Pain management following spinal surgeries: An appraisal of the available options

A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial to Assess the Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Preemptive Caudal Morphine as an Adjunct to Bupivacaine for Lumbosacral Spine Surgeries in Adults

Background

The analgesic efficacy of preemptive administration of caudal morphine for spine surgeries in adults is not well studied. In a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial, safety and analgesic efficacy of preemptive, single-shot caudal morphine and bupivacaine was compared with caudal bupivacaine alone in lumbosacral spine surgeries.

Methods

After Institutional Ethics Committee approval, 40 patients aged 18-60 yrs planned for lumbosacral spine surgery were randomized to groups of 20 patients each. After induction and prone positioning, an ultrasound-guided caudal block was performed with morphine 50 µg/kg with 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine in the study group (LM) and only bupivacaine in the control group (LA). Postoperatively, both groups received intravenous morphine via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump (No basal, 1 mg/bolus, 10 minutes lockout interval). Intraoperative fentanyl use, postoperative 24-h morphine consumption, visual analogue pain scores (VAS) and adverse effects of morphine were noted.

Results

Demographics and baseline data were comparable. Postoperative 24-hour morphine requirement was more in LA group (34.3 ± 10.7 mg vs 19.65 ± 11.8 mg, p=0.0001). Total intraoperative supplemental fentanyl requirement was similar (79.25 ± 67.60 µg in LA vs 54 ± 50.20 µg in LM group, p=0.28). VAS scores at 2/4/6/12-hour in group-LM were significantly less than group-LA (p=0.005, 0.002, 0.001 and 0.047) but were comparable at 18 and 24 hours (p=0.25, 0.42). Postoperative incidence of adverse effects of morphine was comparable.

Conclusions

Ultrasound-guided, single-shot preemptive administration of caudal morphine with bupivacaine is a safe and effective modality of analgesia for patients undergoing lumbosacral spine surgeries.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in spine surgery

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are a set of interventions which are carried out in the preoperative and perioperative period. They are aimed to decrease the harmful effects of surgery on the body and help the patient recover better post-surgery. The effectiveness of ERAS has been well established in various other surgical specialities. Earlier spine surgery was thought to be very complex for application of ERAS protocols. However, this has changed over the last decade with (ERAS) protocols gaining widespread popularity in spine surgery. Initial studies involving ERAS in spine surgery were limited to lumbar spine. However, over the years the horizon of ERAS has expanded to include anterior cervical surgeries, spine deformity, spinal tumors and spine surgery in the elderly. ERAS has been shown to reduce the length of hospital stay, overall hospital costs, opioid consumption in perioperative and postoperative period and to lower complication rates in spine surgery. In this narrative review, we discuss various aspects of ERAS in spine surgery including the benefits of ERAS in spine surgery, the various components of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative measures of ERAS protocol.

Efficacy of surgeon-directed postoperative local injection with an analgesic mixture in posterior fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Background

Severe postsurgical pain in posterior spinal fusion is common. Multimodality analgesia, including opioid-based patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), is commonly used, but opioid-related adverse events such as nausea and vomiting are sometimes a problem. We used a ropivacaine-epinephrine-dexamethasone mixture given as one-time local bilateral submyofascial injections at the operated levels added to conventional multimodality analgesia including PCA for postoperative pain control in one group of patients to confirm whether administration of this mixture reduced postoperative pain and opioid use status post posterior spinal fusion.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 67 consecutive patients who had undergone posterior fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), 35 of whom were treated with conventional analgesia that consisted mainly of PCA (control group) and 32 of whom were treated with one-time submyofascial injections of a ropivacaine-epinephrine-dexamethasone mixture (submyofascial injection group) added to conventional multimodality analgesia. We compared postsurgical pain levels and the amount of opioid use over the first 48 h after surgery, as well as physical activity levels and adverse events 2 weeks after surgery.

Results

Postsurgical pain quantified by a numeric rating scale (1–10) in the submyofascial injection group was significantly lower than that in the control group. The amount of fentanyl use was significantly less in the submyofascial injection group at 24 h, 48 h, and all subsequent periods after surgery. In addition, Walking Recovery Time (WRT) defined as the number of days until the first event of ambulation was significantly less in the submyofascial injection group (3.3 d vs 4.1 d, P = 0.0007)). Laxative use was significantly less in the submyofascial injection group (0.3 times vs 1.3 times, P = 0.02).

Conclusions

One-time submyofascial injections at the operated levels with a ropivacaine-epinephrine-dexamethasone mixture after spinal fusion surgery reduced pain, opioid consumption, and opioid-related adverse events. This technique can contribute significantly to postoperative analgesia.

Efficacy of Erector Spinae Nerve Block for Pain Control After Spinal Surgeries: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB), as a regional anesthesia modality, is gaining interest and has been used in abdominal, thoracic and breast surgeries. The evidence on the efficacy of this block in spinal surgeries is equivocal. Recently published reviews on this issue have concerning limitations in methodology.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were done in patients undergoing spinal surgery and had compared outcomes of interest among those that received ESPB and those with no block/placebo were considered for inclusion. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software. GRADE assessment was done for the quality of pooled evidence.

Results

A total of 13 studies were included. Patients receiving ESPB had significantly reduced total opioid use (Standardized mean difference, SMD −2.76, 95% CI: −3.69, −1.82), need for rescue analgesia (Relative risk, RR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.66) and amount of rescue analgesia (SMD −5.08, 95% CI: −7.95, −2.21). Patients receiving ESPB reported comparatively lesser pain score at 1 h (WMD −1.62, 95% CI: −2.55, −0.69), 6 h (WMD −1.10, 95% CI: −1.45, −0.75), 12 h (WMD −0.78, 95% CI: −1.23, −0.32) and 24 h (WMD −0.54, 95% CI: −0.83, −0.25) post-operatively. The risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (RR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19, 0.54) was lower in those receiving ESPB. There were no differences in the duration of surgery, intra-operative blood loss and length of hospital stay between the two groups. The quality of pooled findings was judged to be low to moderate.

Conclusions

ESPB may be effective in patients with spinal surgery in reducing post-operative pain as well as need for rescue analgesic and total opioid use. In view of the low to moderate quality of evidence, more trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Systematic Review Registration:http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42021278133.

Managing Patients Undergoing Orthopedic Surgery to Improve Glycemic Outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Persons with diabetes are more likely to require orthopedic surgery and are at an increased risk of developing postoperative complications. Recognizing the impact of diabetes on musculoskeletal health provides an opportunity to educate healthcare professionals in standardizing the perioperative approach of persons with diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Elevated hemoglobin A1C, fructosamine, and blood glucose levels have been associated with increased risk for complications in the orthopedic population. These risks can be mitigated by the early identification and optimization of these patients in the perioperative period. Intraoperative and postoperative glycemic management should support efforts to maintain glucose at safe levels while avoiding hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. This paper considers factors surrounding diabetes care in the orthopedic surgical patient. Perioperative care discussed includes optimization, hospitalization to discharge, and special considerations such as steroids and diabetes wearable technology. Hospitals should consider these strategies towards enhancing the care of persons with diabetes requiring musculoskeletal care.

