Outpatient Spine Procedures in Poland: Clinical Outcomes, Safety, Complications, and Technical Insights into an Ambulatory Spine Surgery Center

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of spine procedures performed in an ambulatory spine surgery unit in Poland.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 318 patients who underwent ambulatory spine surgery between 2018 and 2021, with procedures including microdiscectomy (MLD), anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), endoscopic interbody fusion (endoLIF), posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD), interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy IELD, and transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD). Patient data were analyzed for pre-operative and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS) scores.

RESULTS

The findings indicated that outpatient techniques were safe and effective, with a 2.83% complication rate. All procedures significantly improved VAS scores under short-term observation, and core outcome measurement index (COMI) scores under long-term observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulatory spine surgery represents a relatively new approach in Poland, with only a select few centers currently offering this type of service. Outpatient spine surgery is a safe, effective, and cost-effective option for patients requiring basic spine surgeries.

Patient Selection Criteria in Ambulatory Spine Surgery: Single Canadian Provincial Experience

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory spinal surgery is a care delivery model meant to improve patient outcomes and reduce in-hospital length of stay (LOS). We reviewed the experience of implementing an outpatient spine surgery program in Manitoba, Canada and highlight elements that can be used to reduce LOS and re-presentation to hospital.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study using data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network and independent chart review of adult patients undergoing outpatient spinal surgery between 2015 and 2018. Patient demographics, comorbidities, perioperative course, LOS, and readmissions were analyzed.

RESULTS

We included 217 patients in this analysis. The mean LOS was 36.2 hours; 71.98% of patients had a LOS <24 hours. A Kruskal-Wallis test by ranks analysis was conducted and identified 7 elements that correlated with prolonged length of stay (>1 day): age older than 55 (P = 0.027), body mass index >25 (P = 0.045), uncontrolled diabetes (P = 0.015), preoperative use of opioid medication (P = 0.024), American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of 3 (P = 0.023), non-minimally invasive surgical approach, and multilevel procedures. Most (94.1%) of the patients with none of these elements (i.e., age <55, low body mass index, normal/controlled diabetes, minimal preoperative opioid use, American Society of Anesthesiologist classification <3, minimally invasive surgical procedure) had a favorable LOS, <24 hours, compared with 84.8% with 1 risk factor, 80.4% of those with two, 69.8% with three, 53.1% with four, and 31.2% with 5 or more. A small number of patients (14.98%) presented to an emergency department within 90 days of their operation, and there was a 6.28% readmission rate.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several patient and surgical criteria that correlate with prolonged length of stays following planned ambulatory spine surgery. Our work provides some empiric evidence to help guide surgeons on which patients and approaches are ideal for ambulatory surgery.

Risk stratification of patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Reimbursement has slowly transitioned from a fee-for-service model to a bundled payment model after introduction of the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services bundled payment program. To minimize healthcare costs, some surgeons are trying to minimize healthcare expenditures by transitioning appropriately selected lumbar decompression patients to outpatient procedure centers.

PURPOSE

To prepare a risk stratification calculator based on machine learning algorithms to improve surgeon's preoperative predictive capability of determining whether a patient undergoing lumbar decompression will meet inpatient vs. outpatient criteria. Inpatient criteria was defined as any overnight hospital stay.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective single-institution cohort.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 1656 patients undergoing primary lumbar decompression.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative outcomes analyzed for inclusion into the risk calculator included length of stay.

METHODS

Patients were split 80-20 into a training model and a predictive model. This resulted in 1,325 patients in the training model and 331 into the predictive model. A logistic regression analysis ensured proper variable inclusion into the model. C-statistics were used to understand model effectiveness. An odds ratio and nomogram were created once the optimal model was identified.

