Preoperative and postoperative anesthetic and analgesic techniques for minimally invasive surgery of the spine

The Effects of Liposomal Bupivacaine on Long-term Outcomes and Decreasing Immediate Postoperative Opioid Use Following One-level and Two-level Posterior Lumbar Fusions

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine in postoperative analgesia and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing one-level and two-level posterior lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Multiple studies have investigated the use of liposomal bupivacaine in spine surgery with varying results. The potential benefits of its use include decreasing postoperative opioid use, improved pain control, and a shorter hospital stay. Several studies have supported its use in spine surgery with others showing minimal to no benefit. No studies have investigated its possible impact on long-term outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 42 patients (22 one-level, 20 two-level) received liposomal bupivacaine injection just before surgical closure and were compared with a historical control group of 42 patients (27 one-level, 15 two-level) that did not receive liposomal bupivacaine. Daily opioid consumption was collected and converted to oral morphine equivalents. Length of stay and daily average pain scores using the visual analog scale were also recorded. In addition, SF-36 bodily pain and physical function outcome measures were collected preoperatively and at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

The liposomal bupivacaine group was found to have a significantly lower total opioid consumption compared with the control group ( P =0.001). The liposomal bupivacaine group was also found to use significantly fewer opioids on the day of surgery compared with the control group ( P <0.0001). There was no significant difference shown in the average visual analog scale pain scores, length of stay, or long-term outcomes between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of liposomal bupivacaine in one-level and two-level posterior lumbar fusions shows promise as an adjuvant for postoperative analgesia by decreasing postoperative opioid consumption. With the varying results demonstrated with the utilization of liposomal bupivacaine in spine surgery, further investigation is warranted, namely a larger prospective randomized control study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Effects of Multimodal Analgesia on Recovery From Percutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the relationship between number and type of analgesic modalities utilized and postoperative pain after percutaneous spinal cord stimulator implantation. Secondary measures include opioid requirements, discharge times, and effects of specific modalities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort at Brooke Army Medical Center from April 2008 through July 2017 reviewed 70 patients undergoing stimulator implantation by a pain specialist. Data included: home opioid regimen; preoperative/postoperative medications and pain; intraoperative medications; and discharge times. Analysis utilized a Wilcoxon nonparametric mode, and chi-square testing for specific modalities. We compared outcomes based on the number of modalities administered and whether patients received specific medications.

RESULTS

Patients averaged receiving 3.8 modalities (standard deviation 1.4). Patients receiving ≥5 modalities had increased pain from preoperative to postoperative scores by two points, while those who received ≤4 had no increase (p < 0.01). Patients receiving ketamine had a median three point increase in pain scores from their baseline vs no change for others (p < 0.05). Patients receiving four modalities had shorter phase one recovery times vs ≤ 2 (median 66 vs 91.5 min; p = 0.01). Patients receiving ≥4 modalities had shorter times vs ≤3 (median 74 vs 88.5 min; p < 0.01). Patients receiving NSAIDs had shorter times than others (median 78 vs 87 min; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Ketamine administration and use of ≥5 analgesic modalities were associated with more postoperative pain for unclear reasons. Patients receiving NSAIDs or ≥4 analgesic modalities had shorter recovery times. These data may lead to further work that could optimize ambulatory practices for stimulator implantation. More work is warranted on this subject.

Multimodal analgesic protocol for cervical disc replacement in the ambulatory setting: Clinical case series

Background

Effective pain management is paramount for outpatient surgical success. This study aims to report a case series of patients undergoing cervical disc replacement (CDR) in an ambulatory surgery center (ASC) with the use of an enhanced multimodal analgesic (MMA) protocol.

Methods

Primary, single-/2-level CDR procedures at an ASC with an enhanced MMA protocol were included. ASC patients were discharged day of surgery. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were administered at preoperative/6-week/12-week/6-month/1-year/2-year timepoints and included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) neck, VAS arm, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), and 12-Item Short-Form Physical and Mental Composite Score (SF-12 PCS/SF-12 MCS). A t-test assessed postoperative PROM improvement from baseline. MCID achievement was determined by comparing ΔPROM scores to previously established thresholds.

