Cost-effectiveness of posterior versus anterior surgery for cervical radiculopathy: results from a multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial (FACET).

PURPOSE: For cervical nerve root compression, anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) or posterior foraminotomy (posterior surgery) are safe and effective options. Posterior surgery might have a more beneficial economic profile compared to anterior surgery. The purpose of this study was to analyse if posterior surgery is cost-effective compared to anterior surgery. METHODS: An economic evaluation was performed as part of a multicentre, noninferiority randomised clinical trial (Foraminotomy ACDF Cost-effectiveness Trial) with a follow-up of 2 years. Primary outcomes were cost-effectiveness based on arm pain (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 0-100)) and cost-utility (quality adjusted life years (QALYs)). Missing values were estimated with multiple imputations and bootstrap simulations were used to obtain confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In total, 265 patients were randomised and 243 included in the analyses. The pooled mean decrease in VAS arm at 2-year follow-up was 44.2 in the posterior and 40.0 in the anterior group (mean difference, 4.2; 95% CI, - 4.7 to 12.9). Pooled mean QALYs were 1.58 (posterior) and 1.56 (anterior) (mean difference, 0.02; 95% CI, - 0.05 to 0.08). Societal costs were €28,046 for posterior and €30,086 for the anterior group, with lower health care costs for posterior (€12,248) versus anterior (€16,055). Bootstrapped results demonstrated similar effectiveness between groups with in general lower costs associated with posterior surgery. CONCLUSION: In patients with cervical radiculopathy, arm pain and QALYs were similar between posterior and anterior surgery. Posterior surgery was associated with lower costs and is therefore likely to be cost-effective compared with anterior surgery.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of PCF versus ACD in the treatment of cervical brachialgia (FORVAD trial).

BACKGROUND: Cervical radiculopathy occurs when a nerve root is compressed in the spine, if symptoms fail to resolve after 6 weeks surgery may be indicated. Anterior Cervical Discectomy (ACD) is the commonest procedure, Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy (PCF) is an alternative that avoids the risk of damage to anterior neck structures. This prospective, Phase III, UK multicentre, open, individually randomised controlled trial was performed to determine whether PCF is superior to ACD in terms of improving clinical outcome as measured by the Neck Disability Index (NDI) 52 weeks post-surgery. METHOD: Following consent to participate and collection of baseline data, subjects with cervical brachialgia were randomised to ACD or PCF in a 1:1 ratio on the day of surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed on day 1 and patient reported outcomes on day 1 and weeks 6, 12, 26, 39 and 52 post-operation. A total of 252 participants were planned to be randomised. Statistical analysis was limited to descriptive statistics. Health economic outcomes were also described. RESULTS: The trial was closed early (n = 23). Compared to baseline, the median (interquartile range (IQR)) NDI score at 52 weeks reduced from 44.0 (36.0, 62.0) to 25.3 (20.0, 42.0) in the PCF group and increased from 35.6 (34.0, 44.0) to 45.0 (20.0, 57.0) in the ACD group. ACD may be associated with more swallowing, voice and other complications and was more expensive; neck and arm pain scores were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The trial was closed early, therefore no definitive conclusions on clinical or cost-effectiveness could be made.