RESULTS

A total of 1,656 patients were included in our cohort with 1,078 dischared on day of surgery and 578 patients spending ≥ 1 midnight in the hospital. Our model determined older patients (OR=1.06, p<.001) with a higher BMI (OR=1.04, p<0.001), higher back pain (OR=1.06, p=.019), increasing American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (OR=1.39, p=.012), and patients with more levels decompressed (OR=3.66, p<0.001) all had increased risks of staying overnight. Patients who were female (OR=0.59, p=.009) and those with private insurance (OR=0.64, p=.023) were less likely to be admitted overnight. Further, weighted scores based on training data were then created and patients with a cumulative score over 118 points had a 82.9% likelihood of overnight. Analysis of the 331 patients in the test data demonstrated using a cut-off of 118 points accurately predicted 64.8% of patients meeting inpatient criteria compared to 23.0% meeting outpatient criteria (p<0.001). Area under the curve analysis showed a score greater than 118 predicted admission 81.4% of the time. The algorithm was incorporated into an open access digital application available here: https://rothmanstatisticscalculators.shinyapps.io/Inpatient_Calculator/?_ga=2.171493472.1789252330.1671633274-469992803.1671633274 CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing machine-learning algorithms we created a highly reliable predictive calculator to determine if patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression would require admission. Patients who were younger, had lower BMI, lower preoperative back pain, lower ASA score, less levels decompressed, private insurance, lived with someone at home, and with minimal comorbidities were ideal candidates for outpatient surgery.

Opioid prescription trends after ambulatory anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Opioid utilization has been well studied for inpatient anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, the amount and type of opioids prescribed following ambulatory ACDF and the associated risk of persistent use are largely unknown.

PURPOSE

To characterize opioid prescription filling following single-level ambulatory ACDF compared with inpatient procedures.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Opioid-naive patients who underwent ambulatory (no overnight stay) or inpatient single-level ACDF from 2011 to 2019 were identified from a national insurance database.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate, amount, and type of perioperative opioid prescription.

METHODS

Opioid-naive patients who underwent ambulatory (no overnight stay) or inpatient single-level ACDF from 2011 to 2019 were identified from a national insurance database. Perioperative opioids were defined as opioid prescriptions 30 days before and 14 days after the procedure. Rate, amount, and type of opioid prescription were characterized. Multivariable analyses controlling for any differences in demographics and comorbidities between the two treatment groups were utilized to determine any association between surgical setting and persistent opioid use (defined as the patient still filling new opioid prescriptions >90 days postoperatively).

RESULTS

A total of 42,521 opioid-naive patients were identified, of which 2,850 were ambulatory and 39,671 were inpatient. Ambulatory ACDF was associated with slightly increased perioperative opioid prescription filling (52.7% vs 47.3% for inpatient procedures; p<.001). Among the 20,280 patients (47.7%) who filled perioperative opioid prescriptions, the average amount of opioids prescribed (in morphine milligram equivalents) was similar between ambulatory and inpatient procedures (550 vs 540, p=.413). There was no association between surgical setting and persistent opioid use in patients who filled a perioperative opioid prescription, even after controlling for comorbidities, (adjusted odds ratio, 1.15, p=.066).

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulatory ACDF patients who filled perioperative opioid prescriptions were prescribed a similar amount of opioids as those undergoing inpatient procedures. Further, ambulatory ACDF does not appear to be a risk factor for persistent opioid use. These findings are important for patient counseling as well as support the safety profile of this new surgical pathway.

Impact of Ambulatory Setting for Workers' Compensation Patients Undergoing One-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative characteristics and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in workers' compensation (WC) patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in either the inpatient/outpatient setting.

METHODS

Patients with WC undergoing 1-level MIS-TLIF were included. Patients were separated into inpatient/outpatient groups and demographically propensity score matched. PROMs included visual analog scale (VAS) back/VAS leg/Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)/12-item Short Form Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS)/Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) preoperatively and 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Results were compared preoperatively and postoperatively and between cohorts. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement was determined through comparison with values established in the literature.

