217. Impact of previous lumbar spine surgery on outcome of lumbar total disc replacement: analysis of prospective five-year follow up study data

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT FDA-regulated prospective trials evaluating lumbar total disc replacement (LTDR) have included patients with previous lumbar surgeries. Unitedhealth care, one of the largest insurers in the United States recently issued a positive coverage policy for LTDR that disqualifies patients with previous lumbar surgeries of any kind from treatment with LTDR. However, such patients were included in FDA IDE trials that led to approval of these devices. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare LTDR outcomes in patients with prior lumbar spine surgery to outcomes in those without prior surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING The study was a post hoc analysis of data collected prospectively as part of an FDA-regulated trial with 5-year follow-up. PATIENT SAMPLE The study was based on 376 patients from the activL® IDE study population. All patients were treated for single-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease at L4-L5 or L5-S1 unresponsive to at least 6 months of nonoperative care. OUTCOME MEASURES Clinical outcome measures used in the study included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual analog scales (VAS) assessing back and leg pain, SF-36, adverse events and reoperations. Radiographic outcome evaluations were based on flexion/extension range of motion (ROM) and translation of the operated segment. METHODS Patients were divided into two groups: prior lumbar surgery (PLS, n=92) and no prior lumbar surgery (NPLS, n=284). PLS patients had undergone one or more of the following procedures: intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET) (n=5), percutaneous nucleoplasty (n=4), microdiscectomy (n=81), hemilaminectomy (n=17), laminotomy (n=36) or other (n=1) prior to receiving a LTDR. Patients with prior lumbar fusion were excluded from the IDE study. Baseline characteristics, functional and pain outcomes, serious adverse events and reoperations were statistically compared between the groups preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months and 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years. RESULTS Patient baseline demographics were very similar between the two groups. When comparing pre- to postoperative scores, ODI, VAS back pain and leg pain and the SF-36 Physical Component Score improved significantly (p CONCLUSIONS Prior lumbar spine surgery was not related to compromised outcomes among patients undergoing LTDR. There were no statistically significant differences in ODI, SF-36, pain scores or safety rates between PLS and NPLS patients. These results are in line with findings from earlier studies that prior surgery is not a contraindication for LTDR provided that other selection criteria are met. These results do not support the denial by an insurer to give patients and providers the option of receiving LTDR for DDD unresponsive to nonoperative care as described in the FDA approved device usage labeling. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS activL (Approved for this indication), ProDisc-L (Approved for this indication), Charite (Approved for this indication)