Results

106 patients were included, 76 single-level and 30 2-level. Most single-levels occurred at C5-C6, most 2-levels at C5-C7. One 2-level patient developed a hematoma 5 days postoperatively and underwent revision for evacuation. Five patients reported postoperative dysphagia; all were quickly resolved. One patient had an episode of seizure secondary to serotonin syndrome from concealed drug use. Patient was reintubated, transferred, and treated for serotonin syndrome. Two patients experienced postoperative nausea/vomiting. Cohort significantly improved from baseline for all PROMS at all timepoints except SF-12 MCS at 1-year/2-years and SF-12 PCS at 2 years (p < 0.047, all). Overall MCID achievement rates were: VAS arm (48.7%), VAS neck (69.1%), NDI (98.9%), SF-12 MCS (50.0%), SF-12 PCS (54.6%), and PROMIS-PF (73.4%).

Conclusion

Outpatient CDR, incorporating an enhanced MMA protocol, can be safely and effectively performed with proper patient selection and surgical technique. Patients saw timely discharge, well-controlled postoperative pain, and favorable long-term outcomes.

Single-level TLIF Versus LLIF at L4-5: A Comparison of Patient-reported Outcomes and Recovery Ratios

INTRODUCTION

Both transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are suitable for achievement of lumbar arthrodesis. Comparative studies have observed complications and outcomes without stratification by lumbar level. This study aims to assess patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and recovery in TLIF and LLIF at L4-5.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary, elective, single-level, TLIF or LLIF procedures at L4-5 were grouped. Demographics, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative complication rates were collected. PROMs included Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function, visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index, and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Summary, and Mental Component Summary and were collected at preoperative, 6-week, 12-week, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year time points. Delta values and recovery ratios (RRs) were calculated for all PROMs at all time points. Demographics, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative complications were compared using chi-squared and Student t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Differences in mean PROMs, delta values, and RR at each time point were evaluated using unpaired Student's t-test.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty TLIF and 46 LLIF patients were included. Most (54.3%) were men, mean age 56.3 years, and mean body mass index 30.8 kg/m2. Body mass index and insurance significantly differed (P ≤ 0.045, all). TLIF showed significantly greater mean operative time, length of stay, and postoperative narcotic consumption (P < 0.033, all) and greater postoperative nausea/vomiting (P = 0.004). No preoperative PROMs significantly differed. TLIF cohort had significantly greater VAS back at 6 months and VAS leg at 12 weeks and 6 months (P < 0.034, all). No mean delta PROMs or RRs significantly differed.

DISCUSSION

LLIF demonstrated significantly reduced length of stay, postoperative narcotic consumption, and postoperative nausea/vomiting and significantly improved VAS back at 6 months and VAS leg at 12 weeks and 6 months versus TLIF. Although 2-year PROMs and RRs did not significantly differ, our findings may suggest improved midterm follow-up pain scores for LLIF patients.

Multimodal Analgesic Management for Lumbar Decompression Surgery in the Ambulatory Setting: Clinical Case Series and Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Effective pain control is vital for successful surgery in the ambulatory setting. Our study aims to characterize a case series of patients who underwent lumbar decompression (LD) in the ambulatory surgical center (ASC) with the use of a multimodal analgesic (MMA) protocol.

METHODS

A prospective surgical registry was retrospectively assessed for patients who underwent single or multilevel LD in an ASC using MMA from 2013 to 2019. Observation in excess of 23 hours was not permitted at the ASC, and patients were required to be discharged the same day. Length of stay, patient-reported visual analog scale pain scores before discharge, and the quantity of narcotic medications administered to patients before discharge were recorded. Quantity of narcotic medications were converted into units of oral morphine equivalents and summed across all types of narcotic medications prescribed.

