growth of +178% per year (752% per year for adenocarcinomas) compared with +33% per year for nonadvanced polyps and -3% per year for unresected, unretrieved, or resolved polyps (P < .001). In addition, 90% of histologically advanced polyps achieved a volume of 100 mm3 and/or volume growth rate of 100% per year, compared with 29% of nonadvanced and 16% of unresected or resolved polyps (P < .001). Polyp volume-to-diameter ratio was also significantly greater for advanced polyps. For polyps observed at three or more time points, most advanced polyps demonstrated an initial slower growth interval, followed by a period of more rapid growth. Conclusion Small colorectal polyps ultimately proving to be histopathologically advanced neoplasms demonstrated substantially faster growth and attained greater overall size compared with nonadvanced polyps. Clinical trial registration no. NCT00204867 © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Dachman in this issue.

CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS): Version 2023 Update.

The CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS) has withstood the test of time and proven to be a robust classification scheme for CT colonography (CTC) findings. C-RADS version 2023 represents an update on the scheme used for colorectal and extracolonic findings at CTC. The update provides useful insights gained since the implementation of the original system in 2005. Increased experience has demonstrated confusion on how to classify the mass-like appearance of the colon consisting of soft tissue attenuation that occurs in segments with acute or chronic diverticulitis. Therefore, the update introduces a new subcategory, C2b, specifically for mass-like diverticular strictures, which are likely benign. Additionally, the update simplifies extracolonic classification by combining E1 and E2 categories into an updated extracolonic category of E1/E2 since, irrespective of whether a finding is considered a normal variant (category E1) or an otherwise clinically unimportant finding (category E2), no additional follow-up is required. This simplifies and streamlines the classification into one category, which results in the same management recommendation.