Clinical spine surgery · 2024
Cervical Laminoplasty Is Associated With Lower Health Care Costs as Compared With Cervical Fusion Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Baumann Anthony N, Anaspure Omkar, Patel Shiv, Kermanshahi Nazanin, Yoder R Garrett, Conry Keegan T, Preston Gordon, Hoffmann Jacob C
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine the cost of CLP versus CF stratified by approach to guide decision-making.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical laminoplasty (CLP) and cervical fusion (CF) are viable alternatives for surgical management of cervical spine myelopathy, with no clear consensus on clinical superiority. However, despite clinical equivalence in patient outcomes, there is limited data on the relative costs between CLP and CF.
METHODS: This study searched PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Inclusion criteria were articles that examined the cost between CLP and any type of CF (stratified by anterior, posterior, or combined approach). A random-effects continuous model for meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (SMD).
RESULTS: Eleven articles were included. Patients (n = 21,033) had an average age of 56.0 ± 3.6 years and underwent either CLP (n = 4364), posterior CF (n = 3529), anterior CF (n = 13,084), or combined CF (n = 56). The mean reported cost among patients who underwent CLP (n=3742) was significantly lower compared with patients who underwent CF (n = 6329), irrespective of the approach for CF ( P = 0.028; SMD = -2.965). For subgroup analysis by surgical approach, the mean reported cost among patients treated with CLP was significantly lower as compared with patients treated with posterior CF ( P = 0.013; SMD = -1.861) and anterior CF ( P < 0.001; SMD = -0.344). Patients who underwent CLP had a significantly lower mean hardware cost than patients who underwent posterior CF ( P < 0.001; SMD = -3.275).
CONCLUSIONS: CLP appears to be associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant lower reported costs than CF, irrespective of the approach based on meta-analysis of low or moderate-quality retrospective studies. CLP may also have lower reported costs than both posterior CF and anterior CF.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine the cost of CLP versus CF stratified by approach to guide decision-making.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical laminoplasty (CLP) and cervical fusion (CF) are viable alternatives for surgical management of cervical spine myelopathy, with no clear consensus on clinical superiority. However, despite clinical equivalence in patient outcomes, there is limited data on the relative costs between CLP and CF.
METHODS: This study searched PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Inclusion criteria were articles that examined the cost between CLP and any type of CF (stratified by anterior, posterior, or combined approach). A random-effects continuous model for meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (SMD).
RESULTS: Eleven articles were included. Patients (n = 21,033) had an average age of 56.0 ± 3.6 years and underwent either CLP (n = 4364), posterior CF (n = 3529), anterior CF (n = 13,084), or combined CF (n = 56). The mean reported cost among patients who underwent CLP (n=3742) was significantly lower compared with patients who underwent CF (n = 6329), irrespective of the approach for CF ( P = 0.028; SMD = -2.965). For subgroup analysis by surgical approach, the mean reported cost among patients treated with CLP was significantly lower as compared with patients treated with posterior CF ( P = 0.013; SMD = -1.861) and anterior CF ( P < 0.001; SMD = -0.344). Patients who underwent CLP had a significantly lower mean hardware cost than patients who underwent posterior CF ( P < 0.001; SMD = -3.275).
CONCLUSIONS: CLP appears to be associated with statistically significant and clinically relevant lower reported costs than CF, irrespective of the approach based on meta-analysis of low or moderate-quality retrospective studies. CLP may also have lower reported costs than both posterior CF and anterior CF.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.