RESULTS

A total of 216 patients were included (184 inpatient). The inpatient cohort (IC) showed worse perioperative outcomes in multiple measures (P < 0.034; all). The IC improved in all PROMs (P < 0.038; all), besides ODI at 6 weeks, SF-12 PCS at 6 weeks/6 months/1 year, and PROMIS-PF at 6 weeks. The outpatient cohort (OC) improved in VAS back at all time points and VAS leg at 6 months (P < 0.033; all). Between cohorts, the OC showed better scores with VAS leg/ODI/SF-12 PCS/PROMIS-PF at multiple time points (P < 0.031; all). Most of the IC achieved MCID, aside from ODI, whereas the OC achieved MCID in SF-12 PCS. MCID achievement between cohorts was higher in the IC at PROMIS-PF at 1 year and VAS back overall (P < 0.034; all).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite more comorbidities and worse perioperative measures, the IC showed improved PROMs from preoperative to ≥1 follow-up visit, whereas the OC had improvement with only VAS back and leg. The IC showed multiple MCID achievements, whereas the OC showed MCID in only SF-12 PCS. These findings may help guide a surgeon's decision making between inpatient/outpatient lumbar surgery in the WC population.

Outpatient versus inpatient lumbar decompression surgery: a matched noninferiority study investigating clinical and patient-reported outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Spine surgery represents an ideal target for healthcare cost reduction efforts, with outpatient surgery resulting in significant cost savings. With an increased focus on value-based healthcare delivery, lumbar decompression surgery has been increasingly performed in the outpatient setting when appropriate. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes following outpatient and inpatient lumbar decompression surgery.

METHODS

The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) was queried for patients undergoing elective one- or two-level lumbar decompression (laminectomy or laminotomy with or without discectomy) for degenerative spine disease. Patients were grouped as outpatient if they had a length of stay (LOS) < 24 hours and as inpatient if they stayed in the hospital ≥ 24 hours. Patients with ≥ 72-hour stay were excluded from the comparative analysis to increase baseline comparability between the two groups. To create two highly homogeneous groups, optimal matching was performed at a 1:1 ratio between the two groups on 38 baseline variables, including demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, indications, and operative details. Outcomes of interest were readmissions and reoperations at 30 days and 3 months after surgery, overall satisfaction, and decrease in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back pain, and leg pain at 3 months after surgery. Satisfaction was defined as a score of 1 or 2 in the North American Spine Society patient satisfaction index. Noninferiority of outpatient compared with inpatient surgery was defined as risk difference of < 1.5% at a one-sided 97.5% confidence interval.

RESULTS

A total of 18,689 eligible one- and two-level decompression surgeries were identified. The matched study cohorts consisted of 5016 patients in each group. Nonroutine discharge was slightly less common in the outpatient group (0.6% vs 0.3%, p = 0.01). The 30-day readmission rates were 4.4% and 4.3% for the outpatient and inpatient groups, respectively, while the 30-day reoperation rates were 1.4% and 1.5%. The 3-month readmission rates were 6.3% for both groups, and the 3-month reoperation rates were 3.1% for the outpatient cases and 2.9% for the inpatient cases. Overall satisfaction at 3 months was 88.8% for the outpatient group and 88.4% for the inpatient group. Noninferiority of outpatient surgery was documented for readmissions, reoperations, and patient-reported satisfaction from surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient lumbar decompression surgery demonstrated slightly lower nonroutine discharge rates in comparison with inpatient surgery. Noninferiority in clinical outcomes at 30 days and 3 months after surgery was documented for outpatient compared with inpatient decompression surgery. Additionally, outpatient decompression surgery performed noninferiorly to inpatient surgery in achieving patient satisfaction from surgery.

Spine Surgery Complications in the Ambulatory Surgical Center Setting: Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic review study.

PURPOSE

This study aims to review current literature to determine the rates of complications in relation to spine surgery in ambulatory surgery centers (ASC).

BACKGROUND

Recent improvements in anesthesia, surgical techniques, and technological advances have facilitated a rise in the use of ASC. Despite the benefits and lower costs associated with ASCs, there is inconsistent reporting of complication rates.

METHODS

This systematic review was completed utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Pertinent studies were identified through Embase and PubMed databases using the search string ((("ambulatory surgery center") AND "spine surgery") AND "complications"). Articles were excluded if they did not report outpatient surgery in an ASC, did not define complications, were in a language other than English, were non-human studies, or if the articles were classified as reviews, book chapters, single case reports, or small case series (≤10 patients). The primary outcome was the frequency of complications with respect to various categories.

