Differences in the outcomes of anterior versus posterior interbody fusion surgery of the lumbar spine: A propensity score-controlled cohort analysis of 10,941 patients

Kevin T. Huang, Matthew Hazzard, Steven Thomas, Gustavo Chagoya, Rand Wilcox Vanden Berg, Owoicho Adogwa, Carlos A. Bagley, Robert Isaacs, Oren N. Gottfried, Shivanand P. Lad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Few studies have measured outcome differences between the various available spinal fusion techniques. We compare long-term outcomes of anterior versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Using the MarketScan database (Truven Health Analytics, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) we selected patients ≥18 years old who underwent lumbar fusion surgery from 2000-2009 using either approach. Exclusion criteria included circumferential fusion, and having less than 1 year of preoperative or less than 2 years of postoperative follow-up. Using an inverse probability-weighted propensity-score model we compared reoperation and 90 day complication rates, and postoperative health resource utilization of both approaches. A total of 10,941 patients were identified. Of these, 7460 (68.2%) and 3481 (31.8%) underwent posterior and anterior interbody fusion, respectively. Anterior fusion patients had a higher 2 year reoperation rate (odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.70, p < 0.0001), although differences became non-significant at maximum follow-up (p = 0.0877). The 90 day complication rate was 15.7%, with anterior fusion patients being more likely to experience complications (relative risk 1.24, 95%CI: 1.13-1.36, p < 0.0001). Anterior fusion patients also had greater levels of postoperative health utilization, surpassing posterior fusion patients by an average of $US7450 in total charges (95% CI: $4670-$10,220, p < 0.0001). As currently practiced in the USA, anterior lumbar surgical approaches may be associated with higher postoperative morbidity and reoperation rates than posterior fusion approaches.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)848-853
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Neuroscience
Volume22
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2015

Fingerprint

Propensity Score
Spine
Cohort Studies
Reoperation
Confidence Intervals
Spinal Fusion
Health Resources
Health Status
Odds Ratio
Databases
Morbidity
Health

Keywords

  • Lumbar vertebrae
  • Postoperative complications
  • Reoperation
  • Spinal fusion
  • Treatment outcome

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Differences in the outcomes of anterior versus posterior interbody fusion surgery of the lumbar spine : A propensity score-controlled cohort analysis of 10,941 patients. / Huang, Kevin T.; Hazzard, Matthew; Thomas, Steven; Chagoya, Gustavo; Berg, Rand Wilcox Vanden; Adogwa, Owoicho; Bagley, Carlos A.; Isaacs, Robert; Gottfried, Oren N.; Lad, Shivanand P.

In: Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, Vol. 22, No. 5, 01.05.2015, p. 848-853.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Huang, Kevin T. ; Hazzard, Matthew ; Thomas, Steven ; Chagoya, Gustavo ; Berg, Rand Wilcox Vanden ; Adogwa, Owoicho ; Bagley, Carlos A. ; Isaacs, Robert ; Gottfried, Oren N. ; Lad, Shivanand P. / Differences in the outcomes of anterior versus posterior interbody fusion surgery of the lumbar spine : A propensity score-controlled cohort analysis of 10,941 patients. In: Journal of Clinical Neuroscience. 2015 ; Vol. 22, No. 5. pp. 848-853.
@article{bd971e7fd14f463886532115073a817e,
title = "Differences in the outcomes of anterior versus posterior interbody fusion surgery of the lumbar spine: A propensity score-controlled cohort analysis of 10,941 patients",
abstract = "Few studies have measured outcome differences between the various available spinal fusion techniques. We compare long-term outcomes of anterior versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Using the MarketScan database (Truven Health Analytics, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) we selected patients ≥18 years old who underwent lumbar fusion surgery from 2000-2009 using either approach. Exclusion criteria included circumferential fusion, and having less than 1 year of preoperative or less than 2 years of postoperative follow-up. Using an inverse probability-weighted propensity-score model we compared reoperation and 90 day complication rates, and postoperative health resource utilization of both approaches. A total of 10,941 patients were identified. Of these, 7460 (68.2{\%}) and 3481 (31.8{\%}) underwent posterior and anterior interbody fusion, respectively. Anterior fusion patients had a higher 2 year reoperation rate (odds ratio 1.43, 95{\%} confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.70, p < 0.0001), although differences became non-significant at maximum follow-up (p = 0.0877). The 90 day complication rate was 15.7{\%}, with anterior fusion patients being more likely to experience complications (relative risk 1.24, 95{\%}CI: 1.13-1.36, p < 0.0001). Anterior fusion patients also had greater levels of postoperative health utilization, surpassing posterior fusion patients by an average of $US7450 in total charges (95{\%} CI: $4670-$10,220, p < 0.0001). As currently practiced in the USA, anterior lumbar surgical approaches may be associated with higher postoperative morbidity and reoperation rates than posterior fusion approaches.",
keywords = "Lumbar vertebrae, Postoperative complications, Reoperation, Spinal fusion, Treatment outcome",
author = "Huang, {Kevin T.} and Matthew Hazzard and Steven Thomas and Gustavo Chagoya and Berg, {Rand Wilcox Vanden} and Owoicho Adogwa and Bagley, {Carlos A.} and Robert Isaacs and Gottfried, {Oren N.} and Lad, {Shivanand P.}",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jocn.2014.11.016",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "848--853",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Neuroscience",
issn = "0967-5868",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differences in the outcomes of anterior versus posterior interbody fusion surgery of the lumbar spine