RESULTS

A total of 499 patients were included. In total, 86.0% (429) of the patients underwent a single-level decompression procedure, 13.8% (69) of patients underwent a 2-level, and 0.2% (1) of the patients underwent a 3-level procedure; 83.6% (417) of the patients in this study underwent a primary LD, and 14.0% (70) underwent a revision decompression.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest clinical case series focused on LD procedures within an ASC requiring no planned 23-hour observation. This study demonstrates the feasibility of performing LD surgery in an ASC with proper patient selection, surgical technique, and MMA protocol. All patients were discharged from the surgical center on the same day of surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathway for Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Decreases Length of Stay and Opioid Consumption

BACKGROUND

Opioid requirements in the perioperative period in patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion surgery remain problematic. Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have been developed, there still remain substantial challenges to reducing length of hospital stay (LOS) because of postoperative opioid requirements.

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in patients undergoing a 1-level MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) at our institution.

METHODS

We implemented an ERAS pathway in patients undergoing an elective single-level MIS TLIF for degenerative changes at a single institution. Consecutive patients were enrolled over a 20-mo period and compared with a pre-ERAS group prior to the implementation of the ERAS protocol. The primary outcome was LOS. Secondary outcomes included reduction in morphine milligram equivalent units (MME), pain scores, postoperative urinary retention (POUR), and incidence of postoperative delirium. Patients were compared using the chi-square and Welch's 2-sample t-tests.

RESULTS

A total of 299 patients were evaluated in this study: 87 in the ERAS group and 212 in the pre-ERAS group. In the ERAS group, there was a significant reduction in LOS (3.13 ± 1.53 vs 3.71 ± 2.07 d, P = .019), total admission MME (252.74 ± 317.38 vs 455.91 ± 498.78 MME, P = .001), and the number of patients with POUR (48.3% vs 65.6%, P = .008). There were no differences in pain scores.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest ERAS MIS fusion cohort published to date evaluating a single cohort of patients in a generalizable manner. This ERAS pathway has shown a substantial decrease in LOS and opioid requirements in the immediate perioperative and postoperative period. There is further work to be done to evaluate patients undergoing other complex spine surgical interventions.

Multimodal Analgesic Management for Cervical Spine Surgery in the Ambulatory Setting

BACKGROUND

Patient selection and analgesic techniques, such as the multimodal analgesic (MMA) protocol, aid in ambulatory surgical center (ASC) cervical spine surgery. The purpose of this case series is to characterize patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and total cervical disc replacement (CDR) in an ASC with an enhanced MMA protocol.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained registry was retrospectively reviewed for cervical surgeries between May 2013 and August 2019. Inclusion criteria included ASC patients who underwent single-level or multilevel CDR or ACDF using an MMA protocol. Baseline, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics were recorded, including length of stay, visual analog scale pain scores, neck disability index, complications, and narcotics administered.

RESULTS

A total of 178 patients met inclusion criteria with 125 single-level, 52 two-level, and 1 three-level procedure. Of those patients, 127 underwent ACDF and 51 underwent CDR. The longest procedure was 95 minutes and the mean length of stay was 6.1 hours, with 2 patients requiring hospital admission. All other patients were discharged within 10 hours. One of the admitted patients experienced a postoperative seizure that was later determined to be secondary to drug use and serotonin syndrome. The second patient developed an anterior cervical hematoma 5 hours postoperatively, which was immediately evacuated. The patient was admitted for observation and discharged the next day.

CONCLUSION

In our study, patients experienced considerable improvement in disability scores, with a low likelihood of postoperative complications. A safe and effective MMA protocol may help facilitate anterior cervical surgery in the outpatient setting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Transitioning anterior cervical discectomy and fusions to the ASC requires an appropriate MMA protocol. Our findings reveal that an enhanced MMA protocol will help improve disability scores while keeping the likelihood of postoperative complications low. This supports the ASC setting for cervical spine procedures in appropriate patient populations.

