ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
Comparison of value per operative time between anterior lumbar interbody fusion and lumbar disc arthroplasty: A propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06989632 (Total Lumbar Disc Prosthesis and Subsequent Work Activity 5 Years After Total Lumbar Disc Replacement), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Total Lumbar Disc Prosthesis and Subsequent Work Activity 5 Years After Total Lumbar Disc Replacement
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Venous Thromboembolism Rates Have Not Decreased in Elective Lumbar Fusion Surgery from 2011 to 2020.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Lumbar Disc Replacement Versus Interbody Fusion: Meta-analysis of Complications and Clinical Outcomes.Orthopedic reviews · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Despite the growing evidence demonstrating its effectiveness, lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) rates have not increased significantly in recent years. A likely contributing factor is uncertainties related to reimbursement and insurers' denial of coverage due to fear of late complications, reoperations, and unknown secondary costs. However, no prior study has compared the physician reimbursement rates of lumbar fusion and LDA. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the relative value units (RVUs) per min as well as 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity rates between anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and LDA. Settings and Design: This was a retrospective cohort study. Subjects and Methods: The current study utilizes data obtained from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients who underwent ALIF or LDA between 2011 and 2019 were included in the study. Statistical Analysis Used: Propensity score matching analysis was performed according to demographic characteristics and comorbidities. Matched groups were compared through Fisher's exact test and independent t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Results: Five hundred and two patients who underwent ALIF were matched with 591 patients who underwent LDA. Mean RVUs per min was significantly higher for ALIF compared to LDA. ALIF was associated with a significantly higher 30-day morbidity rate compared to LDA, while readmission and reoperation rates were statistically similar. ALIF was also associated with higher frequencies of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and blood transfusions. Conclusions: ALIF is associated with significantly higher RVUs per min compared to LDA. ALIF is also associated with higher rates of 30-day morbidity, DVT, and blood transfusions, while readmission and reoperation rates were statistically similar.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.