Enhanced Recovery after Lumbar Spine Fusion

The efficacy and safety of ketorolac for postoperative pain management in lumbar spine surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Ketorolac is widely utilized for postoperative pain management, including back pain after lumbar spinal surgery. Several trials have assessed the efficacy of Ketorolac alone and in combination with other analgesics such as bupivacaine, morphine, epinephrine, paracetamol, and pregabalin. However, the effects and safety profile of ketorolac in these contexts remain controversial.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Ketorolac administration, both as a monotherapy and in combination with other analgesics, for managing postoperative pain in adults undergoing lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, EBSCO, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and Cochrane library databases through July 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the analgesic efficacy of Ketorolac administration for postoperative pain of lumbar surgery. The meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statements. Data were extracted and analyzed using open-source meta-analysis software OpenMeta-Analyst, focusing on outcomes such as VAS pain scores, postoperative morphine requirements (PMR), length of hospital stay (LOS), and adverse effects, such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, and constipation. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Jada scale.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs comprising a total of 938 patients were included. The methodological quality of the studies was high, with three studies scoring 5, six studies scoring 4, and four studies scoring 3 on the Jadad scale. Ketorolac significantly reduced pain compared to controls at 0-6 h, with a mean difference (MD) of - 1.42 (95% CI: - 2.03 to - 0.80; P < 0.0001), exceeding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of 1.2 to 2.0 points on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), indicating clinically meaningful pain relief. During the 6-12-h period, the pain reduction was significant (MD =  - 0.58; 95% CI: - 0.80 to - 0.35; P < 0.0001), though below the MCID threshold. In the 12-24-h period, Ketorolac continued to show significant pain reduction (MD =  - 0.48; 95% CI: - 0.68 to - 0.28; P < 0.0001), but this reduction was also below the MCID. Heterogeneity was low in the 12-24-h period (I2 = 13%), indicating consistent results across studies. There was a significant reduction in PMR (SMD =  - 1.83; 95% CI =  - 3.42 to - 0.23; P < 0.0001), although with considerable heterogeneity among the studies (I2 = 93%, heterogeneity P < 0.01). Ketorolac administration also significantly reduced the LOS compared to controls (MD =  - 0.45 days; 95% CI =  - 0.74 to - 0.16; P = 0.0001), though this reduction, which is less than a full day (0.45 days), may have limited clinical significance. The findings suggest that Ketorolac effectively reduces pain and opioid use postoperatively, supporting its role in multimodal analgesia for lumbar spinal surgery. The significant reduction in PMR indicates a beneficial opioid-sparing effect, crucial in the context of reducing opioid-related complications. The observed reduction in LOS, while statistically significant, may not translate into substantial clinical benefit due to its limited magnitude. No significant increase in common adverse effects was noted, indicating Ketorolac's safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Ketorolac administration, either alone or in combination with other analgesics, effectively reduces postoperative pain and opioid consumption in adults following lumbar spinal surgery. And Ketorolac did not significantly increase the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting relative to other analgesics or placebos. While it also decreases LOS, the clinical relevance of this reduction is modest. However, the variability in study designs, dosages, and combination therapies contribute to significant heterogeneity in outcomes. Future research should focus on standardizing protocols and exploring optimal dosing strategies. Additionally, long-term safety and effectiveness studies are needed to better understand Ketorolac's role in postoperative pain management.

Consensus-Building Processes for Implementing Perioperative Care Pathways in Common Elective Surgeries: A Systematic Review

AIMS

To identify and understand the different approaches to local consensus discussions that have been used to implement perioperative pathways for common elective surgeries.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Five databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library) were searched electronically for literature published between 1 January 2000 and 6 April 2023.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion and assessed quality. Data were extracted using a structured extraction tool. A narrative synthesis was undertaken to identify and categorise the core elements of local consensus discussions reported. Data were synthesised into process models for undertaking local consensus discussions.

RESULTS

The initial search returned 1159 articles after duplicates were removed. Following title and abstract screening, 135 articles underwent full-text review. A total of 63 articles met the inclusion criteria. Reporting of local consensus discussions varied substantially across the included studies. Four elements were consistently reported, which together define a structured process for undertaking local consensus discussions.

CONCLUSIONS

Local consensus discussions are a common implementation strategy used to reduce unwarranted clinical variation in surgical care. Several models for undertaking local consensus discussions and their implementation are presented.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Advancing our understanding of consensus building processes in perioperative pathway development could be significantly improved by refining reporting standards to include criteria for achieving consensus and assessing implementation fidelity, alongside advocating for a systematic approach to employing consensus discussions in hospitals.

IMPACT

These findings contribute to recognised gaps in the literature, including how decisions are commonly made in the design and implementation of perioperative pathways, furthering our understanding of the meaning of consensus processes that can be used by clinicians undertaking improvement initiatives.

REPORTING METHOD

This review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. No patient or public contribution.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42023413817.

Effects of liposomal bupivacaine on opioid use and healthcare resource utilization after outpatient spine surgery: a real-world assessment

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Perioperative pain management affects cost and outcomes in elective spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This study investigated the association between liposomal bupivacaine (LB) and outpatient spine surgery outcomes, including perioperative, postoperative, and postdischarge opioid use and healthcare resource utilization.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective comparative study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Eligibility criteria included adults with ≥6 months of continuous data before and after outpatient spine procedures including discectomy, laminectomy, or lumbar fusion. Patients receiving LB were matched 1:3 to patients receiving non-LB analgesia by propensity scores.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes included (1) opioid use in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) during the perioperative and postdischarge periods and (2) postdischarge readmission and emergency department (ED) visits up to 3 months after surgery. Generalized linear mixed-effects modeling with appropriate distributions was used for analysis.

METHODS

Deidentified data from the IQVIA linkage claims databases (2016-2019) were used for the analysis. This study was funded by Pacira BioSciences, Inc.