T2 - A propensity score-controlled cohort analysis of 10,941 patients

AU - Huang, Kevin T.

AU - Hazzard, Matthew

AU - Thomas, Steven

AU - Chagoya, Gustavo

AU - Berg, Rand Wilcox Vanden

AU - Adogwa, Owoicho

AU - Bagley, Carlos A.

AU - Isaacs, Robert

AU - Gottfried, Oren N.

AU - Lad, Shivanand P.

PY - 2015/5/1

Y1 - 2015/5/1

N2 - Few studies have measured outcome differences between the various available spinal fusion techniques. We compare long-term outcomes of anterior versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Using the MarketScan database (Truven Health Analytics, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) we selected patients ≥18 years old who underwent lumbar fusion surgery from 2000-2009 using either approach. Exclusion criteria included circumferential fusion, and having less than 1 year of preoperative or less than 2 years of postoperative follow-up. Using an inverse probability-weighted propensity-score model we compared reoperation and 90 day complication rates, and postoperative health resource utilization of both approaches. A total of 10,941 patients were identified. Of these, 7460 (68.2%) and 3481 (31.8%) underwent posterior and anterior interbody fusion, respectively. Anterior fusion patients had a higher 2 year reoperation rate (odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.70, p < 0.0001), although differences became non-significant at maximum follow-up (p = 0.0877). The 90 day complication rate was 15.7%, with anterior fusion patients being more likely to experience complications (relative risk 1.24, 95%CI: 1.13-1.36, p < 0.0001). Anterior fusion patients also had greater levels of postoperative health utilization, surpassing posterior fusion patients by an average of $US7450 in total charges (95% CI: $4670-$10,220, p < 0.0001). As currently practiced in the USA, anterior lumbar surgical approaches may be associated with higher postoperative morbidity and reoperation rates than posterior fusion approaches.

AB - Few studies have measured outcome differences between the various available spinal fusion techniques. We compare long-term outcomes of anterior versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Using the MarketScan database (Truven Health Analytics, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) we selected patients ≥18 years old who underwent lumbar fusion surgery from 2000-2009 using either approach. Exclusion criteria included circumferential fusion, and having less than 1 year of preoperative or less than 2 years of postoperative follow-up. Using an inverse probability-weighted propensity-score model we compared reoperation and 90 day complication rates, and postoperative health resource utilization of both approaches. A total of 10,941 patients were identified. Of these, 7460 (68.2%) and 3481 (31.8%) underwent posterior and anterior interbody fusion, respectively. Anterior fusion patients had a higher 2 year reoperation rate (odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.70, p < 0.0001), although differences became non-significant at maximum follow-up (p = 0.0877). The 90 day complication rate was 15.7%, with anterior fusion patients being more likely to experience complications (relative risk 1.24, 95%CI: 1.13-1.36, p < 0.0001). Anterior fusion patients also had greater levels of postoperative health utilization, surpassing posterior fusion patients by an average of $US7450 in total charges (95% CI: $4670-$10,220, p < 0.0001). As currently practiced in the USA, anterior lumbar surgical approaches may be associated with higher postoperative morbidity and reoperation rates than posterior fusion approaches.

KW - Lumbar vertebrae

KW - Postoperative complications

KW - Reoperation

KW - Spinal fusion

KW - Treatment outcome

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84927174082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84927174082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.11.016

DO - 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.11.016

M3 - Article

C2 - 25691076

AN - SCOPUS:84927174082

VL - 22

SP - 848

EP - 853

JO - Journal of Clinical Neuroscience

JF - Journal of Clinical Neuroscience

SN - 0967-5868

IS - 5

ER -