Effect of perioperative pain neuroscience education in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative education should be improved to decrease unfavourable outcomes after lumbar surgery. This trial aimed to compare effectiveness in terms of pain, quality of life, pain cognition, surgical experience, healthcare use, work resumption, and cost-effectiveness of perioperative pain neuroscience education (PPNE) vs traditional biomedical education (perioperative biomedical education [PBE]) in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. METHODS: In this multicentre RCT (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02630732), patients undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy in three Belgian hospitals were randomised to receive PPNE or PBE. Both groups received one preoperative and one postoperative one-to-one education session and a booklet (balanced interventions), with an essentially different content (PPNE: biopsychosocial; PBE: biomedical). Pain was the primary outcome (Visual Analogue Scales+quantitative sensory testing). Assessments were at 3 days, 6 weeks, and 6 and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Between March 2016 and April 2020, participants were randomly assigned to PPNE (n=58) or PBE (n=62). At 12 months, PPNE did not lead to significantly better pain outcomes, but it did result in more favourable 36-item Short Form Health Survey physical component (additional increase: 46.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.16-79.73; medium effect), Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (additional decrease: 3.15; 95% CI: 0.25-6.04; small effect), and Pain Catastrophising Scale (additional decrease: 6.18; 95% CI: 1.97-10.39; medium effect) scores. Females of the PPNE group showed higher probability for work resumption (95% vs 60% in the PBE group). PPNE was cost-effective compared with PBE (incremental costs: €-2732; incremental quality-adjusted life years: 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative pain neuroscience education showed superior clinical and cost-effectiveness than perioperative biomedical education in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02630732.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Microendoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Unilateral Cervical Radiculopathy: A 1-Year Cost-Utility Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are the most common surgical approaches for medically refractory cervical radiculopathy. Rigorous cost-effectiveness studies comparing ACDF and PCF are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-utility of ACDF vs PCF performed in the ambulatory surgery center setting for Medicare and privately insured patients at 1-year follow-up. METHODS: A total of 323 patients who underwent 1-level ACDF (201) or PCF (122) at a single ambulatory surgery center were compared. Propensity matching generated 110 pairs (220 patients) for analysis. Demographic data, resource utilization, patient-reported outcome measures, and quality-adjusted life-years were assessed. Direct costs (1-year resource use × unit costs based on Medicare national allowable payment amounts) and indirect costs (missed workdays × average US daily wage) were recorded. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. RESULTS: Perioperative safety, 90-day readmission, and 1-year reoperation rates were similar between groups. Both groups experienced significant improvements in all patient-reported outcome measures at 3 months that was maintained at 12 months. The ACDF cohort had a significantly higher preoperative Neck Disability Index and a significantly greater improvement in health-state utility (ie, quality-adjusted life-years gained) at 12 months. ACDF was associated with significantly higher total costs at 1 year for both Medicare ($11 744) and privately insured ($21 228) patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ACDF was $184 654 and $333 774 for Medicare and privately insured patients, respectively, reflecting poor cost-utility. CONCLUSION: Single-level ACDF may not be cost-effective in comparison with PCF for surgical management of unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

Cost effectiveness of implanting a prosthesis after anterior cervical discectomy for radiculopathy: results of the NECK randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In the treatment of cervical radiculopathy due to a herniated disc, potential surgical treatments include: anterior cervical discectomy (ACD), ACD and fusion using a cage (ACDF), and anterior cervical disc arthroplasty (ACDA). Previous publications yielded comparable clinical and radiological outcome data for the various implants, but research on their comparative costutility has been inconclusive. PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost utility of ACD, ACDF, and ACDA. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: About 109 patients with cervical radiculopathy randomized to undergo ACD, ACDF, or ACDA as part of the NEtherlands Cervical Kinetics trial. OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) estimated from patient-reported utilities using the EuroQol-5D questionnaire and EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS), measured at baseline, 2, 4, 8, 12, 26, 52, and 104 weeks postprocedure. Societal costs including admissions to hospital (related and otherwise), GP visits, specialist visits, physical therapy, medications, home care, aids, informal care, productivity losses, and out of pocket condition-related expenses. METHODS: The cost utility of the competing strategies over 1 and 2 years was assessed following a net benefit (NB) approach, whereby the intervention with the highest NB among competing strategies is preferred. Cost effectiveness acceptability curves were produced to reflect the probability of each strategy being the most cost effective across various willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. Five sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of results. RESULTS: ACDF was more likely to be the most cost-effective strategy at WTP thresholds of €20,000 to 50,000/QALY in all but one of the analyses. The mean QALYs during the first year were 0.750, 0.817, and 0.807 for ACD, ACDF, and ACDA, respectively, with no significant differences between groups. Total healthcare costs over the first year were significantly higher for ACDA, largely due to the higher surgery and implant costs. The total societal costs of the three strategies were €12,173 for ACD, €11,195 for ACDF, and €13,746 for ACDA, with no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that ACDF is likely to be more cost-effective than ACDA or ACD at most WTP thresholds, and this conclusion is robust to most sensitivity analyses conducted. It is demonstrated that the difference in costs is mainly caused by the initial surgical costs and that there are only minimal differences in other costs during follow-up. Since clinical data are comparable between the groups, it is to the judgment of the patient and surgeon which intervention is applied.