RESULTS

In total, 381 patients received LB and 1143 patients received non-LB analgesia. Baseline characteristics were well balanced after propensity score matching. The LB cohort used fewer MMEs versus the non-LB cohort before discharge (80 vs 132 MMEs [mean difference, -52 MMEs; p=.0041]). Following discharge, there was a nonsignificant reduction in opioid use in the LB cohort versus the non-LB cohort within 90 days (429 vs 480 MMEs [mean difference, -50 MMEs; p=.289]) and from >90 days to 180 days (349 vs 381 MMEs [mean difference, -31 MMEs; p=.507]). The LB cohort had significantly lower rates of ED visits at 2 months after discharge versus the non-LB cohort (3.9% vs 7.6% [odds ratio, 0.50; p=.015]). Postdischarge readmission rates did not differ between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of LB for outpatient spine surgery was associated with reduced opioid use at the hospital and nonsignificant reduction in opioid use at all postoperative timepoints examined through 90 days after surgery versus non-LB analgesia. ED visit rates were significantly lower at 60 days after discharge. These findings support reduced cost and improved quality metrics in patients treated with LB versus non-LB analgesia for outpatient spine surgery.

Bilateral erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain relief in lumbar spine surgery: A PRISMA-compliant updated systematic review & meta-analysis

Study design

Systematic review.

Objective

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is growing in popularity over the recent past as an adjuvant modality in multimodal analgesic management following lumbar spine surgery (LSS). The current updated meta-analysis was performed to analyze the efficacy of ESPB for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing LSS.

Methods

We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library till June 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing the efficacy of bilateral ESPB for postoperative pain relief in lumbar spine surgeries. Post-operative pain scores, total analgesic consumption, first analgesic requirement time, length of stay and complications were the outcomes evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 17 software.

Results

32 RCTs including 1464 patients (ESPB/Control = 1077/1069) were included in the analysis. There was a significant pain relief in ESPB group, as compared to placebo across all timelines such as during immediate post-operative period (p < 0.001), 4 h (p < 0.001), 8 h (p < 0.001), 12 h (p < 0.001), 24 h (p = 0.001) post-surgery. Similarly, ESPB group showed a significant reduction in analgesic requirement at 8 h (p < 0.001), 12 h (p = 0.001), and 24 h (p < 0.001). However, no difference was noted in the first analgesic requirement time, time to ambulate or total length of stay in the hospital. ESPB demonstrated significantly improved overall satisfaction score for the analgesic management (p < 0.001), reduced intensive care stay (p < 0.05) with significantly reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting (p < 0.001) compared to controls.

Conclusion

ESPB offers prolonged post-operative pain relief compared to controls, thereby reducing the need for opioid consumption and its related complications.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guidelines and Hospital Length of Stay, Readmission, Complications, and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

A comprehensive review of the evidence exploring the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines has not been completed.

Objective

To evaluate if ERAS guidelines are associated with improved hospital length of stay, hospital readmission, complications, and mortality compared with usual surgical care, and to understand differences in estimates based on study and patient factors.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception until June 2021.

Study Selection

Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials that examined ERAS-guided surgery compared with a control group and reported on at least 1 of the outcomes.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Risk of bias was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates for each outcome, and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity within each outcome.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay, hospital readmission within 30 days of index discharge, 30-day postoperative complications, and 30-day postoperative mortality.

Results

Of the 12 047 references identified, 1493 full texts were screened for eligibility, 495 were included in the systematic review, and 74 RCTs with 9076 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies presented data from 21 countries and 9 ERAS-guided surgical procedures with 15 (20.3%) having a low risk of bias. The mean (SD) Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research checklist score was 13.5 (2.3). Hospital length of stay decreased by 1.88 days (95% CI, 0.95-2.81 days; I2 = 86.5%; P < .001) and the risk of complications decreased (risk ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.87; I2 = 78.6%; P < .001) in the ERAS group. Risk of readmission and mortality were not significant.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this meta-analysis, ERAS guidelines were associated with decreased hospital length of stay and complications. Future studies should aim to improve implementation of ERAS and increase the reach of the guidelines.

Abdominal aortic calcification is an independent predictor of perioperative blood loss in posterior spinal fusion surgery

OBJECTIVE

Abdominal aortic calcification (AAC), often found incidentally on lateral lumbar radiographs, is increasingly recognized for its association with adverse outcomes in spine surgery. As a marker of advanced atherosclerosis affecting cardiovascular dynamics, this study evaluates AAC's impact on perioperative blood loss in posterior spinal fusion (PSF).

METHODS

Patients undergoing PSF from March 2016 to July 2023 were included. Estimated blood loss (EBL) and total blood volume (TBV) were calculated. AAC was assessed on lateral lumbar radiographs according to the Kauppila classification. Predictors of the EBL-to-TBV ratio (%EBL/TBV) were examined via univariable and multivariable regression analyses, which adjusted for parameters such as hypertension and aspirin use.

RESULTS

A total of 199 patients (47.2% female) were analyzed. AAC was present in 106 patients (53.3%). AAC independently predicted %EBL/TBV, accounting for an increase in blood loss of 4.46% of TBV (95% CI 1.17-7.74, p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to identify AAC as an independent predictor of perioperative blood loss in PSF. In addition to its link to degenerative spinal conditions and adverse postoperative outcomes, the relationship between AAC and increased blood loss warrants attention in patients undergoing PSF.

Effects of family dignity interventions combined with standard palliative care on family adaptability, cohesion, and anticipatory grief in adult advanced cancer survivors and their family caregivers: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Family involvement and comfort are equally important in palliative care. Dignity undertook a new meaning and novel challenges as a result of restrictions on visits and companionship during the pandemic. Family-centered family dignity interventions have been shown to be effective in increasing patients' sense of dignity, increasing levels of hope, and reducing psychological distress; however, the effectiveness in enhancing family adaptability and intimacy in the survivor-caregiver binary and reducing expected grief have been inconclusive.

Objectives

The primary objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of family dignity interventions on family adaptability and cohesion. The secondary objective was to explore the effects of the interventions on anticipatory grief and psychological distress, and the lasting effect 1 month after the intervention.

Design

A single-blinded, two-arm parallel group, randomized controlled trial was conducted in China.

