High-Value Epilepsy Care in the United States: Predictors of Increased Costs and Complications from the National Inpatient Sample Database 2016-2019.

BACKGROUND: For patients with medically refractory epilepsy, newer minimally invasive techniques such as laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) have been developed in recent years. This study aims to characterize trends in the utilization of surgical resection versus LITT to treat medically refractory epilepsy, characterize complications, and understand the cost of this innovative technique to the public. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample database was queried from 2016 to 2019 for all patients admitted with a diagnosis of medically refractory epilepsy. Patient demographics, hospital length of stay, complications, and costs were tabulated for all patients who underwent LITT or surgical resection within these cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 6019 patients were included, 223 underwent LITT procedures, while 5796 underwent resection. Significant predictors of increased patient charges for both cohorts included diabetes (odds ratio: 1.7, confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-2.19), infection (odds ratio: 5.12, CI 2.73-9.58), and hemorrhage (odds ratio: 2.95, CI 2.04-4.12). Procedures performed at nonteaching hospitals had 1.54 greater odds (CI 1.02-2.33) of resulting in a complication compared to teaching hospitals. Insurance status did significantly differ (P = 0.001) between those receiving LITT (23.3% Medicare; 25.6% Medicaid; 44.4% private insurance; 6.7 Other) and those undergoing resection (35.3% Medicare; 22.5% Medicaid; 34.7% private Insurance; 7.5% other). When adjusting for patient demographics, LITT patients had shorter length of stay (2.3 vs. 8.9 days, P < 0.001), lower complication rate (1.9% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.385), and lower mean hospital ($139,412.79 vs. $233,120.99, P < 0.001) and patient ($55,394.34 vs. $37,756.66, P < 0.001) costs. CONCLUSIONS: The present study highlights LITT's advantages through its association with lower costs and shorter length of stay. The present study also highlights the associated predictors of LITT versus resection, such as that most LITT cases happen at academic centers for patients with private insurance. As the adoption of LITT continues, more data will become available to further understand these issues.

Extracranial-Intracranial Bypass for Moyamoya Disease: The Influence of Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities on Outcomes - A National Inpatient Sample Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Extracranial-intracranial (EC-IC) bypass is an established therapeutic option for Moyamoya disease (MMD). However, little is known about the effects of racial and ethnic disparities on outcomes. This study assessed trends in EC-IC bypass outcomes among MMD patients stratified by race and ethnicity. METHODS: Utilizing the US National Inpatient Sample, we identified MMD patients undergoing EC-IC bypass between 2002 and 2020. Demographic and hospital-level data were collected. Multivariable analysis was conducted to identify independent factors associated with outcomes. Trend analysis was performed using piecewise joinpoint regression. RESULTS: Out of 14,062 patients with MMD, 1771 underwent EC-IC bypass. Of these, 60.59% were White, 17.56% were Black, 12.36% were Asians, 8.47% were Hispanic, and 1.02% were Native Americans. Nonhome discharge was noted in 21.7% of cases, with a 6.7% death and 3.8% postoperative neurologic complications rates. EC-IC bypass was more commonly performed in Native Americans (23.38%) and Asians (17.76%). Hispanics had the longest mean length of stay (8.4 days) and lower odds of nonhome discharge compared to Whites (odds ratio: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.40-1.03; P = 0.04). Patients with Medicaid, private insurance, self-payers, and insurance paid by other governments had lower odds of nonhome discharge than those with Medicare. CONCLUSION: This study highlights racial and socioeconomic disparities in EC-IC bypass for patients with MMD. Despite these disparities, we did not find any significant difference in the quality of care. Addressing these disparities is essential for optimizing MMD outcomes.

Assessment of the External Validity of Dialogue Support for Predicting Lumbar Spine Surgery Outcomes in a US Cohort.

