Design and Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Elective Lumbar Spine Fusion by Posterior Approach: A Retrospective, Comparative Study

Implementing enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in elderly patients following multi-level posterior lumbar or thoracolumbar instrumented fusion for degenerative diseases

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is an evidence-based multimodal perioperative management strategy. The aim of the present study was to analyze the clinical efficacy of ERAS in elderly patients (> 70 years old) undergoing multi-level posterior lumbar or thoracolumbar instrumented fusion for degenerative diseases.

METHODS

Patients older than 70 years undergoing multi-level lumbar or thoracolumbar instrumented fusion for degenerative disk diseases or spinal stenosis from January 2017 to December 2018 (non-ERAS group) and from January 2020 to December 2021 (ERAS group) were enrolled in present study. Patient-specific and procedure-specific clinical characteristics were collected. Univariate and multivariate regression were performed to determine the risk factors related to length of stay (LOS) and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 233 patients were enrolled in this study, 70 in non-ERAS group and 163 in ERAS group. There were comparable baseline characteristics between groups. Further there were no significant differences in 90-day readmission rates and complication rates. However, we observed a significant reduction in LOS (14.89 ± 7.78 days in non-ERAS group versus 11.67 ± 7.26 days in ERAS group, p = 0.002) and overall number of complications (38 in non-ERAS group versus 58 in ERAS group, p = 0.008). Univariate linear regression denoted that operation time (p < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), intraoperative blood transfusion (p < 0.001), fusion number ≥ 5 (p < 0.001), spinal surgery including the thoracic spine (p < 0.001), CCI > 2 (p = 0.018), ERAS (p = 0.003) and spinal surgery including lumbar (p = 0.030) were associated with LOS. Furthermore, multivariate linear regression showed that ERAS (p = 0.001), CCI > 2 (p = 0.014), and Fusion number ≥ 5 (p = 0.002) were independent risk factors for LOS. Analogously, univariate logistic regression revealed that longer operation time (p = 0.005), more intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), more intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.001), fusion number ≥ 5 (p = 0.001), ERAS (p = 0.004) and spinal surgery including thoracic spine (p = 0.002) were related to complications, while implementing ERAS was associated with less complications. Multivariate logistic regression denoted that implementation of ERAS (p = 0.003), Intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.003) and Fusion number ≥ 5 (p = 0.008) were independent risk factors for postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the present study reported the first ERAS principles performed in multi-level lumbar or thoracolumbar instrumented fusion for degenerative conditions. Our outcomes shown that the implementation of ERAS in these populations is favorable for reducing LOS and decreasing overall number of complications though the comparable complication rates between two groups. Totally, our ERAS protocols were safe and feasible in these populations.

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.

Frailty, Myelopathy, and Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in Patients Undergoing Posterior Cervical Fusion

BACKGROUND

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is a proven method to improve postsurgical outcomes. While recent studies have shown the benefit of ERAS even in frail patient populations, myelopathy is another factor affecting outcomes in patients undergoing posterior cervical fusion (PCF). This study evaluated the benefit of an ERAS protocol in frail patients undergoing PCF.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review identified consecutive patients undergoing PCF by a single surgeon from August 2015-July 2021, with implementation of ERAS in December 2018. Outcome measures included length of stay (LOS), nonhome discharge disposition, complications, return of physiologic function, and severe pain score. A mFI-5 score of ≥ 2 and a Nurick score of ≥ 3 defined frail and myelopathic patients, respectively. Univariate analysis (P < 0.05) and multivariate analyses using mixed-effect models (P < 0.0125) were performed.

RESULTS

There were a total of 174 patients, 71 frail (41%). Of the frail patients, 61% were also myelopathic, and 56% underwent ERAS. Of the nonfrail patients, 43% were myelopathic, and 57% underwent ERAS. On univariate analyses, frail patients with ERAS had less drains placed (P < 0.0001), decreased urinary retention (P = 0.0002), decreased LOS (P = 0.013), and were less likely to have a nonhome discharge (P = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, LOS (P = 0.0003), time to return of physiologic function (P = 0.004), complications (P = 0.001), and nonhome discharges (P < 0.0001) were decreased with ERAS, irrespective of groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS is an effective protocol in PCF patients that may expedite return of physiologic function, lessen LOS, decrease the number of nonhome discharges, and reduce complications, irrespective of frailty or myelopathy status.

The Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery in High and Low/Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In this review article, we explore the implementation and outcomes of enhanced recovery after spine surgery (spine ERAS) across different World Bank country-income levels. A systematic literature search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases for articles on the implementation of spine ERAS in both adult and pediatric populations. Study characteristics, ERAS elements, and outcomes were analyzed and meta-analyses were performed for length of stay (LOS) and cost outcomes. The number of spine ERAS studies from low-middle-income countries (LMICs) increased since 2017, when the first spine ERAS implementation study was published. LMICs were more likely than high-income countries (HICs) to conduct studies on patients aged ≥18 years (odds ratio [OR], 6.00; 95% CI, 1.58-42.80), with sample sizes 51 to 100 (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.21-22.90), and randomized controlled trials (OR, 7.25; 95% CI, 1.77-53.50). Preoperative optimization was more frequently implemented in LMICs than in HICs (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.06-4.41), and operation time was more often studied in LMICs (OR 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.35). Implementation of spine ERAS resulted in reductions in LOS in both LMIC (-2.06; 95% CI, -2.47 to -1.64 d) and HIC (-0.99; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.70 d) hospitals. However, spine ERAS implementation did result in a significant reduction in costs. This review highlights the global landscape of ERAS implementation in spine surgery, demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing LOS across diverse settings. Further research with standardized reporting of ERAS elements and outcomes is warranted to explore the impact of spine ERAS on cost-effectiveness and other patient-centered outcomes.

Spinal Anesthesia for Awake Spine Surgery: A Paradigm Shift for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery

Awake surgery has been applied for various surgical procedures with positive outcomes; however, in neurosurgery, the technique has traditionally been reserved for cranial surgery. Awake surgery for the spine (ASFS) is an alternative to general anesthesia (GA). As early studies report promising results, ASFS is progressively gaining more interest from spine surgeons. The history defining the range of adverse events facing patients undergoing GA has been well described. Adverse reactions resulting from GA can include postoperative nausea and vomiting, hemodynamic instability and cardiac complications, acute kidney injury or renal insufficiency, atelectasis, pulmonary emboli, postoperative cognitive dysfunction, or malignant hyperthermia and other direct drug reactions. For this reason, many high-risk populations who have typically been poor candidates under classifications for GA could benefit from the many advantages of ASFS. This narrative review will discuss the significant historical components related to ASFS, pertinent mechanisms of action, protocol overview, and the current trajectory of spine surgery with ASFS.

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.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in sacral tumour surgery and comprehensive description of a multidisciplinary program: a prospective study in a specialized hospital in China

PURPOSE

There were fewer data to guide the application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) theory into sacral tumour surgery. In the present study, we were aiming to describe a multidisciplinary program of ERAS and evaluate the availability in sacral tumour surgery.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of patients with sacral tumour between March 2021 and September 2021 at a single centre. We proposed a multidisciplinary program of ERAS for pre-admission, preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative, and post-discharge clinical care which positively influenced outcomes of patients with sacral tumour. All patients were prospectively assigned into two groups, ERAS group in which patients received ERAS protocols (n = 63), No-ERAS group in which patients had conventional clinical pathways (n = 62). Patient data were collected which included demographics, preoperative preparation, detailed information of surgical procedure, 60-day reoperation rate, 60-day readmission, postoperative length of stay (PLOS), time to first ambulation and flatus after surgery, time to removal of last drainage tube, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score at first ambulation and discharge. Complications referred to ones that occurred within 60 days after surgery. The above parameters were compared between ERAS group and No-ERAS group.

