Analysis of Cost and 30-Day Outcomes in Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Less Invasive, Stand-Alone Lateral Transpsoas Interbody Fusion.

BACKGROUND: A comparative evaluation of operative costs between single-level transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and stand-alone lateral transpsoas interbody fusion (LIF) has not yet been done. We analyzed the costs, operative parameters, and early outcomes of single-level stand-alone LIF versus single-level TLIF. METHODS: Ten patients who underwent single-level TLIF and 10 patients who underwent single-level stand-alone LIF were included in the analysis. Total, variable, and fixed costs from perioperative data were available from a single institution. In addition, patient demographics, length of hospital stay, and 30-day outcomes and readmission rates were reviewed. RESULTS: Total cost, variable cost, and fixed costs were significantly lower in the LIF group, and there was no difference in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Single-level stand-alone LIF may prove to be more cost-effective and provide cost savings with analogous 30-day outcomes compared with single-level TLIF procedures.

Perioperative Cost Analysis of Minimally Invasive vs Open Resection of Intradural Extramedullary Spinal Cord Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive spinal surgery (MIS) has emerged as a clinically effective tool but its cost-effectiveness remains unclear. No studies have compared MIS vs open surgical techniques for the treatment of intradural extramedullary (IDEM) tumors. OBJECTIVE: To analyze and compare open and MIS techniques for resection of IDEM tumors, with focus on perioperative costs. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database including 35 IDEM patients (18 open, 17 MIS). Perioperative data, hospital costs, and hospital and physician charges for in-hospital services associated with the index surgical procedure and readmissions within 90 days were compared. RESULTS: Mean estimated blood loss, operative time, preoperative hospital charges, and physician fees were similar between open and MIS techniques. Patient and tumor characteristics were similar between groups. MIS cases were associated with shorter intensive care unit and floor stay. There were 3 complications in the open group, requiring 2 readmissions and 1 reoperation. Hospital costs ($21 307.80 open, $15 015.20 MIS, P < .01), and postoperative ($75 383.48 open, $56 006.88 MIS, P < .01) and total charges ($100 779.38 open, $76 100.92 MIS, P < .01) were significantly lower in the MIS group. There were no tumor recurrences in either group. All patients except for one in the open group maintained or improved their Nurick score. CONCLUSION: Both MIS and open techniques were able to adequately treat IDEM tumors. Reductions in complication rate and intensive care unit and hospital stay led to a decrease in hospital costs of almost 30% in the MIS group. MIS resection of IDEM tumors is not only an effective and safe option, but allows faster hospital discharge and significant cost savings.