An economic model of one-level lumbar arthroplasty versus fusion

被引:36
作者
Guyer, Richard D. [1 ]
Tromanhauser, Scott G. [2 ]
Regan, John J. [3 ]
机构
[1] Texas Back Inst, Plano, TX 75093 USA
[2] Boston Spine Grp, Boston, MA 02120 USA
[3] W Coast Spine Inst, Beverly Hills, CA 90212 USA
关键词
lumbar spine; arthroplasty; disc replacement; fusion; arthrodesis; economic model;
D O I
10.1016/j.spinee.2006.09.006
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a cause of low back pain commonly requiring surgical intervention. The option of lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) represents an advance in the surgical treatment of DDD. However, new treatments, particularly those that include the use of new implants, may lead to increased costs to both hospitals and payers. Therefore, it is both necessary and appropriate to examine the potential costs associated with a new procedure such as total disc replacement compared with traditional treatments for a specific pathology. PURPOSE: To perform an economic analysis of lumbar TDR versus three different techniques for lumbar fusion. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A cost-minimization model. METHODS: An economic model examining hospital and payer cost perspectives was developed to compare costs of TDR with the CHARITE (R) Artificial Disc to three spinal fusion procedures: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with iliac crest bone graft (ICBG); ALIF with INFUSE (R) Bone Graft and LT-Cages, and instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion (IPLIF) with ICBG. The hospital perspective compares direct medical costs during the index hospitalization. The payer perspective considers direct medical costs of the index hospitalization and those incurred in the following two-year period. The model contains a Diagnostic Related Group (DRG) arm based strictly on DRG coding and payment, and a per-diem arm that includes a device carve-out cost and payment. RESULTS: In the DRG and per-diem arms of the model, compared with TDR, hospital costs are 12.0% higher for ALTF with ICBG, 36.5% higher for ALIF with INFUSE, and 36.5% higher for IPLIF. For payers, in the per-diem arm compared with TDR, ALIF with ICBG has 4.4% lower cost, whereas ALIF with INFUSE and IPLIF have costs of 16.1 % and 27.1 % higher, respectively. In the DRG arm compared with TDR, payer cost is 87.1 % higher for ALIF with ICBG, 82.8% higher for ALIF with INFUSE, and 99.0% higher for IPLIF. CONCLUSIONS: The model shows that the overall economic effect of one-level TDR procedures on hospitals and payers is likely to be less than or at worse equivalent to one-level lumbar fusion procedures. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:558 / 562
页数:5
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]
Economic analysis of finasteride:: A model-based approach using data from the Proscar® long-term efficacy and safety study [J].
Albertsen, PC ;
Pellissier, JM ;
Lowe, FC ;
Girman, CJ ;
Roehrborn, CG .
CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 1999, 21 (06) :1006-1024
[2]
Cost-effectiveness of single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylosis [J].
Angevine, PD ;
Zivin, JG ;
McCormick, PC .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (17) :1989-1997
[3]
An economic model to estimate the relative costs over 20 years of different hip prostheses [J].
Baxter, K ;
Bevan, G .
JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 1999, 53 (09) :542-547
[4]
Resource cost analysis of cervical spine trauma radiography [J].
Blackmore, CC ;
Zelman, WN ;
Glick, ND .
RADIOLOGY, 2001, 220 (03) :581-587
[5]
Cervical spine screening with CT in trauma patients: A cost-effectiveness analysis [J].
Blackmore, CC ;
Ramsey, SD ;
Mann, FA ;
Deyo, RA .
RADIOLOGY, 1999, 212 (01) :117-125
[6]
A prospective, randomized, multicenter food and drug administration Investigational device exemptions study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITE™ artificial disc versus lumbar fusion Part I:: Evaluation of clinical outcomes [J].
Blumenthal, S ;
McAfee, PC ;
Guyer, RD ;
Hochschuler, SH ;
Geisler, FH ;
Holt, RT ;
Garcia, R ;
Regan, JJ ;
Ohnmeiss, DD .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (14) :1565-1575
[7]
Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F Cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system - Two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Clinical Trial [J].
Brantigan, JW ;
Steffee, AD ;
Lewis, ML ;
Quinn, LM ;
Persenaire, JM .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (11) :1437-1446
[8]
Is INFUSE bone graft superior to autograft bone? An integrated analysis of clinical trials using the LT-CAGE lumbar tapered fusion device [J].
Burkus, JK ;
Heim, TE ;
Gornet, MF ;
Zdeblick, TA .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2003, 16 (02) :113-122
[9]
Reply to the author's comment to the letters of K.!Buttner-Janz and H. D.!Link regarding "Charite total disc replacement-clinical and radiographical results after an average follow-up of 17 years (M.!Putzier et al.) [J].
Büttner-Janz, K .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2006, 15 (04) :521-522
[10]
Letter to the Editor concerning "Charite total disc replacement:: clinical and radiographical results after an average follow-up of 17 years" (M.!Putzier et al.) [J].
Büttner-Janz, K .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2006, 15 (04) :510-513