Cost-effectiveness of Surgical Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Posterior-only versus Antero-posterior Approach.

dc.contributor.author

Ogura, Yoji

dc.contributor.author

Gum, Jeffrey L

dc.contributor.author

Hostin, Richard A

dc.contributor.author

Robinson, Chessie

dc.contributor.author

Ames, Christopher P

dc.contributor.author

Glassman, Steven D

dc.contributor.author

Burton, Douglas C

dc.contributor.author

Bess, R Shay

dc.contributor.author

Shaffrey, Christopher I

dc.contributor.author

Smith, Justin S

dc.contributor.author

Yeramaneni, Samrat

dc.contributor.author

Lafage, Virginie F

dc.contributor.author

Protopsaltis, Themistocles

dc.contributor.author

Passias, Peter G

dc.contributor.author

Schwab, Frank J

dc.contributor.author

Carreon, Leah Y

dc.contributor.author

International Spine Study Group (ISSG)

dc.date.accessioned

2020-05-01T13:42:28Z

dc.date.available

2020-05-01T13:42:28Z

dc.date.issued

2020-04-11

dc.date.updated

2020-05-01T13:42:28Z

dc.description.abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT:Considerable debate exists regarding the optimal surgical approach for adult spinal deformity (ASD). It remains unclear which approach, posterior-only or combined anterior-posterior (AP), is more cost-effective. Our goal is to determine the 2-year cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for each approach. PURPOSE:To compare the 2-year cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment for ASD between the posterior-only approach and combined AP approach. STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective economic analysis of a prospective, multicenter database PATIENT SAMPLE: From a prospective, multicenter surgical database of ASD, patients undergoing 5 or more level fusions through a posterior-only or AP approach were identified and compared. METHODS:QALYs gained were determined using baseline, 1-year, and 2-year post-operative Short Form 6D. Cost was calculated from actual, direct hospital costs including any subsequent readmission or revision. Cost-effectiveness was determined using cost/QALY gained. RESULTS:The AP approach showed significantly higher index cost than the posterior-only approach ($84,329 vs $64,281). This margin decreased at 2-year follow-up with total costs of $89,824 and $73,904, respectively. QALYs gained at two years were similar with 0.21 and 0.17 in the posterior-only and the AP approaches, respectively. The cost/QALY at two years after surgery was significantly higher in the AP approach ($525,080) than in the posterior-only approach ($351,086). CONCLUSIONS:We assessed 2-year cost-effectiveness for the surgical treatment through posterior-only and AP approaches. The posterior-only approach is less expensive both for the index surgery and at 2-year follow-up. The QALY gained at 2-years was similar between the two approaches. Thus, posterior-only approach was more cost-effective than the AP approach under our study parameters. However, both approaches were not cost-effective at 2-year follow-up.

dc.identifier

S1529-9430(20)30136-4

dc.identifier.issn

1529-9430

dc.identifier.issn

1878-1632

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/20580

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Elsevier BV

dc.relation.ispartof

The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1016/j.spinee.2020.03.018

dc.subject

International Spine Study Group (ISSG)

dc.title

Cost-effectiveness of Surgical Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Posterior-only versus Antero-posterior Approach.

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Shaffrey, Christopher I|0000-0001-9760-8386

duke.contributor.orcid

Passias, Peter G|0000-0002-1479-4070|0000-0003-2635-2226

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Orthopaedics

pubs.organisational-group

Neurosurgery

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.publication-status

Published

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1-s2.0-S1529943020301364-main.pdf
Size:
523.75 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format