The effect of myelopathic symptoms on hospital costs, length of stay, and discharge location in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a common clinical degenerative disease treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), which seriously impacts quality of life and causes severe disability. The objective of the study was to determine the effect of different characteristics of the neurological deficit found in myelopathic patients undergoing ACDFs on hospital cost, length of stay (LOS), and discharge location. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of ACDF cases performed at a single institution by multiple surgeons from 2011 to 2017. Patient symptomatology, complications, comorbidities, demographics, surgical time, LOS, and discharge location were collected. Patients with readmissions or reoperations were excluded. Symptoms evaluated were based on clinical diagnosis, Japanese Orthopaedic Association classification, Ranawat grade, and Cooper scales. Symptoms were further grouped using principal component analysis. Cost was defined as surgical episode hospital stay costs plus outpatient clinic costs plus discharge disposition cost. Multivariate linear regression models were created to evaluate correlations with outcomes. The primary outcome was total 90-day hospital costs. Secondary outcomes were discharge location and LOS. RESULTS: A total of 250 patients were included in the analyses. Discharge location, neuromonitoring use, number of surgical vertebral levels, cage use, LOS, surgical time, having a complication, and sex were all found to be predictive of total 90-day costs. Myelopathic symptomatology was not found to be associated with increased 90-day costs (p ≥ 0.131) when correcting for these other factors. Lower-extremity functionality was found to be associated with increased LOS (p < 0.0001). Upper-extremity myelopathy was found to be associated with increased discharge location needs (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical myelopathy was not found to be predictive of total 90-day costs using symptomatology based on multiple myelopathy grading systems. Lower-extremity functionality was, however, found to predict LOS, while upper-extremity myelopathy was found to predict increased discharge location needs. This implies that preoperative deficits from myelopathy should not be considered in a bundled payment system; however, certain myelopathic symptoms should be considered when determining the cost of care.

Procedural, workforce, and reimbursement trends in neuroendovascular procedures.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to define the proportion of Medicare neuroendovascular procedures performed by different specialists from 2013 to 2019, map the geographic distribution of these specialists, and trend reimbursement for these procedures. METHODS: The Medicare Provider Utilization Database was queried for recognized neuroendovascular procedures. Data on specialists and their geographic distribution were tabulated. Reimbursement data were gathered using the Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool and adjusted for inflation using the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index Inflation calculator. RESULTS: The neuroendovascular workforce in 2013 and 2019, respectively, was as follows: radiologists (46% vs 44%), neurosurgeons (45% vs 35%), and neurologists (9% vs 21%). Neurologists increased proportionally (p=0.03). Overall procedure numbers increased across each specialty: radiology (360%; p=0.02), neurosurgery (270%; p<0.01), and neurology (1070%; p=0.03). Neuroendovascular revascularization (CPT 61645) increased in all fields: radiology (170%; p<0.01), neurosurgery (280%; p<0.01), neurology (240%; p<0.01); central nervous system (CNS) permanent occlusion/embolization (CPT61624) in neurosurgery (67%; p=0.03); endovascular temporary balloon artery occlusion (CPT61623) in neurology (29%; p=0.04). In 2019, radiologists were the most common neuroendovascular specialists everywhere except in the Northeast where neurosurgeons predominated. Inflation adjusted reimbursement decreased for endovascular temporary balloon occlusion (CPT61623, -13%; p=0.01), CNS transcatheter permanent occlusion or embolization (CPT61624, -13%; p=0.02), non-CNS transcatheter permanent occlusion or embolization (CPT61626, -12%; p<0.01), and intracranial stent placement (CPT61635, -12%; p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The number of neuroendovascular procedures and specialists increased, with neurologists becoming more predominant. Reimbursement decreased. Coordination among neuroendovascular specialists in terms of training and practice location may maximize access to acute care.

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.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Cost of a Surgeon's Learning Curve.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion has become an increasingly common approach in adult degenerative spine disease but is associated with a steep learning curve. We sought to evaluate the impact of the learning experience on mean procedure time and mean cost associated with each procedure. METHODS: We studied the first 100 consecutive minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion procedures of a single surgeon. We performed multivariable linear regression models, modeling operating time, and costs in function of the procedure order adjusted for patients' age, sex, and number of surgical levels. The number of procedures necessary to attain proficiency was determined through a k-means cluster analysis. Finally, the total excess operative time and total excess cost until obtaining proficiency was evaluated. RESULTS: Procedure order was found to impact procedure time and mean costs, with each successive case being associated with progressively less procedure time and cost. On average, each successive case was associated with a reduction in procedure time of 0.97 minutes (95% confidence interval 0.54-1.40; P < 0.001) and an average adjusted reduction in overall costs of $82.75 (95% confidence interval $35.93-129.57; P < 0.001). An estimated 58 procedures were needed to attain proficiency, translating into an excess procedure time of 2604.2 minutes (average of 45 minutes per case), overall costs associated with the learning experience of $226,563.8 (average of $3974.80 per case), and excess surgical cost of $125,836.6 (average of $2207.66 per case). CONCLUSIONS: Successive cases were associated with progressively less procedure time and mean overall and surgical costs, until a proficiency threshold was attained.

Trends in Hospital-to-Hospital Transfers for Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Single-Institution Experience from 2006 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence to support that aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is best treated at high-volume centers, it is unknown whether clinical practice reflects these findings. METHODS: We analyzed patients transferred to our high-volume center for aSAH between 2006 and 2017. Data collection included number of transfers, demographic data, Hunt and Hess score, Fisher score, comorbid conditions, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, in-hospital mortality rates, insurance status, and hospital charges. Comparisons were made across 3 time periods (2006-2009, 2010-2013, and 2014-2017) and included subgroup analyses by treatment modality (endovascular vs. microsurgical). RESULTS: aSAH transfers declined from 213 in 2006-2009 to 160 in 2014-2017. While there was no change in presenting Hunt and Hess scores, the percentage of modified Fisher scores of 4 increased from 2006-2009 to 2014-2017. Transferred patients had a greater comorbidity index and decreased predicted 10-year survival. Despite this, the average LOS decreased. In-hospital mortality decreased from 2006-2009 to 2014-2017, especially in the endovascular cohort. The proportions of patients who were either self-pay or Medicaid did not change. Overall inflation-adjusted hospital charges decreased from $76,975 in 2006-2009 to $59,870 in 2014-2017. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2006 and 2017, transfers to our center for aSAH declined. However, transferred patients had greater levels of complexity, more comorbidities, and were at greater risk for vasospasm based on their presenting Fisher score. Nonetheless, average LOS, in-hospital mortality, and cost declined. These changing referral patterns have implications for outcome data, quality reporting, resident education, and developing systems of care to optimize outcomes.