scholarly journals Long-Term Results of Discover Single Level Total Cervical Disc Replacement: A Single Center Study of 100 Patients with a Minimum 4-Year Follow-Up

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. s-0035-1554288-s-0035-1554288
Author(s):  
Marjan Rozankovic ◽  
Sergej Marasanov ◽  
Velimir Lupret ◽  
Miroslav Vukic
Keyword(s):  
Disc Replacement ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Cervical Disc Replacement ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Center Study

Cost-effectiveness analysis: comparing single-level cervical disc replacement and single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 546-554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven McAnany ◽  
Vadim Goz ◽  
Steven M. Koehler ◽  
Andrew C. Hecht
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Disc Replacement ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Reference Case ◽  
Cervical Disc Replacement ◽  
Single Level

Object In recent years, there has been increased interest in the use of cervical disc replacement (CDR) as an alternative to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). While ACDF is a proven intervention for patients with myelopathy or radiculopathy, it does have inherent limitations. Cervical disc replacement was designed to preserve motion, avoid the limitations of fusion, and theoretically allow for a quicker return to activity. A number of recently published systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials have demonstrated positive clinical results for CDR, but no studies have revealed which of the 2 treatment strategies is more cost-effective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CDR and ACDF by using the power of decision analysis. Additionally, the authors aimed to identify the most critical factors affecting procedural cost and effectiveness and to define thresholds for durability and function to focus and guide future research. Methods The authors created a surgical decision model for the treatment of single-level cervical disc disease with associated radiculopathy. The literature was reviewed to identify possible outcomes and their likelihood following CDR and ACDF. Health state utility factors were determined from the literature and assigned to each possible outcome, and procedural effectiveness was expressed in units of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Using ICD-9 procedure codes and data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the authors calculated the median cost of hospitalization by multiplying hospital charges by the hospital-specific cost-to-charge ratio. Gross physician costs were determined from the mean Medicare reimbursement for each current procedural terminology (CPT) code. Uncertainty as regards both cost and effectiveness numbers was assessed using sensitivity analysis. Results In the reference case, the model assumed a 20-year duration for the CDR prosthesis. Cervical disc replacement led to higher average QALYs gained at a lower cost to society if both strategies survived for 20 years ($3042/QALY for CDR vs $8760/QALY for ACDF). Sensitivity analysis revealed that CDR needed to survive at least 9.75 years to be considered a more cost-effective strategy than ACDF. Cervical disc replacement becomes an acceptable societal strategy as the prosthesis survival time approaches 11 years and the $50,000/QALY gained willingness-to-pay threshold is crossed. Sensitivity analysis also indicated that CDR must provide a utility state of at least 0.796 to be cost-effective. Conclusions Both CDR and ACDF were shown to be cost-effective procedures in the reference case. Results of the sensitivity analysis indicated that CDR must remain functional for at least 14 years to establish greater cost-effectiveness than ACDF. Since the current literature has yet to demonstrate with certainty the actual durability and long-term functionality of CDR, future long-term studies are required to validate the present analysis.

Long-term follow-up of nipple-sparing mastectomy without radiotherapy: a single center study at a Japanese institution

2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Teruhisa Sakurai ◽  
Ning Zhang ◽  
Takaomi Suzuma ◽  
Teiji Umemura ◽  
Goro Yoshimura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Center ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing ◽  
Center Study

ALLOGENEIC CORD BLOOD TRANSPLANTATION IN CHILDREN WITH HEMATOLOGICAL MALIGNANCIES: A Long-Term Follow-Up Single-Center Study

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 165-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel A. Diaz ◽  
Marta Gonzalez-Vicent ◽  
Manuel Ramirez ◽  
Julian Sevilla ◽  
Alvaro Lassaletta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cord Blood ◽  
Hematological Malignancies ◽  
Cord Blood Transplantation ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Blood Transplantation ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Center Study

scholarly journals Single-Level Cervical Disc Replacement Using a PEEK-on-Ceramic Implant: Results of a Multicenter FDA IDE Trial With 24-Month Follow-up