STUDY DESIGN: External validation using prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVES: To determine the model performance of "Dialogue Support" (DS) in predicting outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: To help clinicians discuss risk versus benefit with patients considering lumbar fusion surgery, DS has been made available online. As DS was created using a Swedish sample, there is a need to study how well DS performs in alternative populations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Preoperative data from patients enrolled in the Quality Outcomes Database were entered into DS. The probability for each patient to report satisfaction, achieve success (leg pain improvement ≥3), or have no leg pain 12 months after surgery was extracted and compared with their actual 12-month postoperative data. The ability of DS to identify patients in the Quality Outcomes Database who report satisfaction, achieve success, or have no leg pain 12 months after surgery was determined using Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, goodness-of-fit tests, and calibration plots. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in all outcomes in 23,928 cases included in the analysis from baseline to 12 months postoperative. Most (84%) reported satisfaction, 67% achieved success, and 44% were pain-free 12 months postoperative. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that DS had a low ability to predict satisfaction [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.606], success (AUC = 0.546), and being pain-free (AUC = 0.578) at 12 months postoperative; poor fit for satisfaction (<0.001) and being pain-free ( P = 0.004), but acceptable fit for success ( P = 0.052). Calibration plots showed underestimation for satisfaction and success, but acceptable estimates for being pain-free. CONCLUSION: DS is not directly transferable to predict satisfaction and success after lumbar surgery in a US population. This may be due to differences in patient characteristics, weights of the variables included, or the exclusion of unknown variables associated with outcomes. Future studies to better understand and improve the transferability of these models are needed.

Intraoperative Surgeon Assessment of Bone: Correlation to Bone Mineral Density, CT Hounsfield units and Vertebral Bone Quality.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of consecutive patients. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study is to determine if a surgeon's qualitative assessment of bone intraoperatively correlates with radiologic parameters of bone strength. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative radiologic assessment of bone can include modalities such as CT Hounsfield Units (HUs), dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry bone mineral density (DXA BMD) with trabecular bone score (TBS) and MRI vertebral bone quality (VBQ). Quantitative analysis of bone with screw insertional torque and pull-out strength measurement has been performed in cadaveric models and has been correlated to these radiologic parameters. However, these quantitative measurements are not routinely available for use in surgery. Surgeons anecdotally judge bone strength, but the fidelity of the intraoperative judgement has not been investigated. METHODS: All adult patients undergoing instrumented posterior thoracolumbar spine fusion by one of seven surgeons at a single center over a 3-month period were included. Surgeons evaluated the strength of bone based on intraoperative feedback and graded each patient's bone on a 5-point Likert scale. Two independent reviewers measured preoperative CT HUs and MRI VBQ. BMD, lowest T-score and TBS were extracted from DXA within 2 years of surgery. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were enrolled and 16, 28, 31, 13 and 1 patients had Likert grade 1 (strongest bone), 2, 3, 4, and 5 (weakest bone), respectively. The surgeon assessment of bone correlated with VBQ (τ=0.15, P=0.07), CT HU (τ=-0.31, P<0.01), lowest DXA T-score (τ=-0.47, P<0.01), and TBS (τ=-0.23, P=0.06). CONCLUSION: Spine surgeons' qualitative intraoperative assessment of bone correlates with preoperative radiologic parameters, particularly in posterior thoracolumbar surgeries. This information is valuable to surgeons as this supports the idea that decisions based on feel in surgery have statistical foundation.

Socioeconomic predictors of cost and length of stay for erythroderma: a cross-sectional analysis of the national inpatient sample.

Erythroderma is an uncommon but serious dermatologic disorder that often requires hospitalization for diagnosis and treatment. However, little is known about predictors influencing cost and patient outcomes. The present study sought to characterize the sociodemographic factors that predict patient outcomes and hospital cost. Data were obtained from the 2016-2018 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) provided by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for patients of any age with a primary or secondary diagnosis of exfoliative dermatitis. Regression analyses were performed to find predictors for hospital costs and patient outcomes, represented by the length of stay (LOS). Univariate analysis of LOS revealed urban teaching hospitals were associated with prolonged LOS (p = 0.023). Univariate analysis of hospital cost yielded the following factors associated with increased hospital cost: Black and Asian patients (p = .045), urban teaching hospitals (p = .035), and northeast or south geographic location (p = .004). Multivariable regression analysis revealed prolonged LOS was associated with female sex (p = .043) and large bed capacity (p = .044) while shorter LOS was associated with increased age (p = .025); lower hospital costs were associated with private-owned hospitals -  (p = .025). In patients diagnosed with erythroderma, there appear to be racial, economic, and geographic disparities for patients that lead to greater hospital costs and longer LOS.