Outpatient Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Using Multimodal Analgesic Management in the Ambulatory Surgery Setting

BACKGROUND

The transition of minimally invasive (MIS) spine surgery from the inpatient to outpatient setting has been aided by advances in multimodal analgesic (MMA) protocols. This clinical case series of patients demonstrates the feasibility of ambulatory MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedures while using an enhanced MMA protocol.

METHODS

Consecutive MIS TLIF or LLIF procedures with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and direct decompression in the ambulatory setting were reviewed. The procedures were performed using an MMA protocol. The ambulatory surgery center (ASC) did not allow for observation of patients for periods of time greater than 23 hours. We recorded patient demographics, perioperative, and postoperative characteristics.

RESULTS

Fifty consecutive patients were identified from September 2016 to July 2019. Forty-one patients (82%) underwent MIS TLIF, and 9 patients underwent MIS LLIF (18.0%). All patients were discharged on the same day of surgery. The mean length of stay was 4.5 hours and 3.8 hours for the TLIF and LLIF cohorts, respectively. Our review of medical records revealed no postoperative complications following either the TLIF or the LLIF procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study of 50 consecutive patients is the largest clinical series of ASC patients undergoing lumbar fusion procedures in a stand-alone facility with no extended postoperative observation capability. While using MMA protocol within the ASC, no postoperative complications were observed for either MIS TLIF or LLIF procedures. All patients were discharged from the ambulatory surgical center on the day of surgery with well-controlled postoperative pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The MMA protocol is an essential aspect in transitioning minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery to the ASC. Our findings indicate that MIS lumbar fusion spine surgery with an enhanced MMA protocol can lead to safe and timely ASC discharge while minimizing hospital admission.

The effect of age and gender on acute postoperative pain and function following lumbar spine surgeries

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Understanding the factors contributing to the variability in postoperative pain and function following lumbar spine surgeries (LSS) is necessary to plan inpatient rehabilitation and optimize surgical outcomes. In particular, variability due to age and gender has not been studied. This study's aim was to evaluate the variability in postoperative pain and function, during hospital stay, due to age and gender following LSS.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 585 patients who underwent LSS during their hospital stay. Univariate ANCOVA was performed to study the differences in postoperative pain, and multivariate ANCOVA was performed to study the differences in postoperative function (gait distance, independency combined score, and balance combined score) between age groups (older adults [≥65 years of age] vs. younger adults) and gender.

RESULTS

Younger patients reported statistically, but not clinically, significant higher postoperative pain than older patients (β = 0.652 [95% CI (0.382-0.986)], p < 0.001), and males reported statistically, but not clinically, significant lower postoperative pain than female patients (β = -0.583 [95% CI (-0.825 to -0.252)], p < 0.001) with adjustment of covariates. Male patients walked significantly longer distance than female patients (β = 0.272 [95% CI (0.112-0.432)], p = 0.001) with adjustment of covariates. However, these were clinically insignificant. With adjustment of preoperative diagnosis, type of surgery, severity of illness, and prior level of function, there was no statistically significant difference between age groups in walking distance, and between age and gender groups in independency combined score and balance combined scores.

DISCUSSION

Following LSS, the difference in postoperative pain between age groups and gender are statistically but not clinically significant, suggesting patients require similar effective postoperative pain management regardless of age and gender. The apparent difference in age and gender in postoperative functional outcomes could be due to other factors.

