Cost Savings Associated with Prevention of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation with a Novel Annular Closure Device: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Scott L. Parker; Gordan Grahovac; Duje Vukas; Darko Ledic; Milorad Vilendecic; Matthew J. McGirt

doi:10.1055/s-0033-1341416

Journal of Neurological Surgery Part A: Central European Neurosurgery, Table of Contents

J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2013; 74(05): 285-289
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1341416

Original Article

Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Cost Savings Associated with Prevention of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation with a Novel Annular Closure Device: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Authors

Scott L. Parker

¹Department of Neurosurgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
Gordan Grahovac

²Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Dubrava, Zagreb, Croatia
Duje Vukas

³Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital, Rijeka, Croatia
Darko Ledic

³Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital, Rijeka, Croatia
Milorad Vilendecic

²Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Dubrava, Zagreb, Croatia
Matthew J. McGirt

¹Department of Neurosurgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States

Abstract

Objective Same-level recurrent disc herniation is a well-defined complication following lumbar discectomy. Reherniation results in increased morbidity and health care costs. Techniques to reduce these consequences may improve outcomes and reduce cost after lumbar discectomy. In a prospective cohort study, we set out to evaluate the cost associated with surgical management of recurrent, same-level lumbar disc herniation following primary discectomy.

Methods Forty-six consecutive European patients undergoing lumbar discectomy for a single-level herniated disc at two institutions were prospectively followed with clinical and radiographic evaluations. A second consecutive cohort of 30 patients undergoing 31 lumbar discectomies with implantation of an annular closure device was followed at the same hospitals and same follow-up intervals. Cost estimates for reherniation were modeled on Medicare national allowable payment amounts (direct cost) and patient work-day losses (indirect cost).

Results Annular closure and control cohorts were matched at baseline. By 2 years follow-up, symptomatic recurrent same-level disc herniation occurred in three (6.5%) patients in the control cohort versus zero (0%) patients in the annular closure cohort. For patients experiencing recurrent disc herniation, mean estimated direct and indirect cost of management of recurrent disc herniation was $34,242 and $3,778, respectively. Use of an annular closure device potentially results in a cost savings of $222,573 per 100 primary discectomy procedures performed (or $2,226 per discectomy), based solely on the reduction of reoperated reherniations when modeled on U.S. Medicare costs.

Conclusions Recurrent disc herniation did not occur in any patients after annular closure within the 12-month follow-up. The reduction in the incidence of reherniation was associated with potentially significant cost savings. Development of novel techniques to prevent recurrent lumbar disc herniation is warranted to decrease the associated morbidity and health care costs associated with this complication.

Keywords

cost - disc herniation - annular repair

Full Text

References

References
1 Deyo RA, Weinstein JN. Low back pain. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 363-370
2 Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD , et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 2441-2450
3 Henriksen L, Schmidt K, Eskesen V, Jantzen E. A controlled study of microsurgical versus standard lumbar discectomy. Br J Neurosurg 1996; 10: 289-293
4 Moore AJ, Chilton JD, Uttley D. Long-term results of microlumbar discectomy. Br J Neurosurg 1994; 8: 319-326
5 Wenger M, Mariani L, Kalbarczyk A, Gröger U. Long-term outcome of 104 patients after lumbar sequestrectomy according to Williams. Neurosurgery 2001; 49: 329-334 , discussion 334–335
6 Williams RW. Microlumbar discectomy. A 12-year statistical review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1986; 11: 851-852
7 Carragee EJ, Spinnickie AO, Alamin TF, Paragioudakis S. A prospective controlled study of limited versus subtotal posterior discectomy: short-term outcomes in patients with herniated lumbar intervertebral discs and large posterior anular defect. Spine 2006; 31: 653-657
8 Thomé C, Barth M, Scharf J, Schmiedek P. Outcome after lumbar sequestrectomy compared with microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Neurosurg Spine 2005; 2: 271-278
9 Barth M, Diepers M, Weiss C, Thomé C. Two-year outcome after lumbar microdiscectomy versus microscopic sequestrectomy: part 2: radiographic evaluation and correlation with clinical outcome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008; 33: 273-279
10 Loupasis GA, Stamos K, Katonis PG, Sapkas G, Korres DS, Hartofilakidis G. Seven- to 20-year outcome of lumbar discectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999; 24: 2313-2317
11 Yorimitsu E, Chiba K, Toyama Y, Hirabayashi K. Long-term outcomes of standard discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: a follow-up study of more than 10 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001; 26: 652-657
12 Vik A, Zwart JA, Hulleberg G, Nygaard OP. Eight year outcome after surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a comparison of reoperated and not reoperated patients. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2001; 143: 607-610 , discussion 610–611
13 Waddell G, Kummel EG, Lotto WN, Graham JD, Hall H, McCulloch JA. Failed lumbar disc surgery and repeat surgery following industrial injuries. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1979; 61: 201-207
14 Carragee EJ, Han MY, Suen PW, Kim D. Clinical outcomes after lumbar discectomy for sciatica: the effects of fragment type and anular competence. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A: 102-108
15 Daneyemez M, Sali A, Kahraman S, Beduk A, Seber N. Outcome analyses in 1072 surgically treated lumbar disc herniations. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 1999; 42: 63-68
16 Fountas KN, Kapsalaki EZ, Feltes CH , et al. Correlation of the amount of disc removed in a lumbar microdiscectomy with long-term outcome. Spine 2004; 29: 2521-2524 , discussion 2525–2526
17 McGirt MJ, Eustacchio S, Varga P , et al. A prospective cohort study of close interval computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging after primary lumbar discectomy: factors associated with recurrent disc herniation and disc height loss. Spine 2009; 34: 2044-2051
18 Ambrossi GL, McGirt MJ, Sciubba DM , et al. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after single-level lumbar discectomy: incidence and health care cost analysis. Neurosurgery 2009; 65: 574-578 , discussion 578
19 Tosteson AN, Skinner JS, Tosteson TD , et al. The cost effectiveness of surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar disc herniation over two years: evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine 2008; 33: 2108-2115
20 Hodgson TA, Meiners MR. Cost-of-illness methodology: a guide to current practices and procedures. Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc 1982; 60: 429-462
21 McGirt MJ, Woodworth G, Thomas G, Miller N, Williams M, Rigamonti D. Cerebrospinal fluid shunt placement for pseudotumor cerebri-associated intractable headache: predictors of treatment response and an analysis of long-term outcomes. J Neurosurg 2004; 101: 627-632
22 Angevine PD, Zivin JG, McCormick PC. Cost-effectiveness of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylosis. Spine 2005; 30: 1989-1997
23 Castro Jr FP, Holt RT, Majd M, Whitecloud III TS. A cost analysis of two anterior cervical fusion procedures. J Spinal Disord 2000; 13: 511-514
24 McLaughlin MR, Purighalla V, Pizzi FJ. Cost advantages of two-level anterior cervical fusion with rigid internal fixation for radiculopathy and degenerative disease. Surg Neurol 1997; 48: 560-565