Addressing racial disparities in surgical care with machine learning.

There is ample evidence to demonstrate that discrimination against several population subgroups interferes with their ability to receive optimal surgical care. This bias can take many forms, including limited access to medical services, poor quality of care, and inadequate insurance coverage. While such inequalities will require numerous cultural, ethical, and sociological solutions, artificial intelligence-based algorithms may help address the problem by detecting bias in the data sets currently being used to make medical decisions. However, such AI-based solutions are only in early development. The purpose of this commentary is to serve as a call to action to encourage investigators and funding agencies to invest in the development of these digital tools.

Recent Trends in Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement for Lumbar Fusion Procedures: 2000-2019.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar fusions are commonly performed spinal procedures. Despite this, publicly available lumbar fusion procedural and monetary data are sparse. This study aimed to evaluate trends in utilization and reimbursement for Medicare patients from 2000-2019. METHODS: Medicare National Summary Data Files were used. Data were collected for true physician reimbursements and procedural rates for posterolateral fusion, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion from 2000-2019. Reimbursement was adjusted to inflation utilizing the 2019 Consumer Price Index. RESULTS: From 2000-2019, 1,266,942 lumbar fusion procedures were billed to Medicare Part B. Annual number of lumbar interbody fusion procedures increased by 57,740 procedures (+95%) from 61,017 in 2000 to 118,757 in 2019. This change in annual volume varied by procedure type, with posterolateral fusion increasing from 24,873 procedures in 2000 to 45,665 procedures in 2019 (+20,792, +83.59%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion increasing from 4227 in 2000 to 29,285 procedures in 2019 (+25,058, 592.81%), PLIF increasing from 5579 procedures in 2000 to 5628 procedures in 2019 (+49, +0.88%), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion increasing from 26,338 procedures in 2012 to 38,179 procedures in 2019 (+11,841, +44.96%). The mean inflation-adjusted reimbursement decreased for posterolateral fusion from $1662.96 to $1245.85 (-$417.11, -25.08%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion from $1159.45 to $750.33 (-$409.12, -35.29%), PLIF from $1225.02 to $1223.72 (-$1.3, -0.11%), and combined PLIF and posterolateral fusion from $1541.59 per procedure in 2012 to $1467.08 per procedure in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar fusions have increased in the last 2 decades, although reimbursement for all procedures has decreased. Knowledge of these trends is important to ensure adequate resource allocation to surgeons as treating lumbar pathologies becomes more common among the aging Medicare population.