RESULTS

Our query identified 150 articles. After filtering relevance by title, abstract, and full text, 22 articles were included. After accounting for 2 studies that were conducted on the same study sample, a total of 11,245 patients were analyzed in this study. The most recent study reported results from May 2019. While 5 studies did not list their surgical technique, studies reported techniques including open (6), minimally invasive surgery (2), endoscopic (4), microsurgery (1), and combined techniques (4). The following rates of complications were determined: cardiac 0.29% (3/1027), vascular 0.25% (18/7116), pulmonary 0.60% (11/1839), gastrointestinal 1.12% (2/179), musculoskeletal/spine/operative 0.59% (24/4053), urologic 0.80% (2/250), transient neurological 0.67% (31/4616), persistent neurological 0.61% (9/1479), pain related 0.57% (20/3479), and wound site 0.68% (28/4092).

CONCLUSIONS

After literature review, this is the first study to comprehensively analyze the current state of literature reporting on the complication profile of all ASC spine surgery procedures. The most common complications were gastrointestinal (1.12%) and the most infrequent were vascular (0.25%). Case reports varied significantly with regard to the type and rate of complications reported. This study provides complication profiles to assist surgeons in counseling patients on the most realistic expectations.

Reimbursement of Lumbar Decompression at an Orthopedic Specialty Hospital Versus Tertiary Referral Center

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in Medicare reimbursement for one- to three-level lumbar decompression procedures performed at a tertiary referral center versus an orthopedic specialty hospital (OSH).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar decompression surgery is one of the most commonly performed spinal procedures. Lumbar decompression also comprises the largest proportion of spinal surgery that has transitioned to the outpatient setting.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a primary one- to three- level lumbar decompression were retrospectively identified. Reimbursement data for a tertiary referral center and an OSH were compiled through Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Demographic data, surgical characteristics, and time cost data were collected through chart review. Multivariate regression models were used to determine independent factors associated with total episode of care cost, operating room (OR) time, procedure time, and length of stay (LOS), and to determine independent predictors of having the decompression performed at the OSH.

RESULTS

Total episode of care, facility, and non-facility payments were significantly greater at the tertiary referral center than the OSH, as were OR time for one- to three-level procedures, procedure time of all pooled levels, and LOS for one- and two-level procedures. Three-level procedure was independently associated with increased OR time, procedure time, and LOS. Age and two-level procedure were also associated with increased LOS. Procedure at the OSH was associated with decreased OR time and LOS. Charlson Comorbidity Index was a negative predictor of decompression being performed in the OSH setting.

CONCLUSION

Significant financial savings to health systems can be expected when performing lumbar decompression surgery at a specialty hospital as opposed to a tertiary referral center. Patients who are appropriate candidates for surgery in an OSH can in turn expect faster perioperative times and shorter LOS.Level of Evidence: 3.

Bilateral Outpatient Breast Reconstruction with Stacked DIEP and Vertical PAP Flaps

Background:

Stacking free flaps for breast reconstruction is far from novel, even in the case of a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) plus profunda artery perforator (PAP) configuration, where the latter is always described in the traditional transverse configuration. We present a series of consecutive patients undergoing bilateral breast reconstruction with stacked DIEP and vertical PAP flaps.

Methods:

Patients with inadequate abdominal donor tissue were offered the possibility of a stacking breast reconstruction. The DIEP flap was harvested via microfascial incisions, whereas the vertical PAP flap was harvested in the lithotomy position, following the course of the gracilis muscle.

Results:

In total, 28 consecutive patients with a mean BMI of 24.9 underwent bilateral breast reconstruction with stacked DIEP and vertical PAP flaps. The internal mammary artery and vein were used as recipient vessels in all 56 stacked flaps. Fifty-three PAP flaps were anastomosed to the distal portion of the (primary) DIEP flaps utilizing a sequential flap anastomosis technique, and one DIEP flap was anastomosed to the distal portion of the (primary) PAP flap. Hospitalization for the initial eight patients averaged 35 hours, whereas the following 20 patients were discharged within 23 hours. There were no postoperative takebacks or vascular complications.

Conclusions:

Stacked DIEP/PAP flaps offer an excellent option for patients who require more volume than available from DIEP flaps alone. When compared with transverse PAP flaps, the vertical PAP offers excellent variability of volume and ease of shaping to allow for excellent results, while minimizing donor site tension in the seated position and preserving the gluteal fold.