[Expert consensus on the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery in percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar decompression/discectomy (2020)]

In recent years, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been widely used in spine surgery and achieved satisfactory results. In order to standardize the ERAS implementation process and application in percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar lumbar decompression/discectomy (PEID), we reviewed the literatures and cited evidence-based medicine data, and had a national comprehensive discussion among experts of the Group of Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery and Enhanced Recovery, Professional Committee of Orthopedic Surgery and Enhanced Recovery, Association of China Rehabilitation Technology Transformation and Promotion. Altogether, the up-to-date expert consensus have been achieved. The consensus may provide the reference for clinical treatment in aspect of the standardization of surgical operations, the reduction of surgical trauma and complications, the optimization of perioperative pain and sleep management, the prevention of venous thrombosis, and the guidance of patients' functional training and perioperative education.

The efficacy of bilateral intervertebral foramen block for pain management in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy: A protocol for randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Compared with open lumbar microdiscectomy, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) has the advantages of remarkable preservation of paravertebral structures, less bleeding, shorter operation time and fewer complications, it is a common method for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Local anesthesia is recommended during PELD. However, intraoperative pain is sometimes difficult to control satisfactorily. The efficacy of bilateral intervertebral foramen block (IFB) for pain management in PELD remains unclear. Therefore, this regimen is utilized in a randomized controlled trial for the assessment the safety and effectiveness of bilateral IFB for PELD pain control.

METHOD

This is a single center and randomized controlled trial which will be implemented from September 2020 to September 2021. This research protocol is in accordance with the items of the Standard Protocol for Randomized Trials, which was authorized through the Ethics Committee of Huzhou Central Hospital & Affiliated Centre Hospital of Huzhou University (HZCH0465-0864). 100 participants who undergo PELD will be analyzed. Inclusion criteria containsThe exclusion criteria contains:Patients will be randomly divided into bilateral IFB group (with 50 patients) and local infiltration analgesia group (with 50 patients). Primary outcomes are pain score at different time points. The secondary outcomes are the operative time, radiation exposure time, length of hospital stay and postoperative complications. All the analysis is implemented through applying the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

RESULTS

The clinical outcome variables between groups are illustrated in the Table 1.

CONCLUSION

This investigation can offer a reliable basis for the effectiveness and safety of IFB in treating the PELD pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study protocol is registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5985).

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

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

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

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

Multimodal analgesia in pain management after spine surgery

Multimodal analgesia (MMA) is the simultaneous use of multiple analgesic medications that work in a synergistic manner to provide pain control. In recent years, spine surgery has seen the growth of multimodal perioperative protocols for managing pain. Postoperative pain following spinal procedures is a common complaint, with persistent pain even after the immediate convalescent period leading to negative impacts on health. A multidisciplinary approach is essential in reducing postoperative morbidity and complication rates. This review demonstrates the efficacy in the combined use of opioid-alternative medications such as NSAIDs, gabapentinoids, local anesthetics, acetaminophen, and other neuromodulatory pharmacologic agents. Continued research will be essential in the optimization of the MMA protocol for treating patients who undergo spine procedures.

Anesthesia and postoperative pain control-multimodal anesthesia protocol

Multimodal analgesia (MMA) involves the use of additive or synergistic combinations of analgesics to achieve clinically required analgesia while minimizing significant side effects associated with higher dose of a single equianalgesic medication such as an opioid analgesic. MMA generally involves optimizing non-opioid pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions and reserving opioid use to treat breakthrough pain. Patients receiving medications via MMA protocols are likely to have lower opioid consumption compared to those managed using primarily IV opioid patient-controlled analgesia. MMA pain management strategies have become important components of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in an effort to optimize care by standardizing analgesic medications in the perioperative setting while minimizing adverse effects and improving quality and patient outcomes. Successful implementation of a MMA requires the input and cooperation of all of the stakeholders including the caregivers as well as the patients. Health system benefits can also be realized from the implementation of an effective MMA, as fewer opioid related side effects can improve patient recovery and lead to faster discharge and improved utilization of resources.

