Comparison of the safety of outpatient cervical disc replacement with inpatient cervical disc replacement

Abstract

Background: Cervical disc replacement (CDR) has been widely used as an effective treatment for cervical degenerative disc diseases in recent years. However, the cost of this procedure is very high and may bring a great economic burden to patients and the health care system. It is reported that outpatient procedures can reduce nearly 30% of the costs associated with hospitalization compared with inpatient procedures. However, the safety profile surrounding outpatient CDR remains poorly resolved. This study aims to evaluate the current evidence on the safety of outpatient CDR Methods: Four English databases were searched. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed according to the PICOS principle. The titles and abstracts of the records will be screened by 2 authors independently. Records that meet the eligibility criteria will be screened for a second time by reading the full text. An extraction form will be established for data extraction. Risk of bias assessment will be performed by 2 authors independently using Cochrane risk of bias tool or Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Data synthesis will be conducted using Stata software. Heterogeneity among studies will be assessed using I 2 test. The funnel plot, Egger regression test, and Begg rank correlation test will be used to examine the publication bias. Results: The results of this meta-analysis will be published in a peer-review journal. Conclusion: This will be the first meta-analysis that compares the safety of outpatient CDR with inpatient CDR. Our study will help surgeons fully understand the complications and safety profile surrounding outpatient CDR. OSF registration number: doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3597Z

No Significant Differences in Postoperative Complications Between Outpatient and Inpatient Single-level or Multiple-level Cervical Disk Replacement for Cervical Radiculopathy

“…Previous studies found outpatient single-level CDR to be associated with a decreased risk in 30-day reoperation 29. Although our study did not necessarily find decreased risk in anterior or posterior revision surgery, no increase in risk was seen.…”

“…21 Previous studies found outpatient single-level CDR to be associated with a decreased risk in 30-day reoperation. 29 Although our study did not necessarily find decreased risk in anterior or posterior revision surgery, no increase in risk was seen. With outpatient CDR being a relatively new procedure and multiple-level CDR being a less standard procedure, our sample size for outpatient multiple-level CDR was small (n = 49).…”