Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 327–332 | Cite as

Impact of spine surgery complications on costs associated with management of adult spinal deformity

  • Samrat Yeramaneni
  • Chessie Robinson
  • Richard Hostin
Complications in Spine Surgery (E Klineberg, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Complications in Spine Surgery


A better understanding of the consequences of spine surgery complications is warranted to optimize patient-reported outcomes and contain the rising health care costs associated with the management of adult spinal deformity (ASD). We systematically searched PubMed and Scopus databases using keywords “adult spinal deformity surgery,” “complications,” and “cost” for published studies on costs of complications associated with spinal surgery, with a particular emphasis on ASD and scoliosis. In the 17 articles reviewed, we identified 355,354 patients with 11,148 reported complications. Infection was the most commonly reported complication, with an average treatment cost ranging from $15,817 to $38,701. Hospital costs for patients with deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary thromboembolism, and surgical site infection were 2.3 to 3.1 times greater than for patients without those complications. An effort to collect and characterize data on cost of complications is encouraged, which may help health care providers to identify potential resources to limit complications and overall costs.


Adult spinal deformity Complications Cost analysis Outcomes Scoliosis Spine surgery 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Samrat Yeramaneni and Chessie Robinson declare that they have no conflict of interest. Richard Hostin reports personal fees from DePuy Synthes and grants from DePuy Synthes, NuVasive, Seeger, DJO, and K2M, outside the submitted work.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

12178_2016_9352_MOESM1_ESM.docx (27 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 26.8 kb)


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Good CR et al. Adult spine deformity. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2011;4(4):159–67.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Youssef JA et al. Current status of adult spinal deformity. Glob Spine J. 2013;3(1):51–62.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smith JS et al. Improvement of back pain with operative and nonoperative treatment in adults with scoliosis. Neurosurgery. 2009;65(1):86–93. discussion 93-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li G et al. Adult scoliosis in patients over sixty-five years of age: outcomes of operative versus nonoperative treatment at a minimum two-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(20):2165–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bridwell KH et al. Does treatment (nonoperative and operative) improve the two-year quality of life in patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis a prospective multicenter evidence-based medicine study. Spine. 2009;34(20):2171–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yadla S et al. Adult scoliosis surgery outcomes: a systematic review. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(3):E3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith JS et al. Risk-benefit assessment of surgery for adult scoliosis: an analysis based on patient age. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(10):817–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glassman SD et al. The impact of perioperative complications on clinical outcome in adult deformity surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(24):2764–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baron EM, Albert TJ. Medical complications of surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity and how to avoid them. Spine. 2006;31(19):S106–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nasser R et al. Complications in spine surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;13(2):144–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ganocy T., M. Ohtomo, and O. Boachie-Adjei. Complication rates for combined anterior-posterior adult deformity surgery. in SRS Meeting. 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lapp MA et al. Long-term complications in adult spinal deformity patients having combined surgery: a comparison of primary to revision patients. Spine. 2001;26(8):973–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Daubs MD et al. Adult spinal deformity surgery: complications and outcomes in patients over age 60. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(20):2238–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scheufler K-M et al. Less invasive surgical correction of adult degenerative scoliosis. Part II: complications and clinical outcome. Neurosurgery. 2010;67(6):1609–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McCarthy I et al. Health economic analysis of adult deformity surgery. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2013;24(2):293.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kamerlink JR et al. Hospital cost analysis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction surgery in 125 consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(5):1097–104.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McCarthy IM et al. Total hospital costs of surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity: an extended follow-up study. Spine J. 2014;14(10):2326–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCarthy IM et al. Analysis of the direct cost of surgery for four diagnostic categories of adult spinal deformity. Spine J. 2013;13(12):1843–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim S et al. Cost-utility of lumbar decompression with or without fusion for patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine J. 2012;12(1):44–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schwab F et al. Adult scoliosis: prevalence, SF-36, and nutritional parameters in an elderly volunteer population. Spine. 2005;30(9):1082–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mattie AS, Webster BL. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ “ never events”: an analysis and recommendations to hospitals. Health Care Manag. 2008;27(4):338–49.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hellsten EK et al. An economic evaluation of perioperative adverse events associated with spinal surgery. Spine J. 2013;13(1):44–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tosteson AN et al. The cost effectiveness of surgical versus non-operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation over two years: evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine. 2008;33(19):2108.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.••
    Kuhns BD et al. Cost and quality of life outcome analysis of postoperative infections after subaxial dorsal cervical fusions. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;22(4):381–6. A matched case-control analysis of patients undergoing dorsal cervical fusions who developed wound infections. Health-care associated costs, including direct and indirect costs, for patients in the infection cohort (cases) was significant higher than patients in the control cohort reflecting an additional increase in treatment costs of $12,619.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McGirt MJ et al. Comparative analysis of perioperative surgical site infection after minimally invasive versus open posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of hospital billing and discharge data from 5170 patients: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14(6):771–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Whitmore RG et al. Patient comorbidities and complications after spinal surgery: a societal-based cost analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(12):1065–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Godil SS et al. Comparative effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis of local application of vancomycin powder in posterior spinal fusion for spine trauma: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(3):331–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Theologis AA et al. Local intrawound vancomycin powder decreases the risk of surgical site infections in complex adult deformity reconstruction: a cost analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39(22):1875–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Patil CG et al. Inpatient complications, mortality, and discharge disposition after surgical correction of idiopathic scoliosis: a national perspective. Spine J. 2008;8(6):904–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hostin RA et al. What is the most expensive cause for readmission following adult spinal deformity surgery? Spine J. 2015;15(10):S193.Google Scholar
  31. 31.••
    Daniels AH, et al. Hospital charges associated with “never events”: comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, and lumbar laminectomy to total joint arthroplasty. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;1–5. A retrospective analysis of larger inpartient database estimating the cost of ‘never events’ associated with spine, knee, and hip surgery using the ICD9-CM codes. Despite the low incidence rate of complications (DVT, PE, and SSI), costs for patients with complications increased by a factor of 1.8 t o 4.3. Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nandyala SV et al. Cost analysis of incidental durotomy in spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39(17):E1042–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ambrossi GLG et al. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after single-level lumbar discectomy: incidence and health care cost analysis. Neurosurgery. 2009;65(3):574–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Adogwa O et al. Cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: defining the value of surgical intervention: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(2):135–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dekutoski MB et al. Surgeon perceptions and reported complications in spine surgery. Spine. 2010;35(9S):S9–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cowper DC et al. Using administrative databases for outcomes research: select examples from VA Health Services Research and Development. J Med Syst. 1999;23(3):249–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Linville DA et al. Complications in the adult spinal deformity patient having combined surgery: does revision increase the risk? Spine. 1999;24(4):355–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Parker SL et al. Post-operative infection after minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): literature review and cost analysis. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2011;54(1):33–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Parker SL et al. Factors influencing 2-year health care costs in patients undergoing revision lumbar fusion procedures: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(4):323–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Samrat Yeramaneni
    • 1
  • Chessie Robinson
    • 1
  • Richard Hostin
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Clinical Effectiveness, Baylor Scott & White HealthDallasUSA
  2. 2.Baylor Scoliosis CenterPlanoUSA

Personalised recommendations