Effects of Ramosetron on Nausea and Vomiting Following Spinal Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal surgery is associated with severe pain within the first few days after surgery. Opioids are commonly used to control postoperative pain, but these can lead to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Therefore, use of more effective and better-tolerated agents would be beneficial for these patients. Serotonin receptor antagonists, such as ramosetron, have been used to reduce PONV in patients receiving anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and tolerance of ramosetron to prevent PONV after spinal surgery.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index databases were systematically searched for relevant RCT articles published between January 1979 and November 2020. Full text articles restricted to English language that described RCTs comparing the use of ramosetron with other serotonin antagonists to treat PONV following spinal surgery in adult patients were considered for meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction of all articles. Differences were resolved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

The search identified 88 potentially relevant articles, of which only 3 met our selection criteria. Study drugs were administered at the end of spinal surgery in all 3 included articles. The meta-analysis revealed that ramosetron (0.3 mg) reduced the pain score (mean difference = -0.66; 95% CI -1.02 to -0.30), lowered the risk of PONV (risk ratio = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97), and postoperative vomiting (risk ratio = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.60), and limited the use of rescue antiemetics (risk ratio = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.96) after spinal surgery. However, there were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative nausea, the use of rescue pain medications, the number of rescue analgesics required, and the risk of discontinuation of patient-controlled analgesia between ramosetron and palonosetron (0.075 mg) or ondansetron (4 mg). There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of adverse events among the 3 medications.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of 3 RCTs showed that ramosetron reduced the risk of PONV and POV, limited the use of rescue antiemetics, reduced the postoperative pain score, and did not increase the risk of discontinuing patient-controlled analgesia compared with palonosetron or ondansetron after spinal surgery in 3 RCTs. Therefore, this meta-analysis indicates that ramosetron is an effective and well tolerated antiemetic that can be used to prevent PONV following spinal surgery in adult patients. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42020223596 (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2022; 83:XXX-XXX)© 2022 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

Evaluation of the postoperative morphine-sparing effect of oral premedicants used as pre-emptive analgesics in breast-conserving cancer surgeries: A randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background and Aims:

Breast cancer surgeries are associated with both nociceptive and neuropathic pain, requiring strong analgesics. We aimed to evaluate the postoperative morphine-sparing effect of pre-emptive oral premedication with tramadol versus pregabalin in patients undergoing breast-conserving cancer surgeries (BCCS).

Methods:

This prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was carried out at tertiary care centre on 90 patients undergoing BCCS randomised into three groups of 30 each. Group C received placebo, Group T received tramadol 100 mg and Group P received pregabalin 75 mg as oral premedication, 1 hour before surgery. General anaesthesia was administered. Postoperatively morphine 1 mg.h^-1 through intravenous PCA was started at a visual analogue scale score ≥4. Total morphine consumption in 24 hours was calculated and its sparing effect was evaluated as the primary outcome.

Results:

The median with interquartile range (IQR) of total postoperative morphine consumed in 24 hours, was found to be 22 mg (IQR 0-25.77), 15 mg (IQR 0-16) and 17.50 mg (IQR 0-19.25) in groups C, T, P respectively, (P = 0.000, 0.003, 0.060). The median duration of analgesia in group C was 5.40 hours (IQR 3.30-11.40), 11.6 hours (IQR 9.30-24.0) in group T and 8.60 hours (IQR 6.97-16.27) in group P (P value C/T = 0.000, C/P = 0.007, T/P = 0.002). The postoperative side effects were comparable.

Conclusion:

Oral tramadol 100 mg and oral pregabalin 75 mg as premedication reduced the 24 hours postoperative morphine requirement as compared to placebo in BCCS. However, tramadol 100 mg provided superior analgesia for longer duration than pregabalin 75 mg and was associated with more side effects.

Is there resource wastage in the research for spinal diseases? An observational analysis of discontinuation and non-publication in randomised controlled trials

Introduction

The scale of waste in research funding systems is large and detrimental to research capacity. Both incompleteness and non-publication of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) have been increasingly reported in the literature. This is a serious consequence as RCTs demand monumental amounts of healthcare resources leading to wastage. Most importantly, both under-reporting and non-publication can distort the evidence landscape and obscure rationale behind clinical decisions.

Research question

We, therefore, aimed at conducting the first systematic assessment of registered trial discontinuation and non-publication in the field of spinal disorders.

Material and methods

A list of RCTs was obtained from the U.S National Library of Medicine ClinicalTrials.gov database from January 1st, 2013, to December 31st, 2020. Two independent authors excluded all non-RCTs, trials unrelated to spinal diseases, and trials that are in or before the recruitment phase. We extracted the progress status, sources of funding, the number of centres, type of intervention, principal investigator's department affiliation, publication status, location, the reason for discontinuation, publication date, and subtopics.

Results

112 trials were included in the study. 25 (22%) trials were discontinued early, with slow recruitment being the major reason (38%). Only 56 (50%) of the trials were published in peer-reviewed journals. The publication rate amongst discontinued trials was significantly lower compared to completed trials (P ​< ​0·001). The trial discontinuation rate was much higher in trials registered in the United States (US) compared to other countries (P ​= ​0·009). Industry-sponsored studies had 11 trials (23·4%) that were discontinued whilst there was 20% of non-industry-sponsored studies that were unfinished. Only 20% of the trials were compliant with the FDA reporting requirements over the study period.

Discussion and conclusion

Nearly a quarter of all trials in spinal disorders were discontinued. Half of the trials were unpublished. There was over a third of trials that were completed but not published. These rates remain worrisome from an ethical and financial perspective. Both under-reporting and non-publication adversely affect efforts in evidence synthesis and can compromise clinical guideline development.

•

Nearly a quarter of all trials in spinal disorders were discontinued early.

•

Only half of the trials were published in peer-reviewed journals.

•

Over a third of the trials were completed but not published.

•

The rates of trial discontinuation and non-publication are worrisome from an ethical and financial perspective.

•

Both under-reporting and non-publication adversely affect efforts in evidence synthesis and can compromise clinical guideline development.

Effect of Ultrasound-Guided Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block on the Analgesic Requirements in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spine Surgery Under General Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block was recently described as a regional anesthetic technique to achieve analgesia for lumbar spine surgery by blocking the dorsal rami of spinal nerves. The study aims to test the hypothesis that TLIP block can offer pain control and reduce the perioperative analgesic requirement in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

METHODS

There were 60 patients scheduled for lumbar spine surgery who were randomly assigned into two equal groups, TLIP and control groups. Patients in the TLIP group received general anesthesia and TLIP block while patients in the control group received general anesthesia alone. The primary outcome was the analgesic consumption in the first postoperative 24 hours, while intraoperative additional analgesic needs, time to the first request of postoperative analgesia, and pain scores were the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

At 24 hours postoperatively, morphine consumption was lower in the TLIP group (5.13±1.55) versus the control group (14.33±2.58) mg. The intraoperative fentanyl consumption was lower in the TLIP group (15±35.11 mcgs) versus the control group (105±62.08 mcgs). Postoperative first request for analgesia was delayed in the TLIP group (7.30±2.69 h) compared to the control group (0.92±1.23 h). Postoperative Pain scores at rest were 2.53 ± 0.97 and 3.43 ± 0.50 at 24 hours in the TLIP group and the control group, respectively. Postoperative Pain scores at passive flexion of spine were 2.73 ±0.87 and 3.93 ±0.78 at 24 hours in the TLIP group and the control group, respectively. Patients in the TLIP group had lower perioperative hemodynamic responses to surgical stimulation in comparison to the control group.

CONCLUSION

Combined TLIP block with general anesthesia in patients undergoing spinal surgery reduced both postoperative and intraoperative analgesic needs, reduced intra-operative hemodynamic response to surgery, and achieved good postoperative pain control.

