Image-guided surgery using intraoperative cone-beam CT and navigation improves screw placement accuracy rates. However, this technology is associated with high acquisition costs. The aim of this study is to evaluate the costs of revision surgery from symptomatic pedicle screw malposition to justify whether the costs of acquiring intraoperative navigation justify the expected benefits. This is a retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of consecutive patients who had pedicle screw instrumentation using intraoperative cone-beam CT and navigation compared with patients who underwent freehand pedicle screw instrumentation at our institution over 4 years. The costs associated with revision surgery for symptomatic pedicle screw malposition (excess length of stay, intensive care, theatre time, implants and additional outpatient appointments) were calculated. A total of 19 patients had symptomatic screw malpositioning requiring revision surgery. None of these patients had screws inserted under navigation. Revision surgery accounted for an extra 304 bed days and an additional 97 h theatre time. The total extra spent over 4 years was £464,038. When compared to the costs of revision surgery for screw malpositioning, it was cost neutral to acquire and maintain this technology. Intraoperative image-guided surgery reduces reoperation rates for symptomatic screw malposition and is cost-effective in high volume centers with improved patients outcomes. High acquisition and maintenance cost of such technologies is economically justifiable.
Keywords: Cost-effectiveness analysis; Economic evaluation; O-arm; Pedicle screw; Spinal navigation.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.