Variation in Commercial Insurance Type Impacts Access to Cervical Spine Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Prior literature has demonstrated that disparities exist in health care access and outcomes by insurance status, and patients with commercial plans fare better than those with Medicaid. However, variation may exist within commercial plans, which may impact care access. The purpose of our study was to determine the association between commercial health insurance plan type and access/time to surgery among patients with degenerative cervical conditions. METHODS: The MarketScan database (IBM Watson Health, Ann Arbor, MI) was utilized to identify the first instance of International Classification of Diseases-10-CM diagnosis codes for cervical myelopathy and radiculopathy. Patients 65 years old or below enrolled from 2015 to 2020 with a minimum of two years of continuous enrollment were included. Surgery for myelopathy included anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), posterior cervical laminectomy and fusion, and laminoplasty, whereas surgery for radiculopathy included ACDF, cervical disk arthroplasty, and foraminotomy. The time between first diagnosis and surgery was determined. Insurance plan type was categorized as noncapitated (NC), non-high-deductible health plan, Health Management Organization-type partially or fully capitated plans, or high-deductible health plans (HDHP). Proportional hazards regression was utilized to compare time-to-incidence of surgery by plan type, adjusting for age, and sex. RESULTS: In total, 55,954 patients with cervical myelopathy and 705,117 patients with cervical radiculopathy were included. Mean follow-up was 537 and 657 days for myelopathy and radiculopathy, respectively. At two years postdiagnosis, 22.6% of myelopathy and 5.6% of radiculopathy patients were managed surgically. ACDF was the most common surgery for both myelopathy (85.7% of surgically managed patients) and radiculopathy (80.6%). The mean time to surgery for myelopathy was 101 days, and 196 days for radiculopathy. The most common plan type was NC for both myelopathy (81.5%, n=44,832) and radiculopathy (80.6%, n=559,109). Time-to-occurrence of surgery was significantly higher among both myelopathy and radiculopathy patients with capitated plans and HDHP versus NC plans, but the impact was significantly greater among those with radiculopathy than myelopathy (all P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Insurance plan structure has a significant impact on incidence of and on time-to-occurrence of surgery for patients with cervical degenerative conditions. Patients with HDHP plans may experience higher costs, potentially limiting access to care.

A national snapshot of the impact of clinical depression on post-surgical pain and adverse outcomes after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical myelopathy and radiculopathy: 10-year results from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

Depression is associated with poorer outcomes in a wide spectrum of surgeries but the specific effects of depression in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery are unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and impact of pre-surgical clinical depression on pain and other outcomes after surgery for cervical degenerative disc disease using a national representative database. Data of patients with cervical myelopathy and radiculopathy were extracted from the 2005-2014 US Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Included patients underwent anterior discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Acute or chronic post-surgical pain, postoperative complications, unfavorable discharge, length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs were evaluated. Totally 215,684 patients were included. Pre-surgical depression was found in 29,889 (13.86%) patients, with a prevalence nearly doubled during 2005-2014 in the US. Depression was independently associated with acute or chronic post-surgical pain (aOR: 1.432), unfavorable discharge (aOR: 1.311), prolonged LOS (aOR: 1.152), any complication (aOR: 1.232), respiratory complications/pneumonia (aOR: 1.153), dysphagia (aOR: 1.105), bleeding (aOR: 1.085), infection/sepsis (aOR: 1.529), and higher hospital costs (beta: 1080.640) compared to non-depression. No significant risk of delirium or venous thrombotic events was observed in patients with depression as compared to non-depression. Among patients receiving primary surgery, depression was independently associated with prolonged LOS (aOR: 1.150), any complication (aOR:1.233) and postoperative pain (aOR:1.927). In revision surgery, no significant associations were found for prolonged LOS, any complication or pain. In conclusion, in the US patients undergoing ACDF, pre-surgical clinical depression predicts post-surgical acute or chronic pain, a slightly prolonged LOS and the presence of any complication. Awareness of these associations may help clinicians stratify risk preoperatively and optimize patient care.

