The economic impact of open versus endoscope-assisted craniosynostosis surgery

Choosing a Multidisciplinary Cleft and Craniofacial Team: Medical, Surgical, and Social Considerations

Cleft and craniofacial conditions often present with a variety of functional and esthetic sequelae optimally treated by a multidisciplinary approach. Diagnosis of such conditions pre- or postnatally may evoke parental uncertainty and anxiety, and an important primary consideration is the selection of a cleft and craniofacial team. Identifying an optimal team may be particularly important for developing long-term relationships with clinicians who will ideally work intimately with the family from diagnosis to adulthood. While families, parents, and providers should consider several factors, a dearth of evidence-based suggestions preclude critical appraisal of cleft and craniofacial teams. In this article, the authors summarize medical, surgical, and social considerations for selecting a cleft and craniofacial team to optimize patient outcomes and the family/caregiver experience.

Sagittal Craniosynostosis: Treatment and Outcomes According to Age at Intervention

The purpose of this study is to describe the treatment strategies and outcomes of nonsyndromic single-suture sagittal craniosynostosis based on the patient's age at intervention. Studies from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for patients with nonsyndromic single-suture sagittal craniosynostosis. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies with follow-up of at least 12 months, minimum of 25 patients per cohort, and first-time surgical intervention. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of intervention tool [Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I)] was applied. A total of 49 manuscripts with 3316 patients met criteria. Articles were categorized based on age at intervention; 0 to 6, older than 6 to 12, and older than 12 months. Fifteen of the manuscripts described interventions in more than 1 age group. From the 49 articles, 39 (n=2141) included patients 0 to 6 months old, 15 (n=669) discussed patients older than 6 to 12 months old, and 9 (n=506) evaluated patients older than 12 months old. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 144 months. Over 8 types of open surgical techniques were identified and 5 different minimally invasive procedures were described. Minimally invasive procedures were exclusively seen in the youngest patient cohort, while open cranial vault reconstructions were often seen in the 2 older cohorts. Endoscopic surgery and open conservative procedures are indicated for younger patients, while complex open cranial vault reconstructions are common in older patients. However, there is no consensus on one approach over the other. Even with the analysis of this review, we cannot factor a strong conclusion on a specific technique.

Quality and patient safety research in pediatric neurosurgery: a review

BACKGROUND

In 2001, the National Academy of Medicine, formerly known as the Institute of Medicine (IOM), published their seminal work, Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. In this work, the authors called for improved safety, effectiveness, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity in the United States' healthcare system. Two decades after the publication of this work, healthcare costs continue to rise, but outcomes lag other nations. The objective of this narrative review is to describe research efforts in pediatric neurosurgery with respect to the six quality aims proposed by the IOM, and highlight additional research opportunities.

METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, and EBSCOhost were queried to identify studies in pediatric neurosurgery that have addressed the aims proposed by the IOM. Studies were summarized and synthesized to develop a set of research opportunities to advance quality of care.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were reviewed which focused on the six quality aims proposed by the IOM. Out of these studies, five research opportunities emerged: (1) To examine performance of tools of care, (2) To understand processes surrounding care delivery, (3) To conduct cost-effectiveness analyses for a broader range of neurosurgical conditions, (4) To identify barriers driving healthcare disparities, and (5) To understand patients' and caregivers' experiences receiving care, and subsequently develop tools and programs to address their needs and preferences.

CONCLUSION

There is a growing body of literature examining quality in pediatric neurosurgical care across all aims proposed by the IOM. However, there remains important gaps in the literature that, if addressed, will advance the quality of pediatric neurosurgical care delivery.

Geographic Financial Analysis of Craniosynostosis Surgery in the United States

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate the financial implications of demographic and socioeconomic factors upon the cost of surgical procedures for craniosynostosis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted of admissions for craniosynostosis surgery in the United States from 2015 through 2020 using the Pediatric Health Information System. Patient demographics, case volume, and surgical approach were analyzed in context of hospital charges.

RESULTS

During the study interval, 3869 patients were admitted for surgery for craniosynostosis. In multivariate regression accounting for demographic and socioeconomic factors, hospital admission charges were significantly higher in patients with longer hospital length of stay (P < 0.001), longer ICU length of stay (P < 0.001), living in an underserved area (P = 0.046), preoperative risk factors (P = 0.016), and those undergoing open procedures (P < 0.001); hospital admission charges were significantly lower in patients with White race (P = 0.020) and those treated at high-volume centers (P < 0.001). In multivariate regression, ICU length of stay was significantly higher in patients with preoperative risk factors (P < 0.001), undergoing open procedures (P < 0.001), government insurance (P = 0.018), and not treated at high-volume centers (P = 0.005). There were significant differences in admission charges (P < 0.001), charge-to-cost ratios (P < 0.001), and likelihood of being treated at high-volume craniofacial centers (P < 0.001) across geographic regions of the country.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, there is significant sociodemographic variability in charges for craniosynostosis care, with increased hospital charges independently associated with non-White race, preoperative risk factors, and living in an underserved area.

