Post-Operative Infection after Minimally Invasive versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): Literature Review and Cost Analysis

INTRODUCTION Surgical site infection (SSI) in the setting of lumbar fusion is associated with significant morbidity and medical resource utilization. To date, there have been no studies conducted with sufficient power to directly compare the incidence of SSI following minimally invasive (MIS) vs. open TLIF procedures. Furthermore, studies are lacking that quantify the direct medical cost of SSI following fusion procedures. We set out to determine the incidence of SSI in patients undergoing MIS vs. open TLIF reported in the literature and to determine the direct hospital cost associated with the treatment of SSI following TLIF at our institution. METHODS A systematic Medline search was performed to identify all published studies assessing SSI after MIS or open TLIF. The cumulative incidence of SSI was calculated from all reported cohorts and compared between MIS vs. open TLIF. In order to determine the direct hospital costs associated with the treatment of SSI following TLIF, we retrospectively reviewed 120 consecutive TLIFs performed at our institution, assessed the incidence of SSI, and calculated the SSI-related hospital costs from accounting and billing records. RESULTS To date, there have been 10 MIS-TLIF cohorts (362 patients) and 20 open-TLIF cohorts (1 133 patients) reporting incidences of SSI. The cumulative incidence of reported SSI was significantly lower for MIS vs. open-TLIF (0.6% vs. 4.0%, p=0.0005). In our experience with 120 open TLIF procedures, SSI occurred in 6 (5.0%) patients. The mean hospital cost associated with the treatment of SSI following TLIF was $ 29,110 in these 6 cases. The 3.4% decrease in reported incidence of SSI for MIS vs. open-TLIF corresponds to a direct cost savings of $ 98,974 per 100 MIS-TLIF procedures performed. CONCLUSIONS Post-operative wound infections following TLIF are costly complications. MIS vs. open TLIF is associated with a decreased reported incidence of SSI in the literature and may be a valuable tool in reducing hospital costs associated with spine care.

[1]  K. Bulsara,et al.  Perioperative Complications in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Anterior–Posterior Reconstruction for Lumbar Disc Degeneration and Instability , 2006, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[2]  P. Mummaneni,et al.  Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technique, Complications, and Early Results , 2001, Neurosurgery.

[3]  小川 寛恭,et al.  症例報告 Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionによる整復固定術を施行した形成不全性第5腰椎すべり症の1例 , 2005 .

[4]  W. Yue,et al.  Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion , 2009, Spine.

[5]  K. Ikuta,et al.  Surgical Complications of Microendoscopic Procedures for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis , 2007, Minimally invasive neurosurgery : MIN.

[6]  A. Starkweather,et al.  The Multiple Benefits of Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery: Results Comparing Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterior Lumbar Fusion , 2008, The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses.

[7]  D. Polly,et al.  Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Clinical and Radiographic Results and Complications in 100 Consecutive Patients , 2005, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[8]  Viola Bullmann,et al.  Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results , 2005, European Spine Journal.

[9]  K. Bulsara,et al.  Safety of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and intervertebral recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[10]  R. Gaynes,et al.  Surgical site infection (SSI) rates in the United States, 1992-1998: the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System basic SSI risk index. , 2001, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[11]  D. Garland,et al.  Cost of medical care for postoperative spinal infections. , 1996, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[12]  H. Matsui,et al.  Serial changes in trunk muscle performance after posterior lumbar surgery. , 1999, Spine.

[13]  H. Halm,et al.  Clinical and Radiologic 2—4-Year Results of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Degenerative and Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Grades 1 and 2 , 2006, Spine.

[14]  T. Lowe,et al.  Unilateral Transforaminal Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): Indications, Technique, and 2-Year Results , 2002, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[15]  Sang-Ho Lee,et al.  Single-level instrumented mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. , 2008, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[16]  C. Turkelson,et al.  Treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. , 2004, American family physician.

[17]  C. Schizas,et al.  Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: evaluating initial experience , 2009, International Orthopaedics.

[18]  S. Hodges,et al.  Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study of long-term pain relief and fusion outcomes. , 2007, Orthopedics.

[19]  D. Crandall,et al.  Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion as an Adjunct to Posterior Instrumented Correction of Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis: Three Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes , 2009, Spine.

[20]  Patrick C. Hsieh,et al.  Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance. , 2007, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[21]  J. Grauer,et al.  Postoperative wound infections of the spine. , 2003, Neurosurgical focus.

[22]  A. Mannion,et al.  A prospective, cohort study comparing translaminar screw fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and pedicle screw fixation for fusion of the degenerative lumbar spine. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[23]  Brett Hanscom,et al.  The Cost Effectiveness of Surgical Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Lumbar Disc Herniation Over Two Years: Evidence From the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) , 2008, Spine.

[24]  James D. Schwender,et al.  Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior–posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective comparative study of 133 patients , 2009, European Spine Journal.

[25]  R. Fessler,et al.  Surgical site infection rates after minimally invasive spinal surgery. , 2009, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[26]  Jin-Sung Kim,et al.  Mini-Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Augmented by Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation: A Comparison of Surgical Outcomes in Adult Low-grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis , 2009, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[27]  J. Burgos,et al.  Comparing the Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Pedicular Transvertebral Screw Fixation of the Lumbosacral Spine in Spondylolisthesis Versus Unilateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) With Posterior Fixation Using Anterior Cages , 2008, Spine.

[28]  T. Albert,et al.  Complications associated with single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. , 2009, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[29]  M. Olsen,et al.  Risk factors for surgical site infection in spinal surgery. , 2003, Journal of neurosurgery.

[30]  D. Sexton,et al.  The Impact of Surgical-Site Infections Following Orthopedic Surgery at a Community Hospital and a University Hospital Adverse Quality of Life, Excess Length of Stay, and Extra Cost , 2002, Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.

[31]  Avinash G. Patwardhan,et al.  Comparison of Posterior and Transforaminal Approaches to Lumbar Interbody Fusion , 2001, Spine.

[32]  J. Thomas,et al.  Outcome assessment in spinal infections. , 1996, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[33]  M. Shamji,et al.  Minimally Invasive Interbody Fusion for Revision Lumbar Surgery: Technical Feasibility and Safety , 2009, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[34]  J. Jang,et al.  Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[35]  D. B. Cohen,et al.  Incidence, Prevalence, and Analysis of Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection Following Adult Spinal Surgery , 2009, Spine.

[36]  Nicholas H. Post,et al.  Clinical and radiographically/neuroimaging documented outcome in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. , 2006, Neurosurgical focus.

[37]  Kevin T Foley,et al.  Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): Technical Feasibility and Initial Results , 2005, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[38]  M. Rahm,et al.  Clinical and radiographic assessment of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using HEALOS collagen-hydroxyapatite sponge with autologous bone marrow aspirate. , 2009, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[39]  F. Castro,et al.  Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of complications and predictive factors. , 2001, Journal of spinal disorders.

[40]  H. Deutsch,et al.  Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. , 2006, Neurosurgical focus.

[41]  R. Winter,et al.  Postoperative deep wound infection in adults after posterior lumbosacral spine fusion with instrumentation: incidence and management. , 2000, Journal of spinal disorders.