Background/aim:

Regarding the surgical treatment of incomplete burst fractures of the spine, no optimal standard procedure has been established. While previous studies have focused on radiological and surgical outcome parameters, the literature has not elucidated economic aspects of various surgical treatment options in detail yet. This study aimed to investigate whether open and minimal-invasive approaches differ in their economic profit gain. Furthermore, we examined whether a single-stage or two-stage approach of anterior-posterior fusion was more profitable.

Patients and methods:

By analyzing retrospectively data of 129 patients who underwent surgical procedure due to isolated incomplete burst fractures, we examined the economic profit and radiological parameter of open pedicle screw insertion, minimal-invasive techniques (percutaneous screws, percutaneous screws combined with SpineJack^®, kyphoplasty or SpineJack^®), and anterior-posterior fusion.

Results:

Percutaneous screws in combination with SpineJack^® gained significantly higher profit and higher profit per day of hospital length of stay. Profit was similar after single-stage and two-stage approach of vertebral body replacement. No significant difference in radiological outcome after 24 months was detected between the various surgical techniques.

Conclusion:

From a financial aspect, our finding suggests that application of percutaneous screws in combination with SpineJack^® may generate the highest economic profit gain regarding treatment of incomplete burst fracture.