Perioperative outcomes, complications, and costs associated with lumbar spinal fusion in older patients with spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. E5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L. Ong ◽  
Joshua D. Auerbach ◽  
Edmund Lau ◽  
Jordana Schmier ◽  
Jorge A. Ochoa

Object The purpose of this study was to quantify the perioperative outcomes, complications, and costs associated with posterolateral spinal fusion (PSF) among Medicare enrollees with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and/or spondylolisthesis by using a national Medicare claims database. Methods A 5% systematic sample of Medicare claims data (2005–2009) was used to identify outcomes in patients who had undergone PSF for a diagnosis of LSS and/or spondylolisthesis. Patients eligible for study inclusion also required a minimum of 2 years of follow-up and a claim history of at least 12 months prior to surgery. Results A final cohort of 1672 patients was eligible for analysis. Approximately half (50.7%) had LSS only, 10.2% had spondylolisthesis only, and 39.1% had both LSS and spondylolisthesis. The average age was 71.4 years, and the average length of stay was 4.6 days. At 3 months and 1 and 2 years postoperatively, the incidence of spine reoperation was 10.9%, 13.3%, and 16.9%, respectively, whereas readmissions for complications occurred in 11.1%, 17.5%, and 24.9% of cases, respectively. At 2 years postoperatively, 36.2% of patients had either undergone spine reoperation and/or received an epidural injection. The average Medicare payment was $36,230 ± $17,020, $46,840 ± $31,350, and $61,610 ± $46,580 at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery, respectively. Conclusions The data showed that 1 in 6 elderly patients treated with PSF for LSS or spondylolisthesis underwent reoperation on the spine within 2 years of surgery, and nearly 1 in 4 patients was readmitted for a surgery-related complication. These data highlight several potential areas in which improvements may be made in the effective delivery and cost of surgical care for patients with spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis.

This case focuses on using an epidural on spinal stenosis by asking the question: What is the effectiveness of epidural injections of glucocorticoids plus anesthetic compared with injections of anesthetic alone in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis? This study demonstrated that epidural injection containing glucocorticoids for the treatment of lumbar stenosis offered minimal or no benefit over epidural injection of lidocaine alone at 6 weeks. Systemic absorption of glucocorticoids and suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis were demonstrated among patients who received epidural injections containing glucocorticoids.


2002 ◽  
Vol 97 (4) ◽  
pp. 460-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley R. Poynton ◽  
Fengyu Zheng ◽  
Emre Tomin ◽  
Joseph M. Lane ◽  
G. Bryan Cornwall

Object. The authors studied the effect of a resorbable graft containment device in a rabbit posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion model. Methods. Twenty rabbits were divided into four groups: autologous bone graft (ABG), ABG with the MacroPore containment device (ABG + MP), demineralized bone matrix (DBM), and DBM with the containment device (DBM + MP). Fusion mass was assessed at 6 weeks with high-resolution radiography and volumetric computerized tomography. The graft containment device was associated with alteration of the fusion mass structure and significant enhancement of fusion mass volume (ABG versus ABG + MP, p = 0.027; DBM versus DBM + MP, p = 0.043). Conclusions. A bioabsorbable protective graft containment device successfully enhanced posterolateral spinal fusion mass volume.


Author(s):  
Ulf Krister Hofmann ◽  
Ramona Luise Keller ◽  
Maximilian von Bernstorff ◽  
Christian Walter ◽  
Falk Mittag

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin F. Fraser ◽  
Russel C. Huang ◽  
Federico P. Girardi ◽  
Frank P. Cammisa

Sagittal- or coronal-plane deformity considerably complicates the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Although decompressive laminectomy remains the standard operative treatment for uncomplicated lumbar spinal stenosis, the management of stenosis with concurrent deformity may require osteotomy, laminectomy, and spinal fusion with or without instrumentation. Broadly stated, the surgery-related goals in complex stenosis are neural decompression and a well-balanced sagittal and coronal fusion. Deformities that may present with concurrent stenosis are scoliosis, spondylolisthesis, and flatback deformity. The presentation and management of lumbar spinal stenosis associated with concurrent coronal or sagittal deformities depends on the type and extent of deformity as well as its impact on neural compression. Generally, clinical outcomes in complex stenosis are optimized by decompression combined with spinal fusion. The need for instrumentation is clear in cases of significant scoliosis or flatback deformity but is controversial in spondylolisthesis. With appropriate selection of technique for deformity correction, a surgeon may profoundly improve pain, quality of life, and functional capacity. The decision to undertake surgery entails weighing risk factors such as age, comorbidities, and preoperative functional status against potential benefits of improved neurological function, decreased pain, and reduced risk of disease progression. The purpose of this paper is to review the pathogenesis, presentation, and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis complicated by scoliosis, spondylolisthesis, or flat-back deformity. Specific attention is paid to surgery-related goals, decision making, techniques, and outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document