Open Versus Minimally Invasive Approach for Craniosynostosis: Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Pediatric

OBJECTIVE

This multicenter study aimed to compare demographic, operative, and short-term outcomes data between open and minimally invasive surgical approaches for craniosynostosis repair utilizing the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric (NSQIP-P) database and highlight surgical disparities among races and ethnicities.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of large multicenter database.

SETTING

Freestanding general acute care children's hospitals, children's hospitals within a larger hospital, specialty children's hospitals, or general acute care hospitals with a pediatric wing.

PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 4931 pediatric patients underwent craniosynostosis correction within the NSQIP-P database from 2013 to 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Demographic information included age at surgery, sex, race, and ethnicity. Operative and outcomes measures included operative time, anesthesia time, days until discharge, postoperative complications, blood transfusions, 30-day readmission, and 30-day unplanned return to operating room.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery had significantly shorter operative and anesthesia times (p < .001; p < .001), fewer days until discharge (p < .001), fewer postoperative complications (p < .05), and less blood transfusions (p < .001). The proportion of White patients was significantly higher in the minimally invasive surgery group (p < .01), whereas Black and Hispanic patients had a significantly higher proportion in the open surgery group (p < .001; p < .001). Additionally, the percentage of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery increased from 3.8% in 2014 to over 13% in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to a growing consensus that minimally invasive surgery has significantly decreased operative time, anesthesia time, transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications compared to open surgery. Racial and ethnic surgical disparities showed larger proportions of Black and Hispanic populations undergoing open procedures.

Comparison of aesthetic outcomes between open and endoscopically treated sagittal craniosynostosis

OBJECTIVE

In the last several decades, there has been much debate regarding the ideal treatment for sagittal synostosis. The purpose of this study was to compare perioperative, anthropometric, and subjective assessments of cosmetic outcomes between open and endoscopic management of isolated sagittal synostosis.

METHODS

At their routine postoperative follow-up, pediatric patients with sagittal craniosynostosis were recruited to undergo digital cranial measurement and standardized photography for objective and subjective assessments of perioperative outcomes. Age-normalized z-scores for cephalic index, head circumference, euryon-euryon diameter (Eu-Eu), and glabella-opisthocranion diameter (G-Op) were calculated for each patient. Faculty surgeons, surgical trainees, nurses, and laypersons were asked to rate the normalcy of craniofacial appearances using a 5-point Likert scale. Outcomes were compared between patients treated with endoscopic correction and those treated with open repair.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients were included in the study. Thirty-one had undergone open surgical correction, and 19 had undergone endoscopic treatment. Endoscopic repair involved significantly lower operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, and hospital length of stay than those with open repair (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups in terms of z-scores for head circumference (p = 0.22), cephalic index (p = 0.25), or Eu-Eu (p = 0.38). Endoscopic treatment was associated with a significantly lower G-Op (p = 0.009). Additionally, the average subjective rating of head shape was higher for endoscopic treatment when corrected for age, gender, and ethnicity (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings suggest that patients who are treated endoscopically may have an overall more normal appearance in skull morphology and cosmesis, although these results are limited by poor reliability.

Cost comparison of surgical management of nonsagittal synostosis: traditional open versus endoscope-assisted techniques

OBJECTIVE

Management of craniosynostosis at an early age is important for mitigating the risk of abnormal cranial development, but treatment can result in significant expenses. Previous research has shown that endoscope-assisted craniectomy (EAC) is less costly than open cranial vault remodeling (CVR) for patients with sagittal synostosis. The aim of this study was to strengthen the existing body of healthcare cost research by elucidating the charges associated with open and endoscopic treatment for patients with nonsagittal synostosis.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective analysis of data obtained in 41 patients who underwent open CVR and 38 who underwent EAC with postoperative helmet therapy for nonsagittal, single-suture craniosynostosis (metopic, coronal, and lambdoid) between 2008 and 2018. All patients were < 1 year of age at the time of surgery and had a minimum 1 year of follow-up. Inpatient charges, physician fees, helmet charges, and outpatient clinic visits in the 1st year were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean ages of the children treated with EAC and open CVR were 3.5 months and 8.7 months, respectively. Patients undergoing EAC with postoperative helmet therapy required more outpatient clinic visits in the 1st year than patients undergoing CVR (4 vs 2; p < 0.001). Overall, 13% of patients in the EAC group required 1 helmet, 30% required 2 helmets, 40% required 3 helmets, and 13% required 4 or more helmets; the mean total helmeting charges were $10,072. The total charges of treatment, including inpatient charges, physician fees, outpatient clinic visit costs, and helmet charges, were significantly lower for the EAC group than they were for the open CVR group ($50,840 vs $95,588; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the additional charges for postoperative helmet therapy and the more frequent outpatient visits, EAC is significantly less expensive than open CVR for patients with metopic, coronal, and lambdoid craniosynostosis. In conjunction with the existing literature on clinical outcomes and perioperative resource utilization, these data support EAC as a cost-minimizing treatment for eligible patients with nonsagittal synostosis.