Inferior Clinical Outcomes for Patients with Medicaid Insurance After Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Prospective Registry Analysis of 608 Patients.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear how type of insurance coverage affects long-term, spine-specific patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This study sought to elucidate the impact of insurance on clinical outcomes after lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery. METHODS: The prospective Quality Outcomes Database registry was queried for patients with grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent single-segment surgery. Twenty-four-month PROs were compared and included Oswestry Disability Index, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) back pain, NRS leg pain, EuroQol-5D, and North American Spine Society Satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients undergoing surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (mean age, 62.5 ± 11.5 years and 59.2% women) were selected. Insurance types included private insurance (n = 319; 52.5%), Medicare (n = 235; 38.7%), Medicaid (n = 36; 5.9%), and Veterans Affairs (VA)/government (n = 17; 2.8%). One patient (0.2%) was uninsured and was removed from the analyses. Regardless of insurance status, compared to baseline, all 4 cohorts improved significantly regarding ODI, NRS-BP, NRS-LP, and EQ-5D scores (P < 0.001). In adjusted multivariable analyses, compared with patients with private insurance, Medicaid was associated with worse 24-month postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ß = 10.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9-16.5; P = 0.002) and NRS leg pain (ß =1.3; 95% CI, 0.3-2.4; P = 0.02). Medicaid was associated with worse EuroQol-5D scores compared with private insurance (ß = -0.07; 95% CI -0.01 to -0.14; P = 0.03), but not compared with Medicare and VA/government insurance (P > 0.05). Medicaid was associated with lower odds of reaching ODI minimal clinically important difference (odds ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.03-0.7; P = 0.02) compared with VA/government insurance. NRS back pain and North American Spine Society satisfaction did not differ by insurance coverage (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite adjusting for potential confounding variables, Medicaid coverage was independently associated with worse 24-month PROs after lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery compared with other payer types. Although all improved postoperatively, those with Medicaid coverage had relatively inferior improvements.

Racial disparities in the cost of inpatient spinal cord stimulator surgery among patients in the 2016-2018 National Inpatient Sample.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation is a promising therapy for patients with treatment refractory pain syndromes, and a viable alternative to chronic opioid therapy. Racial disparities are well-documented in the field of pain medicine. This study seeks to determine whether racial disparities are present in spinal cord stimulator (SCS) surgery involving inpatient hospital stays in the United States. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze the effects of race on health care cost and utilization for patients receiving inpatient SCS surgery. We used total charges incurred by the patient to measure cost and length of stay (LOS) to measures hospital utilization for patients undergoing inpatient SCS surgery. We examined cost and utilization for inpatient surgeries involving SCS insertion, removal, and revision across different race demographics. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used ICD-10 procedure codes to query for all patients in the 2016-2018 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) who received SCS insertion, removal, and revision surgeries. Univariate analysis was performed in R-studio to assess the relationship between race, LOS, and total charge. Multivariate analysis was also performed in R-studio to adjust for possible confounders. RESULTS: Hispanic race was associated with higher total charge for inpatient SCS surgery (ß=+0.29, p = 3.92e-07). Hospital region was also associated with total charge. The South (ß=+0.12, p = 3.7e-03) and the West (ß=+0.28, p = 3.8e-09) were associated with higher total charge. The linear model also showed that patients with more comorbidities and complex cases paid higher total charges (ß=+0.014, p = 6.2e-04). There was no statistically significant difference in LOS between race demographics. CONCLUSION: After adjusting for age, gender, type of surgical approach (percutaneous vs. open), household income, insurance coverage, hospital region, and hospital location (urban vs. rural vs. teaching), and comorbidity scores, Hispanic patients had higher total charges for inpatient SCS surgery, but there was no disparity in total charge between white and black patients. White patients were older than minority patients at the time of inpatient SCS surgery.

High-impact chronic pain transition in surgical recipients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

OBJECTIVE: High-impact chronic pain (HICP) is a recently proposed metric that indicates the presence of a severe and troubling pain-related condition. Surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is designed to halt disease transition independent of chronic pain status. To date, the prevalence of HICP in individuals with CSM and their HICP transition from presurgery is unexplored. The authors sought to define HICP prevalence, transition, and outcomes in patients with CSM who underwent surgery and identify predictors of these HICP transition groups. METHODS: CSM surgical recipients were categorized as HICP at presurgery and 3 months if they exhibited pain that lasted 6-12 months or longer with at least one major activity restriction. HICP transition groups were categorized and evaluated for outcomes. Multivariate multinomial modeling was used to predict HICP transition categorization. RESULTS: A majority (56.1%) of individuals exhibited HICP preoperatively; this value declined to 15.9% at 3 months (71.6% reduction). The presence of HICP was also reflective of other self-reported outcomes at 3 and 12 months, as most demonstrated notable improvement. Higher severity in all categories of self-reported outcomes was related to a continued HICP condition at 3 months. Both social and biological factors predicted HICP translation, with social factors being predominant in transitioning to HICP (from none preoperatively). CONCLUSIONS: Many individuals who received CSM surgery changed HICP status at 3 months. In a surgical population where decisions are based on disease progression, most of the changed status went from HICP preoperatively to none at 3 months. Both social and biological risk factors predicted HICP transition assignment.

