Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Sherman C. Stein x
  • By Author: Malhotra, Neil R. x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Sherman C. Stein, Neil R. Malhotra and Mark G. Burnett

Restricted access

Bradley C. Lega, Shabbar F. Danish, Neil R. Malhotra, Seema S. Sonnad and Sherman C. Stein

Object

Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH), a condition much more common in the elderly, presents an increasing challenge as the population ages. Treatment strategies for CSDH include bur-hole craniostomy (BHC), twist-drill craniostomy (TDC), and craniotomy. Decision analysis was used to organize existing data and develop recommendations for effective treatment.

Methods

A Medline search was used to identify articles about treatment of CSDH. Direct assessment by health care professionals of the relative health impact of common complications and recurrences was used to generate utility values for treatment outcomes. Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analyses allowed comparisons across treatment strategies. A second simulation examined whether intraoperative irrigation or postoperative drainage affect the outcomes following BHC.

Results

On a scale from 0 to 1, the utility of BHC was found to be 0.9608, compared with 0.9202 for TDC (p = 0.001) and 0.9169 for craniotomy (p = 0.006). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of these values. Craniotomy yielded fewer recurrences, but more frequent and more serious complications than did BHC. There were no significant differences for BHC with or without irrigation or postoperative drainage.

Conclusions

Bur-hole craniostomy is the most efficient choice for surgical drainage of uncomplicated CSDH. Bur-hole craniostomy balances a low recurrence rate with a low incidence of highly morbid complications. Decision analysis provides statistical and empirical guidance in the absence of well-controlled large trials and despite a confusing range of previously reported morbidity and recurrence.

Full access

Matthew R. Sanborn, Jayesh P. Thawani, Robert G. Whitmore, Michael Shmulevich, Benjamin Hardy, Conrad Benedetto, Neil R. Malhotra, Paul Marcotte, William C. Welch, Stephen Dante and Sherman C. Stein

Object

There is considerable variation in the use of adjunctive technologies to confirm pedicle screw placement. Although there is literature to support the use of both neurophysiological monitoring and isocentric fluoroscopy to confirm pedicle screw positioning, there are no studies examining the cost-effectiveness of these technologies. This study compares the cost-effectiveness and efficacy of isocentric O-arm fluoroscopy, neurophysiological monitoring, and postoperative CT scanning after multilevel instrumented fusion for degenerative lumbar disease.

Methods

Retrospective data were collected from 4 spine surgeons who used 3 different strategies for monitoring of pedicle screw placement in multilevel lumbar degenerative disease. A decision analysis model was developed to analyze costs and outcomes of the 3 different monitoring strategies. A total of 448 surgeries performed between 2005 and 2010 were included, with 4 cases requiring repeat operation for malpositioned screws. A sample of 64 of these patients was chosen for structured interviews in which the EuroQol-5D questionnaire was used. Expected costs and quality-adjusted life years were calculated based on the incidence of repeat operation and its negative effect on quality of life and costs.

Results

The decision analysis model demonstrated that the O-arm monitoring strategy is significantly (p < 0.001) less costly than the strategy of postoperative CT scanning following intraoperative uniplanar fluoroscopy, which in turn is significantly (p < 0.001) less costly than neurophysiological monitoring. The differences in effectiveness of the different monitoring strategies are not significant (p = 0.92).

Conclusions

Use of the O-arm for confirming pedicle screw placement is the least costly and therefore most cost-effective strategy of the 3 techniques analyzed.