Comparison of the Safety of Outpatient Cervical Disc Replacement With Inpatient Cervical Disc Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

Outpatient cervical disc replacement (CDR) has been performed with an increasing trend in recent years. However, the safety profile surrounding outpatient CDR remains insufficient. The present study systematically reviewed the current studies about outpatient CDR and performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the current evidence on the safety of outpatient CDR as a comparison with the inpatient CDR.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases comprehensively up to April 2020. Patient demographic data, overall complication, readmission, returning to the operation room, operating time were analyzed with the Stata 14 software and R 3.4.4 software.

RESULTS

Nine retrospective studies were included. Patients underwent outpatient CDR were significantly younger (mean difference [MD] = -1.97; 95% CI -3.80 to -0.15; P = .034) and had lower prevalence of hypertension (OR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.53-0.87; P = .002) compared with inpatient CDR. The pooled prevalence of overall complication was 0.51% (95% CI 0.10% to 1.13%) for outpatient CDR. Outpatient CDR had a 59% reduction in risk of developing complications (OR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.18-0.95; P = .037). Outpatient CDR showed significantly shorter operating time (MD = -18.37; 95% CI -25.96 to -10.77; P < .001). The readmission and reoperation rate were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of prospective studies on the safety of outpatient CDR. However, current evidence shows outpatient CDR can be safely performed under careful patient selection. High-quality, large prospective studies are needed to demonstrate the generalizability of this study.

Recent Trends in Medicare Utilization and Reimbursement for Orthopaedic Procedures Performed at Ambulatory Surgery Centers

BACKGROUND

As part of a market-driven response to the increasing costs of hospital-based surgical care, an increasing volume of orthopaedic procedures are being performed in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). The purpose of the present study was to identify recent trends in orthopaedic ASC procedure volume, utilization, and reimbursements in the Medicare system between 2012 and 2017.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, national study tracked annual Medicare claims and payments and aggregated data at the county level. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression models were used to evaluate trends in procedure volume, utilization rates, and reimbursement rates, and to identify demographic predictors of ASC utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 1,914,905 orthopaedic procedures were performed at ASCs in the Medicare population between 2012 and 2017, with an 8.8% increase in annual procedure volume and a 10.5% increase in average reimbursements per case. ASC orthopaedic procedure utilization, including utilization across all subspecialties, is strongly associated with metropolitan areas compared with rural areas. In addition, orthopaedic procedure utilization, including for sports and hand procedures, was found to be significantly higher in wealthier counties (measured by average household income) and in counties located in the South.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated increasing orthopaedic ASC procedure volume in recent years, driven by increases in hand procedure volume. Medicare reimbursements per case have steadily risen and outpaced the rate of inflation over the study period. However, as orthopaedic practice overhead continues to increase, other Medicare expenditures such as hospital payments and operational and implant costs also must be evaluated. These findings may provide a source of information that can be used by orthopaedic surgeons, policy makers, investors, and other stakeholders to make informed decisions regarding the costs and benefits of the use of ASCs for orthopaedic procedures.

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.

Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity Between Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty Performed in the Inpatient and Outpatient Settings Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP Dataset

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Spine surgery has been increasingly performed in the outpatient setting, providing greater control over cost, efficiency, and resource utilization. However, research evaluating the safety of this trend is limited. The objective of this study is to compare 30-day readmission, reoperation, and morbidity for patients undergoing lumbar disc arthroplasty (LDA) in the inpatient versus outpatient settings.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LDA from 2005 to 2018 were identified using the ACS-NSQIP (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database. Regression was utilized to compare readmission, reoperation, and morbidity between surgical settings, and to evaluate for predictors thereof.

