Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33462767›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2021

Economic Analysis of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Utilizing a Curved Bone Removal Device.

John H Peloza, Michael A Millgram, Erel Jacobian, Daniel E Kolsky, Richard D Guyer, Jean-Charles Le Huec, Ely Ashkenazi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

John H PelozaCenter for Spine Care, Dallas, TX, 75287, USA.
Michael A MillgramIsrael Spine Center, Assuta Hospital, Assuta Medical Centers, 69710, Tel Aviv, Israel. research@isc.co.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7787-0854
Erel JacobianIsrael Spine Center, Assuta Hospital, Assuta Medical Centers, 69710, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Daniel E KolskyIsrael Spine Center, Assuta Hospital, Assuta Medical Centers, 69710, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Richard D GuyerTexas Back Institute, Plano, TX, 75093, USA.
Jean-Charles Le HuecPolyclinique Bordeaux Nord Aquitaine, 33077, Bordeaux, France.
Ely AshkenaziIsrael Spine Center, Assuta Hospital, Assuta Medical Centers, 69710, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Assuta Medical Center · ILPolyclinique Bordeaux Nord Aquitaine · FRPrecision Spine (United States) · USTexas Back Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) represents a commonly performed spinal procedure that poses a significant financial burden on patients, hospitals and insurers. Reducing these costs, while maintaining efficacy, may be assisted by a new powered endplate preparation device, designed to shorten procedural time while offering positive impacts on other elements that contribute to the cost of care.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to assess and compare the individual cost elements of TLIF procedures with and without the use of the device, to determine whether application of this technology translated into any material procedural savings.

methodsThe records of 208 single-level TLIF procedures in a single hospital were reviewed. Surgical time, length of hospital stay, blood loss, infection rate, and other parameters were compared for the cases where the device was used (device group; n = 143) and cases which used standard tools (control group; n = 65). The cost per unit of each element was derived from the literature, online resources, and the hospital's financial department.

resultsThe analysis revealed a shorter surgery duration in the device group (23 min, after controlling for procedure year and patient characteristics; statistically significant at p < 0.001) and lower complication and readmission rates (p = 0.67 and p = 0.21, respectively) associated with the use of the device, leading to a statistically significant cost reduction of approximately 2060 US dollars (US$) (p < 0.01).

conclusionThe study suggests that use of the device may lead to a cost reduction and shorter procedure without deteriorating the clinical outcome.

Identifiers

PMID33462767
PMCPMC8333172
OpenAlexW3121770636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.