Cost-effectiveness of current treatment strategies for lumbar spinal stenosis: nonsurgical care, laminectomy, and X-STOP
- PMID: 20594016
- DOI: 10.3171/2010.3.SPINE09552
Cost-effectiveness of current treatment strategies for lumbar spinal stenosis: nonsurgical care, laminectomy, and X-STOP
Abstract
OBJECT Standard treatment options for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis include nonoperative therapies as well as decompressive laminectomy. The introduction of interspinous decompression devices such as the X-STOP has broadened treatment options, but data comparing these treatment strategies are lacking. The object of this study was to provide a cost-effectiveness analysis of laminectomy, interspinous decompression, and nonoperative treatment for patients with lumbar stenosis. METHODS The authors performed a structured literature review of lumbar stenosis and constructed a cost-effectiveness model. Using conservative treatment, decompressive laminectomy, and placement of X-STOP as the treatment arms, their primary analysis evaluated the optimal treatment strategy for a patient with lumbar stenosis at a 2-year time horizon. Secondary analyses were done to compare cases in which patients required single-level procedures with those in which multilevel procedures were required as well as to examine the outcomes for a 4-year time horizon. Outcomes were calculated using quality-adjusted life years and costs were considered from the perspective of society. RESULTS Laminectomy was found to be the most effective treatment strategy, followed by X-STOP and then conservative treatment at a 2-year time horizon. Both surgical procedures were more costly than conservative treatment. Because laminectomy was both more effective and less costly than X-STOP, it is said to dominate overall. When single level procedures were considered alone, laminectomy was more effective but also more costly than X-STOP. CONCLUSIONS Lumbar laminectomy appears to be the most cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis.
Comment in
-
Treatment options for lumbar spinal stenosis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2010 Jul;13(1):36-8; author reply 38. doi: 10.3171/2009.11.SPINE09853. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010. PMID: 20594015 No abstract available.
-
Spinal stenosis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2011 Jul;15(1):125-6. doi: 10.3171/2010.11.SPINE10676. Epub 2011 Apr 15. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011. PMID: 21495814 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Cost-effectiveness and Safety of Interspinous Process Decompression (Superion).Pain Med. 2019 Dec 1;20(Suppl 2):S2-S8. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnz245. Pain Med. 2019. PMID: 31808529 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Cost-effectiveness of multilevel hemilaminectomy for lumbar stenosis-associated radiculopathy.Spine J. 2011 Aug;11(8):705-11. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.04.024. Epub 2011 Jun 8. Spine J. 2011. PMID: 21641874
-
Comparing cost-effectiveness of X-Stop with minimally invasive decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Apr 15;40(8):514-20. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000798. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015. PMID: 25608246 Clinical Trial.
-
A randomized controlled trial of the X-Stop interspinous distractor device versus laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis with 2-year quality-of-life and cost-effectiveness outcomes.J Neurosurg Spine. 2021 Feb 2;34(4):544-552. doi: 10.3171/2020.7.SPINE20880. Print 2021 Apr 1. J Neurosurg Spine. 2021. PMID: 33530059 Clinical Trial.
-
Interspinous process decompression (IPD) system (X-STOP) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.Surg Technol Int. 2006;15:265-75. Surg Technol Int. 2006. PMID: 17029185 Review.
Cited by
-
Longitudinal Analysis of the Care Pathway of Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in the US.J Pain Res. 2024 Jun 4;17:1979-1987. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S454887. eCollection 2024. J Pain Res. 2024. PMID: 38854929 Free PMC article.
-
Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Comparing Open and Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Surgery.Int J Spine Surg. 2022 Jul 14;16(4):612-24. doi: 10.14444/8297. Online ahead of print. Int J Spine Surg. 2022. PMID: 35835570 Free PMC article.
-
Patients Undergoing 3-Level-or-Greater Decompression-Only Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Have Similar Outcomes to Those Undergoing Single-Level Surgery at 2 Years.Int J Spine Surg. 2021 Oct;15(5):945-952. doi: 10.14444/8124. Epub 2021 Sep 22. Int J Spine Surg. 2021. PMID: 34551931 Free PMC article.
-
Association of Cost and Medical Service Satisfaction with Korean and Conventional Medicine Use before and after Surgery in Postsurgical Patients: A Questionnaire Survey of Korean Patients with Postsurgical Pain Visiting Korean Medicine Hospitals.Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020 Mar 19;2020:8195241. doi: 10.1155/2020/8195241. eCollection 2020. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020. PMID: 32256657 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness and Safety of Interspinous Process Decompression (Superion).Pain Med. 2019 Dec 1;20(Suppl 2):S2-S8. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnz245. Pain Med. 2019. PMID: 31808529 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