Clinical efficacy of ultrasound guided bilateral erector spinae block for single-level lumbar fusion surgery: a prospective, randomized, case-control study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Postoperative experience plays a vital role in patient recovery and does not depend on the type and quality of the surgical procedure alone. Non-opioid therapies have become part of the multimodal analgesic regimen for better pain control and reduced opioid-related side effects. Most recently evolved among these are the regional anesthetic techniques, such as the thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block and the erector spinae (ESP) block.

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of ultrasound-guided (US) ESP block for postoperative analgesia after a single level lumbar spine fusion surgery compared with conventional (opioid-based) multimodal postoperative analgesia.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective, randomized, controlled, and double-blinded clinical trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A 100 consecutive patients requiring single-level lumbar spinal fusion procedure were randomized into two groups- block (multimodal analgesia with US-ESP) and control (only multimodal analgesia) groups.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic and surgical data, intra-operative blood loss, duration of surgery, total opioid consumption (TOC) and amount of muscle relaxants used were assessed. Postoperatively, the Numeric pain Rating Scale(NRS), Modified Observer's assessment of Alertness and/or Sedation Scale (MOASS) and Patient satisfaction scores were recorded every 2 hours for the first 6 hours followed by every 6 hours for 24 hours. Continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test, and categorical variables were analyzed using either the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. p-value < .05 was considered statistically significant.

METHODS

Patients in both groups underwent the identical protocol for pre-emptive analgesia and induction of anesthesia. Patients in the block group received the US-ESP block after induction and positioning, followed by the multimodal analgesia, while the control group received only the multimodal analgesia.

RESULTS

Both groups had identical demographic backgrounds and surgical profile. TOC for 24 hours following induction was significantly lower in the block group than the control group (105.0 ± 15.15 vs 158.00 ± 23.38mcg; p < .001). The total muscle relaxant consumption during surgery was also significantly less in the block group than the control group (51.90 ± 3.17 vs 57.70 ± 5.90; p < .001). The intra-operative blood loss was significantly less (p < .001) in the block group (303.00 ± 86.55 ml) than the control group (437.00 ± 116.85 ml). Compared to the block group, the control group's pain score (NRS) was significantly higher in the first 48 hours following surgery. The MOASS score was significantly lower in the control group (4.46 ± 0.50 vs 3.82 ± 0.82; p < .001) in the immediate postoperative period. The satisfaction score was significantly higher in the block group than the control group (9.52 ± 0.65 vs 8.22 ± 0.79; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The employed US-ESP block for single-level lumbar fusion surgery is an effective component of multimodal analgesia for reducing blood loss, total opioid consumption, and related side effects with a significant reduction of postoperative pain and higher patient satisfaction.

Erector spinae plane block for spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although the erector spinae plane block has been used in various truncal surgical procedures, its clinical benefits in patients undergoing spinal surgery remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical benefits of erector spinae plane block in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for randomized controlled trials comparing the erector spinae plane block with a nonblocked control for spinal surgery.

Results

Twelve studies encompassing 696 subjects were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. We found that the erector spinae plane block decreased postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption in the postoperative and intraoperative periods. Moreover, it prolonged the time to the first rescue analgesic, reduced the number of patients who required rescue analgesia, and lowered the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, it did not exhibit efficacy in decreasing the incidence of urinary retention and itching or shortening the length of hospital stays, or the time to first ambulation.

Conclusions

Erector spinae plane block improves analgesic efficacy among patients undergoing spinal surgery compared with nonblocked controls; however, there is insufficient evidence regarding the benefits of erector spinae plane block for rapid recovery.

Magnesium Sulfate Enables Patient Immobilization during Moderate Block and Ameliorates the Pain and Analgesic Requirements in Spine Surgery, Which Can Not Be Achieved with Opioid-Only Protocol: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study

Spine surgery is painful despite the balanced techniques including intraoperative and postoperative opioids use. We investigated the effect of intraoperative magnesium sulfate (MgSO₄) on acute pain intensity, analgesic consumption and intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IOM) during spine surgery. Seventy-two patients were randomly allocated to two groups: the Mg group or the control group. The pain intensity was significantly alleviated in the Mg group at 24 h (3.2 ± 1.7 vs. 4.4 ± 1.8, p = 0.009) and 48 h (3.0 ± 1.2 vs. 3.8 ± 1.6, p = 0.018) after surgery compared to the control group. Total opioid consumption was reduced by 30% in the Mg group during the same period (p = 0.024 and 0.038, respectively). Patients in the Mg group required less additional doses of rocuronium (0 vs. 6 doses, p = 0.025). Adequate IOM recordings were successfully obtained for all patients, and abnormal IOM results denoting warning criteria (amplitude decrement >50%) were similar. Total intravenous anesthesia with MgSO₄ combined with opioid-based conventional pain control enables intraoperative patient immobilization without the need for additional neuromuscular blocking drugs and reduces pain intensity and analgesic requirements for 48 h after spine surgery, which is not achieved with only opioid-based protocol.

THE USE OF DEXMEDETOMIDINE IN PUNCTURE TECHNIQUES FOR DEGENERATIVE DISEASES OF THE LUMBAR SPINE

ABSTRACT Objective To analyze the results of the use of dexmedetomidine (D) in the treatment of patients with degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine using puncture techniques. Methods The study included 77 patients who underwent surgical puncture for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine with the use of alpha-2-adrenomimetic D: percutaneous laser denervation of the facet joints (n = 46) and posterolateral transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (n = 31). We assessed: the level of sedation using the Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) and the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS); intraoperative dynamics of the cardiovascular and respiratory system parameters; the level of pain syndrome according to VAS. Results A high intraoperative level of sedation was determined, with RASS -2, -3 and Ramsay III, IV; when transferring a patient to a department (in 90 minutes) this parameter was RASS 0 and Ramsay II. There were no significant changes in central hemodynamics and respiratory depression. The minimum level of pain was determined immediately after surgery, at 30 and 60 minutes after surgery, and before transfer to the department (90 minutes): 6 (4;9); 10 (8;12); 12 (9;13); 16 (13;19) respectively. The absence of the need for additional analgesia on the first postoperative day was verified. Conclusion The use of D significantly reduces the level of pain, while maintaining the necessary verbal contact with the patient, and provides the necessary neurovegetative protection without respiratory depression or lowered hemodynamic parameters during the perioperative period. Level of evidence II; Prognostic Studies - Investigating the Effect of a Patient Characteristic on Disease Outcome. Case series, retrospective study.

Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block Results in Opioid-Free Postoperative Recovery After Percutaneous/Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate efficacy in reducing postoperative pain and opioid analgesia of a novel interdisciplinary strategy combining preoperative thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block and percutaneous/endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery and to determine time to first postoperative ambulation and hospital length of stay.

METHODS

In this retrospective review, 42 patients who underwent elective single-level percutaneous/endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery between 2015 and 2021 were divided into 2 groups: TLIP group with 17 patients who underwent TLIP block and non-TLIP group with 25 patients. Both groups received the same postoperative analgesia with morphine as patient-controlled rescue medication. Visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores were evaluated. Statistical evaluation was performed with Student t test.

