Comparison of interbody fusion approaches for disabling low back pain

被引:95
作者
Hacker, RJ
机构
[1] Eugene, OR 97401
关键词
interbody fusion; low hack pain; spinal arthrodesis; spinal instrumentation;
D O I
10.1097/00007632-199703150-00017
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. This is a study comparing two groups of patients surgically treated for disabling low back pain. One group was treated with lumbar anteroposterior fusion (360 degrees fusion), the other with posterior lumbar interbody fusion and an interbody fixation device. Objectives. To determine which approach provided the best and most cost-effective outcome using similar patient selection criteria. Summary of Background Data. Others have shown that certain patients with disabling low back pain benefit from lumbar fusion. Although rarely reported, the costs of different surgical treatments appear to vary significantly, whereas the patient outcome may vary little. Methods. Since 1991, 75 patients have been treated. Starting in 1993, posterior lumbar interbody fusion-BAK was offered to patients as an alternative to 360 degrees fusion. The treating surgeon reviewed the cases. The interbody fixation device used (BAK; Spine-Tech, Inc., Minneapolis, MN) was part of a Food and Drug Administration study. Patient selection criteria included examination, response to conservative therapy, imaging, psychological profile, and discography. North American Spine Society outcome questionnaires, BAK investigation data, radiographs, chart entries, billing records and patient interviews were the basis for assessment. Results. Age, sex, compensable injury history, and history of previous surgery were similar. Operative time, blood loss, hospitalization time, and total costs were significantly different. There was a quicker return to work and closure of workers' compensation claims for the posterior lumbar interbody fusion-BAK group. Patient satisfaction was comparable at last follow-up. Conclusions. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion-BAK achieves equal patient satisfaction but fiscally surpasses the 360 degrees fusion approach. Today's environment of regulated medical practice requires the surgeon to consider cost effectiveness when performing fusion for low back pain.
引用
收藏
页码:660 / 665
页数:6
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
BYRD JA, 1992, ANN M N AM SPIN SOC
[2]   NEURAL MECHANISMS OF LUMBAR PAIN [J].
CAVANAUGH, JM .
SPINE, 1995, 20 (16) :1804-1809
[4]   PROVOCATION DISCOGRAPHY AS A GUIDE TO PLANNING OPERATIONS ON THE SPINE [J].
COLHOUN, E ;
MCCALL, IW ;
WILLIAMS, L ;
PULLICINO, VNC .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1988, 70 (02) :267-271
[5]   A REAPPRAISAL OF INTERVERTEBRAL DISC LESIONS [J].
CROCK, HV .
MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 1970, 1 (20) :983-&
[6]  
CROCK HV, 1982, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, V165, P157
[7]  
LINSON MA, 1991, SPINE, V16, P143, DOI 10.1097/00007632-199102000-00008
[8]   REPORTED PAIN DURING LUMBAR DISCOGRAPHY AS A FUNCTION OF ANULAR RUPTURES AND DISC DEGENERATION - A REANALYSIS OF 833 DISCOGRAMS [J].
MONETA, GB ;
VIDEMAN, T ;
KAIVANTO, K ;
APRILL, C ;
SPIVEY, M ;
VANHARANTA, H ;
SACHS, BL ;
GUYER, RD ;
HOCHSCHULER, SH ;
RASCHBAUM, RF ;
MOONEY, V .
SPINE, 1994, 19 (17) :1968-1974
[9]   ANTERIOR LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION FOR INTERNAL DISK DISRUPTION [J].
NEWMAN, MH ;
GRINSTEAD, GL .
SPINE, 1992, 17 (07) :831-833
[10]   MAGNETIC-RESONANCE-IMAGING ASSESSMENT OF DISC DEGENERATION 10 YEARS AFTER ANTERIOR LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION [J].
PENTA, M ;
SANDHU, A ;
FRASER, RD .
SPINE, 1995, 20 (06) :743-747