Robotic-Assisted vs Nonrobotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Management of degenerative disease of the spine has evolved to favor minimally invasive techniques, including nonrobotic-assisted and robotic-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Value-based spending is being increasingly implemented to control rising costs in the US healthcare system. With an aging population, it is fundamental to understand which procedure(s) may be most cost-effective. OBJECTIVE: To compare robotic and nonrobotic MIS-TLIF through a cost-utility analysis. METHODS: We considered direct medical costs related to surgical intervention and to the hospital stay, as well as 1-yr utilities. We estimated costs by assessing all cases involving adults undergoing robotic surgery at a single institution and an equal number of patients undergoing nonrobotic surgery, matched by demographic and clinical characteristics. We adopted a willingness to pay of $50 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Uncertainty was addressed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Costs were estimated based on a total of 76 patients, including 38 undergoing robot-assisted and 38 matched patients undergoing nonrobot MIS-TLIF. Using point estimates, robotic surgery was projected to cost $21 546.80 and to be associated with 0.68 QALY, and nonrobotic surgery was projected to cost $22 398.98 and to be associated with 0.67 QALY. Robotic surgery was found to be more cost-effective strategy, with cost-effectiveness being sensitive operating room/materials and room costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis identified robotic surgery as cost-effective in 63% of simulations. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that at a willingness to pay of $50 000/QALY, robotic-assisted MIS-TLIF was cost-effective in 63% of simulations. Cost-effectiveness depends on operating room and room (admission) costs, with potentially different results under distinct neurosurgical practices.

Social risk factors predicting outcomes of cervical myelopathy surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Combinations of certain social risk factors of race, sex, education, socioeconomic status (SES), insurance, education, employment, and one's housing situation have been associated with poorer pain and disability outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. To date, an exploration of such factors in patients with cervical spine surgery has not been conducted. The objective of the current work was to 1) define the social risk phenotypes of individuals who have undergone cervical spine surgery for myelopathy and 2) analyze their predictive capacity toward disability, pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction-based outcomes. METHODS: The Cervical Myelopathy Quality Outcomes Database was queried for the period from January 2016 to December 2018. Race/ethnicity, educational attainment, SES, insurance payer, and employment status were modeled into unique social phenotypes using latent class analyses. Proportions of social groups were analyzed for demonstrating a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 30% from baseline for disability, neck and arm pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction at the 3-month and 1-year follow-ups. RESULTS: A total of 730 individuals who had undergone cervical myelopathy surgery were included in the final cohort. Latent class analysis identified 2 subgroups: 1) high risk (non-White race and ethnicity, lower educational attainment, not working, poor insurance, and predominantly lower SES), n = 268, 36.7% (class 1); and 2) low risk (White, employed with good insurance, and higher education and SES), n = 462, 63.3% (class 2). For both 3-month and 1-year outcomes, the high-risk group (class 1) had decreased odds (all p < 0.05) of attaining an MCID score in disability, neck/arm pain, and health-related quality of life. Being in the low-risk group (class 2) resulted in an increased odds of attaining an MCID score in disability, neck/arm pain, and health-related quality of life. Neither group had increased or decreased odds of being satisfied with surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Although 2 groups underwent similar surgical approaches, the social phenotype involving non-White race/ethnicity, poor insurance, lower SES, and poor employment did not meet MCIDs for a variety of outcome measures. This finding should prompt surgeons to proactively incorporate socially conscience care pathways within healthcare systems, as well as to optimize community-based resources to improve outcomes and personalize care for populations at social risk.

