Browse

You are looking at 11 - 20 of 7,766 items for

  • User-accessible content x
Clear All
Free access

Vikram B. Chakravarthy, Hana Yokoi, Daniel J. Coughlin, Mariel R. Manlapaz and Ajit A. Krishnaney

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been shown to be effective at reducing perioperative morbidity and costs while improving outcomes. To date, spine surgery protocols have been limited in scope, focusing only on specific types of procedures or specific parts of the surgical episode. The authors describe the creation and implementation of one of the first comprehensive ERAS protocols for spine surgery. The protocol is unique in that it has a comprehensive perioperative paradigm encompassing the entire surgical period that is tailored based on the complexity of each individual spine patient.

Free access

Ebru Tarıkçı Kılıç, Tuncay Demirbilek and Sait Naderi

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal approach that aims to improve perioperative surgical outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits of ERAS in terms of cost-effectiveness and postoperative outcomes in single-level lumbar microdiscectomy.

METHODS

This study was a single-center retrospective comparing costs and outcomes before and after implementation of the ERAS pathway. Data were collected from the electronic medical records of patients who had undergone single-level lumbar microdiscectomy during 2 time periods—during the 2 years preceding implementation of the ERAS pathway (pre-ERAS group) and after implementation of the ERAS pathway (ERAS group). Each group consisted of 60 patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification of class 1. Patients were excluded if their physical status was classified as ASA class II–V or if they were younger than 18 years or older than 65.

Groups were compared in terms of age, sex, body mass index (BMI), perioperative hemodynamics, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluid administration, intraoperative opioid administration, time to first oral intake, time to first mobilization, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), difference between preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores, postoperative analgesic requirements, length of hospital stay, and cost of anesthesia.

RESULTS

The ERAS and pre-ERAS groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, and BMI. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative opioid administration, and intraoperative fluid administration were all less in the ERAS group. First oral intake and first mobilization were earlier in the ERAS group. The incidence of PONV was less in the ERAS group. Postoperative analgesic requirements and postoperative VAS scores were significantly less in the ERAS group. The length of hospital stay was found to be shorter in the ERAS group. The ERAS approach was found to be cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS had clinical and economic benefits and is associated with improved outcomes in lumbar microdiscectomy.

Free access

Marcus D. Mazur and Andrew T. Dailey

Free access

John Paul G. Kolcun, G. Damian Brusko, Gregory W. Basil, Richard Epstein and Michael Y. Wang

OBJECTIVE

Open spinal fusion surgery is often associated with significant blood loss, postoperative pain, and prolonged recovery times. Seeking to minimize surgical and perioperative morbidity, the authors adopted an endoscopic minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) technique performed without general anesthesia. In this report, they present data on the first 100 patients treated with this procedure.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective review of the first 100 patients who underwent awake endoscopic MIS-TLIF at a single institution between 2014 and 2017. Surgery was performed while the patient was sedated but without intubation or the use of general anesthetic or narcotic agents. Long-lasting (liposomal) bupivacaine was used for local analgesia. The discectomy and placement of an expandable interbody graft were performed endoscopically, followed by percutaneous pedicle screw implantation. Inclusion criteria for the procedure consisted of diagnosis of degenerative disc disease with grade I or II spondylolisthesis and evidence of spinal stenosis or nerve impingement with intractable symptomatology.

RESULTS

Of the first 100 patients, 56 were female and 44 were male. Single-level fusion was performed in 84 patients and two-level fusion in 16 patients. The most commonly fused level was L4–5, representing 77% of all fused levels. The mean (± standard deviation) operative time was 84.5 ± 21.7 minutes for one-level fusions and 128.1 ± 48.6 minutes for two-level procedures. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 65.4 ± 76.6 ml for one-level fusions and 74.7 ± 33.6 ml for two-level fusions. The mean length of hospital stay was 1.4 ± 1.0 days. Four deaths occurred in the 100 patients; all four of those patients died from complications unrelated to surgery. In 82% of the surviving patients, 1-year follow-up Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) data were available. The mean preoperative ODI score was 29.6 ± 15.3 and the mean postoperative ODI score was 17.2 ± 16.9, which represents a significant mean reduction in the ODI score of −12.3 using a two-tailed paired t-test (p = 0.000001). In four cases, the surgical plan was revised to include general endotracheal anesthesia intraoperatively and was successfully completed. Other complications included two cases of cage migration, one case of osteomyelitis, and one case of endplate fracture; three of these complications occurred in the first 50 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This series of the first 100 patients to undergo awake endoscopic MIS-TLIF demonstrates outcomes comparable to those reported in our earlier papers. This procedure can provide a safe and efficacious option for lumbar fusion with less morbidity than open surgery. Further refinements in surgical technique and technologies will allow for improved success.

Free access

André Beer-Furlan, Krishna C. Joshi, Hormuzdiyar H. Dasenbrock and Michael Chen

Superior sagittal sinus (SSS) dural arteriovenous fistulas (DAVFs) are rare and present unique challenges to treatment. Complex, often bilateral, arterial supply and involvement of large volumes of eloquent cortical venous drainage may necessitate multimodality therapy such as endovascular, microsurgical, and stereotactic radiosurgery techniques. The authors present a complex SSS DAVF associated with an occluded/severely stenotic SSS. The patient underwent a successful endovascular transvenous approach with complete obliteration of the SSS. The authors discuss the management challenges faced on this case.

The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/-rztg0_cBXY.

Free access

Daniel A. Carr, Rajiv Saigal, Fangyi Zhang, Richard J. Bransford, Carlo Bellabarba and Armagan Dagal

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare total cost and length of stay (LOS) between spine surgery patients enrolled in an enhanced perioperative care (EPOC) pathway and patients receiving traditional perioperative care (TRDC).

METHODS

All spine surgery candidates were screened for inclusion in the EPOC pathway. This cohort was compared to a retrospective cohort of patients who received TRDC and a concurrent group of patients who met inclusion criteria but did not receive the EPOC (no pathway care [NOPC] group). Direct and indirect costs as well as hospital and intensive care LOSs were analyzed between the 3 groups.

RESULTS

Total costs after pathway implementation decreased by $19,344 in EPOC patients compared to a historical cohort of patients who received TRDC and $5889 in a concurrent cohort of patients who did not receive EPOC (NOPC group). Hospital and intensive care LOS were significantly lower in EPOC patients compared to TRDC and NOPC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a multimodal EPOC pathway decreased LOS and cost in major elective spine surgeries.

Free access

Mazin Elsarrag, Sauson Soldozy, Parantap Patel, Pedro Norat, Jennifer D. Sokolowski, Min S. Park, Petr Tvrdik and M. Yashar S. Kalani

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multidimensional approach to improving the care of surgical patients using subspecialty- and procedure-specific evidence-based protocols. The literature provides evidence of the benefits of ERAS implementation, which include expedited functional recovery, decreased postoperative morbidity, reduced costs, and improved subjective patient experience. Although extensively examined in other surgical areas, ERAS principles have been applied to spine surgery only in recent years. The authors examine studies investigating the application of ERAS programs to patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic review of the PubMed and MEDLINE databases up to November 20, 2018.

RESULTS

Twenty full-text articles were included in the qualitative analysis. The majority of studies were retrospective reviews of nonrandomized data sets or qualitative investigations lacking formal control groups; there was 1 protocol for a future randomized controlled trial. Most studies demonstrated reduced lengths of stay and no increase in rates of readmissions or complications after introduction of an ERAS pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

These introductory studies demonstrate the potential of ERAS protocols, when applied to spine procedures, to reduce lengths of stay, accelerate return of function, minimize postoperative pain, and save costs.