Settings

and methods: Ninety-eight dyads who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to the family dignity intervention (n = 51) or standard palliative care group (n = 47) between June and August 2022. Study outcomes were measured at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at the 1-month follow-up post-intervention evaluation. Data were analyzed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, independent sample t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and generalized estimation equations. The Intention-To-Treat analysis was performed for all available data.

Results

In comparison to the control group, significant improvements in family adaptability and cohesion and anticipatory grief over post-intervention and 1-month follow-up were demonstrated among the patients in the intervention group. The intervention group of caregivers had significant improvement in anticipatory grief at post-intervention and 1-month follow-up. The level of psychological distress was significantly lower in the intervention group than the control group (p < 0.05) at 1-month follow-up but the differences were not statistically significant at post-intervention. All outcomes showed clear differences from baseline after the intervention and at the 1-month follow-up evaluation but not between post-intervention and at the 1-month follow-up evaluation.

Conclusion

This study further verifies the actual effect of family dignity intervention program through randomized controlled trials, and provides a reference for improving the family relationship between advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers, and improving their mental health. The addition of family dignity intervention to standard palliative care greatly increased the adaptability and cohesion between survivors and their families, lessened the anticipatory grief of the survivor-caregiver pair, and relieved caregivers' anxiety and despair. We did not detect a statistically significant difference between post-intervention and the 1-month follow-up evaluation, suggesting that the intervention may have a durable impact at least 1 month.

Promoting postoperative recovery in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression based on the concept of ERAS: a multicenter analysis of 304 patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has proven beneficial for patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. However, the application of ERAS in the context of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) remains undefined.

PURPOSE

This study aims to establish a medical pathway rooted in the ERAS concept, with the ultimate goal of scrutinizing its efficacy in enhancing postoperative outcomes among patients suffering from MESCC.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

An observational cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 304 patients with MESCC who underwent surgery were collected between January 2016 and January 2023 at two large tertiary hospitals.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Surgery-related variables, patient quality of life, and pain outcomes. Surgery-related variables in the study included surgery time, surgery site, intraoperative blood loss, and complication.

METHODS

From January 2020 onwards, ERAS therapies were implemented for MESCC patients in both institutions. Thus, the ERAS cohort included 138 patients with MESCC who underwent surgery from January 2020 to January 2023, whereas the traditional cohort consisted of 166 patients with MESCC who underwent surgery from January 2016 to December 2019. Clinical baseline characteristics, surgery-related features, and surgical outcomes were collected. Patient quality of life was evaluated using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Scale (FACT-G), and pain outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Comparison of baseline characteristics revealed that the two cohorts were similar (all p>.050), indicating comparable distribution of clinical characteristics. In terms of surgical outcomes, patients in the ERAS cohort exhibited lower intraoperative blood loss (p<.001), shorter postoperative hospital stays (p<.001), lower perioperative complication rates (p=.020), as well as significantly shorter time to ambulation (P<0.001), resumption of regular diet (p<.001), removal of urinary catheter (p<.001), initiation of radiation therapy (p<.001), and initiation of systemic internal therapy (p<.001) compared with patients in the traditional cohort. Regarding pain outcomes and quality of life, patients undergoing the ERAS program demonstrated significantly lower VAS scores (p<.010) and higher scores for physical (p<.001), social (p<.001), emotional (p<.001), and functional (p<.001) well-being compared with patients in the traditional cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The ERAS program, renowned for its ability to expedite postoperative recuperation, emerges as a promising approach to ameliorate the recovery process in MESCC patients. Not only does it exhibit potential in enhancing pain management outcomes, but it also holds the promise of elevating the overall quality of life for these individuals. Future investigations should delve deeper into the intricate components of the ERAS program, aiming to unravel the precise mechanisms that underlie its remarkable impact on patient outcomes.

Posterior Instrumented Spinal Surgery Outcomes in the Elderly: A Comparison of the 5-Item and 11-Item Modified Frailty Indices

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

OBJECTIVES

To validate the most concise risk stratification system to date, the 5-item modified frailty index (mFI-5), and compare its effectiveness with the established 11-item modified frailty index (mFI-11) in the elderly population undergoing posterior instrumented spine surgery.

METHODS

A single centre retrospective review of posterior instrumented spine surgeries in patients aged 65 years and older was conducted. The primary outcome was rate of post-operative major complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification ≥ 4). Secondary outcome measures included rate of all complications, 6-month mortality and surgical site infection. Multi-variate analysis was performed and adjusted receiver operating characteristic curves were generated and compared by DeLong's test. The indices were correlated with Spearman's rho.

RESULTS

272 cases were identified. The risk of major complications was independently associated with both the mFI-5 (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.01-3.55, P = .047) and mFI-11 (OR 3.73, 95% CI 1.90-7.30, P = .000). Both the mFI-5 and mFI-11 were statistically significant predictors of risk of all complications (P = .007 and P = .003), surgical site infection (P = .011 and P = .003) and 6-month mortality (P = .031 and P = .000). Adjusted ROC curves determined statistically similar c-statistics for major complications (.68 vs .68, P = .64), all complications (.66 vs .64, P = .10), surgical site infection (.75 vs .75, P = .76) and 6-month mortality (.83 vs .81, P = .21). The 2 indices correlated very well with a Spearman's rho of .944.

CONCLUSIONS

The mFI-5 and mFI-11 are equally effective predictors of postoperative morbidity and mortality in this population. The brevity of the mFI-5 is advantageous in facilitating its daily clinical use.