RESULTS

We identified 751 patients. There were no significant differences between inpatient and outpatient LDA in rates of readmission, reoperation, or morbidity on univariate or multivariate analyses. There were also no significant differences in rates of specific complications. Inpatient operative time (138 ± 75 minutes) was significantly (P < .001) longer than outpatient operative time (106 ± 43 minutes). In multivariate analysis, diabetes (P < .001, OR = 7.365), baseline dyspnea (P = .039, OR = 6.447), and increased platelet count (P = .048, OR = 1.007) predicted readmission. Diabetes (P = .016, OR = 6.533) and baseline dyspnea (P = .046, OR = 13.814) predicted reoperation. Baseline dyspnea (P = .021, OR = 8.188) and ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) class ≥3 (P = .014, OR = 3.515) predicted morbidity. Decreased hematocrit (P = .008) and increased operative time (P = .003) were associated with morbidity in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Readmission, reoperation, and morbidity were statistically similar between surgical setting, indicating that LDA can be safely performed in the outpatient setting. Higher ASA class and specific comorbidities predicted poorer 30-day outcomes. These findings can guide choice of surgical setting given specific patient factors.

Recoup From Home? Comparison of Relative Cost Savings for ACDF, Lumbar Discectomy, and Short Segment Fusion Performed in the Inpatient Versus Outpatient Setting

STUDY DESIGN

Broad narrative review.

OBJECTIVE

To review and summarize the current literature on the cost efficacy of performing ACDF, lumbar discectomy and short segment fusions of the lumbar spine performed in the outpatient setting.

METHODS

A thorough review of peer- reviewed literature was performed on the relative cost-savings, as well as guidelines, outcomes, and indications for successfully implementing outpatient protocols for routine spine procedures.

RESULTS

Primary elective 1-2 level ACDF can be safely performed in most patient populations with a higher patient satisfaction rate and no significant difference in 90-day reoperations and readmission rates, and a savings of 4000 to 41 305 USD per case. Lumbar discectomy performed through minimally invasive techniques has decreased recovery times with similar patient outcomes to open procedures. Performing lumbar microdiscectomy in the outpatient setting is safe, cheaper by as much as 12 934 USD per case and has better or equivalent outcomes to their inpatient counterparts. Unlike ACDF and lumbar microdiscectomy, short segment fusions are rarely performed in ASCs. However, with the advent of minimally invasive techniques paired with improved pain control, same-day discharge after lumbar fusion has limited clinical data but appears to have potential cost-savings up to 65-70% by reducing admissions.

CONCLUSION

Performing ACDF, lumbar discectomy and short segment fusions in the outpatient setting is a safe and effective way of reducing cost in select patient populations.

Gray-Scale Sonography of the Spinal Cord in Postlaminectomy Patient

Laminectomy, a common neurosurgical procedure that decompresses the spinal cord, is the definitive surgical treatment for spinal epidural abscesses. Although complications after laminectomy occur infrequently, they can cause significant morbidity and health care resource usage. These complications include soft tissue collections like a persistent and/or new abscess or a hematoma. The preferred method of diagnosis for spinal soft tissue collections is magnetic resonance imaging. However, traditional neuroimaging poses significant challenges in patients with spinal hardware due to metallic artifact precluding appropriate visualization of anatomy and pathology. This was a case of a patient with extensive spinal hardware where visualization of the spinal cord by postoperative sonography was made feasible by a lack of bone after a laminectomy. Point-of-care ultrasound, a convenient bedside tool with the ability to detect soft tissue collections easily, was used to monitor for postoperative recurrence of a spinal epidural abscess in this patient. Patients with an intact spine do not have adequate acoustic windows due to posterior vertebral anatomy. In postlaminectomy patients without posterior vertebral structures, sonography may offer a diagnostic modality for postoperative monitoring. Ultrasonographers can employ spinal cord sonography, particularly when the indication for decompressive laminectomy was a localized fluid collection or abscess.

Readmission Rate After 2-level Lumbar Decompression: A Propensity-matched Cohort Study Comparing Inpatient and Outpatient Settings

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database years 2012-2015.

OBJECTIVE

Compare the 30-day readmission and postoperative major complications rates of 2-level lumbar decompression performed in the ambulatory and the inpatient settings.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In recent years, there is an increasing trend toward ambulatory spine surgery. However, there remains a concern regarding risks of readmission and postoperative morbidity after discharge.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP database from 2012 to 2015 was queried for adult patients who underwent elective 2-level lumbar decompression (CPT code 63047 accompanied with code 63048). A cohort of ambulatory lumbar decompression cases was matched 1:1 with an inpatient cohort after controlling for patient demographics, comorbidities, and complexity of the procedure. The primary outcome was the 30-day readmission rate. Secondary outcomes included a composite of 30-day postoperative major complications and hospital length of stay for hospitalized patients.

