A comparison of successful versus failed nonoperative treatment approaches in patients with degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine.

Identifying an optimal composition of nonoperative therapies to trial in patients suffering from degenerative lumbar spine conditions prior to surgical management remains challenging. Contrasting successful versus failed nonoperative treatment approaches may provide clinicians with valuable insight. The purpose of this study was to compare the nonoperative therapy regimens in degenerative lumbar spine disorder patients successfully managed conservatively versus patients who failed primary treatment and opted for lumbar fusion surgery. Clinical records from patients diagnosed with lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis from 2007 to 2017 were gathered from a comprehensive insurance database. Patients were separated into two cohorts: patients managed successfully with nonoperative therapies and patients who failed conservative therapy and underwent lumbar fusion surgery. Nonoperative therapy utilization by the two cohortswere collected across a 2-year surveillance window. A total of 531,980 adult patients with lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis comprised the base population. There were 523,031 patients (98.3%) successfully treated with conservative management alone, while 8,949 patients (1.7%) ultimately failed nonoperative management and opted for lumbar fusion.Conservative therapy failure rates were especially high in patients with a smoking history (2.1%) and those utilizing lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESIs) (3.7%). A greater percentage of patients who failed conservative management utilized opioid medications (p < 0.0001), muscle relaxants (p < 0.0001), and LESIs (p < 0.0001). Patients who failed nonoperative management spent more than double than the successfully treated cohort (failed cohort: $1806.49 per patient; successful cohort: $768.50 per patient). In a multivariate logistic regression model, smoking, obesity and prolonged opioid use were independently associated with failure of nonoperative treatment.

A comparison of prolonged nonoperative management strategies in cervical stenosis patients: Successes versus failures.

A paucity of evidence exists regarding the optimal composition of conservative therapies to best treat patients diagnosed with cervical stenosis prior to consideration of surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the nonoperative therapy utilization strategies in cervical stenosis patients successfully managed with conservative treatments versus those that failed medical management and opted for an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. Medical records from adult patients with a diagnosis of cervical stenosis from 2007 to 2017 were collected retrospectively from a large insurance database. Patients were divided into two cohorts: patients treated successfully with nonoperative therapies and patients that failed conservative management and opted for ACDF surgery. Nonoperative therapies utilized by the two cohorts were collected over a 2-year surveillance window. A total of 90,037 adult patients with cervical stenosis comprised the base population. There were 83,384 patients (92.6%) successfully treated with nonoperative therapies alone, while 6,653 patients (7.4%) ultimately failed conservative management and received an ACDF. Failure rates of non-operative therapies were higher in smokers (11.2%), patients receiving cervical epidural steroid injections (11.2%), and male patients (8.1%). A greater percentage of patients who failed conservative management utilized opioid medications (p < 0.001), muscle relaxants (p < 0.001), and CESIs (p < 0.001). The costs of treating patients that failed conservative management was double the amount of the successfully treated group (failed cohort: $1,215.73 per patient; successful cohort: $659.58 per patient). A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that male patients, smokers, opioid utilization, and obesity were independent predictors of conservative treatment failure.

Gender differences in the 3-month utilization of nonoperative therapies prior to primary lumbar microdiscectomy.

Patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation classically trial a brief course of conservative management prior to microdiscectomy surgery. Gender differences have previously been identified in the selection and symptomatic response to commonly-utilized nonoperative treatments. However, whether gender differences exist in the degree and cost of nonoperative therapy in this cohort remains unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess for gender differences in the utilization and costs of nonoperative therapy in patients diagnosed with symptomatic lumbar intervertebral disc herniation 3-months prior to undergoing microdiscectomy. Medical records from adult patients diagnosed with a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation undergoing index microdiscectomy procedures from 2007 to 2017 were collected retrospectively from a large insurance database. The utilization of nonoperative therapy within 3-months after initial lumbar herniation diagnosis was determined. A total of 13,106 patients (55.4% Males) underwent index microdiscectomy. Male patients were more likely to fail conservative management and opt for surgery (Males: 2.9% vs. Females: 1.8%, p < 0.0001). A greater percentage of female patients utilized muscle relaxants (p = 0.0049), lumbar epidural steroid injections (p = 0.0007), and emergency department services (p = 0.001). The total direct cost of conservative treatment prior to microdiscectomy was $13,205,924, with males accountable for $7,457,023 (56.5%). When normalized by number of patients utilizing the respective therapy, males used fewer units of NSAIDs (males: 84.2 pills/patient; females: 97.3 pills/patient) and muscle relaxants (males: 77.5 pills/patient; females: 89.0 pills/patient). These results suggest that gender differences exist in the utilization of nonoperative therapies for the management of a lumbar intervertebral herniated disc prior to microdiscectomy surgery.