RESULTS

In contrast to the non-TLIP group, in the TLIP group, postoperative mean visual analog scale back score and mean Oswestry Disability Index score significantly decreased from 6.6 to 3.3 (P < 0.01) and 32.8 to 23.6 (P < 0.01), respectively, at hospital discharge. No differences were found between the groups at 1 month. Overall mean follow-up time was 29 ± 18 months (range, 3-78 months). Patients in the non-TLIP group were administered a median postoperative 24-hour morphine dose equivalent of 23 mg (range, 8-31 mg), while patients in the TLIP group did not require opioid analgesia (P < 0.01). Patients in the TLIP group started postoperative ambulation at a median of 4.1 hours (range, 2.5-26 hours) with a median hospital length of stay of 24 hours (range, 20-48 hours) (P = 0.112).

CONCLUSIONS

TLIP block significantly improves patient outcome at hospital discharge after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery without postoperative administration of opioids. A prospective study is recommended to confirm our preliminary results.

Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion for Post-operative Analgesia in Patients undergoing Surgery of the Spine Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the impact of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on pain management scores, opioid consumption, adverse events and hospital length of stay in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials (RCT's) evaluating the use of perioperative intravenous lidocaine in adult and paediatric patients undergoing spinal surgery. Primary outcomes were post-operative pain scores at rest, at two, four- six, twenty-four and forty-eight hours and adverse events attributable to lidocaine administration. We searched electronic databases from inception to present. We used Cochrane's standard methods. We used a random-effects model to synthetize data. We conducted three subgroup analysis: major versus minor surgery, patients with chronic pain conditions versus patients without, and adult versus paediatric.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies were included comparing patients having intravenous lidocaine (n = 349) to controls (n = 343). Intravenous lidocaine administration was associated with significantly reduced visual analogue pain scores at two MD= -1.13, four-six MD =-0.79 and twenty-four hours MD= -0.50 post-operatively. In the adults, efficacy of treatment was extended to forty-eight hours MD= -0.72. Perioperative intravenous lidocaine administration was associated with reduced peri-operative opioid consumption at twenty-four and forty-eight as well as decreased hospital length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion consistently improves analgesic measures in adult and paediatric population in the first twenty-four hours, with an effective decrease in opioid consumption noted to forty-eight hours. These results are most generalizable in the adult population in the first four-six to twenty four post-operative hours.

Appropriate Opioid Use After Spine Surgery: Psychobehavioral Barriers and Patient Knowledge

OBJECTIVE

To identify spine patients' barriers to appropriate postoperative opioid use, comfort with naloxone, knowledge of safe opioid disposal practices, and associated factors.

METHODS

We preoperatively surveyed 174 spine patients about psychobehavioral barriers to appropriate opioid use, comfort with naloxone, and knowledge about opioid disposal. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with barriers and knowledge (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Common barriers were fear of addiction (71%) and concern about disease progression (43%). Most patients (78%) had neutral/low confidence in the ability of nonopioid medications to control pain; most (57%) felt neutral or uncomfortable with using naloxone; and most (86%) were familiar with safe disposal. Anxiety was associated with fear of distracting the physician (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-14) and with lower odds of knowing safe disposal methods (aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.72). Opioid use during the preceding month was associated with comfort with naloxone (aOR, 4.9; 95% CI, 2.1-12). Patients with a higher educational level had lower odds of reporting fear of distracting the physician (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.97), and those with previous postoperative opioid use had lower odds of concern about disease progression (aOR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.09-0.63) and with a belief in tolerating pain (aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12-0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Many spine patients report barriers to appropriate postoperative opioid use and are neutral or uncomfortable with naloxone. Some are unfamiliar with safe disposal. Associated factors include anxiety, lack of recent opioid use, and no previous postoperative use.

Erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia in spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Although in recent years some randomized controlled trails (RCTs) have explored the analgesic effect of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in spine surgery, their results are controversial. Our study aimed to examine the analgesic effect of preoperative ESPB in spine surgery by a meta-analysis of RCTs.

METHODS

The articles of RCTs that compared preoperative ESPB with no block in terms of the analgesic effect in adult patients following spine surgery were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the pain scores reported by Visual Analog Scale or Numerical Rating Scale of pain at different time intervals in 48 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption, rescue analgesia requirement, opioid-related side effects and complications associated with ESPB.

RESULTS

Twelve studies involving 828 patients were eligible for our study. Compared with no block, ESPB had a significant effect on reducing postoperative pain scores at rest and at movement at different time intervals except at movement at 48 h. ESPB significantly decreased opioid consumption in 24 h after surgery (SMD - 1.834; 95%CI - 2.752, - 0.915; p < 0.001; I² = 89.0%), and reduced the incidence of rescue analgesia (RR 0.333; 95%CI 0.261, 0.425; p < 0.001; I² = 0%) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.380; 95%CI 0.272, 0.530; p < 0.001; I² = 9.0%). Complications associated with ESPB were not reported in the included studies.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis demonstrates that ESPB is effective in decreasing postoperative pain intensity and postoperative opioid consumption in spine surgery. Therefore, for the management of postoperative pain following spine surgery, preoperative ESPB is a good choice.

Evaluation of adding the Erector spinae plane block to standard anesthetic care in patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery

Postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery is challenging due to the invasiveness of the surgical procedure and the frequent use of opioids preoperatively by many patients. Recently, the erector spinae plane (ESP) block has been introduced in our clinical practice as part of a multimodal pain strategy after posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. This is a retrospective case–control study evaluating the analgesic efficacy of the ESP block when added to our standard analgesic regimen for posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Twenty patients who received an erector spinae plane block were compared with 20 controls. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain, measured by the numeric rating scale. Secondary outcome measures were opioid use, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and length of stay. Postoperative pain scores in the PACU were lower in patients who received an erector spinae plane block (p = 0.041). Opioid consumption during surgery and in the PACU was not significantly different. Need for patient-controlled analgesia postoperatively was significantly lower in the group receiving an ESP block (p = 0.010). Length of stay in hospital was reduced from 3.23 days (IQR 1.1) in the control group to 2.74 days (IQR 1.6) in the study group (p = 0.012). Adding an erector spinae plane block to the analgesic regimen for posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery seemed to reduce postoperative pain and length of hospital stay.

Multimodal Analgesia in Spine Surgery: An Umbrella Review

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, there has been a growing interest regarding the implementation of multimodal analgesia as an important component of the ideal perioperative patient management. The aim of the current umbrella review was to establish the role of multimodal analgesia in patients undergoing spine surgery during the immediate postoperative period.

METHODS

A systematic review of the pertinent literature was performed. The evaluation was based on a multitude of primary endpoints including the postoperative requirements for patient-controlled analgesia, pain intensity, back-related disability, overall functionality, patient satisfaction, complications, length of hospitalization, and costs.

RESULTS

The results were summarized using a meta-analysis in the presence of quantitative data or in a narrative review, otherwise. There was a large body of high-quality evidence supporting that the implementation of multimodal analgesia improves patient outcome in terms of the intensity of postoperative pain, the requirements for postoperative opioid analgesia, and the opioid-associated side effects. Similarly, limited high-quality evidence supported that multimodal analgesia improved patients' functionality and satisfaction while decreasing the length of hospitalization and overall costs of surgery. However, the results were inconclusive as far as the disability was concerned.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimodal analgesia seems to have an essential role for the optimal management of patients undergoing spine surgery. Future research is required to optimize the multimodal analgesia protocols in this group of patients.

Patient-Controlled Analgesia Following Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery Is Associated With Increased Opioid Consumption and Opioid-Related Adverse Events

BACKGROUND

Optimal postoperative pain control is critical after spinal fusion surgery. There remains significant variability in the use of postoperative intravenous opioid patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and few data evaluating its utility compared with nurse-controlled analgesia (NCA) among patients with lumbar fusion.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of postoperative PCA compared with NCA to improve opiate prescription practices.

