Search

Anxiety and depression are associated with suboptimal outcomes, higher complications, and cost of care after elective spine surgery. The effect of combined anxiety-depression and preoperative antidepressant treatment in spinal fusion patients is not known.To study the burden of combined anxiety-depression and its impact on healthcare utilization and costs in patients undergoing spinal fusion and to study the prevalence and impact of antidepressant treatment preoperatively.This is a retrospective cohort study from the IBM MarketScan Research Database (2000-2018). Patients were studied in 7 different "phenotypes" of anxiety and depression based on combination of diagnoses and treatment. Outcome measures included healthcare utilization and costs from 1 year preoperatively to 2 years postoperatively. Bivariate and multivariable analyses have been reported.We studied 75 087 patients with a median age of 57 years. Patients with combined anxiety-depression were associated with higher preoperative and postoperative healthcare utilization and costs, as compared with anxiety or depression alone. The presence of depression in patients with and without anxiety disorder was a risk factor for postoperative opioid use and 2-year reoperation rates, as compared with anxiety alone. Patients with anxiety and/or depression on antidepressants are associated with significantly higher healthcare costs and opioid use. The adjusted 2-year reoperation rate was not significantly different between treated and untreated cohorts.Spine surgeons should use appropriate measures/questionnaires to screen depressed patients for anxiety and vice versa because the presence of both adds significant risk of higher healthcare utilization and costs over patients with 1 diagnosis, especially anxiety alone.

BACKGROUND Preoperative depression is a risk factor for poor outcomes after spine surgery. OBJECTIVE To understand effects of depression on spine surgery outcomes and healthcare resource utilization. METHODS Using IBM's MarketScan Database, we identified 52 480 patients who underwent spinal fusion. Retained patients were classified into 6 depression phenotype groups based on International Classification of Disease, 9th/10th Revision (ICD-9/10) codes and use/nonuse of antidepressant medications: major depressive disorder (MDD), other depression (OthDep), antidepressants for other psychiatric condition (PsychRx), antidepressants for physical (nonpsychiatric) condition (NoPsychRx), psychiatric condition only (PsychOnly), and no depression (NoDep). We analyzed baseline demographics, comorbidities, healthcare utilization/payments, and chronic opioid use. RESULTS Breakdown of groups in our cohort: MDD (15%), OthDep (12%), PsychRx (13%), NonPsychRx (15%), PsychOnly (12%), and NoDep (33%). Postsurgery: increased outpatient resource utilization, admissions, and medication refills at 1, 2, and 5 yr in the NoDep, PsychOnly, NonPsychRx, PsychRx, and OthDep groups, and highest in MDD. Postoperative opioid usage rates remained unchanged in MDD (44%) and OthDep (36%), and reduced in PsychRx (40%), NonPsychRx (31%), and PsychOnly (20%), with greatest reduction in NoDep (13%). Reoperation rates: 1 yr after index procedure, MDD, OthDep, PsychRx, NonPsychRx, and PsychOnly had more reoperations compared to NoDep, and same at 2 and 5 yr. In NoDep patients, 45% developed new depressive phenotype postsurgery. CONCLUSION EHR-defined classification allowed us to study in depth the effects of depression in spine surgery. This increased understanding of the interplay of mental health will help providers identify cohorts at risk for high complication rates, and health care utilization.

BACKGROUND Anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) are the mainstay surgical treatment options for patients with degenerative cervical radiculopathy (DCR). OBJECTIVE To compare 90-d bundled payments between ACDF and PCF for DCR in a cohort study. METHODS Data were extracted from MarketScan database (2000-2016) using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT-4 codes. The bundle payments were calculated as the payments accumulated from the index hospitalization admission to 90 d postsurgery. We also analyzed the index hospitalization (physician, hospital, and total) and the postdischarge payments (hospital readmission, outpatient services, medications, and total). Surgical groups were matched based on baseline characteristics (age, sex, insurance type, and Elixhauser score). RESULTS A total of 100 041 patients met the inclusion criteria. 94.9% of patients (n = 95 031). Patients underwent ACDF with 5.1% (n = 5 010) treated via PCF. Overall, median 90-d costs were significantly higher for ACDF than for PCF ($31567 vs $18412; P < .0001). The median total index hospitalization ($27841 vs $15043), physician ($4572 vs $1920), and hospital payments ($14540 vs $7404) were higher for ACDF compared to PCF for both single- and multiple-level cohorts (P < .0001). There was no difference in overall 90-d postdischarge payments. Factors associated with higher 90-d payments for both cohorts included age and comorbidity scores. CONCLUSION ACDF is associated with greater bundle payments in patients diagnosed with DCR. No difference was noted for the total postdischarge payments. PCF may be a cost-effective surgical option in appropriately selected patients with unilateral, paracentral, and foraminal soft herniated discs.

Introduction and Methods Prompt management of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is critical. Literature is inconclusive regarding outcomes for patients directly-admitted to specialized centers versus transferred from lower-volume hospitals. Providers are often unclear about the safety of transferring critical patients. This study evaluated the “transfer effect” in a large sample of aneurysmal SAH patients undergoing treatment. Using NIS 20022007 data, we analyzed outcomes of SAH patients treated with coil or clip procedures. Analyses studied the effect of direct-admit versus transfer admission on mortality, discharge disposition, complications, Length of stay (LOS) and total charges. Results Of 47,114 patients, 31,711 (67.3%) were directadmits and 15,403 (32.7%) were transfers. More transfer patients were coiled than direct-admits (45.3% vs. 33.7%, p

BACKGROUND Lateral interbody fusion techniques have been linked with considerable postoperative morbidity, often the outcome of direct psoas trauma. The most common neurological postoperative complications are transient motor weakness/palsy and sensory dysesthesia, which can be permanent. It appears that these neural complications are a result of passing through the psoas muscle where the potential for nerve injury is significant. The supra-psoas shallow docking method may be a safer alternative and may help minimize morbidities by eliminating or reducing direct psoas injury. OBJECTIVE To describe the operative technique of performing lateral interbody fusion using supra-psoas retractor docking. METHODS The authors describe the surgical technique including side selection, positioning, and patient outcomes. RESULTS Fifteen patients were treated with the supra-psoas shallow docking method. Specifically, no patient reported weakness, numbness, and/or pain on the side that underwent the surgery. In these cases, performing lateral transpsoas interbody fusion using supra-psoas shallow docking appeared to minimize the most common neurological postoperative complications of the surgery, motor weakness/palsy and sensory dysesthesia, which may be a result of dilation of the psoas muscle. CONCLUSION The shallow docking technique may decrease postoperative morbidities by docking on top of psoas muscle instead of passing through it. An important potential benefit of this approach is direct visualization of the lumbosacral plexus, which may potentially minimize the postoperative neurological morbidity often encountered in patients after this surgery.