Regional Variation in Nonoperative Therapy Utilization for Symptomatic Lumbar Stenosis and Spondylolisthesis: A 2-Year Costs Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To characterize regional variations in maximal nonoperative therapy (MNT) costs in patients suffering from lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis. METHODS: Medical records from patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis undergoing primary ≤3-level lumbar decompression and fusion procedures from 2007 to 2016 were gathered from a large insurance database. Geographic regions (Midwest, Northeast, South, and West) reflected the US Census Bureau definitions. Records were searchable by International Classification of Diseases diagnosis/procedure codes, Current Procedural Terminology codes, and insurance-specific generic drug codes. Utilization of MNT, defined as cost billed, prescriptions written, and number of units disbursed, within 2-years prior to index surgery was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 27 877 patients underwent 1-, 2-, or 3-level lumbar decompression and fusion surgery. Regional breakdown of the study cohort was as follows: South 62.3%, Midwest 25.2%, West 10.4%, Northeast 2.1%. Regional variations in the number of patients using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (P < .0001), opioids (P < .0001), muscle relaxants (P < .0001), and lumbar steroid injections (P < .0001) were detected. A significant difference was identified in the regional MNT failure rates (P < .0001). The total cost associated with MNT prior to index surgery was $48 411 125 ($1736.60/patient), with the Midwest ($1943.83/patient) responsible for the greatest average spending. Despite comprising 62.3% of the cohort, the South was accountable for 67.5% of NSAID prescriptions, 64.6% of opioid prescriptions, and 71.2% of muscle relaxant prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: Regional differences exist in the costs of MNT in patients with lumbar stenosis and spondylolisthesis prior to surgery. Future studies should focus on identifying patients likely to fail prolonged nonoperative management.

A 2-Year Cost Analysis of Maximum Nonoperative Treatments in Patients With Symptomatic Lumbar Stenosis or Spondylolisthesis That Ultimately Required Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to characterize the utilization and costs of maximal nonoperative therapies (MNTs) within 2 years prior to spinal fusion surgery in patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis. METHODS: A large insurance database was queried for patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis or spondylolisthesis undergoing index 1-, 2-, or 3-level lumbar decompression and fusion procedures between 2007 and 2016. This database consists of 20.9 million covered lives and includes private/commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. The utilization of MNTs within 2 years prior to index surgery was assessed by cost billed to the patient, prescriptions written, and number of units billed. RESULTS: A total of 27 877 out of 3 423 114 (0.8%) eligible patients underwent posterior lumbar instrumented fusion. Patient MNT utilization was as follows: 11 383 (40.8%) used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 19 770 (70.9%) used opioids, 12 414 (44.5%) used muscle relaxants, 14 422 (51.7%) received lumbar epidural steroid injection (LESI), 11 156 (40.0%) attended physical therapy/occupational therapy, 4005 (14.4%) presented to the emergency department, and 4042 (14.5%) received chiropractor treatments. The total direct cost associated with all MNTs prior to index spinal fusion was $28 241 320 ($1013.07 per/patient). LESI comprised the largest portion of the total cost of MNT ($15 296 941, 54.2%), followed by opioids ($3 702 463, 13.1%) and NSAIDs ($3 058 335, 10.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Opioids are the most frequently prescribed and most used therapy in the preoperative period. Assuming minimal improvement in pain and functional disability after maximum nonoperative therapies, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio for MNT could be highly unfavorable.