Development and Validation of Cervical Prediction Models for Patient-Reported Outcomes at 1 Year After Cervical Spine Surgery for Radiculopathy and Myelopathy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate prediction models for 12-month patient-reported outcomes of disability, pain, and myelopathy in patients undergoing elective cervical spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Predictive models have the potential to be utilized preoperatively to set expectations, adjust modifiable characteristics, and provide a patient-centered model of care. METHODS: This study was conducted using data from the cervical module of the Quality Outcomes Database. The outcomes of interest were disability (Neck Disability Index:), pain (Numeric Rating Scale), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for myelopathy. Multivariable proportional odds ordinal regression models were developed for patients with cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. Patient demographic, clinical, and surgical covariates as well as baseline patient-reported outcomes scores were included in all models. The models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling to estimate the likely performance on a new sample of patients. RESULTS: Four thousand nine hundred eighty-eight patients underwent surgery for radiculopathy and 2641 patients for myelopathy. The most important predictor of poor postoperative outcomes at 12-months was the baseline Neck Disability Index score for patients with radiculopathy and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for patients with myelopathy. In addition, symptom duration, workers' compensation, age, employment, and ambulatory and smoking status had a statistically significant impact on all outcomes (P < 0.001). Clinical and surgical variables contributed very little to predictive models, with posterior approach being associated with higher odds of having worse 12-month outcome scores in both the radiculopathy and myelopathy cohorts (P < 0.001). The full models overall discriminative performance ranged from 0.654 to 0.725. CONCLUSIONS: These predictive models provide individualized risk-adjusted estimates of 12-month disability, pain, and myelopathy outcomes for patients undergoing spine surgery for degenerative cervical disease. Predictive models have the potential to be used as a shared decision-making tool for evidence-based preoperative counselling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Financial Aspects of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review of Recent Literature.

Recently, there has been significant interest in understanding the cost-effectiveness of treatments in spine surgery as health care systems in the United States move toward value-based care and alternative payment models. Previous studies have shown comparable outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and anterior cervical discectomy fusion; however, there is a lack of consensus on the cost-effectiveness of CDA to support full adoption. Evidence of the limitations of these cost-analysis studies also exists in the literature, including industry funding, potential selection bias, and varying methods of calculating value. The goal of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the cost-effectiveness of CDA compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, and potential limitations with cost-analysis studies in spine surgery.

Ninety-Day Bundled Payment Reimbursement for Patients Undergoing Anterior and Posterior Procedures for Degenerative Cervical Radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are the mainstay surgical treatment options for patients with degenerative cervical radiculopathy (DCR). OBJECTIVE: To compare 90-d bundled payments between ACDF and PCF for DCR in a cohort study. METHODS: Data were extracted from MarketScan database (2000-2016) using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT-4 codes. The bundle payments were calculated as the payments accumulated from the index hospitalization admission to 90 d postsurgery. We also analyzed the index hospitalization (physician, hospital, and total) and the postdischarge payments (hospital readmission, outpatient services, medications, and total). Surgical groups were matched based on baseline characteristics (age, sex, insurance type, and Elixhauser score). RESULTS: A total of 100 041 patients met the inclusion criteria. 94.9% of patients (n = 95 031). Patients underwent ACDF with 5.1% (n = 5 010) treated via PCF. Overall, median 90-d costs were significantly higher for ACDF than for PCF ($31567 vs $18412; P < .0001). The median total index hospitalization ($27841 vs $15043), physician ($4572 vs $1920), and hospital payments ($14540 vs $7404) were higher for ACDF compared to PCF for both single- and multiple-level cohorts (P < .0001). There was no difference in overall 90-d postdischarge payments. Factors associated with higher 90-d payments for both cohorts included age and comorbidity scores. CONCLUSION: ACDF is associated with greater bundle payments in patients diagnosed with DCR. No difference was noted for the total postdischarge payments. PCF may be a cost-effective surgical option in appropriately selected patients with unilateral, paracentral, and foraminal soft herniated discs.