10.14444/8084 ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 8084
Author(s):  
Richard D. Guyer ◽  
Domagoj Coric ◽  
Pierce D. Nunley ◽  
Rick C. Sasso ◽  
Michael Musacchio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disc Replacement ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Replacement ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Ceramic Implant

scholarly journals Mid- to long-term rates of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery after cervical total disc replacement compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized clinical trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yifei Deng ◽  
Guangzhou Li ◽  
Hao Liu ◽  
Ying Hong ◽  
Yang Meng
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cervical Fusion ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Disc Replacement ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Level ◽  
Cervical Total Disc Replacement ◽  
Cervical Disc Replacement

Abstract Background Thus far, no meta-analysis focusing on the mid- to long-term incidence of adjacent segment disease requiring surgery after cervical total disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion has been published yet. This study aimed to compare mid- to long-term rates of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery after cervical disc replacement and anterior cervical fusion. Methods A meta-analysis was performed, and only randomized controlled trials with a follow-up period of more than 48 months reporting rates of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery after cervical total disc replacement and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion were included. Results The analysis revealed that the overall rate of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery in the cervical disc replacement group was significantly lower than that of the anterior cervical fusion group at 48–120 months’ follow-up. The subgroup analysis of different follow-up periods also yielded the same results. The rate of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery in the cervical disc replacement group using unrestricted prosthesis was significantly lower than that of the anterior cervical fusion group (p < 0.001); however, the cervical disc replacement group using semi-restricted prosthesis showed no statistical difference compared with the fusion group. Conclusions Our review suggests that cervical disc replacement is preferable to anterior cervical fusion in reducing the incidence of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery at mid- to long-term follow-up. A review of the literature also demonstrated that randomized controlled trials investigating the rate of symptomatic adjacent-level disease requiring surgery were insufficient; therefore, studies focusing on this subject with longer-term follow-up are warranted.

Mo1485 – Long-Term Follow-Up After Recurrence of Primary Biliary Cholangitis Following Liver Transplantation: A Single Center Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 156 (6) ◽  
pp. S-1323
Author(s):  
Shreesh Shrestha ◽  
Thomas B. Wells ◽  
Stephen J. Soufleris ◽  
clanahan michael ◽  
Hemnishil K. Marella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Liver Transplantation ◽  
Primary Biliary Cholangitis ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Center Study

P1466Leadless pacemaker mid and long term follow-up in a single center-study

EP Europace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J L Martinez Sande ◽  
J Garcia-Seara ◽  
L Gonzalez-Melchor ◽  
C E Cacho-Antonio ◽  
X A Fernandez-Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Electrical Performance ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Electrical Parameters ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Center Study

Abstract Introduction and objectives Initial results of Leadless pacemakers (LPM) has been promising in worldwide, nevertheless there are still no long term experience published, so the objective of our study was to evaluate electrical parameters at mid  and long term follow-up, describing as well total complications and mortality in a single center-study. Methods   This was a prospective, observational clinical trial that included 183 consecutive patients, with an indication for a single-chamber pacemaker implantation. Results   All successful implantation included a total of 183 patients with a mean age of 79,2 ±6,6 years (range 54-93y/o); 111 (60,6%) were men and more frequent rhythm was permanent atrial fibrillation (160), including those in which a node ablation was performed in the same procedure (22). Clinical and echocardiographyc characteristics are described in table 1.Mean follow-up was of 26 ±10 months including: 64 patient at 24 months, 46 at 36 months and 7 patients at 48 months. Electrical parameters are represented in figure 1, which were stable and flawless at long term follow-up.  Total complications were 3,3%, with only 2 patient requiring surgery for resolution (1,7%), and all were acute during LPM implantation. A total of 17 patients (9,3%) died with no relation to pacemaker.  Conclusions In our experience, leadless pacemakers electrical performance continues stable, appropriate at long term follow-up, and no other complications developed. Baseline Characteristics of Patients Age(years) 79.2 ± 6.6[54-93] Male gender, n (%) 118 (60.6%) Hypertension, n (%) 149 (81.7%) Diabetes mellitus, n (%) 64 (34.9%) COPD, n (%) 33(18.3%) Renal dysfunction, n (%) 30 (16.7%) Valvular disease, n (%) 74 (41.1%) Atrial Fibrillation, n (%) 161 (98.0%) LVEF(%) 60.0 ± 8 OAC, n (%) 123(67.2%) NOAC, n (%) 23 (10.0%) Abstract Figure. Electrical performance

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document