Long-term quality of life after posterior cervical foraminotomy for radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVES: Cervical radiculopathy may cause symptoms and loss of function that can lead to a significant reduction in health related quality of life (HRQOL). As part of a comprehensive review of long-term outcomes, we examined HRQOL in a large cohort of patients undergoing posterior cervical foraminotomy (FOR) for radiculopathy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 338 patients who underwent FOR between 1990 and 2009 participated in a telephone interview designed to measure symptomatic and functional improvements following surgery. We also administered the EQ-5D, a standardized tool for assessing HRQOL. We analyzed this data for associations between patient and treatment characteristics, improvements in symptoms and function, and HRQOL as measured by the EQ-5D. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 10.0 years. The average EQ-5D at follow-up was 0.81±0.18, and improvements in pain, weakness and function as well as ability to return to work correlated with improved EQ-5D score (p<0.0001). There was no correlation between length of follow-up and EQ-5D score (p=0.980). Additionally, there was no difference between mean EQ-5D score for soft disc versus osteophyte pathology (0.84 versus 0.81, p=0.21). CONCLUSION: These data provide evidence that FOR for cervical radiculopathy is associated with improved HRQOL at long-term follow-up. The lack of correlation between length of follow-up and HRQOL suggests that FOR is a durable treatment option. Moreover, FOR is associated with improved HRQOL whether radiculopathy is due to soft disc or osteophyte pathology.

Cost-effectiveness of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: experience with the NeuroPoint-SD registry.

OBJECT: There is significant practice variation and uncertainty as to the value of surgical treatments for lumbar spine disorders. The authors' aim was to establish a multicenter registry to assess the efficacy and costs of common lumbar spinal procedures by using prospectively collected outcomes. METHODS: An observational prospective cohort study was completed at 13 academic and community sites. Patients undergoing single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis or single-level lumbar discectomy were included. The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) data were obtained preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Power analysis estimated a sample size of 160 patients: lumbar disc (125 patients) and lumbar listhesis (35 patients). The quality-adjusted life year (QALY) data were calculated using 6-dimension utility index scores. Direct costs and complication costs were estimated using Medicare reimbursement values from 2011, and indirect costs were estimated using the human capital approach with the 2011 US national wage index. Total costs equaled $14,980 for lumbar discectomy and $43,852 for surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis. RESULTS: There were 198 patients enrolled over 1 year. The mean age was 46 years (49% female) for lumbar discectomy (n = 148) and 58.1 years (60% female) for lumbar spondylolisthesis (n = 50). Ten patients with disc herniation (6.8%) and 1 with listhesis (2%) required repeat operation at 1 year. The overall 1-year follow-up rate was 88%. At 30 days, both lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion procedures were associated with significant improvements in ODI, visual analog scale, and SF-36 scores (p = 0.0002), which persisted at the 1-year evaluation (p < 0.0001). By 1 year, more than 80% of patients in each cohort who were working preoperatively had returned to work. Lumbar discectomy was associated with a gain of 0.225 QALYs over the 1-year study period ($66,578/QALY gained). Lumbar spinal fusion for Grade I listhesis was associated with a gain of 0.195 QALYs over the 1-year study period ($224,420/QALY gained). CONCLUSIONS: This national spine registry demonstrated successful collection of high-quality outcomes data for spinal procedures in actual practice. These data are useful for demonstrating return to work and cost-effectiveness following surgical treatment of single-level lumbar disc herniation or spondylolisthesis. One-year cost per QALY was obtained, and this cost per QALY is expected to improve further by 2 years. This work sets the stage for real-world analysis of the value of health interventions.

Cervical laminoforaminotomy for radiculopathy: Symptomatic and functional outcomes in a large cohort with long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of cervical laminoforaminotomy (FOR) in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy has been demonstrated in several series with follow-up less than a decade. However, there is little data analyzing the relative effectiveness of FOR for radiculopathy due to soft disc versus osteophyte disease. In the present study, we review our experience with FOR in a single-center cohort, with long-term follow-up. METHODS: We examined the charts of patients who underwent 1085 FORs between 1990 and 2009. A cohort of these patients participated in a telephone interview designed to assess improvement in symptoms and function. RESULTS: A total of 338 interviews were completed with a mean follow-up of 10 years. Approximately 90% of interviewees reported improved pain, weakness, or function following FOR. Ninety-three percent of patients were able to return to work after FOR. The overall complication rate was 3.3%, and the rate of recurrent radiculopathy requiring surgery was 6.2%. Soft disc subtypes compared to osteophyte disease by operative report were associated with improved symptoms (P < 0.05). The operative report of these pathologic subtypes was associated with the preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interpretation (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that FOR is a highly effective surgical treatment for cervical radiculopathy with a low incidence of complications. Radiculopathy due to soft disc subtypes may be associated with a better prognosis compared to osteophyte disease, although osteophyte disease remains an excellent indication for FOR.

The efficacy of lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis: results from the NeuroPoint-SD registry: clinical article.

OBJECT: There is significant practice variation and considerable uncertainty among payers and other major stakeholders as to whether many surgical treatments are effective in actual US spine practice. The aim of this study was to establish a multicenter cooperative research group and demonstrate the feasibility of developing a registry to assess the efficacy of common lumbar spinal procedures using prospectively collected patient-reported outcome measures. METHODS: An observational prospective cohort study was conducted at 13 US academic and community sites. Unselected patients undergoing lumbar discectomy or single-level fusion for spondylolisthesis were included. Patients completed the 36-item Short-Form Survey Instrument (SF-36), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaires preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Power analysis estimated a sample size of 160 patients: 125 patients with lumbar disc herniation, and 35 with lumbar spondylolisthesis. All patient data were entered into a secure Internet-based data management platform. RESULTS: Of 249 patients screened, there were 198 enrolled over 1 year. The median age of the patients was 45.0 years (49% female) for lumbar discectomy (n = 148), and 58.0 years (58% female) for lumbar spondylolisthesis (n = 50). At 30 days, 12 complications (6.1% of study population) were identified. Ten patients (6.8%) with disc herniation and 1 (2%) with spondylolisthesis required reoperation. The overall follow-up rate for the collection of patient-reported outcome data over 1 year was 88.3%. At 30 days, both lumbar discectomy and single-level fusion procedures were associated with significant improvements in ODI, VAS, and SF-36 scores (p ≤ 0.0002), which persisted over the 1-year follow-up period (p < 0.0001). By the 1-year follow-up evaluation, more than 80% of patients in each cohort who were working preoperatively had returned to work. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to build a national spine registry for the collection of high-quality prospective data to demonstrate the effectiveness of spinal procedures in actual practice. Clinical trial registration no.: 01220921 (ClinicalTrials.gov).