Physiotherapy after anterior cervical spine surgery for cervical disc disease: study protocol of a prospective randomised study to compare internet-based neck-specific exercise with prescribed physical activity.

INTRODUCTION: Patients suffering from remaining disability after anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) surgery for cervical disc disease may be prescribed physical activity (PPA) or neck-specific exercises (NSEs). Currently, we lack data for the success of either approach. There is also a knowledge gap concerning the use of internet-based care for cervical disc disease. The scarcity of these data, and the high proportion of patients with various degrees of incapacity following ACDF, warrant increased efforts to investigate and improve cost-effective rehabilitation. The objective is to compare the effectiveness of a structured, internet-based NSE programme, versus PPA following ACDF surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective, randomised, multicentre study that includes 140 patients with remaining disability (≥30% on the Neck Disability Index, NDI) following ACDF for radiculopathy due to cervical disc disease. Patient recruitment occurs following attendance at routine clinical appointments, scheduled at 3 months postsurgery. Patients are then randomised to one of two groups (70 patients/group) for a 3-month treatment programme/period of either internet-based NSE or PPA. Questionnaires on background data, pain and discomfort, physical and mental capacity, satisfaction with care, and health and workplace factors are completed, along with physical measures of neck-related function conducted by independent test leaders blinded to randomisation. Measures are collected at inclusion, after the 3-month treatments (end of treatment) and at a 2-year follow-up. Radiography will be completed at the 2-year follow-up. Preoperative data will be collected from the Swedish Spine Registry. Data on healthcare consumption, drug use and sick leave will be requested from the relevant national registers. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: This study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Linköping Ref. 2016/283-31 and 2017/91- 32. The scientists are independent with no commercial ties. Patients are recruited after providing written informed consent. Patient data are presented at group level such that no connection to any individual can be made. All data are anonymised when reported, and subject to the Swedish Official Secrets Health Acts. The test leaders are independent and blinded for randomisation. Exercises, both general and neck-specific, have been used extensively in clinical practice and we anticipate no harm from their implementation other than a risk of muscle soreness. Both randomisation groups will receive care that is expected to relieve pain, although the group receiving NSE is expected to demonstrate a greater and more cost-effective improvement versu s the PPA group. Any significant harm or unintended effects in each group will be collected by the test leaders. All questionnaires and test materials are coded by the research group, with code lists stored in locked, fireproof file cabinets, housed at the university in a room with controlled (card-based) access. Only individuals in receipt of a unique website address posted by the researchers can access the programme; patients can neither communicate with each other nor with caregivers via the programme.Study participation might lead to improved rehabilitation versus non-participation, and might therefore be of benefit. The results of this study should also contribute to more effective and flexible rehabilitation, shorter waiting times, lower costs and the possibility to implement our findings on a wider level. DISSEMINATION: If effective, the protocols used in this study can be implemented in existing healthcare structures. The results of the study will be presented in scientific journals and popular science magazines of relevance to health. The findings will also be presented at local, regional, national and international conferences and meetings, as well as in the education of university students and at public lectures. Information about the results will be communicated to the general population in cooperation with patient organisations and the media. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03036007.