Lumbar spinal fusion in the outpatient setting: an update on management, surgical approaches and planning

Outpatient lumbar spinal fusion surgery has the potential for improved patient satisfaction, speed of recovery, and economic advantages when compared to inpatient surgery. Despite the rise in the number of these procedures performed annually, the literature on this topic remains scarce. As such, there is a need for a comprehensive review of current concepts in indications and management. The current review will present the most recent literature regarding pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative considerations when performing outpatient lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Effect of Lidocaine on Viability and Gene Expression of Human Adipose-derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells: An in vitro Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the biologic effects of lidocaine on the viability, proliferation, and function of human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) in vitro.

METHODS

Adipose-derived MSCs from three donors were exposed to lidocaine at various dilutions (2 mg/mL to 8 mg/mL) and exposure times (0.5 to 4 hours). Cell number and viability, mitochondrial activity, and real-time reverse-transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) were analyzed at 0 (immediate effects) or 24 and 48 hours (recovery effects) after treatment with lidocaine.

RESULTS

Trypan blue staining showed that increasing concentrations of lidocaine decreased the number of observable viable cells. 3-[4,5,dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-5-[3-carboxymethoxy-phenyl]-2-[4-sulfophenyl]-2H-tetrazolium (MTS) assays revealed a concentration- and time- dependent decline of mitochondrial activity and proliferative ability. Gene expression analysis by RT-qPCR revealed that adipose-derived MSCs exposed to lidocaine express robust levels of stress response/cytoprotective genes. However, higher concentrations of lidocaine caused a significant downregulation of these genes. No significant differences were observed in expression of extracellular matrix (ECM) markers COL1A1 and DCN except for COL3A1 (P < .05). Levels of messenger RNA (mRNA) for proliferation markers (CCNB2, HIST2H4A, P < .001) and MKI67 (P < .001) increased at 24 and 48 hours. Expression levels of several transcription factors- including SP1, PRRX1, and ATF1-were modulated in the same manner. MSC surface markers CD44 and CD105 demonstrated decreased expression immediately after treatment, but at 24 and 48 hours postexposure, the MSC markers showed no significant difference among groups.

CONCLUSION

Lidocaine is toxic to MSCs in a dose- and time- dependent manner. MSC exposure to high (4-8 mg/mL) concentrations of lidocaine for prolonged periods can affect their biologic functions. Although the exposure time in vivo is short, it is essential to choose safe concentrations when applying lidocaine along with MSCs to avoid compromising the viability and potency of the stem cell therapy.

Comparison of Preoperative and Postoperative Parecoxib Administration for Pain Control Following Major Spine Surgery

Study Design

Prospective randomized, double-blind controlled trial.

Purpose

Here, we aim to compare the efficacy and safety of pain control between pre- and postoperative parecoxib administration in patients who have undergone major spine surgery.

Overview of Literature

Several studies have compared the efficacy of pre- and postoperative administration of parecoxib, which led to inconclusive results owing to variation in operative time. Preincisional parecoxib administration reduces inflammatory response in major spine surgery requiring longer operative time; however, it may not reduce pain as much as parecoxib administration immediately after surgery would.

Methods

Totally, 127 patients who underwent major spine surgery were randomly divided into three groups: pre-group, which received 40 mg parecoxib before skin incision and at 12 and 24 hours after the first dose; post-group, which received the same dose at wound closure and at 12 and 24 hours after the first dose; and control group, which did not receive any parecoxib. Efficacy and safety of parecoxib were measured based on pain score, morphine consumption, and side effects from both morphine and parecoxib at 24 hours after surgery.

Results

Initial postoperative pain score, postoperative pain score at rest, and accumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours after surgery were similar between the pre- and post-groups. Despite the significantly lower pain score and morphine consumption in both pre- and post-groups compared with the control group, cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours after surgery was reduced by approximately 50% in the pre-group and 46% in the post-group compared. Analgesic-related complication incidence was similar in all groups.

Conclusions

The timing of parecoxib administration, either before or after major spinal surgery, did not affect the safety and analgesic efficacy of pain management.