Transforming Outcomes of Spine Surgery-Exploring the Power of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of 15 198 Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to optimize patient outcomes by reducing the surgical stress response, expediting recovery, and reducing care costs. We aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing ERAS protocols on the perioperative surgical outcomes and financial implications associated with spine surgeries.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed studies directly comparing outcome differences between spine surgeries performed with and without utilization of ERAS pathways was conducted along Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

Of 676 unique articles identified, 59 with 15 198 aggregate patients (7748 ERAS; 7450 non-ERAS) were included. ERAS-treated patients had shorter operative times (mean difference [MD]: 10.2 mins; P < .01), shorter hospitalizations (MD: 1.41 days, P < .01), fewer perioperative complications (relative risk [RR] = 0.64, P < .01), lower postoperative opioid use (MD of morphine equivalent dose: 164.36 mg; P < .01), and more rapid mobilization/time to first out-of-bed ambulation (MD: 0.92 days; P < .01). Spine surgeries employing ERAS were also associated with lower total costs (MD: $1140.26/patient; P < .01), especially in the United States (MD: $2869.11/patient, P < .01) and lower postoperative visual analog pain scores (MD = 0.56, P < .01), without any change in odds of 30-day readmission (RR: 0.80, P = .13) or reoperation (RR: 0.88, P = .60). Subanalyses based on the region of spine showed significantly lower length of stay in both cervical and lumbar surgeries implementing ERAS. Type of procedure showed a significantly lesser time-to-initiate mobilization in fusion surgeries using ERAS protocols compared with decompression.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis indicates that current literature supports ERAS implementation as a means of reducing care costs and safely accelerating hospital discharge for patients undergoing spine surgery.

Postoperative quality of recovery with erector spinae plane block or thoracolumbar interfascial plane block after major spinal surgery: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Major spinal surgery causes severe postoperative pain. The present randomized, controlled, prospective study tested the short- and long-term effects of thoracolumbar interfascial and erector spinae plane blocks on patient-centered outcomes for major lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

Sixty adult patients were randomly assigned to receive either bilateral thoracolumbar interfascial plane or erector spinae plane block after anesthesia induction using bupivacaine 0.25%, 20 mL. The primary outcome of this study was the Quality of Recovery-40 score in the postoperative 24th hour. Secondary outcomes were Comprehensive Complication Index scores, postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, first rescue analgesic administration time, and complication incidence.

RESULTS

The recovery scores of both blocks at the postoperative 24th hour were similar, with a median thoracolumbar interfascial plane block of 178 (IQR 173-180) and an erector spinae plane block of 175 (IQR 168.7-182) (p = 0.717). Thoracolumbar interfascial plane block reduced area under the curve pain with movement over 24 h compared with erector spinae plane block (p = 0.024). The pain scores between the groups were similar at all time points (p > 0.05), except the 24th hour with movement in the thoracolumbar interfascial plane block compared with the erector spinae plane block [median 3 (IQR 2-4)] vs. 4 (IQR 3-5), respectively] (p = 0.019). No differences were recorded between the block groups regarding postoperative 24th-h oxycodone consumption, time to first opioid intake, and complication incidence (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both blocks resulted in similar quality of recovery in the postoperative 24-h period in major spinal surgery and were effective in terms of analgesia.

A Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess the Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery on Patients Undergoing Elective Spine Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a prospective, randomized controlled trial (RCT) of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in an elective spine surgery population.

BACKGROUND

Surgical outcomes such as length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and opioid utilization greatly contribute to patient satisfaction and societal healthcare costs. ERAS protocols are multimodal, patient-centered care pathways shown to reduce postoperative opioid use, reduced LOS, and improved ambulation; however, prospective ERAS data are limited in spine surgery.

METHODS

This single-center, institutional review board-approved, prospective RCT-enrolled adult patients undergoing elective spine surgery between March 2019 and October 2020. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 1-month postoperative opioid use. Patients were randomized to ERAS (n=142) or standard-of-care (SOC; n=142) based on power analyses to detect a difference in postoperative opioid use.

RESULTS

Opioid use during hospitalization and the first postoperative month was not significantly different between groups (ERAS 112.2 vs SOC 117.6 morphine milligram equivalent, P =0.76; ERAS 38.7% vs SOC 39.4%, P =1.00, respectively). However, patients randomized to ERAS were less likely to use opioids at 6 months postoperatively (ERAS 11.4% vs SOC 20.6%, P =0.046) and more likely to be discharged to home after surgery (ERAS 91.5% vs SOC 81.0%, P =0.015).

CONCLUSION

Here, we present a novel ERAS prospective RCT in the elective spine surgery population. Although we do not detect a difference in the primary outcome of short-term opioid use, we observe significantly reduced opioid use at 6-month follow-up as well as an increased likelihood of home disposition after surgery in the ERAS group.

Analgesic efficacy of inter-semispinal fascial plane block in Patients undergoing Cervical Spine Surgery through Posterior Approach: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Posterior cervical spine surgery is commonly performed in elderly patients with significant comorbidities and is considered one of the most painful surgical procedures. Accordingly, perioperative pain management during posterior cervical spine surgery represents a unique challenge for anesthesiologists. Inter-semispinal plane block (ISPB) represents a promising analgesic technique for spine surgery through the blockade of the dorsal rami of the cervical spinal nerves. The present study aimed to investigate the analgesic effect of bilateral ISPB as an opioid-sparing nerve block technique for posterior cervical spine surgeries.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial enrolled 52 patients planned for cervical spine surgery via the posterior approach. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups in a one-to-one ratio, with 26 patients allocated to the block group (ISPB) who received general anesthesia preceded by bilateral ISP using 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine on each side and the remaining 26 patients allocated to the control group who received general anesthesia only. The primary outcome was total perioperative opioid consumption through two co-primary outcomes, i.e. total amount of fentanyl administered intraoperatively and total morphine consumption during the first 24 hours postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, assessment of numerical rating scores (NRS) during the first 24 hours postoperatively, time to first rescue analgesia and opioid-related side effects.

RESULTS

A significantly lower amount of intraoperative fentanyl was administered in the ISPB group (median, 175 μg; range, 110-220 μg] compared to the control group [median, 290 μg; range 110-350 μg). Patients in the ISPB group consumed significantly lower doses of morphine (median, 7 mg; range, 5-12 mg]) within the first 24 h postoperatively compared to the control group (median, 12 mg; range, 8-21 mg). In addition, NRS values were significantly lower in the ISPB group during the first 12 h postoperatively than in the control group. No significant differences in mean arterial pressure (MAP) or heart rate (HR) were observed between intraoperative time points in the ISPB group. However, a significant increase in MAP was observed during surgery in the control group (p < 0.001). The incidence of opioid side effects such as nausea, vomiting, and sedation was significantly greater in the control group compared to the ISPB group.

