Prolonged Opioid Use After Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Prevalence and Risk Factors.

BACKGROUND: Persistent opioid utilization after spine surgery is a rising complication among both preoperatively opioid-naïve and opioid-tolerant patients. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to determine the prevalence and characterize the risk factors that predispose patients to prolonged opioid use (≥3 months) after lumbar fusion. METHODS: Studies were identified through searches in PubMed and EMBASE from each database's earliest records to February 1, 2022. We included observational studies examining the risk factors and rates of prolonged opioid use following lumbar fusion. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) or standardized mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using inverse-variance methods. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis of 12 studies encompassing 80,935 patients, 40.2% of patients continued to fill opioid prescriptions ≥3 months after lumbar fusion. Significant sociodemographic predictors included Medicare or Medicaid insurance (OR=1.60, 95% CI 1.36-1.88), African-American ethnicity (OR=1.29, 95% CI 1.18-1.41), being from the Southern United States (OR=1.18, 95% CI 1.11-1.25), or women (OR=1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20). Being from the Midwestern United States (OR=0.80, 95% CI 0.75-0.85) was found to be a protective factor. Comorbidities associated with increased risk of prolonged opioid use were preoperative opioid use (OR=5.76, 95% CI 3.52-9.41), drug abuse (OR=3.11, 95% CI 2.37-4.08), alcohol abuse (OR=2.37, 95% CI 2.14-2.64), psychiatric disorders (OR=2.29, 95% CI 1.94-2.70), smoking history (OR=1.81, 95% CI 1.23-2.66), arthritis (OR=1.35, 95% CI 1.29-1.40), and higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score (standardized mean difference=0.72, 95% CI 0.61-0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of prolonged opioid use after lumbar fusion underscores the importance of screening patients for comorbidities and implementing targeted strategies to minimize opioid misuse.

Evaluation of Benefit and Cost Utility of Immediate Postanesthesia Care Unit Radiographs to Predict Airway Compromise After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a commonly performed procedure that may be complicated by airway compromise postoperatively. This life-threatening complication may necessitate reintubation and reoperation. We evaluated the cost utility of conventional postoperative x-ray. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Studies have demonstrated minimal benefit in obtaining an x-ray on postoperative day 1, but there is some utility of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) x-rays for predicting the likelihood of reoperation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of consecutive patients who underwent ACDF between September 2013 and February 2017. Patients were dichotomized into those who received PACU x-rays and those who did not (control group). Primary outcomes were reoperation, reintubation, mortality, and health care costs. RESULTS: Eight-hundred and fifteen patients were included in our analysis: 558 had PACU x-rays; 257 did not. In those who received PACU x-rays, mean age was 53.7 ±â€Š11.3 years, mean levels operated on were 2.0 ±â€Š0.79, and mean body mass index (BMI) was 30.3 ±â€Š6.9. In those who did not, mean age was 51.8 ±â€Š10.9 years, mean levels operated on were 1.48 ±â€Š0.65, and mean BMI was 29.9 ±â€Š6.3. Complications in the PACU x-ray group were reintubation-0.4%, reoperation-0.7%, and death-0.3% (due to prevertebral swelling causing airway compromise). Complications in the control group were reintubation-0.4%, reoperation-0.8%, and death-0. There were no differences between groups with respect to reoperation (P = 0.92), reintubation (P = 0.94), or mortality (P = 0.49). The mean per-patient cost was significantly higher (P = 0.009) in those who received PACU x-rays, $1031.76 ±â€Š948.67, versus those in the control group, $700.26 ±â€Š634.48. Mean length of stay was significantly longer in those who had PACU x-rays (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Although there were no differences in reoperation, reintubation, or mortality, there was a significantly higher cost for care and hospitalization in those who received PACU x-rays. Further studies are warranted to validate the results of the presented study.Level of Evidence: 3.

Assessment of Rod Material Types in Spine Surgery Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spine fusion surgery is traditionally performed with rigid fixation. Because the rigidity is often supraphysiologic, semirigid rods were developed. To the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive evaluation of rod material type on surgical outcomes has yet to be conducted. METHODS: A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines was conducted across 3 electronic databases. After examination for inclusion and exclusion criteria, data were extracted from the studies. RESULTS: Seventeen studies, including 1399 patients, were included in this review. The mean rigid rod fusion rate is 92.2% and 95.5% for semirigid rods (P = 0.129). The mean improvement in back pain was 60.6% in rigid rods and 71.6% in semirigid rods. The improvement in leg pain was 81.9% and 77.2%, respectively. There were no differences in visual analog scale back pain score (P = 0.098), visual analog scale leg pain score (P = 0.136), or in functional improvement between rigid and semirigid rods (P = 0.143). There was no difference (P = 0.209) in the reoperation rate between rigid rods (13.1%) and semirigid rods (6.5%). There was a comparable incidence of adjacent segment disease (3%), screw fracture (1.7%), and wound infection (1.9%) between rod material types. CONCLUSIONS: There is a moderate level of evidence supporting that surgical intervention results in high fusion rates regardless of rod material type. Surgical intervention improves back pain, leg pain, and function, with neither material type showing clear superiority. There are comparable rates of reoperation, development of adjacent segment disease, development of mechanical complications, and incidence of infection in both rigid and semirigid rods. Further studies regarding rod material type are warranted.

Trends in Physician Reimbursement for Spinal Procedures Since 2010.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To identify trends in spinal procedure reimbursement in our practice since 2010. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In an uncertain healthcare climate with continuous reform, trends in physician reimbursement are unclear. Market forces of supply and demand, legislation imposing penalties for quality measures, local competition, and geographic location have the potential to affect reimbursement. An emphasis on quality-of-care and cost reduction is placed on providers and insurers. In a high-cost area such as spine surgery, it is unknown what the reimbursement trends have been over the last 7 years of major healthcare reforms. METHODS: We collected payments received data for the 20 most commonly billed Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for spinal surgery from January 2010 to December 2016. Payments were adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for Medical Care in the Northeastern United States. Insurers were separated into four groups: Medicare, Medicaid, Private Insurance, and Workers Compensation and No Fault (WC/NF). Using a weighted average to adjust for variation in procedures performed, average payments were trended over time. Average payments were trended by insurance group averaged by CPT code. RESULTS: After adjusting for inflation, average overall payments for spinal claims from 2010 to 2016 increased 13.6%. Average reimbursement declined 1.9% from 2010 to 2013 and rose 16.8% from 2014 to 2016. Average Medicaid payments increased 150.1% since 2010 whereas average Medicare payments rose 4.9%. Average reimbursement from private insurers and WC/NF claims decreased 16.2% and 8.5%, respectively, from 2010 to 2013; increasing 14.2% and 12.5%, respectively, from 2014 to 2016. From 2010 to 2016, reimbursement for private insurance decreased 9.3% and increased 8.2% for WC/NF claims. CONCLUSION: Since 2010, inflation-adjusted reimbursement for spinal procedures increased in our practice. There was a decline from 2010 to 2013. Increases occurred from 2014 to 2016 across all insurers. Medicaid payments more than doubled since 2010. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.