Patient Perceptions of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE

To describe patient perceptions of minimally invasive spine (MIS) versus open surgery, and to determine which factors are most heavily considered by the patient when choosing between approaches.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

MIS surgery has increased in popularity due to proposed advantages in the perioperative and immediate postoperative periods. However, patient preferences and understanding with regard to the differences between MIS and open surgery have not been elucidated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An anonymous questionnaire consisting of 30 questions was administered to patients scheduled to see either an MIS surgeon or an open spine surgeon for a clinical evaluation from 2016 to 2017. Six questions asked about patient demographics and medical history. Nine questions asked respondents to rate the importance of several criteria when deciding between MIS and open surgery. In total, 15 multiple choice and free response questions asked respondents about their perceptions of MIS versus open surgery with regard to surgical and physician characteristics.

RESULTS

In total, 326 patients completed the survey. The 3 most important criteria for patients when choosing between open and MIS surgery were: long-term outcomes, surgeon's recommendation, and complication risk. When compared with MIS surgery, the majority of patients perceived open surgery to be more painful (83.8%), have increased complication risk (78.5%), have increased recovery time (89.3%), have increased costs (68.1%), and require heavier sedation (62.6%). If required to have spine surgery in the future, the majority of both patient groups would prefer a minimally invasive approach (80.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term outcomes, surgeon's recommendation, and complication risk were the most important criteria identified by patients when choosing between open and MIS surgery. Patients also perceived MIS surgery to have advantages over open surgery with regard to postoperative pain, complication risk, recovery time, cost, and anesthesia requirement. Most patients seem to prefer a minimally invasive approach to their treatment.

Multimodal Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedures

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare postoperative narcotic consumption and pain scores between multimodal analgesia (MMA) and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A multimodal analgesic approach to pain management may lead to decreased pain and narcotic consumption after orthopedic procedures. Additional evidence is, however, required to determine how MMA compares to intravenous PCA after MIS TLIF.

METHODS

Patients undergoing 1-level MIS TLIF followed by either MMA or PCA at our institution were compared in terms of inpatient pain scores, narcotic consumption, hospital length of stay, rates of surgical complications, rates of inpatient nausea/vomiting, rates of postoperative urinary retention, and rates of narcotic consumption during the months after discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 39 (28.1%) received MMA and 100 (71.9%) received PCA. Demographic and comorbidity characteristics did not differ between cohorts. Compared with patients receiving PCA, patients receiving MMA had a lower rate of inpatient narcotic consumption (2.8 ± 1.9 vs. 5.3 ± 4.4 oral morphine equivalents/hour, P < 0.001), a lower rate of inpatient nausea/vomiting (20.5% vs. 48.0%; P = 0.003), and a shorter hospital length of stay (53.0 ± 25.3 vs. 62.6 ± 24.4 h, P = 0.041). There were no differences in Numeric Rating Scale pain score between cohorts for day 0, postoperative day 1, or postoperative day 2 (P > 0.05 for each). There was no difference in the rate of postoperative urinary retention (P > 0.05). Similarly, there were no differences in narcotic consumption at 6 or 12 weeks postoperatively (P > 0.05 for each).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that MMA results in reduced inpatient hospital narcotic consumption compared with PCA after MIS TLIF. The decrease in narcotic consumption may contribute to the observed decrease in the rate of inpatient nausea/vomiting and shorter hospital length of stay. Importantly, MMA and PCA resulted in similar analgesia for patients during the inpatient stay.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Patient-Controlled Transdermal Fentanyl Versus Intravenous Morphine Pump After Spine Surgery

Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is regularly used to manage pain following major surgery. The fentanyl hydrochloride iontophoretic transdermal system (ITS) was developed to overcome some of the limitations of intravenous (IV) PCA. The small, self-adhesive, needle-free disposable system is applied to the skin on the upper arm or chest and is controlled by patients clicking a button on the device. The authors identified patients who were underwent spinal surgery from 2 prior multicenter, randomized studies and analyzed their data. Of the 1296 patients in the original trials, 170 underwent spine surgery procedures: 90 were randomized to the fentanyl ITS (40 mcg/activation) and 80 to IV PCA morphine (1 mg/dose). More patients treated with the fentanyl ITS rated their method of pain control as "excellent" across all time points, but differences did not reach statistical significance. However, investigators' ratings of "excellent" satisfaction with study treatment were significantly higher for the fentanyl ITS. Discontinuation rates and overall adverse event rates were similar between groups. The only significant difference was that patients treated with the fentanyl ITS had a higher rate of application site reactions than infusion site reactions in the IV PCA morphine group; the reactions were typically mild-to-moderate erythema that resolved shortly after removal of the fentanyl ITS device and did not require further treatment. Ratings of satisfaction with pain control method were consistently higher for the fentanyl ITS than the IV PCA morphine. The 2 groups had a similar safety profile. These results suggest that the fentanyl ITS appears to be a safe, efficacious alternative to IV PCA in spine surgery patients.

Amide-type local anesthetics and human mesenchymal stem cells: clinical implications for stem cell therapy

In the realm of regenerative medicine, human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) are gaining attention as a cell source for the repair and regeneration of tissues spanning an array of medical disciplines. In orthopedics, hMSCs are often delivered in a site-specific manner at the area of interest and may require the concurrent application of local anesthetics (LAs). To address the implications of using hMSCs in combination with anesthetics for intra-articular applications, we investigated the effect that clinically relevant doses of amide-type LAs have on the viability of bone marrow-derived hMSCs and began to characterize the mechanism of LA-induced hMSC death. In our study, culture-expanded hMSCs from three donors were exposed to the amide-type LAs ropivacaine, lidocaine, bupivacaine, and mepivacaine. To replicate the physiological dilution of LAs once injected into the synovial capsule, each anesthetic was reduced to 12.5%, 25%, and 50% of the stock solution and incubated with each hMSC line for 40 minutes, 120 minutes, 360 minutes, and 24 hours. At each time point, cell viability assays were performed. We found that extended treatment with LAs for 24 hours had a significant impact on both hMSC viability and adhesion. In addition, hMSC treatment with three of the four anesthetics resulted in cell death via apoptosis following brief exposures. Ultimately, we concluded that amide-type LAs induce hMSC apoptosis in a time- and dose-dependent manner that may threaten clinical outcomes, following a similar trend that has been established between these particular anesthetics and articular chondrocytes both in vitro and in vivo.

A comprehensive multimodal pain treatment reduces opioid consumption after multilevel spine surgery

PURPOSE

Major spine surgery with multilevel instrumentation is followed by large amount of opioid consumption, significant pain and difficult mobilization in a population of predominantly chronic pain patients. This case-control study investigated if a standardized comprehensive pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) treatment protocol would improve pain treatment in this population.

METHODS

A new regimen with acetaminophen, NSAIDs, gabapentin, S-ketamine, dexamethasone, ondansetron and epidural local anesthetic infusion or patient controlled analgesia with morphine, was introduced in a post-intervention group of 41 consecutive patients undergoing multilevel (median 10) instrumented spinal fusions and compared with 44 patients in a pre-intervention group.

RESULTS

Compared to patients in the pre-intervention group, patients treated according to the new protocol consumed less opioid on postoperative day (POD) 1 (P = 0.024) and 2 (P = 0.048), they were mobilized earlier from bed (P = 0.003) and ambulation was earlier both with and without a walking frame (P = 0.027 and P = 0.027, respectively). Finally, patients following the new protocol experienced low intensities of nausea, sedation and dizziness on POD 1-6.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of patients scheduled for multilevel spine surgery, it was demonstrated that compared to a historic group of patients receiving usual care, a comprehensive and standardized multimodal pain and PONV protocol significantly reduced opioid consumption, improved postoperative mobilization and presented concomitant low levels of nausea, sedation and dizziness.