CONCLUSIONS

Inter-semispinal plane block (ISPB) represents an effective analgesic technique and reduces opioid consumption in both intra- and postoperative settings. Moreover, the ISPB could significantly decrease opioid-associated side effects.

Fast-track protocols for patients undergoing spine surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Fast-track is an evidence-based multidisciplinary strategy for pre-, intra-, and postoperative management of patients during major surgery. To date, fast-track has not been recognized or accepted in all surgical areas, particularly in orthopedic spine surgery where it still represents a relatively new paradigm.

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was provided an evidenced-based assessment of specific interventions, measurement, and associated outcomes linked to enhanced recovery pathways in spine surgery field.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in three databases from February 2012 to August 2022 to assess the pre-, intra-, and postoperative key elements and the clinical evidence of fast-track protocols as well as specific interventions and associated outcomes, in patients undergoing to spine surgery.

RESULTS

We included 57 full-text articles of which most were retrospective. Most common fast-track elements included patient's education, multimodal analgesia, thrombo- and antibiotic prophylaxis, tranexamic acid use, urinary catheter and drainage removal within 24 hours after surgery, and early mobilization and nutrition. All studies demonstrated that these interventions were able to reduce patients' length of stay (LOS) and opioid use. Comparative studies between fast-track and non-fast-track protocols also showed improved pain scores without increasing complication or readmission rates, thus improving patient's satisfaction and functional recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the review results, fast-track seems to be a successful tool to reduce LOS, accelerate return of function, minimize postoperative pain, and save costs in spine surgery. However, current studies are mainly on degenerative spine diseases and largely restricted to retrospective studies with non-randomized data, thus multicenter randomized trials comparing fast-track outcomes and implementation are mandatory to confirm its benefit in spine surgery.

Influence of perioperative opioid-related patient education: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the role of perioperative protocolized opioid-specific patient education on opioid consumption for individuals undergoing surgical procedures.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared protocolized perioperative opioid-specific patient education to the usual care for adult individuals undergoing surgical interventions. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes while the risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 15 RCTs that enrolled 2546 participants were deemed eligible. Protocolized opioid-specific patient education showed a significant reduction in postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain score compared to usual care (SMD= -0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.28 to -0.03 and SMD= -0.17, 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.06, respectively). No significant difference was found between the protocolized opioid-specific patient education and the usual care in terms of the number of refill requests (RR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.50-1.34), patients with opioid leftovers (RR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.78-1.08), and patients taking opioids after hospital discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrated that protocolized opioid-specific patient education significantly reduces postoperative opioid consumption and pain score but has no influence on the number of opioid refill requests, opioid leftovers, and opioid use after hospital discharge.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare professionals may offer opioid-related educational sessions for the surgical patients during the perioperative period through a video-based material that emphasizes the role of alternative analgesics to opioids, patients' expectations about the post-operative pain, and the potential side effects of opioid consumptions.

Analgesic efficacy of erector spinae plane blocks for lumbar spine surgery: a randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Erector spinae plane block has been proposed to reduce opioid use and improve pain relief with controversial results. This randomized clinical study aimed to assess the efficacy of erector spinae plane block in major spine surgery including multimodal and 'Enhance Recovery After Surgery' programs.

METHOD

After institutional review board approval, adult patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery with standardized general anesthesia, rehabilitation and multimodal analgesia protocols were randomly allocated to receive bilateral ultrasound-guided block with saline versus ropivacaine (3.75 mg/mL). Before surgery, a bilateral erector spinae plane block was performed at lumbar level (third vertebrae) with 20 mL of solution for each side. The primary outcome was morphine consumption after 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included pain scores and side effects, from postanesthesia care unit to discharge, and questionnaires at 3 months on pain and quality of life (EQ-5D).

RESULTS

From November 2019 to July 2021, 50 patients were enrolled with similar characteristics and surgery for each group. After the first 24 hours, there was no statistical difference regarding cumulative intravenous morphine consumption between ropivacaine and saline groups: 7.3 mg (3.7-19) vs 12.5 mg (3.5-26) (p=0.51). Over the five postoperative days, opioid sparing, pain scores and side effects were similar between groups. At 3 months, pain relief, incidence of chronic pain and EQ-5D were similar between groups.

DISCUSSION

Erector spinae plane block used in conjunction with 'Enhance Recovery After Surgery' and multimodal analgesia protocols provides limited reduction in opioid consumption and no long-term benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT 2019-001678-26.

Key Components, Current Practice and Clinical Outcomes of ERAS Programs in Patients Undergoing Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have led to improvements in outcomes in several surgical fields, through multimodal optimization of patient pathways, reductions in complications, improved patient experiences and reductions in the length of stay. However, their use has not been uniformly recognized in all orthopedic fields, and there is still no consensus on the best implementation process. Here, we evaluated pre-, peri-, and post-operative key elements and clinical evidence of ERAS protocols, measurements, and associated outcomes in patients undergoing different orthopedic surgical procedures. A systematic literature search on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases was conducted to identify clinical studies, from 2012 to 2022. Out of the 1154 studies retrieved, 174 (25 on spine surgery, 4 on thorax surgery, 2 on elbow surgery and 143 on hip and/or knee surgery) were considered eligible for this review. Results showed that ERAS protocols improve the recovery from orthopedic surgery, decreasing the length of hospital stays (LOS) and the readmission rates. Comparative studies between ERAS and non-ERAS protocols also showed improvement in patient pain scores, satisfaction, and range of motion. Although ERAS protocols in orthopedic surgery are safe and effective, future studies focusing on specific ERAS elements, in particular for elbow, thorax and spine, are mandatory to optimize the protocols.