A Two-Year Cost Analysis of Maximum Nonoperative Treatments in Patients with Cervical Stenosis that Ultimately Required Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to characterize the use and associated costs of maximal nonoperative therapy (MNT) received within 2-years before anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery in patients with symptomatic cervical stenosis. METHODS: An insurance database, including private/commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, was queried for patients undergoing 1-level, 2-level, or 3-level ACDF procedures between 2007 and 2016. Research records were searchable by International Classification of Diseases diagnosis and procedure, Current Procedural Terminology, and generic drug codes. The use of MNTs within 2 years before index ACDF surgery was assessed by cost billed to patients, prescriptions written, and number of units billed. RESULTS: Of 220,902 (7.16%) eligible patients, 15,825 underwent index surgery. Patient breakdown of the use of MNT modalities was as follows: 5731 (36.2%) used nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs; 9827 (62.1%) used opioids; 7383 (46.7%) used muscle relaxants; 3609 (22.8%) received cervical epidural steroid injection; 5504 (34.8%) attended physical therapy/occupational therapy; 1663 (10.5%) received chiropractor treatments; and 200 (1.3%) presented to the emergency department. During the 2-year preoperative period, there were 51,675 prescriptions for diagnostic cervical imaging. The total direct cost associated with all MNTs before ACDF was $16,056,556. Cervical spine imaging comprised the largest portion of the total MNT cost ($8,677,110; 54.0%), followed by cervical epidural steroid injection ($3,315,913; 20.7%) and opioids ($2,228,221; 13.9%). Opiates were the most frequently prescribed therapy (71,602 prescriptions). DISCUSSION: Opioids are the most frequently prescribed and most used therapy in the preoperative period for cervical stenosis. Further studies and improved guidelines are necessary to determine which patients may benefit from ACDF earlier in the course of nonoperative therapies.

Short-Term Outcomes of Treatment of Hip Osteoarthritis With 4 Bone Marrow Concentrate Injections: A Case Series.

The use of mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow concentrate (BMC) has become an increasingly popular option as an alternative to total joint replacement. Although there is evidence to support the use of BMC injections to improve quality of life for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), there is limited evidence to support its use in patients with hip OA. This case series provides the short-term outcomes of 4 hip OA patients who each underwent 4 BMC injections. On average, the last follow-up was administered 3.5 months after the first injection. The results show that patients experienced decreased resting and active pain compared with baseline and mean 72.4% total overall improvement. Patients also reported less difficulty in performing daily activities following the procedure. These encouraging results warrant further research to better understand the effects of BMC injections on hip OA.

Short-Term Outcomes in Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis With 4 Bone Marrow Concentrate Injections.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary research suggests that bone marrow concentrate (BMC), which contains mesenchymal stem cells and platelets, is a promising treatment for knee osteoarthritis. The aim of this study was to build on this preliminary research by reporting the short-term progress of 15 patients (20 knees) with knee osteoarthritis through 4 BMC treatments. METHODS: Patients underwent four sequential BMC treatments with mean injection times of 13.80 days after the first treatment, 21.40 days after the second treatment, and 33.50 days after the third treatment. The last follow-up was conducted a mean 86 days after the first treatment. Baseline and posttreatment outcomes of resting pain, active pain, lower functionality scale, and overall improvement percentage were compared after each treatment. RESULTS: Patients experienced statistically significant improvements in active pain and functionality score after the first treatment. Additionally, patients experienced a mean decrease in resting pain after the first treatment, yet outcomes were not statistically significant until after the second treatment. On average, patients experienced an 84.31% decrease in resting pain, a 61.95% decrease in active pain, and a 55.68% increase in functionality score at the final follow-up. Patients also reported a mean 67% total overall improvement at study conclusion. Outcomes at the final follow-up after the fourth treatment were statistically significant compared to outcomes at baseline, after first treatment, after second treatment, and after third treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results are promising, and additional research with a larger sample size and longer follow-up is needed to further examine the treatment effectiveness of multiple BMC injections for knee osteoarthritis.

Fate of patients unwilling or unsuitable to undergo surgical intervention for a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this study was to assess the duration of in-hospital survival in 57 patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAA) who did not undergo surgical intervention. REPORT: Two hours after registration in the emergency room, 58% (95% CI 45-71) of patients were still alive. The median survival was 2.2 hours (interquartile range 1-18). In a subgroup including 26 haemodynamically stable patients, survival after 2 hours was 96% (95% CI 89-100). CONCLUSION: In patients with an RAAA without surgical intervention, the duration of in-hospital survival is limited. However, a group of haemodynamically stable patients can be identified in whom survival is much longer.