RESULTS

A total of 7505 patients met our study criteria. The ambulatory 2-level lumbar decompression surgery rate increased significantly over the study period from 28% in 2012 to 49% in 2015 (P<0.001). In the matched sample, there was no statistically significant difference in the 30-day readmission rate (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.04; P=0.097) between the two cohorts; however, the ambulatory cohort had a lower 30-day postoperative major complication rate (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.79; P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

After 2-level lumbar decompression performed on inpatient versus outpatient basis, the 30-day readmission rate is similar. However, the 30-day postoperative complication rate is significantly lower in the ambulatory setting. The reasons for these differences need further exploration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Implementation of Outpatient Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression at an Academic Medical Center without Ambulatory Surgery Centers: A Cost Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Lumbar decompressions are increasingly performed at ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). We sought to compare costs of open and minimally invasive (MIS) lumbar decompressions performed at a university without dedicated ASCs.

METHODS

Lumbar decompressions performed at a tertiary academic hospital or satellite university hospital dedicated to outpatient surgery were retrospectively reviewed. Care pathways were same-day, overnight observation, or inpatient admission. Patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, Charlson Comorbidity Index, surgical characteristics, 30-day readmission, and costs were collected. A systematic review of lumbar decompression cost literature was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 354 patients, mean age 55 years with 128 women (36.2%), were reviewed. There was no significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, or Charlson Comorbidity Index between patients treated with open and minimally invasive surgery. Open decompression was associated with higher total cost ($21,280 vs. $14,407; P < 0.001); however, this was driven by care pathway and length of stay. When stratifying by care pathway, there was no difference in total cost between open versus minimally invasive surgery among same-day ($10,609 vs. $11,074; P = 0.556), overnight observation ($14,097 vs. $13,992; P = 0.918), or inpatient admissions ($24,507 vs. $27,929; P = 0.311).

CONCLUSIONS

When accounting for care pathway, the cost of open and MIS decompression were no different. Transition from a tertiary academic hospital to a university hospital specializing in outpatient surgery was not associated with lower costs. Academic departments may consider transitioning lumbar decompressions to a dedicated ASC to maximize cost savings; however, additional studies are needed.

Low Complication Rate of Anterior Lumbar Spine Surgery in an Ambulatory Surgery Center

BACKGROUND

As healthcare costs rise, attempts are being made to perform an increasing proportion of spine surgery in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). ASCs are more efficient, both economically and functionally. There remains uncertainty regarding the safety of performing anterior lumbar procedures requiring vascular access, as little has been published on this subset of patients.

METHODS

This is a consecutive case series analysis of anterior lumbar spine surgeries that were performed in a free-standing ASC in a private-practice setting over a 1-year period, including anterior lumbar interbody fusion, artificial disc replacement, and hybrid procedures. The preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data recorded included age, gender, body mass index, tobacco use, and the presence of diabetes; level and procedure, operating room time, estimated blood loss, complications; discharge site, occurrence of reoperation, hospital admission, or any medical complication or infection over a 90-day period.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients underwent 63 treated levels (34 artificial disc replacement, 29 anterior lumbar interbody fusion): 40 single-level, 10 two-level, one three-level. Average age was 45 years; 27 female, 24 males. None of the patients were diabetics, three were current smokers, seven were former smokers. Average body mass index was 27 ± 4 (range 16-36). Average total anesthesia time was 100 minutes (range 57-187 minutes). Average estimated blood loss was 23 mL (range 5-250 mL). Seventy-one percent of patients were discharged directly home, 29% to an aftercare facility. In the 30-day postoperative period there were no deaths, one hospital admission for pain, and no significant medical complications or surgical site infections.

CONCLUSION

In this consecutive case series artificial disc replacement or anterior lumbar interbody fusion was performed at 63 levels in 51 patients in the ASC setting with an observed major complication rate of zero and hospital unplanned admission rate of 2% (1/51). This provides some evidence that these procedures are safe to perform in the ASC setting. However, a highly experienced vascular surgeon and efficient surgical team, and strict patient selection criteria are all critical in making this possible.