Do all outpatient spine surgeries cost the same? Comparison of economic outcomes data from a state-level database for outpatient lumbar decompression performed in an ambulatory surgery center or hospital outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal procedures are increasingly conducted as outpatient procedures, with a growing proportion conducted in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). To date, studies reporting outcomes and cost analyses for outpatient spinal procedures in the US have not distinguished the various outpatient settings from each other. In this study, the authors used a state-level administrative database to compare rates of overnight stays and nonroutine discharges as well as index admission charges and cumulative 7-, 30-, and 90-day charges for patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression in freestanding ASCs and hospital outpatient (HO) settings. METHODS: For this project, the authors used the Florida State Ambulatory Surgery Database (SASD), offered by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), for the years 2013 and 2014. Patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression for degenerative diseases were identified using CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) and ICD-9 codes. Outcomes of interest included rates of overnight stays, rate of nonroutine discharges, index admission charges, and subsequent admission cumulative charges at 7, 30, and 90 days. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the impact of outpatient type on index admission charges. Marginal effect analysis was employed to study the difference in predicted dollar margins between ASCs and HOs for each insurance type. RESULTS: A total of 25,486 patients were identified; of these, 7067 patients (27.7%) underwent lumbar decompression in a freestanding ASC and 18,419 (72.3%) in an HO. No patient in the ASC group required an overnight stay compared to 9.2% (n = 1691) in the HO group (p < 0.001). No clinically significant difference in the rate of nonroutine discharge was observed between the two groups. The mean index admission charge for the ASC group was found to be significantly higher than that for the HO group ($35,017.28 ± $14,335.60 vs $33,881.50 ± $15,023.70; p < 0.001). Patients in ASCs were also found to have higher mean 7-day (p < 0.001), 30-day (p < 0.001), and 90-day (p = 0.001) readmission charges. ASC procedures were associated with increased charges compared to HO procedures for patients on Medicare or Medicaid (mean index admission charge increase $4049.27, 95% CI $2577.87-$5520.67, p < 0.001) and for patients on private insurance ($4775.72, 95% CI $4171.06-$5380.38, p < 0.001). For patients on self-pay or no charge, a lumbar decompression procedure at an ASC was associated with a decrease in index admission charge of -$10,995.38 (95% CI -$12124.76 to -$9866.01, p < 0.001) compared to a lumbar decompression procedure at an HO. CONCLUSIONS: These "real-world" results from an all-payer statewide database indicate that for outpatient spine surgery, ASCs may be associated with higher index admission and subsequent 7-, 30-, and 90-day charges. Given that ASCs are touted to have lower overall costs for patients and better profit margins for physicians, these analyses warrant further investigation into whether this cost benefit is applicable to outpatient spine procedures.

Economic Burden of Hospitalizations Associated with Opioid Dependence Among Patients Undergoing Spinal Fusion.

BACKGROUND: The current study seeks to examine the association between chronic opioid use and postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried for patients with and without chronic opioid use undergoing ACDF or PLF for degenerative disc disease between 2012 and 2015 using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was performed to assess the association between chronic opioid use and length of stay (LOS), nonhome discharge, and hospital charge. RESULTS: A total of 391 patients undergoing ACDF and 644 patients undergoing PLF with opioid dependence were identified. On multivariable regression analysis, opioid dependence was significantly associated with an increased LOS (mean, 3.09 days vs. 2.16 days; odds ratio (OR) for prolonged LOS (>3 days), 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-3.14; P < 0.001). Although on unadjusted analyses, patients with opioid dependence undergoing ACDF were found to have higher hospital charges (mean, U.S. $18,698.42 vs. $11,378.61; P < 0.001) and higher rates of nonroutine discharge (19.18% vs. 10.21%; P < 0.001), the multivariable regression analyses found no significant association between opioid dependence and odds of hospital charges >75th percentile (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.84-2.47; P = 0.188) or nonroutine discharge (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.93-2.34; P = 0.098). For those undergoing PLF, opioid dependence was significantly associated with increased hospital charges (mean, U.S. $37,712.98 vs. $30,475.43, P < 0.001; OR for hospital charge >75th percentile, 1.78, 95% CL, 1.23-2.58, P = 0.002), LOS (mean, 3.42 days vs. 2.30 days; OR for prolonged LOS, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16-2.00; P = 0.003), and nonroutine discharge (46.89% vs. 36.47%; OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.34-2.26; P < 0.001) on both unadjusted and adjusted multivariable regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis using a national administrative database showed that opioid dependence may be associated with worse economic outcomes for patients undergoing ACDF and PLF.

The Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A pilot study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the single assessment numerical evaluation (SANE) as a patient reported outcomes measure (PROM) after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), by comparing to legacy measures. METHODS: We included all patients undergoing ACDF with at least one year of follow up with complete PROM data. Patients completed the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the RAND-36 and the EuroQual Five Dimension (EQ-5D) scale, as well as the one-question SANE, pre- and post-operatively. Validity of SANE compared with other PROMs was determined utilizing Pearson's correlation (ρ), proportional bias (B), responsiveness, minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and agreement. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were included. There were moderate-to-strong correlations at a minimum of one-year follow-up between the SANE and NDI (ρ = -0.73, P < 0.0001), RAND (ρ = 0.80, P < 0.0001), and EQ-5D (ρ = -0.66, P < 0.0001). No significant proportional bias was found for the SANE when compared to the RAND (B = 0.03, p = 0.99), NDI (B = -0.003, p = 0.99), or EQ-5D (B = -0.0007, p = 0.99). Responsiveness for SANE was statistically similar to all other PROMs. The MCID for SANE was determined to be 10.5, with 42% of patients achieving the MCID. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated high agreement between all PROMs. CONCLUSION: We found the SANE score provides clinically important patient outcomes data after ACDF, despite only requiring answering one question. The SANE performs comparably to more burdensome health questionnaires. The SANE score may offer spine surgeons the option to easily and quickly collect clinically relevant data on their surgical patients.

