Incidence and Risk of Severe Ileus After Orthopedic Surgery: A Case-Control Study

Lateral decubitus single position anterior posterior surgery improves operative efficiency, improves perioperative outcomes, and maintains radiological outcomes comparable with traditional anterior posterior fusion at minimum 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The advantages of Lateral Single Position surgery (LSPS) in the perioperative period has previously been demonstrated, however 2-year postoperative outcomes of this novel technique have not yet been compared to circumferential anterior-posterior fusion (FLIP) at 2-years postoperatively.

PURPOSE

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of LSPS versus gold-standard FLIP STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Multi-center retrospective cohort review.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Four hundred forty- two patients undergoing lumbar fusion via LSPS or FLIP OUTCOME MEASURES: Levels fused, operative time, estimated blood loss, perioperative complications, and reasons for reoperation at 30-days, 90-days, 1-year, and 2-years. Radiographic outcomes included lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), PI-LL mismatch, and segmental lumbar lordosis.

METHODS

Patients were grouped as LSPS if anterior and posterior portions of the procedure were performed in the lateral decubitus position, and FLIP if patients were repositioned from supine or lateral to prone position for the posterior portion of the procedure under the same anesthetic. Groups were compared in terms of demographics, intraoperative, perioperative and radiological outcomes, complications and reoperations up to 2-years follow-up. Measures were compared using independent samples or paired t-tests and chi-squared analyses with significance set at p<.05.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty- two pts met inclusion, including 352 LSPS and 90 FLIP pts. Significant differences were noted in age (62.4 vs 56.9; p≤.001) and smoking status (7% vs 16%; p=.023) between the LSPS and FLIP groups. LSPS demonstrated significantly lower Op time (97.7min vs 297.0 min; p<.001), fluoro dose (36.5mGy vs 78.8mGy; p<.001), EBL (88.8mL vs 270.0mL; p<.001), and LOS (1.91 days vs 3.61 days; p<.001) compared to FLIP. LSPS also demonstrated significantly fewer post-op complications than FLIP (21.9%vs 34.4%; p=.013), specifically regarding rates of ileus (0.0% vs 5.6%; p<.001). No differences in reoperation were noted at 30-day (1.7%LSPS vs 4.4%FLIP, p=.125), 90-day (5.1%LSPS vs 5.6%FLIP, p=.795) or 2-year follow-up (9.7%LSPS vs 12.2% FLIP; p=.441). LSPS group had a significantly lower preoperative PI-LL (4.1° LSPS vs 8.6°FLIP, p=.018), and a significantly greater postoperative LL (56.6° vs 51.8°, p = .006). No significant differences were noted in rates of fusion (94.3% LSPS vs 97.8% FLIP; p=.266) or subsidence (6.9% LSPS vs 12.2% FLIP; p=.260).

CONCLUSIONS

LSPS and circumferential fusions have similar outcomes at 2-years post-operatively, while reducing perioperative complications, improving perioperative efficiency and safety.

Use of a Standardized Perioperative Care Path for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Leads to Decreased Complications and Readmissions

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of patients ages 10-18 who underwent posterior fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) at a single institution from 2014 to 2019.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate a standardized Care Path to determine its effects on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing spinal fusion for AIS.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

AIS is the most common pediatric spinal deformity and thousands of posterior fusions are performed annually. Surgery presents several postoperative challenges, such as pain control, delayed mobilization, and opioid-related morbidity. Optimizing perioperative care of AIS is a high priority to reduce morbidity and improving health care efficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 336 patients ages 10-18 were included in this study; 117 in the pre-Care Path cohort (2014-2015) and 219 in the post-Care Path cohort (2016-2019). Data compared included intraoperative details, length of stay, timing of mobilization, inpatient complications, emergency room (ER) visits, readmissions after discharge, postoperative complications, and reoperations.

RESULTS

The post-Care Path cohort had improved mobilization on postoperative day 0 (pre 16.7%, post 53.3%, P<0.00001), reduced length of stay (pre 4.14 days, post 3.36 days, P=0.00006), fewer total inpatient complications (pre 17.1%, post 8.1%, P=0.0469), and fewer instances of postoperative ileus (pre 8.5%, post 1.9%, P=0.0102). Within 60 days of surgery, the post-Care Path cohort had fewer ER visits (pre 12.8%, post 7.2%, P=0.0413), decreased postoperative infections (pre 5.1%, post 0.48%, P=0.00547), decreased readmissions (pre 6.0%, post 0.48%, P=0.0021), and decreased reoperations (pre 5.1%, post 0.96%, P=0.0195). There was a decrease in inpatient oral morphine equivalents in the Care Path cohort (pre 118.7, post 84.7, P=0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

Our Care Path for AIS patients demonstrated significant improvements in postoperative mobilization and decreases in length of stay, complications, infections, ER visits, readmissions, and reoperations.

Bowel dysfunction after elective spinal surgery: etiology, diagnostics and management based on the medical literature and experience in a university hospital

BACKGROUND

Bowel dysfunction after spinal surgery is often underestimated and if not treated in a timely manner can lead to undesirable surgical interventions or fatal complications. The current medical literature primarily focuses on bowel dysfunction as a result of spinal injury.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to explore this topic in evaluating current evidence regarding the causes of acute bowel dysfunction after elective spinal surgery, primarily the thoracolumbar spine. Since available evidence for recommendations of treatment is scarce, an interdisciplinary management approach for treatment of bowel dysfunction following spinal surgery is also formulated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An extensive literature search was carried out on PubMed. Keywords that were used in the search included bowel dysfunction, obstruction, postoperative ileus, spinal surgery, spinal fusion, constipation, opioid-induced constipation, colonic pseudo-obstruction, ischemic colitis, immobility-induced bowel changes, epidural anesthesia and diet. Relevant studies were chosen and included in the review. The treatment approach used in the spine center of a university hospital was included.

RESULTS

Current research mainly focuses on investigating the nature and symptomatology of chronic bowel dysfunction after spinal cord injury. Emphasis on the acute phase of bowel dysfunction in patients after elective spinal surgery is lacking. The comorbidities that exacerbate bowel dysfunction postoperatively are well-defined. There has been refinement and expansion of the pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment that could be implemented. Enough evidence exists to provide sufficient care.

CONCLUSION

Management of acute bowel dysfunction after spinal surgery requires a comprehensive and individualized approach, encompassing comorbidities, behavioral changes, medications and surgery. Close supervision and timely treatment could minimize further complications. Research is required to identify patients who are at a higher risk of developing bowel dysfunction after specific spinal procedures.