METHODS

A retrospective review from a single institution was conducted in consecutive patients treated with posterior lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative pathology. Patients were divided into cohorts on the basis of postoperative treatment with PCA or NCA. Postoperative pain scores, length of stay, and total opioid consumption data were collected. Patients were stratified according to preoperative opioid consumption as opioid naive (0 morphine milligram equivalents [MME] daily), low consumption (1-60 MME), high consumption (61-90 MME), or very high consumption (>90 MME).

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients were identified, including 62 in the PCA group and 178 in the NCA group. PCA patients had higher mean preoperative opioid consumption than NCA patients (49.2 vs 24.3 MME, P = .009). PCA patients had higher mean opioid consumption in the first 72 h in all 4 of the preoperative opioid consumption subcategories. Pain control and adverse event rates were similar between PCA and NCA in the low to high preoperative opioid consumption groups.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative PCA is associated with significantly more opioid consumption in the first 72 h after surgery and equal or worse postoperative pain scores compared with NCA after lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

General Anesthesia Compared to Spinal Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Lumbar Vertebral Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Vertebral lumbar surgery can be performed under both general anesthesia (GA) and spinal anesthesia. A clear benefit from spinal anesthesia (SA) remains unproven. The aim of our meta-analysis was to compare the early analgesic efficacy and recovery after SA and GA in adult patients undergoing vertebral lumbar surgery. A systematic investigation with the following criteria was performed: adult patients undergoing vertebral lumbar surgery (P); single-shot SA (I); GA care with or without wound infiltration (C); analgesic efficacy measured as postoperative pain, intraoperative hypotension, bradycardia, length of surgery, blood loss, postoperative side effects (such as postoperative nausea/vomiting and urinary retention), overall patient and surgeon satisfaction, and length of hospital stay (O); and randomized controlled trials (S). The search was performed in Pubmed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar up to 1 November 2020. Eleven studies were found upon this search. SA in vertebral lumbar surgery decreases postoperative pain and the analgesic requirement in the post anesthesia care unit. It is associated with a reduced incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and a higher patient satisfaction. It has no effect on urinary retention, intraoperative bradycardia, or hypotension. SA should be considered as a viable and efficient anesthetic technique in vertebral lumbar surgery.

The analgesic effect of intravenous lidocaine versus intrawound or epidural bupivacaine for postoperative opioid reduction in spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pain management following spine surgery remains a challenge. The significant use of opioids may lead to opioid-related adverse events. These complications can increase perioperative morbidity and rapidly expend health care resources by developing chronic pain. Although intraoperative pain control for surgery has been studied in the literature, a thorough assessment of the effect in spine surgery is rarely reported. The objective of the present study was to examine the outcomes of intraoperative intravenous lidocaine and intrawound or epidural bupivacaine use in spine surgery.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was conducted for studies on the use of lidocaine and bupivacaine in spine surgery for all years available. Only articles in English language were included. Postoperative opioid consumption, VAS score, nausea/vomiting, and length of hospital stay comprised the outcomes of interest. Pooled descriptive statistics with Risk Ratios (RR), Mean Differences (MD) and 95 % confidence interval were used to synthesize the outcomes for each medication.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies (n = 579) were included in the analysis. Comparison of the opioid consumption revealed a significant mean difference between lidocaine and bupivacaine (MD: -12.25, and MD: -0.4, respectively, p = 0.01), favoring lidocaine. With regard to postoperative VAS, the pooled effect of both groups decreased postoperative pain (MD: -0.61 (95 % CI: -1.14, -0.08)), with a more significant effect in the lidocaine group (MD: -0.84, (95 % CI: -1.21, -0.48)). There was no significant effect in length of stay, and postoperative nausea/vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that lidocaine and bupivacaine use may decrease postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Lidocaine had a stronger effect on the reduction of opioid consumption compared to bupivacaine.

Effect of Multimodal Drugs Infiltration on Postoperative Pain in Split Laminectomy of Lumbar Spine: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized, double-blinded controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

This study tested the effect of single-dose wound infiltration with multiple drugs for pain management after lumbar spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Patients undergoing spine surgery often experience severe pain especially in early postoperative period. We hypothesized that intraoperative wound infiltration with multiple drugs would improve outcomes in lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients who underwent one to two levels of spinous process splitting laminectomy of lumbar spine, were randomized into two groups. Infiltration group received intraoperative wound infiltration of local anesthetics, morphine sulfate, epinephrine, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs at the end of surgery, and received patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) postoperatively. The control group received only PCA postoperatively. The primary outcome measures were amount of morphine consumption and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain. The secondary outcome measures were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland-Morris Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, and side effects.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients (23 patients for local infiltration group, and 26 patients for control group) were analyzed. There were statistically significant [P < 0.001, the effect size -5.0, 95% CI (-6.1, -3.9)] less morphine consumptions in the local infiltration group than the control group during the first 12 hours, 12 to 24 hours, and 24 to 48 hours after surgery. The VAS of postoperative pain reported by patients at rest and during motion was significantly lower in the local infiltration group than the control group at all assessment times (P < 0.001). The effect size of VAS of postoperative pain at rest and during motion were -2.0, 95% CI (-2.5, -1.4) and -2.0, 95% CI (-2.6, -1.4) respectively. ODI and RMDQ at 2 week and 3 month follow-ups in both groups had significant improvement from baseline (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between groups (P = 0.262 for ODI and P = 0.296 for RMDQ). There were no significant differences of patient satisfaction, length of stay, and side effects between both groups (P = 0.256, P = 0.262, P = 0.145 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative wound infiltration with multimodal drugs reduced postoperative morphine consumption, decreased pain score with no increased side effects.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Clinical Protocol for Identifying and Managing Bladder Dysfunction during Acute Care after Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury

Bladder dysfunction is widespread following traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI). Early diagnosis of bladder dysfunction is crucial in preventing complications, determining prognosis, and planning rehabilitation. We aim to suggest the first clinical protocol specifically designed to evaluate and manage bladder dysfunction in TSCI patients during acute care. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 101 patients admitted for an acute TSCI between C1 and T12. Following spinal surgery, presence of voluntary anal contraction (VAC) was used as a criterion for removal of indwelling catheter and initiating trial of void (TOV). Absence of bladder dysfunction was determined from three consecutive post-void bladder scan residuals ≤200 mL without incontinence. All patients were reassessed 3 months post-injury using the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM). A total of 74.3% were diagnosed with bladder dysfunction during acute care, while 57.4% had a motor-complete TSCI. Three months later, 94.7% of them reported impaired bladder function. None of the patients discharged from acute care after a functional bladder was diagnosed reported impaired bladder function at the 3-month follow-up. A total of 95.7% patients without VAC had persisting impaired bladder function at follow-up. The proposed protocol is specifically adapted to the dynamic nature of neurogenic bladder function following TSCI. The assessment of VAC into the protocol provides major insight on the potential for reaching adequate bladder function during the subacute phase. Conducting TOV using bladder scan residuals in patients with VAC is a non-invasive and easy method to discriminate between a functional and an impaired bladder following acute TSCI.

