Asian Spine J.  2023 Aug;17(4):620-631. 10.31616/asj.2022.0261.

Clinical Outcomes and Cost Profiles for Cage and Allograft Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Procedures in the Adult Population: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

• Rodrigues AJ
• Varshneya K
• Stienen MN
• Schonfeld E
• Than KD
• Veeravagu A

• KMID: 2545379
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2022.0261

Abstract

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Purpose: To characterize the postoperative outcomes and economic costs of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures using synthetic biomechanical intervertebral cage (BC) and structural allograft (SA) implants. Overview of Literature: ACDF is a common spine procedure that typically uses an SA or BC for the cervical fusion. Previous studies that compared the outcomes between the two implants were limited by small sample sizes, short-term postoperative outcomes, and procedures with single-level fusion.
Methods
Adult patients who underwent an ACDF procedure in 2007–2016 were included. Patient records were extracted from MarketScan, a national registry that captures person-specific clinical utilization, expenditures, and enrollments across millions of inpatient, outpatient, and prescription drug services. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was employed to match the patient cohorts across demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and treatments.
Results
Of 110,911 patients, 65,151 (58.7%) received BC implants while 45,760 (41.3%) received SA implants. Patients who underwent BC surgeries had slightly higher reoperation rates within 1 year after the index ACDF procedure (3.3% vs. 3.0%, p=0.004), higher postoperative complication rates (4.9% vs. 4.6%, p=0.022), and higher 90-day readmission rates (4.9% vs. 4.4%, p =0.001). After PSM, the postoperative complication rates did not vary between the two cohorts (4.8% vs. 4.6%, p=0.369), although dysphagia (2.2% vs. 1.8%, p<0.001) and infection (0.3% vs. 0.2%, p=0.007) rates remained higher for the BC group. Other outcome differences, including readmission and reoperation, decreased. Physician’s fees remained high for BC implantation procedures.
Conclusions
We found marginal differences in clinical outcomes between BC and SA ACDF interventions in the largest published database cohort of adult ACDF surgeries. After adjusting for group-level differences in comorbidity burden and demographic characteristics, BC and SA ACDF surgeries showed similar clinical outcomes. Physician’s fees, however, were higher for BC implantation procedures.

Keyword

Allograft; Assessment; Patient outcomes; Propensity score; Spine