Navigation bei lumbalen Eingriffen: Wann ist sie sinnvoll?

Schöller, Karsten; Jablawi, Fidaa

doi:10.1007/s00132-018-03671-9

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, as with all new technology, it is important to perform cost-benefit analyses to identify or disprove the benefit of the technology to the patient. In our study, we see a significant decrease in odds for both 30-day and 6,7 Our results support these claims with the significantly decreased readmission odds in patients receiving CAN because this could show that CAN is leading to better postoperative outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…We relate this outcome back to previous literature that claims CAN can improve 3D intraoperative instrumentation, preoperative planning, and procedural reproducibility. 6,7 Further, Kelley et al 10 found that the utilization of CAN (n = 4,208,068) in spinal fusion cases can significantly decrease mortality rates compared with non-CAN operations (n = 67,345) (P = 0.035). Our results support these claims, implying that the improved perioperative care may lead to improved postoperative outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CAN has been shown to have indications for use in all types of lumbar surgery, specifically for intraoperative 3D visualization and pedicle screw implementation. 6 Because of lumbar procedures being inherently more complicated when it comes to visualizing a patient's spinal anatomy than other spinal fusion cases, CAN becomes especially helpful and is thus more readily utilized in these cases. 6,7 While prior studies have analyzed the effectiveness of navigation utilization in lumbar fusion procedures, no studies to our knowledge have analyzed its impact on patient outcomes at a national level.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 Because of lumbar procedures being inherently more complicated when it comes to visualizing a patient's spinal anatomy than other spinal fusion cases, CAN becomes especially helpful and is thus more readily utilized in these cases. 6,7 While prior studies have analyzed the effectiveness of navigation utilization in lumbar fusion procedures, no studies to our knowledge have analyzed its impact on patient outcomes at a national level. The goal of this study is to evaluate how CAN affects cost and patient outcomes in lumbar fusion surgery.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CAN has been shown to have indications for use in all types of lumbar surgery, specifically for intraoperative 3D visualization and pedicle screw implementation 6. Because of lumbar procedures being inherently more complicated when it comes to visualizing a patient’s spinal anatomy than other spinal fusion cases, CAN becomes especially helpful and is thus more readily utilized in these cases 6,7…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Impact of Computer-Assisted Navigation on Charges and Readmission in Lumbar Spinal Fusion

Dominy¹,

Tang²,

White³

et al. 2022

Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost and patient outcomes associated with the utilization of computerassisted navigation (CAN) utilization on patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.Background: CAN systems have demonstrated comparable outcomes with instrumentation and procedural speed when compared with traditional techniques. In recent years, CAN systems have seen increased adoption in spinal surgery as they allow for better contextualization of anatomical structures with the goal of improving surgical accuracy and reproducibility. Methods:The 2016 National Readmission Database was queried for patients with lumbar spinal fusion ICD-10 codes, with 2 subgroups created based on computer-aided navigation ICD-10 codes. Nonelective cases and patients below 18 years of age were excluded. Univariate analysis on demographics, surgical data, and total charges was performed. Postoperative complication rates were calculated based on diagnosis. Lastly, multivariate analysis was performed to assess navigation's impact on cost and postoperative outcomes.Results: A total of 88,445 lumbar fusion surgery patients were identified. Of the total, 2478 (2.8%) patients underwent lumbar fusion with navigation utilization, while 85,967 (97.2%) patients underwent surgery without navigation. The average total charges

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Impact of Computer-Assisted Navigation on Charges and Readmission in Lumbar Spinal Fusion

Dominy¹,

Tang²,

White³

et al. 2022

Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Trends in the Charges and Utilization of Computer-Assisted Navigation in Cervical and Thoracolumbar Spinal Surgery

Dominy¹,

Tang²,

Arvind³

et al. 2022

Asian Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design: Retrospective national database study.Purpose: This study is conducted to assess the trends in the charges and usage of computer-assisted navigation in cervical and thoracolumbar spinal surgery.Overview of Literature: This study is the first of its kind to use a nationwide dataset to analyze trends of computer-assisted navigation in spinal surgery over a recent time period in terms of use in the field as well as the cost of the technology.Methods: Relevant data from the National Readmission Database in 2015–2018 were analyzed, and the computer-assisted procedures of cervical and thoracolumbar spinal surgery were identified using International Classification of Diseases 9th and 10th revision codes. Patient demographics, surgical data, readmissions, and total charges were examined. Comorbidity burden was calculated using the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity index. Complication rates were determined on the basis of diagnosis codes.Results: A total of 48,116 cervical cases and 27,093 thoracolumbar cases were identified using computer-assisted navigation. No major differences in sex, age, or comorbidities over time were found. The utilization of computer-assisted navigation for cervical and thoracolumbar spinal fusion cases increased from 2015 to 2018 and normalized to their respective years’ total cases (Pearson correlation coefficient=0.756, p =0.049; Pearson correlation coefficient=0.9895, p =0.010). Total charges for cervical and thoracolumbar cases increased over time (Pearson correlation coefficient=0.758, p =0.242; Pearson correlation coefficient=0.766, p =0.234).Conclusions: The use of computer-assisted navigation in spinal surgery increased significantly from 2015 to 2018. The average cost grossly increased from 2015 to 2018, and it was higher than the average cost of nonnavigated spinal surgery. With the increased utilization and standardization of computer-assisted navigation in spinal surgeries, the cost of care of more patients might potentially increase. As a result, further studies should be conducted to determine whether the use of computer-assisted navigation is efficient in terms of cost and improvement of care.

show abstract

Navigation bei lumbalen Eingriffen: Wann ist sie sinnvoll?

Cited by 2 publications

References 27 publications

The Impact of Computer-Assisted Navigation on Charges and Readmission in Lumbar Spinal Fusion

The Impact of Computer-Assisted Navigation on Charges and Readmission in Lumbar Spinal Fusion

Trends in the Charges and Utilization of Computer-Assisted Navigation in Cervical and Thoracolumbar Spinal Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About