Cervical Paraspinal Muscle Fatty Degeneration Is Not Associated with Muscle Cross-sectional Area: Qualitative Assessment Is Preferable for Cervical Sarcopenia.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, defined as decreased skeletal mass, is an independent marker of frailty that is not accounted for by other risk-stratification methods. Recent studies have demonstrated a clear association between paraspinal sarcopenia and worse patient-reported outcomes and complications after spine surgery. Currently, sarcopenia is characterized according to either a quantitative assessment of the paraspinal cross-sectional area or a qualitative analysis of paraspinal fatty infiltration on MRI. No studies have investigated whether the cervical paraspinal cross-sectional area correlates with fatty infiltration of the cervical paraspinal muscles on advanced imaging. QUESTION/PURPOSE: Do patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with increasing paraspinal fatty degeneration on advanced imaging also demonstrate decreased cervical paraspinal cross-sectional area? METHODS: Between 2011 and 2017, 98 patients were prospectively enrolled in a database of patients undergoing one- to three-level ACDF for degenerative conditions at a single institution. To be eligible for this prospective study, patients were required to undergo an MRI before surgery, be older than 18 years, and have no previous history of cervical spine surgery. Two independent reviewers, both surgeons not involved in the patients' care and who were blinded to the clinical outcomes, retrospectively assessed the paraspinal cross-sectional area and Goutallier classification of the right-sided paraspinal muscle complex. We then compared the patients' Goutallier grades with their paraspinal cross-sectional area measurements. We identified 98 patients for inclusion. Using the Fuchs modification of the Goutallier classification, we classified the fatty degeneration of 41 patients as normal (Goutallier Grades 0 to 1), that of 47 patients as moderate (Grade 2), and that of 10 patients as severe (Grades 3 to 4). We used ANOVA to compare all means between groups. RESULTS: There was no difference in the mean paraspinal cross-sectional area of the obliquus capitus inferior (normal 295 ± 81 mm2; moderate 317 ± 104 mm2; severe 300 ± 79 mm2; p = 0.51), multifidus (normal 146 ± 59 mm2; moderate 170 ± 70 mm2; severe 192 ± 107 mm2; p = 0.11), or sternocleidomastoid (normal 483 ± 150 mm2; moderate 468 ± 149 mm2; severe 458 ± 183 mm2; p = 0.85) among patients with mild, moderate, and severe fatty infiltration based on Goutallier grading. There was a slightly greater longus colli cross-sectional area in the moderate and severe fatty infiltration groups (74 ± 22 mm2 and 66 ± 18 mm2, respectively) than in the normal group (63 ± 15 mm2; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Because our study demonstrates minimal association between paraspinal cross-sectional area and fatty infiltration of the cervical paraspinals, we recommend that physicians use the proven qualitative assessment of paraspinal fatty infiltration during preoperative evaluation of patients who are candidates for ACDF. Future studies investigating the relationship between cervical paraspinal cross-sectional area and patient-reported outcomes after ACDF are necessary to lend greater strength to this recommendation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Trends in Utilization and Cost of Inpatient Spinal Cord Stimulation: Analysis of Data from 2008 to 2014.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to characterize contemporary trends in cost and utilization of spinal cord stimulation (SCS). METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample was queried for inpatient admissions from 2008 to 2014 where SCS was performed. We then determined the rates and costs of SCS performed in this time frame to treat diagnoses that we classified as device-related complications, degenerative spine disease, pain syndromes, and neuropathies/neuritis/nerve lesions. Least-squares regression was performed to determine the yearly trends for each indication adjusted by the total number of yearly hospitalizations for that diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified a total of 6876 admissions in whom an SCS was performed. The overall rate of inpatient SCS procedures performed has decreased by 45% from 2008 to 2014 (14.0 to 7.7 procedures per 100,000 admissions). Adjusted analysis for yearly trends also demonstrated a declining trend for all indications; however, this was not found to be statistically significant, except for device-related complications (P = 0.004). The median inflation-adjusted cost of an admission where SCS was performed increased slightly by 7.4% from $26,200 (IQR: $16,700-$33,800) in 2008 to $28,100 (IQR: $19,600-$36,900) in 2014. Billed hospital charges demonstrated a significant increase with median inflation-adjusted admission charge of $66,068 in 2008 to $110,672 in 2014. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a declining contemporary trend in inpatient SCS, an increase was noted in admission costs and hospital charges. A significant declining trend was noted in revision SCS implantations due to device-related complications.

Is the current insurance structure leading to seasonality in demand for spinal surgery? A quarterly, yearly, and insurance based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elective lumbar fusion is a commonly employed procedure for degenerative lumbar spine disease. With healthcare costs rising reimbursement for procedures may be restricted by payers. Additionally, patients may undergo elective fusion once deductibles are covered, typically in the fourth quarter in a given year. The objective of this study was to analyze the trends in utilization for posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) earlier in the year (Q1-Q3) as compared to the end of the year(Q4). Variations in this proposed trend by insurance type were also studied as a primary outcome. METHODS: We queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS) between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014 for patients diagnosed with lumbar disc degenerative disease (DDD). Outcomes of interest included utilization and frequency of PLF. RESULTS: 221,466 patients hospitalized with Lumbar DDD between 2012 and 2014 were identified. Of these, 67,343(30.4 %) underwent a PLF procedure. The likelihood of lumbar fusion in patients hospitalized with DDD was significantly higher in the 4th quarter, compared to 1st quarter (OR1.13, p < 0.001). Marginal effect analysis indicated that Medicare patients were 1.0 % more likely to undergo PLF in quarter 4 compared to quarters 1-3 (p = 0.003), while privately insured patients were 2.5 % more likely to undergo PLF in quarter 4 compared to quarters 1-3(p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These results indicate that utilization of PLF is higher at the end of the year relative to the beginning, especially for patients with private insurance. This may be due to deductibles that have previously been paid off, lowering out-of-pocket expenses.