Effects of an opioid stewardship program on opioid consumption and related outcomes after multilevel lumbar spine fusion: a pre- and postimplementation analysis of 268 patients

OBJECTIVE

Opioid stewardship programs combine clinical, regulatory, and educational interventions to minimize inappropriate opioid use and prescribing for orthopedic and spine surgery. Most evaluations of stewardship programs quantify effects on prescriber behavior, whereas patient-relevant outcomes have been relatively neglected. The authors evaluated the impact of an opioid stewardship program on perioperative opioid consumption, prescribing, and related clinical outcomes after multilevel lumbar fusion.

METHODS

The study was based on a retrospective, quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest design in 268 adult patients who underwent multilevel lumbar fusion in 2016 (preimplementation, n = 141) or 2019 (postimplementation, n = 127). The primary outcome was in-hospital opioid consumption (morphine equivalent dose [MED], mg). Secondary outcomes included numeric rating scale pain scores (0-10), length of stay (LOS), incidence of opioid-induced side effects (gastrointestinal, nausea/vomiting, respiratory, sedation, cognitive), and preoperative and discharge prescribing. Outcomes were measured continuously during the hospital admission. Differences in outcomes between the epochs were assessed in bivariable (Wilcoxon signed-rank or Fisher's exact tests) and multivariable (Wald's chi-square test) analyses.

RESULTS

In bivariable analyses, there were significant decreases in preoperative opioid use (46% vs 28% of patients, p = 0.002), preoperative opioid prescribing (MED 30 mg [IQR 20-60 mg] vs 20 mg [IQR 11-39 mg], p = 0.003), in-hospital opioid consumption (MED 329 mg [IQR 188-575 mg] vs 199 mg [100-372 mg], p < 0.001), the incidence of any opioid-related side effect (62% vs 50%, p = 0.03), and discharge opioid prescribing (MED 90 mg [IQR 60-135 mg] vs 60 mg [IQR 45-80 mg], p < 0.0001) between 2016 and 2019. There were no significant differences in postanesthesia care unit pain scores (4 [IQR 3-6] vs 5 [IQR 3-6], p = 0.33), nursing floor pain scores (4 [IQR 3-5] vs 4 [IQR 3-5], p = 0.93), or total LOS (118 hours [IQR 81-173 hours] vs 103 hours [IQR 81-132 hours], p = 0.21). On multivariable analysis, the opioid stewardship program was significantly associated with decreased discharge prescribing (Wald's chi square = 9.45, effect size -52.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] -86 to -19.0, p = 0.002). The number of lumbar levels fused had the strongest effect on total opioid consumption during the hospital stay (Wald's chi square = 16.53, effect size = 539, 95% CI 279.1 to 799, p < 0.001), followed by preoperative opioid use (Wald's chi square = 44.04, effect size = 5, 95% CI 4 to 7, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant decrease in perioperative opioid prescribing, consumption, and opioid-related side effects was found after implementation of an opioid stewardship program. These gains were achieved without adverse effects on pain scores or LOS. These results suggest the major impact of opioid stewardship programs for spine surgery may be on changing prescriber behavior.

Longitudinal Trends of Patient Demographics and Morbidity of Different Approaches in Lumbar Interbody Fusion: An Analysis Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to determine the time trend of demographics, complications, and outcomes for patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF/TLIF) or anterior lumbar interbody fusion/lateral lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF/LLIF) and to compare the differences in the time trends between both procedures.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LLIF procedures. Outcomes were analyzed for differences between 2 time periods in the PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LLIF cohorts separately (2009-2013 and 2015-2019). Longitudinal time trends of the 2 procedures were determined by difference-in-differences (DID) analysis. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

For both approaches, there was an increase in age and American Society of Anesthesiologists class over time, accompanied by a significant decrease in blood transfusions and morbidity. The DID analysis showed a greater change in age (DID:-1.8%; P < 0.001), and more patients were rated American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 (DID: -2.4%; P = 0.033) in the ALIF/LLIF cohort than in the PLIF/TLIF cohort. Length of stay declined significantly over time in both cohorts, with a greater reduction observed for patients who underwent ALIF/LLIF than for patients who underwent PLIF/TLIF (DID: 0.2%; P = 0.014). There were no changes in readmission rates over time in either cohort (PLIF/TLIF DID: 0.6%; P = 0.080; ALIF/LLIF DID: -0.2%; P = 0.696).

CONCLUSIONS

Time trends for PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LIIF showed a significant increase in the number of older patients with complex medical status undergoing surgery. Despite these trends, there were decreases in overall postoperative morbidity, incidence of blood transfusion, and length of stay, without increasing readmission. These results suggest general improvement in surgical and perioperative management of lumbar fusion over time with greater gains found in ALIF/LLIF-specific care than in PLIF/TLIF.

Perioperative Multimodal Analgesia for Adults undergoing surgery of the Spine- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Three or More Modalities

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia is a strategy which may be employed to improve pain management in the perioperative period in patients undergoing surgery of the spine. However, there is no review evidence available on quantitative models of multimodal analgesia within this clinical setting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the impact of maximal (three or more analgesic agents) multimodal analgesic medication in patients undergoing surgery of the spine.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials (RCT's) evaluating the use of three or more multimodal analgesia components (maximal multi modal analgesia) in patients undergoing spinal surgery. We excluded patients receiving neuraxial or regional analgesia. The control group consisted of placebo, standard care (any therapeutic modality including two or less analgesic components). Primary outcomes were post-operative pain scores at rest, at twenty-four, and forty eight hours. We searched the MEDLINE via Ovid SP; EMBASE via Ovid SP; and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). We used Cochrane's standard methods.

RESULTS

We identified consistently improved analgesic endpoints across all pre-determined primary and secondary outcomes. A total of eleven eligible studies evaluated the primary outcome of pain at rest at twenty four hours. Patients receiving maximal multimodal analgesia were identified to have lower pain scores with an average of MD [-1.03], p<0.00001. Length of hospital stay was decreased in patients receiving multimodal analgesia MD [-0.55], p<0.00001.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative maximal multimodal analgesia consistently improves visual analogue scale outcomes in adult population in the immediate post-operative period, with a moderate quality of evidence. There is significant decrease in hospital length of stay in patients receiving maximal multimodal analgesia with a high level of evidence and no statistical heterogeneity.