RESULTS

Time to first ambulation after surgery in ERAS group (mean 20.9 h) was significantly shorter than that in No-ERAS group (mean 104.3 ho). Meanwhile, time to first flatus after surgery in ERAS group (mean 26.7 h) was also significantly shorter than that in No-ERAS group (mean 37.3 h). Patients in ERAS group had statistically shorter PLOS (10.7 days) as compared to that in No-ERAS group (13.8 days). In ERAS group, 19 of 63 patients (30.2%) were discharged within seven days after surgery as compared to seven of 62 patients (11.3%) in No-ERAS group. VAS score at first ambulation in ERAS group was not obviously higher than that in No-ERAS group though the time of first ambulation in ERAS group was statistically earlier than one in No-ERAS group. Furthermore, VAS score at discharge in ERAS group was significantly lower than that in No-ERAS group. The rate of postoperative incision necrosis was 6.3% (4/63) in ERAS group and 8.1% (5/62) in No-ERAS group and all of these nine patients underwent reoperation before discharge. The difference was not statistically significant in the wound complication of incision necrosis and 60-day reoperation rate. Only one readmission occurred in No-ERAS group due to the surgical site infection and also there was no significant difference of 60-day readmission rate between these two groups. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference of complications of femoral artery thrombosis and rectal rupture between ERAS group and No-ERAS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our proposed ERAS pathway for sacral tumour surgery and early walking facilitate safe and prompt discharge. ERAS protocols of sacral tumour surgery could decrease PLOS without significantly increasing postoperative complications, 60-day readmission rate and 60-day reoperation rate. The application of ERAS pathway in the field of sacral tumour surgery should have personalized feature with regard to resection type.

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.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Surgery Reduces Length of Hospital Stay and Inpatient Narcotic Use

Background

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has the potential to improve outcomes, hasten patient recovery, and reduce costs. ERAS has been applied to spine surgery for several years, but data are limited around the impact of ERAS on minimally invasive spine surgery, specifically. The authors report their experience implementing a multimodal ERAS protocol for patients receiving minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Methods

The ERAS protocol was implemented at The Valley Hospital Hospital in Ridgewood, New Jersey in January 2020. Following implementation, all patients receiving minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion by a single surgeon were studied. The authors analyze the impact of the protocol on length of stay (LOS), disposition post discharge, and opioid consumption postoperatively in the inpatient and outpatient settings.

Results

Sixteen patients were enrolled in the protocol and compared with 17 historical controls. LOS was significantly shorter in the ERAS cohort (1.6 vs. 2.4 days, P = 0.022). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to disposition; the majority of patients were discharged to home without need for in-home medical services. Patients in the ERAS cohort consumed significantly fewer opioid analgesics postoperatively in the inpatient setting (51 mg morphine milligram equivalents vs. 320 mg morphine milligram equivalents, P = 0.00016). On average, patients in the ERAS cohort were prescribed fewer opioids analgesics post discharge.

Conclusions

ERAS application to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was safe and effective, significantly reducing LOS and inpatient opioid consumption. These data reflect the importance of uniformly applying a multimodal ERAS protocol to accelerate recovery and reduce narcotic use.

The Impact of Perioperative Multimodal Pain Management on Postoperative Outcomes in Patients (Aged 75 and Older) Undergoing Short-Segment Lumbar Fusion Surgery

Background

Due to the presence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy, patients aged 75 and older are at a higher risk for postoperative adverse events after lumbar fusion surgery. More effective enhanced recovery pathway is needed for these patients. Pain control is a crucial part of perioperative management. The objective of this study is to determine the impact of multimodal pain management on pain control, opioid consumption, and other outcomes.

Methods

This is a retrospective review of a prospective collected database. Consecutive patients who underwent elective posterior lumbar fusion surgery (PLF) from October 2017 to April 2021 in our hospital were reviewed. Perioperative multimodal pain management (PMPM) group (from January 2019 to April 2021) in which patients received multimodal analgesia was case-matched to the control group (from October 2017 to December 2018) in which patients were treated under the conventional patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) method. Postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), opioid consumption, complications within 3 months, and other outcomes were collected and compared between groups.

Results

A total of 122 consecutive patients (aged 75 and older) were included in the PMPM group and compared with previous 122 patients. The PMPM group had a lower maximal VAS score (3.0 ± 1.7 vs. 3.7 ± 2.0, p < 0.001) and frequency of additional opioid consumption (6.6% vs. 19.7%, p=0.001) on POD3 than the control group. The rates of postoperative complications were lower in the PMPM group compared with the control group (25% vs. 49%, p=0.006) during a 3-month follow-up period.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the PMPM protocol is effective in pain control and reducing additional opioid consumption when compared with conventional analgesia, even for patients aged 75 and older. Moreover, these improvements occur with a lower incidence of postoperative complications within three months after PLF surgery.