No Difference in Pain After Spine Surgery with Local Wound Filtration of Morphine and Ketorolac: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Controlling postoperative pain after spinal surgery is important for rehabilitation and patient satisfaction. Wound infiltration with local anesthetics may improve postoperative pain, but true multimodal approaches for achieving analgesia after spinal surgery remain unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this randomized, controlled, double-blind trial after lumbar interbody fusion, we asked: (1) Does multimodal analgesia reduce VAS pain scores by a clinically important amount? (2) Does this analgesic approach reduce the amount of morphine patients consume after surgery? (3) Is this approach associated with fewer opioid-related side effects after surgery?

METHODS

This study included 80 adult patients undergoing lumbar interbody fusion who were randomized into two groups: A control group (n = 40) who received infiltration of the surgical incision at the end of the procedure with an injection of 0.5% bupivacaine 100 mg (20 mL) and epinephrine 0.5 mg (0.5 mL), and the multimodal group (n = 40), who received wound infiltration with the same approach but with different medications: 0.5% bupivacaine 92.5 mg (18.5 mL), ketorolac 30 mg (1 mL), morphine 5 mg (0.5 mL), and epinephrine 0.5 mg (0.5 mL). There were no between-group differences in the proportion of patients who were male, nor in the mean age, height, weight, preoperative pain score, or surgical time. All treatments were administered by one surgeon. All patients, the surgeon, and the researchers were blinded to the allocation of patients to each group. Pain at rest was recorded using the VAS. Postoperative morphine consumption (administered using a patient-controlled analgesia pump) and opiod-associated side effects including nausea/vomiting, pruritus, urinary retention, and respiratory depression were assessed; this study was analyzed according to intention-to-treat principles. No loss to follow-up or protocol deviations were noted. We considered a 2-cm change on a 10-cm scale on the VAS as the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Differences smaller than this were considered unlikely to be important.

RESULTS

At no point were there between-group differences in the VAS scores that exceeded the MCID, indicating no clinically important reductions in pain associated with administering multimodal injections. The highest treatment effect was observed at 3 hours that showed only a -1.3 cm mean difference between the multimodal and the control groups (3.2 ± 1.8 versus 4.5 ± 1.9 [95% CI -1.3 to -0.3]; p < 0.001), which was below the MCID. Morphine consumption was very slightly higher in the control group than in the multimodal group (2.8 ± 2.8 versus 0.3 ± 1.0, mean difference 2.47; p < 0.001). The percentage of patients reporting opioid-related side effects was lower in the multimodal group than in the control group. The proportions of nausea and vomiting were higher in the control group (30% [12 of 40] than in the multimodal group (3% [1 of 40]; p = 0.001). All of these side effects were transient and none was severe.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimodal wound infiltration with an NSAID and morphine did not yield any clinically important reduction in pain or opioid consumption. Since no substantial benefit of adding these drugs to a patient's aftercare regimen was achieved, and considering the potential risks of administering opioids and NSAIDs (such as, polypharmacy in older patients, serious adverse effects of NSAIDs), we recommend against routine use of this approach in clinical practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine for patients undergoing spine surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine has been reported to have analgesic and opioid-sparing effects in many kinds of surgery. Several studies have evaluated its use in the settings of spine surgery. The aim of the study is to examine the effect of intravenous lidocaine in patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

We performed a quantitative systematic review. Databases of PubMed, Medline, Embase database and Cochrane library were investigated for eligible literatures from their establishments to June, 2019. Articles of randomized controlled trials that compared intravenous lidocaine to a control group in patients undergoing spine surgery were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption and the length of hospital stay.

RESULT

Four randomized controlled trials with 275 patients were included in the study. postoperative pain compared with control was reduced at 6 hours after surgery (WMD -0.50, 95%CI, -0.76 to -0.25, P < .001), at 24 hours after surgery (WMD -0.50, 95%CI, -0.70 to -0.29, P < .001) and at 48 hours after surgery (WMD -0.57, 95%CI, -0.96 to -0.17, P = .005). The effect of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative opioid consumption compared with control revealed a significant effect (WMD -15.36, 95%CI, -21.40 to -9.33 mg intravenous morphine equivalents, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This quantitative analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrated that the perioperative intravenous lidocaine was effective for reducing postoperative opioid consumption and pain in patients undergoing spine surgery. The intravenous lidocaine should be considered as an effective adjunct to improve analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery. However, the quantity of the studies was very low, more research is needed.

Perioperative intravenous lignocaine infusion for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing surgery of the spine: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Intravenous lignocaine is an amide local anaesthetic known for its analgesic, antihyperalgesic and anti-inflammatory properties. Administration of intravenous lignocaine has been shown to enhance perioperative recovery parameters. This is the protocol for a systematic review which intends to summarise the evidence base for perioperative intravenous lignocaine administration in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Our primary outcomes include: postoperative pain scores at rest and movement at predefined early, intermediate and late time points and adverse events. Other outcomes of interest include perioperative opioid consumption, composite morbidity, surgical complications and hospital length of stay. We will include randomised controlled trials, which compared intravenous lignocaine infusion vs standard treatment for perioperative analgesia. We will search electronic databases from inception to present; MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). Two team members will independently screen all citations, full-text articles and abstract data. The individual study risk of bias will be appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We will obtain a risk ratio or mean difference (MD) from the intervention and control group event rates based on the nature of data. We will correct for the variable measurement tools by using the standardised MD (SMD). We will use a random-effects model to synthesise data. We will conduct five subgroup analysis: major versus minor surgery, emergency versus elective surgery, patients with chronic pain conditions versus patients without, duration of lignocaine infusion and adult versus paediatric. Confidence in cumulative evidence for will be classified according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. We will construct summary of findings tables supported detailed evidence profile tables for predefined outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD420201963314.

Postoperative Pain, Narcotics Consumption, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Based on PROMIS Physical Function Following a Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) scores with postoperative pain, narcotics use, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) following a single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedure.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is a scarcity of prior literature on the ability of baseline PROMIS scores to predict clinical outcomes for patients undergoing ACDF procedures.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a primary ACDF were retrospectively reviewed and stratified into low and high disability cohorts. Preoperative PROMIS PF cohorts were tested for association with demographic and perioperative characteristics using chi-square analysis and one-way analysis of variance. Cohorts were tested for association with inpatient pain scores and narcotics consumption, as well as postoperative improvements in PROMIS PF, neck disability index (NDI), and visual analog scale (VAS) neck and arm pain using linear regression.

RESULTS

Ninety one patients were included: 39 low disability and 52 high disability. Inpatient postoperative VAS pain scores and narcotic consumption are also compared between cohorts. Patients with greater disability reported higher VAS pain scores (P = 0.003). However, patients in both cohorts consumed comparable amounts of narcotics (P = 0.926). Patients with greater preoperative disability demonstrated lower PROMIS PF scores, greater NDI scores, and greater VAS Neck scores at the preoperative baseline. However, patients demonstrated similar improvement of VAS neck and arm pain, as well as NDI at all postoperative timepoints. Patients with low disability reported worsened physical function at the 6 weeks timepoint.

CONCLUSION

Patients with worse preoperative disability as measured by PROMIS PF reported increased pain but comparable narcotics consumption in the immediate postoperative period following a single-level ACDF procedure. Furthermore, patients experienced similar long-term postoperative improvement of PROs regardless of preoperative physical function. PROMIS PF can efficiently quantify physical function before and after the ACDF procedure as self-evaluated by patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Effect of Adding Neural Mobilization Versus Myofascial Release to Stabilization Exercises after Lumbar Spine Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

To test the effect of adding neural mobilization (NM) versus myofascial release (MFR) to stabilization exercises (SE) on disability, pain, and lumbar range of motion (ROM) in patients with lumbar spine fusion (LSF).

