Safety and Efficacy of Outpatient Anterior Cervical Disk Replacement (ACDR) in an Ambulatory Surgery Center Versus Hospital Setting: A 2-year Retrospective Analysis.
Journal
Clinical spine surgery
ISSN: 2380-0194
Titre abrégé: Clin Spine Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101675083
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Feb 2024
16 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
17
05
2023
accepted:
22
01
2024
medline:
17
2
2024
pubmed:
17
2
2024
entrez:
17
2
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Retrospective cohort analysis. To compare clinical outcomes of outpatient anterior cervical disk replacements (ACDR) performed in free-standing private ambulatory surgery centers versus tertiary hospital centers. ACDR is an increasingly popular technique for treating various degenerative pathologies of the cervical spine. There has been an increase in the utilization of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) for outpatient cervical procedures due to economic and convenience benefits; however, a paucity of literature exists in evaluating long-term safety and efficacy of ACDRs performed in ASCs versus outpatient hospital centers. A retrospective cohort review of all patients undergoing 1- or 2-level ACDRs at 2 outpatient ASCs and 4 tertiary care medical centers from 2012 to 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months, was performed. Approval by each patient's insurance and patient preference determined distribution into an ASC or non-ASC. Demographics, perioperative data, length of follow-up, complications, and revision rates were analyzed. Functional outcomes were assessed using VAS and NDI at follow-up visits. One hundred seventeen patients were included (65 non-ASC and 52 ASC). There were no significant differences in demographics or length of follow-up between the cohorts. ASC patients had significantly lower operative times (ASC: 89.5 minutes vs. non-ASC: 110.5 minutes, P<0.001) and mean blood loss (ASC: 17.5 mL vs. non-ASC: 25.3 mL, P<0.001). No significant differences were observed in rates of dysphagia (ASC: 21.2% vs. non-ASC: 15.6%, P<0.001), infection (ASC: 0.0% vs. non-ASC: 1.6%, P=0.202), ASD (ASC: 1.9% vs. non-ASC: 1.6%, P=0.202), or revision (ASC: 1.9% vs. non-ASC: 0.0%, P=0.262). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS and NDI scores (P<0.001), but no significant differences in the degree of improvement were observed. Our 2-year results demonstrate that ACDRs performed in ASCs may offer the advantages of reduced operative time and blood loss without an increased risk of postoperative complications.
Sections du résumé
STUDY DESIGN
METHODS
Retrospective cohort analysis.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To compare clinical outcomes of outpatient anterior cervical disk replacements (ACDR) performed in free-standing private ambulatory surgery centers versus tertiary hospital centers.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
BACKGROUND
ACDR is an increasingly popular technique for treating various degenerative pathologies of the cervical spine. There has been an increase in the utilization of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) for outpatient cervical procedures due to economic and convenience benefits; however, a paucity of literature exists in evaluating long-term safety and efficacy of ACDRs performed in ASCs versus outpatient hospital centers.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective cohort review of all patients undergoing 1- or 2-level ACDRs at 2 outpatient ASCs and 4 tertiary care medical centers from 2012 to 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months, was performed. Approval by each patient's insurance and patient preference determined distribution into an ASC or non-ASC. Demographics, perioperative data, length of follow-up, complications, and revision rates were analyzed. Functional outcomes were assessed using VAS and NDI at follow-up visits.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred seventeen patients were included (65 non-ASC and 52 ASC). There were no significant differences in demographics or length of follow-up between the cohorts. ASC patients had significantly lower operative times (ASC: 89.5 minutes vs. non-ASC: 110.5 minutes, P<0.001) and mean blood loss (ASC: 17.5 mL vs. non-ASC: 25.3 mL, P<0.001). No significant differences were observed in rates of dysphagia (ASC: 21.2% vs. non-ASC: 15.6%, P<0.001), infection (ASC: 0.0% vs. non-ASC: 1.6%, P=0.202), ASD (ASC: 1.9% vs. non-ASC: 1.6%, P=0.202), or revision (ASC: 1.9% vs. non-ASC: 0.0%, P=0.262). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS and NDI scores (P<0.001), but no significant differences in the degree of improvement were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our 2-year results demonstrate that ACDRs performed in ASCs may offer the advantages of reduced operative time and blood loss without an increased risk of postoperative complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38366345
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001591
pii: 01933606-990000000-00260
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
A.E. receives grants/research support from NuVasive and Stryker Spine. K.H. is a consultant for Stryker Spine. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Wang QL, Tu ZM, Hu P, et al. Long‐term results comparing cervical disc arthroplasty to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Orthop Surg. 2020;12:16.
Wohns R. Safety and cost-effectiveness of outpatient cervical disc arthroplasty. Surg Neurol Int. 2010;1:77.
Purger DA, Pendharkar AV, Ho AL, et al. Analysis of outcomes and cost of inpatient and ambulatory anterior cervical disk replacement using a state-level database. Clin Spine Surg. 2019;32:E372–E379.
Shin JJ, Kim KR, Son DW, et al. Cervical disc arthroplasty: what we know in 2020 and a literature review. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2021;29(suppl_1):230949902110069.
Xu S, Liang Y, Zhu Z, et al. Adjacent segment degeneration or disease after cervical total disc replacement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13:244.
Segal DN, Wilson JM, Staley C, et al. Outpatient and inpatient single-level cervical total disc replacement: a comparison of 30-day outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:79–83.
Avery DM, Matullo KS. The efficiency of a dedicated staff on operating room turnover time in hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 2014;39:108–110.
Kadhim M, Gans I, Baldwin K, et al. Do surgical times and efficiency differ between inpatient and ambulatory surgery centers that are both hospital owned. J Pediatr Orthop. 2016;36:423–428.
Walid MS, Robinson JS, Robinson ERM, et al. Comparison of outpatient and inpatient spine surgery patients with regards to obesity, comorbidities and readmission for infection. J Clin Neurosci. 2010;17:1497–1498.
Schlesinger S, Krugman K, Abbott D, et al. Thirty-day outcomes from standalone minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion patients in an Ambulatory Surgery Center vs. Hospital setting. Cureus. 2020;12:e10197.
Cuéllar JM, Lanman TH, Rasouli A. The safety of single and multilevel cervical total disc replacement in Ambulatory Surgery Centers. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:512–521.
Gornet MF, Buttermann GR, Wohns R, et al. Safety and efficiency of cervical disc arthroplasty in Ambulatory Surgery Centers vs. hospital settings. Int J Spine Surg. 2018;12:571–581. doi:10.14444/5068
doi: 10.14444/5068
Goffin J, Geusens E, Vantomme N, et al. Long-term follow-up after interbody fusion of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2004;17:79–85.
Fu MC, Gruskay JA, Samuel AM, et al. Outpatient anterior cervical discectomy and fusion is associated with fewer short-term complications in one- and two-level cases: a propensity-adjusted analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:1044–1049.
Mohandas A, Summa C, Worthington WB, et al. best practices for outpatient anterior cervical surgery: results a Delphi Panel. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:E648–E659.
Small TJ, Gad B v, Klika AK, et al. Dedicated orthopedic operating room unit improves operating room efficiency. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:1066–1071.e2.
Vaishnav A, Hill P, McAnany S, et al. Safety of 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) performed in an ambulatory surgery setting with same-day discharge. Clin Spine Surg. 2019;32:E153–E159.