Perioperative management in complex spine surgery: a narrative review

The last two decades have seen a significant increase in the number of spine surgical procedures performed worldwide. This type of surgery includes a wide variety of procedures, from mini-invasive discectomies to multi-level spinal arthrodesis and osteotomies. Moreover, different surgical approaches are described at different spine levels: the anesthesiologist should be aware of the potential benefits and risks for the patients and be prepared for their management. In this narrative review we seek to describe basic concepts of perioperative spine care and address evolving areas in which care is changing. We will discuss preoperative concerns, intraoperative management including airway management, choice of maintenance, intraoperative neuromonitoring and anesthetic effect, blood management and the dynamic topic of anesthetic and analgesic techniques. Finally, we will briefly address the issue of perioperative complications as they relate specifically to spine surgery.

Procedure-Specific Complications Associated with Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block for Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis of 342 Consecutive Cases

Purpose

Presumed benefits of erector spinae plane blocks (ESPB) include an enhanced safety profile and few complications. There are few large series, which report the incidence of complications associated with ESPB on a procedure-specific basis. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to estimate the incidence of complications of ESPB in a large series of patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery.

Patients and Methods

We included 342 consecutive patients who underwent any primary lumbar spine surgery via posterior approach (November 2018–July 2020). All patients received bilateral ultrasound-guided ESPB. The primary study outcome was the incidence of any perioperative complication, defined a priori as sensory, motor, hematologic, hemodynamic or respiratory complication consistent with plausible contribution from the ESPB. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores ≥7 in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU) and risk factors associated with NRS ≥7 (age, sex, ASA class, BMI, opioid tolerance, surgical type, and duration).

Results

We did not identify any pre-specified complications associated with ESPB. There was one unilateral pneumothorax, in one patient, deemed unlikely to have been related to ESPB. NRS ≥7 was found in 17/342 patients (5%) and was independent of any background differences or risk factors assessed.

Conclusion

Ultrasound guided ESPB for lumbar spine surgery was associated with zero complications, no interference with intraoperative neuromonitoring or the early postoperative neurological examination, and low incidence of poorly controlled pain in the PACU. These results help to establish procedure-specific risks and benefits of ESPB for spine surgery.

Benefits of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program (ERAS) in Short-segment Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal, evidence-based approach to perioperative care that aims to reduce physiological and psychological stress, improve the quality of rehabilitation and speed up the recovery of patients. Our study aims to investigate the benefits of perioperative use of ERAS for short-segment posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

METHODS

We selected two 1-year periods: the first from before the establishment of the multidisciplinary ERAS team in January 2017 (pre-ERAS year 2016) and the second period when ERAS was applied widely in our hospital (ERAS year 2019). Data were collected from the electronic medical records of patients who had undergone short-level PLIF during these 2 periods. The primary outcomes were postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS) and off-bed time.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients were included; 95 patients in the pre-ERAS group were compared with 112 patients in the ERAS group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in baseline demographic. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly shorter LOS, bed-off time and earlier drainage tube and catheter removal time. The rate of postoperative complications differed significantly between the pre-ERAS and ERAS groups. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly less intraoperative blood loss, financial cost and opioid consumption than patients in the pre-ERAS group. The VAS and ODI scores, similar at baseline, were significantly lower in the ERAS group at postoperative day 3 (POD 3).

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of our ERAS protocol for patients undergoing short-level posterior lumbar fusion are evident in terms of reduced hospital stay and time to get out of bed, reduced incidence of postoperative complications, intraoperative blood loss, opioid use and hospital costs, and improved early postoperative pain and dysfunction.

Impact of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block on outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion: a retrospective propensity score matched study of 242 patients

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the impact of bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane blocks on pain and opioid-related outcomes within a standardized care pathway for lumbar fusion.

METHODS

A retrospective propensity score matched cohort study. Clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical records of patients who underwent lumbar fusion (January 2019-July 2020). Propensity score matching based on common confounders was used to match patients who received or did not receive blocks in a 1:1 ratio. Primary outcomes were Numeric Rating Scale pain scores (0-10) and opioid consumption (morphine equivalent dose) in the first 24 hours after surgery (median (IQR)). Secondary outcomes included length of stay and opioid-related side effects.

RESULTS

Of 1846 patients identified, 242 were matched and analyzed. Total 24-hour opioid consumption was significantly lower in the erector spinae plane block group (30 mg (0, 144); without-blocks: 45 mg (0, 225); p=0.03). There were no significant differences in pain scores in the postanesthesia care unit (with blocks: 4 (0, 9); without blocks: 4 (0,8); p=0.984) or on the nursing floor (with blocks: 4 (0,8); without blocks: 4 (0,8); p=0.134). Total length of stay was 5 hours shorter in the block group (76 hours (21, 411); without blocks: 81 (25, 268); p=0.001). Fewer patients who received blocks required postoperative antiemetic administration (with blocks: n=77 (64%); without blocks: n=97 (80%); p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Erector spinae plane blocks were associated with clinically irrelevant reductions in 24-hour opioid consumption and no improvement in pain scores after lumbar fusion. The routine use of these blocks in the setting of a comprehensive care pathway for lumbar fusion may not be warranted.

Efficacy of perioperative pharmacological and regional pain interventions in adult spine surgery: a network meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Development of a widely accepted standardised analgesic pathway for adult spine surgery has been hampered by the lack of quantitative analysis. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare, rank, and grade all pharmacological and regional interventions used in adult spine surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in January 2021. We performed double study screening, selection, and data extraction. The co-primary outcomes were cumulative morphine consumption (mg) and visual analogue pain score (range 0-10) at postoperative 24 h. An NMA was performed using the Bayesian approach (random effects model). We also ranked and graded all analgesic interventions using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for NMA.

