Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Prospective, randomized multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 5-year results with a metal-on-metal artificial disc.
OBJECTIVE Seven cervical total disc replacement (TDR) devices have received FDA approval since 2006. These devices represent a heterogeneous assortment of implants made from various biomaterials with different biomechanical properties. The majority of these devices are composed of metallic endplates with a polymer core. ⋯ CONCLUSIONS Cervical TDR with an MoM device is safe and efficacious at the 5-year follow-up. These results from a prospective randomized study support that Kineflex|C TDR as a viable alternative to ACDF in appropriately selected patients with cervical radiculopathy. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT00374413 (clinicaltrials.gov).
-
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD), microendoscopic discectomy (MED), and microdiscectomy (MD) for treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH). METHODS One hundred ninety-two patients with symptomatic LDH at L3-4 and L4-5 were included in this study. The mean (± SD) age of patients was 34.2 ± 2.6 years (range 18-62 years). ⋯ Three cases (5.5%) in the PETD group had recurrent LDH, and 2 recurrent cases (3.4%) were confirmed in the MED group. CONCLUSIONS PETD, MED, and MD were all reliable techniques for the treatment of symptomatic LDH. With a restricted indication, PETD can result in rapid recovery and better clinical results after at least 2 years of follow-up.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy compared with microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation: 1-year results of an ongoing randomized controlled trial.
OBJECTIVE A prospective randomized controlled study was conducted to clarify whether percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) results in better clinical outcomes and less surgical trauma than microendoscopic discectomy (MED). METHODS In this single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial, patients were included if they had persistent signs and symptoms of radiculopathy with corresponding imaging-confirmed lumbar disc herniation. Patients were randomly allocated to the PTED or the MED group by computer-generated randomization codes. ⋯ CONCLUSIONS Over the 1-year follow-up period, PTED did not show superior clinical outcomes and did not seem to be a safer procedure for patients with lumbar disc herniation compared with MED. PTED had inferior results for median disc herniation, whereas MED did not seem to be the best treatment option for far-lateral disc herniation. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01997086 (clinicaltrials.gov).
-
OBJECTIVE The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), which is funded by the National Institutes of Health, is a set of adaptive, responsive assessment tools that measures patient-reported health status. PROMIS measures have not been validated for surgical patients with cervical spine disorders. The objective of this project is to evaluate the validity (e.g., convergent validity, known-groups validity, responsiveness to change) of PROMIS computer adaptive tests (CATs) for pain behavior, pain interference, and physical function in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. ⋯ CONCLUSIONS This study verifies that PROMIS CATs demonstrate convergent and known-groups validity and comparable responsiveness to change as existing legacy measures. The PROMIS measures required less time for completion than legacy measures. The validity and efficiency of the PROMIS measures in surgical patients with cervical spine disorders suggest an improvement over legacy measures and an opportunity for incorporation into clinical practice.
-
OBJECTIVE Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a progressive spinal condition that often requires surgery. Studies have shown the clinical equivalency of anterior versus posterior approaches for CSM surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine the amount and type of resources used for anterior and posterior surgical treatment of CSM by using large national databases of clinical and financial information from patients. ⋯ There is a statistically significant higher resource utilization for patients undergoing the posterior approach for CSM, which is consistent with the literature. Understanding the reimbursement patterns for anterior versus posterior approaches for CSM will help providers design a bundled payment for patients requiring surgery for CSM, and this study suggests that a subset of patients who require the posterior approach for treatment also require greater resources. The data also suggest that hospital-related reimbursement is the major driver of payments.