Determinants and Variations of Hospital Costs in Patients With Lumbar Radiculopathy Hospitalized for Spinal Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine hospital costs related to surgery for lumbar radiculopathy and identify determinants of intramural costs based on minimal hospital and claims data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Costs related to the initial hospitalization of patients undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy make up the major part of direct health care expenditure in this population. Identifying factors influencing intramural costs can be beneficial for health care policy makers, and clinicians working with patients with lumbar radiculopathy. METHODS: The following data were collected from the University Hospital Brussels data warehouse for all patients undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy in 2016 (n = 141): age, sex, primary diagnosis, secondary diagnoses, type of surgery, severity of illness (SOI), admission and discharge date, type of hospital admission, and all claims incurred for the particular hospital stay. Descriptive statistics for total hospital costs were performed. Univariate analyses were executed to explore associations between hospital costs and all other variables. Those showing a significant association (P < 0.05) were included in the multivariate general linear model analysis. RESULTS: Mean total hospital costs were &OV0556; 5016 ±â€Š188 per patient. Costs related to the actual residence (i.e., "hotel costs") comprised 53% of the total hospital costs, whereas 18% of the costs were claimed for the surgical procedure. Patients with moderate/major SOI had 44% higher hospital costs than minor SOI (P = 0.01). Presence of preadmission comorbidities incurred 46% higher costs (P = 0.03). Emergency procedures led to 72% higher costs than elective surgery (P < 0.001). Patients receiving spinal fusion had 211% higher hospital costs than patients not receiving this intervention (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Hospital costs in patients receiving surgery for lumbar radiculopathy are influenced by SOI, the presence of preadmission comorbidities, type of hospital admission (emergency vs. elective), and type of surgical procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Comparison of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion to Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy for Cervical Radiculopathy: Utilization, Costs, and Adverse Events 2003 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for cervical radiculopathy is often approached by either anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF). ACDF is more common; however, recent single center studies suggest comparable efficacy and significant cost savings with PCF in appropriately selected patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare utilization, adverse events, and costs for each approach from a national perspective. METHODS: Adults undergoing single level ACDF or PCF for cervical radiculopathy were included from a US commercial health insurance claims database spanning 2003 to 2014. Outcomes consisted of mortality, adverse events, length of stay, and total payments to the health provider. Propensity score matching balanced the groups on observed baseline covariates. RESULTS: The PCF cohort comprised 4851 subjects and the ACDF cohort included 46 147. A greater proportion of PCF cases were discharged on the same day (70.6% vs 46.1%; P < .001). Mortality (0.1/1000, P = .012), vascular injury (0.2/1000, P = .001), postoperative dysphagia/dysphonia (14.5/1000, P < .001), cutaneous cerebrospinal fluid leak (0.2/1000, P = .002), and deep venous thrombosis (0.9/1000, P = .013) occurred more frequency in the ACDF cohort. Conversely, wound infections (14.6/1000, P < .001) and 30-d readmissions (9.8/1000, P < .001) were more frequent in the PCF cohort. Mean unadjusted total payments for the PCF cohort were $15 281 ± 12 225 and $26 849 ± 16 309 for ACDF. Matched difference was -$11 726 [95% confidence interval: -$12 221, -$11 232, P < .001] favoring PCF. CONCLUSION: Within the inherent limitations of administrative data, our findings suggest an opportunity for value improvement in managing cervical radiculopathy and indicate a need for large-scale comparative study of clinical outcomes and costs.

A novel noninstrumented surgical approach for foramen reconstruction for isthmic spondylolisthesis in patients with radiculopathy: preliminary clinical and radiographic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE The health care costs for instrumented spine surgery have increased dramatically in the last few decades. The authors present a novel noninstrumented surgical approach for patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis, with clinical and radiographic results. METHODS Charts of patients who underwent this technique were reviewed. The procedure consisted of nerve root decompression by reconstruction of the intervertebral foramen. This was achieved by removal of the pedicle followed by noninstrumented posterolateral fusion in which autologous bone graft from the right iliac crest was used. Outcomes regarding radicular complaints, bony fusion, progression of the slip, and complications were evaluated using patient history and radiographs obtained at follow-up intervals of 3-18 months after surgery. RESULTS A total of 58 patients with a mean age of 47 years were treated with this method. Partial removal of the pedicle was performed in 93.1% of the cases, whereas in 6.9% of the cases the entire pedicle was removed. The mean duration of surgery was 216.5 ± 54.5 minutes (range 91-340 minutes). The mean (± SD) duration of hospitalization was 10.1 ± 2.9 days (range 5-18 days). After 3 months of follow-up, 86% of the patients reported no leg pain, and this dropped to 81% at last follow-up. Radiographic follow-up showed bony fusion in 87.7% of the patients. At 1 year, 5 patients showed progression of the slip, which in 1 patient prompted a second operation within 1 year. No major complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS Treatment of isthmic spondylolisthesis by reconstruction of the intervertebral neuroforamen and posterolateral fusion in situ is a safe procedure and has comparable results with the existing techniques. Cost-effectiveness research comparing this technique to conventional instrumented fusion techniques is necessary to evaluate the merits for both patients and society.

Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy for treatment of radiculopathy : An effective, time-tested, and cost-efficient motion-preservation technique.

OBJECTIVE: To relieve foraminal root impingement due to lateral soft disc fragments, bony spurs, or other rarer causes. INDICATIONS: Soft disc fragment whose bulk is >2/3 lateral to the lateral border of the thecal sac. Intraforaminal dorsal bony narrowing of the root canal. Intraforaminal synovial cyst, extra/intradural tumor. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Paramedian and median soft/hard disc protrusions. Kyphosis of the index level. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Patient prone in reverse Trendelenburg position with the head fixed in a Mayfield clamp. Cervical spine horizontal and approximately 10 cm above the heart. Microscope from skin to skin. Skin incision: 25 mm, about 10 mm off the midline. Microsurgical blunt splitting of the muscle layers along the fiber direction. An expandable tubular retractor or a miniaturized speculum counter retractor, table anchored, is centered on the target lamino-facet junction as confirmed by fluoroscopy. Drilling of the keyhole. The axilla of the root is exposed while preserving most of the facet complex. Epidural exploration until an extruded or subligamentous disc fragment(s) is removed. If needed, removal of the dorsal bone overlying the root exiting in the foramen. The adequacy of decompression is assessed by palpating the root along its course with a small nerve hook. Closure by layers. No drain. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Same day mobilization. No external brace. RESULTS: Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) was used to treat 103 patients for unilateral cervical radiculopathy. Mean follow-up was 32 months. Despite 1 cerebrospinal fluid leak, 1 wound hematoma, and 1 radiculitis during the early postoperative period, no patients required revision surgery. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for neck/shoulder and arm improved significantly in the early postoperative period (3 months) and were maintained with time (p < 0.001). Neck Disability Index (NDI) improved significantly postoperatively but worsened slightly during follow-up (p < 0.001). Anterior decompression and fusion (ACDF) was required at the index level by 3 patients (mean: 55 months later) and at the adjacent level by 4 patients (mean: 27 months later).

Preoperative Opioid Use: A Risk Factor for Poor Return to Work Status After Single-level Cervical Fusion for Radiculopathy in a Workers' Compensation Setting.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative case-control study. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are: (1) How preoperative opioid use impacts RTW status after single-level cervical fusion for radiculopathy? and (2) What are other postsurgical outcomes affected by preoperative opioid use? SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Opioid use has increased significantly in the past decade. The use of opioids has a drastic impact on workers' compensation population, an at-risk cohort for poorer surgical and functional outcomes than the general population. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data was retrospectively collected from Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation between 1993 and 2011. The study population included patients who underwent single-level cervical fusion for radiculopathy as identified by current procedural terminology codes and International Classification of Diseases-9 codes. On the basis of opioid use before surgery, two groups were constructed (opioids vs. non-opioids). Using a multivariate logistic regression model, the effect of preoperative opioid use on return to work (RTW) status after fusion was analyzed and compared between the groups. RESULTS: In the regression model, preoperative opioid use was a negative predictor of RTW status within 3-year follow-up after surgery. Opioid patients were less likely to have stable RTW status [odds ratio (OR), 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38-0.65; P=0.05] and were less likely to RTW within the first year after surgery (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.66; P=0.05) compared with controls. Stable RTW was achieved in 43.3% of the opioids group and 66.6% of control group (P=0.05). RTW rate within the first year after fusion was 32.5% of opioids group and 57% of control group (P<0.05).Reoperation and permanent disability rates after surgery were higher in the opioid group compared with the control group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In a workers' compensation, patients with work-related injury who underwent single-level cervical fusion for radiculopathy and received opioids before surgery had worse RTW status, a higher reoperation rate, and higher rate of awarded permanent disability after surgery.