4.3 Article

Outcomes of cervical laminoplasty-Population-level analysis of a national longitudinal database

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 48, Issue -, Pages 66-70

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.10.089

Keywords

Laminoplasty; Cervical spondylotic myelopathy; Decompression; Complications; MarketScan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Cervical laminoplasty is an important alternative to laminectomy in decompressing of the cervical spine. Further evidence to assess the utility of laminoplasty is required. We examine outcomes of cervical laminoplasty via a population level analysis in the United States. Methods: We performed a population-level analysis using the national MarketScan longitudinal database to analyze outcomes and costs of cervical laminoplasty between 2007 and 2014. Outcomes included postoperative complications, revision rates, and functional outcomes. Results: Using a national administrative database, we identified 2613 patients (65.6% male, mean 58.5 years) who underwent cervical laminoplasty. Mean length of stay was 3.1 +/- 2.8 days and mean follow-up was 795.5 +/- 670.6 days. The overall complication rate was 22.5% (N = 587), 30-day readmission rate was 7.5% (N = 195), and mortality rate was 0.08% (N = 2, elderly patients only). The complication rate was significantly increased in elderly patients (age >65 years) compared to non-elderly patients (OR 0.751, p < .01). The use of intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) during the cervical laminoplasty procedure did not significantly impact outcomes. The overall re-operation rate after the initial procedure was 10.9%. Total costs of cervical laminoplasty were mainly driven by hospital charges with physician-related payments comprising a small amount. Conclusions: Our national analysis of cervical laminoplasty found the procedure to be clinically effective with low complication rates and postoperative symptomatic improvement. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available