Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity Between Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty Performed in the Inpatient and Outpatient Settings Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP Dataset

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objective: Spine surgery has been increasingly performed in the outpatient setting, providing greater control over cost, efficiency, and resource utilization. However, research evaluating the safety of this trend is limited. The objective of this study is to compare 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity for patients undergoing lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) in the inpatient versus outpatient settings. Methods: Patients who underwent LDA from 2005 to 2018 were identified using the ACS-NSQIP (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database. Regression was utilized to compare readmission, reoperation, and morbidity between surgical settings, and to evaluate for predictors thereof. Results: We identified 751 patients. There were no significant differences between inpatient and outpatient LDA in rates of readmission, reoperation, or morbidity on univariate or multivariate analyses. There were also no significant differences in rates of specific complications. Inpatient operative time (138 ± 75 minutes) was significantly ( P < .001) longer than outpatient operative time (106 ± 43 minutes). In multivariate analysis, diabetes ( P < .001, OR = 7.365), baseline dyspnea ( P = .039, OR = 6.447), and increased platelet count ( P = .048, OR = 1.007) predicted readmission. Diabetes ( P = .016, OR = 6.533) and baseline dyspnea ( P = .046, OR = 13.814) predicted reoperation. Baseline dyspnea ( P = .021, OR = 8.188) and ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) class ≥3 ( P = .014, OR = 3.515) predicted morbidity. Decreased hematocrit ( P = .008) and increased operative time ( P = .003) were associated with morbidity in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Readmission, reoperation, and morbidity were statistically similar between surgical setting, indicating that LDA can be safely performed in the outpatient setting. Higher ASA class and specific comorbidities predicted poorer 30-day outcomes. These findings can guide choice of surgical setting given specific patient factors.

Lumbar Arthroplasty: Past, Present, and Future

Lumbar degenerative disc disease is a pathologic process that affects a large portion of our aging population. In the recent past, surgical treatment has involved fusion procedures. However, lumbar disc arthroplasty and replacement provides an alternative for carefully selected patients. It provides the major advantage of motion preservation and thus keeps adjacent segments from significantly progressive degeneration. The history of lumbar disc replacement has roots that start in the 1960s with the implantation of stainless-steel balls. Decades later, multiple implants with different material design and biomechanical properties were introduced to the market. New third-generation implants have made great strides in improved biomechanics and clinical outcomes. Although there is room for further advancement and studies are warranted to assess the long-term durability and sustainability of lumbar disc arthroplasty, it has certainly proven to be a very acceptable alternative within the surgical armamentarium that should be offered to patients who meet indications. In this review we present an overview of lumbar disc arthroplasty including its history, indications, biomechanics, challenges, and future directions.

Lumbar disc arthroplasty versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion: 5-year outcomes for patients in the Maverick disc investigational device exemption study

OBJECTIVEDespite evidence of its safety and effectiveness, the use of lumbar disc arthroplasty has been slow to expand due in part to concerns about late complications and the risks of revision surgery associated with early devices. More recently, FDA approval of newer devices and improving reimbursements have reversed this trend in the United States. Additional long-term data on lumbar disc arthroplasty are still needed. This study reports the 5-year results of the FDA investigational device exemption clinical trial of the Medtronic Spinal and Biologics’ Maverick total disc replacement.METHODSPatients with single-level degenerative disc disease from L4 to S1 were randomized 2:1 at 31 investigational sites. In the period from April 2003 to August 2004, 405 patients received the investigational device and 172 patients underwent the control procedure of anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scales (NRSs) for back and leg pain, the SF-36, disc height, interbody motion, heterotopic ossification (investigational device), adverse events (AEs), additional surgeries, and neurological status. Treatment was considered an overall success when all of the following criteria were met: 1) ODI score improvement ≥ 15 points over the preoperative score; 2) maintenance or improvement in neurological status compared with preoperatively; 3) disc height success, that is, no more than a 2-mm reduction in anterior or posterior height; 4) no serious AEs caused by the implant or by the implant and the surgical procedure; and 5) no additional surgery classified as a failure.RESULTSCompared to that in the control group, improvement in the investigational group was statistically greater according to the ODI and SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) at 1, 2, and 5 years; the NRS for back pain at 1 and 2 years; and the NRS for leg pain at 1 year. The rates of heterotopic ossification increased over time: 1.0% (4/382) at 1 year, 2.6% (9/345) at 2 years, and 5.9% (11/187) at 5 years. Investigational patients had fewer device-related AEs and serious device-related AEs than the control patients at both 2 and 5 years postoperatively. Noninferiority of the composite measure overall success was demonstrated at all follow-up intervals; superiority was demonstrated at 1 and 2 years.CONCLUSIONSLumbar disc arthroplasty is a safe and effective treatment for single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease, resulting in improved physical function and reduced pain up to 5 years after surgery.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00635843 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Anterior Longitudinal Ligament Reconstruction to Reduce Hypermobility of Cervical and Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty

<sec><title>Study Design</title><p>Retrospective case series</p></sec><sec><title>Purpose</title><p>This study aims to present the early clinical and radiological outcomes of anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) reconstruction following disc arthroplasty.</p></sec><sec><title>Overview of Literature</title><p>Although cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty have entered the clinical setting, there are still concerns regarding the short and long term complications arising from hypermobility of current prosthesis designs. Reconstruction of the ALL is a potential solution to disc arthroplasty hypermobility.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>ALL reconstruction following disc arthroplasty have been performed by the senior author over a 24 month period. Ligament replacements used include allograft and synthetic, ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) ligaments. Methods of fixation used include titanium staples, bone anchors and suture fixation. Radiological follow-up pre- and postoperative Oswestry disability index, Neck Disability Index, Patient Satisfaction index scores were recorded on all patients.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>A total of 18 ALL reconstructions were performed. There have been no cases of early complications, revision surgery for recurrent symptoms or implant failure. Of the 6 patients receiving a minimum of 15 months follow-up, 4 patients received an allograft, 2 patients received the LARS ligament. Favourable, postoperative clinical and radiographic outcomes have been demonstrated.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusions</title><p>ALL reconstruction following cervical and lumbar disc arthroplasty is a promising solution to addressing non-physiological kinematics of current disc arthroplasty devices. Randomized, controlled studies with larger study samples and long-term follow-up are required to establish these conclusions.</p></sec>

National Trends for Primary and Revision Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty Throughout the United States

Study Design: Retrospective database study. Objectives: Analysis of economic and demographic data concerning lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) throughout the United States to improve value-based care and health care utilization. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample database was queried for patients who underwent primary or revision LDA between 2005 and 2013. Demographic and economic data included total surgeries, costs, length of stay, and frequency of routine discharge. The National Inpatient Sample database represents a 20% sample of discharges from US hospitals weighted to provide national estimates. Results: Primary LDA decreased 86% from 3059 to 420 from 2005 to 2013. The mean total cost of LDA increased 33% from $17 747 to $23 804. The mean length of stay decreased from 2.8 to 2.4 days. The mean routine discharge (home discharge without visiting nursing care) remained constant at 91%. Revision procedures (removal, supplemental fixation, or reoperation at the treated level) declined 30% from 194 to 135 cases over the study period. The mean revision burden, defined as the ratio of revision procedures to the sum of primary and revision procedures, was 12% (range 6% to 24%). The mean total cost of revisions ranged from $12 752 to $22 282. Conclusions: From 2005 to 2013, primary LDA significantly declined in the United States by 86% despite several studies pointing to improved efficacy and cost-efficiency. This disparity may be related to a lack of surgeon reimbursement from insurance companies. Congruently, the number of revision LDA cases has declined 30%, while revision burden has risen from 6% to 24%.