RESULTS

We screened 5908 studies and included 86 randomised controlled studies, which comprised 6284 participants. Of 20 pharmacological and 10 regional interventions, the most effective intervention was triple-drug therapy, consisting of paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and adjunct. The pooled mean reduction in morphine consumption and pain score at postoperative 24 h were -26 (95% credible interval [CrI]: -39 to -12) mg and -2.3 (95% CrI: -3.1 to -1.4), respectively. Double-drug therapy was less effective, but showed moderate morphine reduction in a range of -15 to -17 mg and pain score reduction in a range of -1 to -1.6. Single-agent interventions were largely ineffective.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple-drug therapy is the most effective pain intervention in adult spine surgery with moderate-to-high certainty of evidence. We have also identified a graded analgesic effect, in which analgesic efficacy increased with the number of multimodal drugs used.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020171326).

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Lumbar Spinal Surgery With Regional Anesthesia: A Retrospective Review

Background

In the USA, spinal fusion surgery incurs the highest hospital cost. Despite the recent advances in the application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in these surgeries, the efficacy of these protocols in improving the perioperative outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective review as a quality improvement (QI) project to analyze the efficacy of the ERAS protocol with intraoperative modified thoracolumbar interfascial plane (mTLIP) block to determine whether these interventions reduce the length of stay (LOS) and opioid requirements during the postoperative period.

Methods

Retrospective reviews of adult patients (>18 yrs) who underwent elective lumbar spinal fusion or laminectomy at our institute were reviewed. Patients were administered oral gabapentin and acetaminophen preoperatively. Prior to incision, an mTLIP block was performed using liposomal bupivacaine. Intraoperatively, ketamine, ketorolac, and tranexamic acid were administered. Postoperative, pain control was treated with scheduled acetaminophen, ketorolac, and low-dose ketamine infusion. Hydromorphone and oxycodone were administered for breakthrough pain. Patients who underwent a similar procedure without ERAS protocol were chosen as controls to assess the efficacy of ERAS protocol. Data pertaining to patient demographics, operative and perioperative use of analgesics, LOS, 90-day readmissions, and morbidity were collected. Patients who underwent laminectomy and spinal fusion surgery were analyzed separately

Results

A total of 65 patients were identified; laminectomy (n- 24), spinal fusion surgery (n-41). In the laminectomy patients, treatment group (n-12) and the control group (n-12). Treatment group receiving the ERAS protocol with the regional anesthesia via the mTLIP (n= 12) opioid requirement was reduced by 51.42% [P = 0.03], and LOS was reduced by 2.04 days [P = 0.01] [0.75 days vs. 2.79 days]). In the spinal fusion patients, treatment group (n-15) and control group (n-26). Treatment group receiving the ERAS protocol with the use of regional anesthesia via the mTLIP group (n= 15), opioid requirement was reduced by 38.33% [P = 0.04]. No difference in LOS was observed at 5.4 days vs. 4.88 days (P = 0.28).

Conclusion

ERAS protocol in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery incorporated the use of regional anesthesia via the mTLIP block, we observed there is a statistically significant reduction in the LOS for lumbar laminectomy and a significant reduction in opioid administration for lumbar laminectomies and spinal fusion surgery.

How Much Benefit Can Patients Acquire from Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols with Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion?

Purpose

We aimed to explore the role of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (PELIF).

Patients and Methods

We performed a retrospective, observational, cohort study on 91 patients who underwent PELIF for degenerative disc disease. The primary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption, hospital length of stay (LOS), and hospital cost.

Results

Forty-six patients comprised the ERAS group, and 45 patients comprised the pre-ERAS group (control group). The groups had comparable demographic characteristics. Good compliance with the ERAS pathway was observed in the ERAS group. Patients in the ERAS group used significantly fewer morphine equivalents compared with the pre-ERAS group (25.0 vs 33.3, respectively; p = 0.017). Hospital LOS did not decrease significantly in the ERAS group compared with the pre-ERAS group (3.1days vs 3.4 days, respectively; p = 0.096). Likewise, there was no significant difference in hospital cost between the pre-ERAS group and the ERAS group ($10,598.60 vs $10,384.50, respectively; p = 0.468).

Conclusion

In the present study, the benefit of ERAS in the context of PELIF was limited. Although a multidisciplinary ERAS protocol can improve analgesia and decrease opioid consumption, no significant reduction in hospital LOS and cost was observed.

The association of transversus abdominis plane block with length of stay, pain and opioid consumption after anterior or lateral lumbar fusion: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

Anterior (ALIF) and lateral (LLIF) lumbar interbody fusion is associated with significant postoperative pain, opioid consumption and length of stay. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks improve these outcomes in other surgical subtypes but have not been applied to spine surgery. A retrospective study of 250 patients was performed to describe associations between TAP block and outcomes after ALIF/LLIF.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of 129 patients who underwent ALIF or LLIF with TAP block were compared to 121 patients who did not. All patients were cared for under a standardized perioperative care pathway with comprehensive multimodal analgesia. Differences in patent demographics, surgical factors, length of stay (LOS), opioid consumption, opioid-related side effects and pain scores were compared in bivariable and multivariable regression analyses.

RESULTS

In bivariable analyses, TAP block was associated with a significantly shorter LOS, less postoperative nausea/vomiting and lower opioid consumption in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). In multivariable analyses, TAP block was associated with significantly shorter LOS (β - 12 h, 95% CI (- 22, - 2 h); p = 0.021). Preoperative opioid use was a strong predictive factor for higher opioid consumption in the PACU, opioid use in the first 24 h after surgery and longer LOS. We did not find significant differences in pain scores at any times between the groups.

CONCLUSION

TAP block may represent an effective addition to pain management and opioid-reducing strategies and improve outcomes after ALIF/LLIF. Prospective trials are warranted to further explore these associations.

Neuroanesthesiology Update

This review summarizes the literature published in 2020 that is relevant to the perioperative care of neurosurgical patients and patients with neurological diseases as well as critically ill patients with neurological diseases. Broad topics include general perioperative neuroscientific considerations, stroke, traumatic brain injury, monitoring, anesthetic neurotoxicity, and perioperative disorders of cognitive function.