DESIGN

A single blinded, parallel groups, randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Outpatient public and governmental hospital clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (N=60) who had undergone LSF were randomly assigned into 3 equal groups.

INTERVENTION

Group I received NM plus SE, group II received MFR and SE, and group III received SE only. Each group visited the hospital 3 times a week for 4 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale, and back range of motion (BROM) were assessed before starting treatment, immediately after finishing treatment, and 1 month later.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences among the groups regarding the ODI and pain (P<.05) in favor of the study groups, but no statistically significant differences were found among groups regarding the BROM outcome (P>.05). Regarding the within-group effect, statistically significant differences were found in all outcomes after 1 month of treatment, as well as after 1 month of follow-up in each group (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received NM or MFR combined with SE demonstrated better improvement, in favor of the NM group, regarding disability and pain than patients who received SE alone after LSF. No differences were found among the groups regarding lumbar ROM.

Postoperative Single-shot Epidural Fentanyl and Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia After Lumbar Decompression: A Prospective, Double-blind Randomized Study

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of the postoperative single-shot bolus of epidural Fentanyl and Bupivicaine in providing pain relief postlumbar decompression surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite lumbar decompression's success in alleviating symptoms of sciatica, radiculopathy, and neurogenic claudication, transient back and buttock pain has been a common complaint postoperatively. Providing good postoperative pain alleviation predicts patient's quality of recovery.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. Forty-five patients scheduled for lumbar decompression for a year's period who were randomly assigned to receive a postoperative bolus of 10-mL solution of 50 mcg of Fentanyl, 0.125% Bupivacaine, and 0.9% saline solution via an intraoperatively placed epidural catheter immediately after wound closure, before dressing application. Facial pain scale scores (from 0 to 10) were measured at three time points after surgery (fully awake at recovery room, transfer to ward, first postoperative day). Postoperative need for oral analgesics, time to independent ambulation, associated adverse events, and time to hospital discharge were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Pain scores were noted to be significantly lower at all time points in the epidural group (P < 0.001). In turn, they also received less on-demand oral pain medications than those in the control group (P = 0.000). The mean time to ambulation was 0.09 days in the epidural group and 0.91 days in the decompression-alone group (P = 0.000). Criteria for hospital discharge were usually met on Day 0 in the epidural and Day 1 in the control group (P = 0.000). Within the study period, only one infection was noted in the epidural group which necessitated additional lumbar spine surgery (4.3%). No adverse events or complications related to Fentanyl use were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

A postoperative bolus of Fentanyl and Bupivacaine is effective in reducing early postoperative pain without the related complications of opiod administration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine on Postoperative Pain in Patients Undergoing Intraspinal Tumor Resection: Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Patients undergoing intraspinal tumor resection usually experience severe acute pain, delaying postoperative rehabilitation, and increasing incidence of chronic pain. Recently, an increasing number of studies have found that low-dose intravenous lidocaine infusion during and/or after surgery can reduce opioid usage and the incidence of related side effects, inhibit hyperalgesia and promote recovery. Thus far, no studies have evaluated the analgesic effect and safety of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion for intraspinal tumor resection, especially the long-term analgesic effects of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with lidocaine during the first postoperative 48 hours. This study tests the hypothesis that intra- and postoperative systemic lidocaine infusion for patients undergoing intraspinal tumor resection can relieve postoperative acute or chronic pain and reduce the opioid dosage and incidence of related side effects without other problems.

Study Design and Methods

This is a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blinded study. In total, 180 participants scheduled for intraspinal tumor resection will be randomly divided into lidocaine and placebo groups. The lidocaine group will be administered lidocaine intravenously during anesthesia and postoperative pain management during the first 48 postoperative hours; the placebo group will be administered normal saline at the same volume, infusion rate, and timing. The primary outcome will be the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score. Secondary outcomes will be postoperative cumulative sufentanil consumption, indicators of postoperative recovery, and the incidence of perioperative adverse events.

Discussion

This study investigates the effect of continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion on postoperative sufentanil consumption and VAS scores. The findings will provide a new strategy of anesthesia and analgesia management for intraspinal tumor resection.

Cold Therapy and the Effect on Pain and Physiological Parameters in Patients Recovering from Spine Surgery: A Randomized Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the effect of cold therapy (CT) on pain and physiological parameters after spine surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Study participants were randomly assigned to either a control group or a CT group. The outcome measured was pain intensity rated by a numeric rating scale. Psychological outcome measures were considered secondary.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients in each group completed the study. No statistically significant difference was found between the pain scores of patients in the CT and those in the control group during the 24-h period following surgery (group: F = 0.01, p = 0.922). However, it was found that the pain scores of patients in the CT group were significantly lower than those in the control group during the 48-h period (group: F = 10.59, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

CT reduced pain scores during the 48-h period following spine surgery. Our findings support the use of CT as an adjuvant therapy in pain management.

Regional Anesthesia in Neuroanesthesia Practice

Regional anesthesia has been an undervalued entity in neuroanesthetic practice. However, in the past few years, owing to the development of more advanced techniques, drugs and the prolific use of ultrasound guidance, the unrecognised potential of these modalities have been highlighted. These techniques confer the advantages of reduced requirements for local anesthetics, improved hemodynamic stability in the intraoperative period, better pain score postoperatively and reduced analgesic requirements in the postoperative period. Reduced analgesic requirement translates into lesser side effects associated with analgesic use. Furthermore, the transition from the traditional blind landmark-based techniques to the ultrasound guidance has increased the reliability and the safety profile. In this review, we highlight the commonly practised blocks in the neuroanesthesiologist's armamentarium and describe their characteristics, along with their individual particularities.

Analgesic efficacy of intravenous nefopam after spine surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background: The incidence of moderate to severe pain is high among patients undergoing spinal surgery. Nefopam can be used as an adjuvant analgesic postoperatively after spine surgery. The study aimed to assess the analgesic efficacy and side effects of nefopam on 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption after spine surgery. Methods: The study is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 96 patients were randomized into 4 treatment groups, 24 each. In group 1, patients received normal saline before surgical incision and before the end of surgery. In group 2, patients received 30 mg nefopam before surgical incision and normal saline before the end of surgery. In group 3, patients received normal saline before surgical incision and 30 mg of nefopam before the end of surgery. In group 4, patients received 30 mg of nefopam in both timings. Patient-controlled analgesia morphine was used for the postoperative period. Outcomes were to determine 24-hour morphine consumption and incidence of side effects.  Results: Of 96 patients enrolled, 21 in placebo-placebo, 22 in nefopam-placebo, 22 in placebo-nefopam and 21 in nefopam-nefopam groups completed the study.  Analysis of the Kruskal-Wallis test on the intention-to-treat basis shows no significant difference in 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption between four groups, which were 18 [IQR 13.5-29], 20 [IQR 11-28.3], 17 [IQR 11.5-28.5], 13 [IQR 8.5-18.5] mg., respectively (p = 0.223). Incidence of side effects, including tachycardia, sedation, sweating and nausea/ vomiting, did not differ. Conclusions: Adding perioperative nefopam to opioid analgesic does not improve analgesic efficacy in patients who underwent spine surgery. Registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR20171115001; registered on 15 November 2017.

Analgesic efficacy of intravenous nefopam after spine surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background: The incidence of moderate to severe pain is high among patients undergoing spinal surgery. Nefopam can be used as an adjuvant analgesic postoperatively after spine surgery. The study aimed to assess the analgesic efficacy and side effects of nefopam on 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption after spine surgery. Methods: The study is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 96 patients were randomized into 4 treatment groups, 24 each. In group 1, patients received normal saline before surgical incision and before the end of surgery. In group 2, patients received 30 mg nefopam before surgical incision and normal saline before the end of surgery. In group 3, patients received normal saline before surgical incision and 30 mg of nefopam before the end of surgery. In group 4, patients received 30 mg of nefopam in both timings. Patient-controlled analgesia morphine was used for the postoperative period. Outcomes were to determine 24-hour morphine consumption and incidence of side effects.  Results: Of 96 patients enrolled, 21 in placebo-placebo, 22 in nefopam-placebo, 22 in placebo-nefopam and 21 in nefopam-nefopam groups completed the study. Analysis of the Kruskal-Wallis test shows no significant difference in 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption between four groups, which were 18 [IQR 13.5-29], 20 [IQR 11-28.3], 17 [IQR 11.5-28.5], 13 [IQR 8.5-18.5] mg., respectively (p = 0.223).  Incidence of side effects, including tachycardia, sedation, sweating and nausea/ vomiting, did not differ. Conclusions: Adding perioperative nefopam to opioid analgesic does not improve analgesic efficacy in patients who underwent spine surgery. Registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR20171115001; registered on 15 November 2017.

Current Trends in Pediatric Spine Deformity Surgery: Multimodal Pain Management and Rapid Recovery

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative review.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article is to perform a review of the literature assessing the efficacy of opioid alternatives, multimodal pain regimens, and rapid recovery in pediatric spine surgery.

METHODS

A literature search utilizing PubMed database was performed. Relevant studies from all the evidence levels have been included. Recommendations to decrease postoperative pain and expedite recovery after posterior spinal fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients have been provided based on results of studies with the highest level of evidence.

RESULTS

Refining perioperative pain management to lessen opioid consumption with multimodal regimens may be useful to decrease recovery time, pain, and complications. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, gabapentin, neuraxial blockades, and local anesthesia alone offer benefits for postoperative pain management, but their combination in multimodal regimens and rapid recovery pathways may contribute to faster recovery time, improved pain levels, and lower reduction in total opioid consumption.

CONCLUSION

A rapid recovery pathway using the multimodal approach for pediatric scoliosis correction may offer superior postoperative pain management and faster recovery than traditional opioid only pain protocols.

Multimodal Analgesia (MMA) Versus Patient-Controlled Analgesia (PCA) for One or Two-Level Posterior Lumbar Fusion Surgery

A multimodal analgesic method was known to avoid the high-dose requirements and dose-dependent adverse events of opioids, and to achieve synergistic effects. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of our multimodal analgesia (MMA) regimen with that of the patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) method for acute postoperative pain management. Patients who underwent one or two-level posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) followed by either MMA or PCA administration at our hospital were compared for pain score, additional opioid and non-opioid consumption, side effects, length of hospital stay, cost of pain control, and patient satisfaction. From 2016 through 2017, a total 146 of patients were screened. After propensity score matching, 66 remained in the PCA and 34 in the MMA group. Compared with the PCA group, the MMA group had a shorter length of hospital stay (median (interquartile range): 7 days (5-8) vs. 8 (7-11); P = 0.001) and lower cost of pain control (70.6 ± 0.9 USD vs. 173.4 ± 3.3, P < 0.001). Baseline data, clinical characteristics, pain score, additional non-opioid consumption, side effects, and patient subjective satisfaction score were similar between the two groups. The MMA seems to be a good alternative to the PCA after one or two-level PLF.

Using Electronic Health Record Activity to Represent Interdisciplinary Care Teams and Examining their Contribution to Hospital Length of Stay

Modeling variance in patient outcomes using medical claims and other forms of aggregated administrative data may ignore significant contributions associated with providers who are not recorded in billing transactions. We examined the association between interdisciplinary provider factors and length of stay (LOS) for 1,099 lumbar spine surgery patients. Interdisciplinary provider "dose" (number of providers/case), "workload" (care of other patients), and "activity" factors were defined and generated. Hierarchical Regression models were used to test the impact of these provider factors controlling for the effect of socio-demographic and clinical factors. Interdisciplinary provider factors explained 12% of additional variance in LOS. EHR-based interdisciplinary care team representations hold promise in contributing to our understanding of health care delivery and quality. Keywords: interdisciplinary care, nursing documentation, workload, length of stay, electronic health records (EHR).

The Relationship Between Preoperative PROMIS Scores With Postoperative Improvements in Physical Function After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVE

Assess preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) scores and differences between preoperative and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores for patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

After Institutional Review Board approval, a prospectively maintained surgical registry was retrospectively reviewed for elective spine surgeries of nontraumatic, degenerative pathology between 2015-2018. Inclusion criteria were primary or revision, single-level ACDF procedures. Multilevel procedures and patients without preoperative surveys were excluded. A preoperative PROMIS score cutoff of 35 divided patients into PROMIS-PF score categories (e.g. , ≥ 35.0, < 35.0). Categorical and continuous variables were evaluated with chi-square tests and t-tests. Linear regression analyzed PROMIS-PF score improvement.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients were selected, the high and low PROMIS-PF subgroups only differed in mean age (49.1 vs. 41.3, p = 0.002). Significant differences in PROMIS-PF scores were observed among high and low preoperative PROMIS-PF score subgroups at 6 weeks (p = 0.006), 12 weeks (p = 0.006), and 6 months (p = 0.014). Mean differences between preoperative and postoperative PROMIS-PF scores were significantly different between the high and low PROMIS-PF subgroups at 6 weeks (p = 0.041) and 1 year (p = 0.038). A significant negative association was observed between preoperative PROMIS scores and magnitude of improvement at the 6-week postoperative time point (slope = -0.6291, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with low preoperative PROMIS-PF scores demonstrated greater improvements at 6 weeks and 1 year. Clinicians should consider patients with low preoperative PROMIS-PF scores to be in the unique position to potentially experience larger postoperative improvement magnitudes than patients with higher preoperative PROMIS-PF scores.

Perioperative duloxetine as part of a multimodal analgesia regime reduces postoperative pain in lumbar canal stenosis surgery: a randomized, triple blind, and placebo-controlled trial

Background

Duloxetine is an antidepressant that is also useful in chronic neuropathic and central origin pain. In this study, the role of duloxetine in decreasing acute postoperative pain after lumbar canal stenosis surgery is explored.

Methods

In this single center, triple blinded, and placebo-controlled trial, 96 patients were randomized for statistical analysis. The intervention group received oral duloxetine 30 mg once a day (OD) for 2 days before surgery, 60 mg OD from the day of surgery to the postoperative second day and 30 mg OD for the next 2 days (a total duration of 7 days). A placebo capsule was given in the other group for a similar time and schedule. The same standard perioperative analgesia protocols were followed in both groups.

Results

Total morphine consumption up to 24 hours was significantly decreased in the duloxetine group (P < 0.01). The time to the first analgesia requirement was similar in both groups but the time to the second and third dose of rescue analgesia increased significantly in the duloxetine group. The time to ambulation was decreased significantly (P < 0.01) in the duloxetine group as compared to the placebo group. Pain scores remained similar during most of the time interval. No significant difference was observed in the complication rate and patient satisfaction score recorded.

Conclusions

Duloxetine reduces postoperative pain after lumbar canal stenosis surgery with no increase in adverse effects.