High-risk surgical procedures and semi-emergent surgical procedures for ambulatory surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review evaluates more complex surgical procedures to see whether they might be suitable for ambulatory surgery. Operations that have shown an increasing daycase rate in England include thyroidectomy, joint arthroplasty, spinal surgery and hysterectomy, and these procedures are evaluated. Similarly, there have been recent developments in the management of nonelective ambulatory surgery with more timely throughput and home discharge for suitable patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Caveats on patient selection with the development of focussed educational programmes about the proposed operation have assisted with the development of shorter discharge times. Strict antiemetic guidelines, multimodal analgesic protocols and postoperative multidisciplinary follow-up are core components of the pathway for effective ambulatory management. Communication after discharge should include phone calls from the Ambulatory Unit and easy access to the medical staff who conducted their operation.

SUMMARY

There should be no reason why more complex surgical operations could not be included in a day surgery armamentarium. Similarly, the evidence for more effective use of timely emergency care with shortened length of stay is increasing.

Patient Perceptions of Physician Ownership in Spine Care

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine the perspectives of patients seeking spine care in regard to physician ownership of surgical facilities and to understand the importance of disclosing financial conflicts.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There has been limited investigation regarding patient perceptions of the proprietary structure of surgical facilities.

METHODS

Patients seeking treatment for spine pathology completed an 8-item survey. The questions assessed if patients acknowledged the owners of surgical facilities, if the patient thought knowledge of ownership is important, who they perceived as most qualified to own surgical facilities, preference of communication of ownership, and impact of facility ownership on care.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients completed the survey. When patients were asked whom they thought owned the hospital, most reported private hospital corporations followed by universities/medical schools and insurance companies. With regard to whom patients thought owned an ambulatory surgical center, most reported physicians, followed by private hospital corporations and individual investors. When asked how important it is to know the financial stakeholders of a surgical facility, 73.5% of patients stated "very important" or "somewhat important." Most patients reported they were not aware of who owned the facility. Regarding how facility owners should be communicated, 31.0% answered "written document," whereas 25.0% preferred verbal communication with the staff/surgeon. When asked how much impact the owner of a surgical facility has on their care, 38.0% of patients responded, "strong impact," followed by "moderate impact," (43.0%), and "little or no impact" (19.0%). Patients thought that physicians were the most qualified to own an ambulatory surgical center, followed by universities/medical schools and private hospital corporations.

CONCLUSIONS

The pretreatment perception of patients referred to a spine clinic favored the opinion that physicians were the most qualified to own and manage surgical facilities. Therefore, physicians should be encouraged to share disclosures with patients as their ownership of surgical facilities is viewed favorably.

Does Rheumatoid Arthritis Affect the Infection and Complications Rates of Spinal Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease that produces synovial membrane inflammation and causes progressive articular damage with function loss. Some controversy exists regarding whether RA is associated with infection and complications after spinal surgery. The present study aimed to determine the effect of RA on spinal surgery infection and complications.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. All studies that had compared patients who had undergone spinal surgery with and without RA were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

We found significantly greater rates statistically of complications (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.70; P < 0.05) and infections (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.46-1.95, P < 0.05) in those with RA than in those without RA after spinal surgery. When registry data were excluded, the results suggested that the incidence of complications (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 0.92-5.44; P = 0.08) and infections (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.50-2.07; P < 0.05) was still greater for the RA group than for the non-RA group.

CONCLUSION

When undergoing spinal surgery, patients with RA have a greater risk of operative complications and infection. Surgeons should be aware of these risks and appropriately plan spinal operation for patients with RA to reduce the risk of complications.

Lumbar Laminectomy in the Outpatient Setting Is Associated With Lower 30-Day Complication Rates

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the incidence of complications in patients undergoing single-level and 2-level lumbar laminectomy in either the inpatient or outpatient settings.

METHODS

Patients who underwent single-level and 2-level lumbar laminectomy were identified in the ACS NSQIP database from the years 2006 to 2015. Independent patient variables were recorded, including demographics and preoperative health characteristics. Logistic regression was used to determine the risk of postoperative complications for both a 1- and 2-level lumbar laminectomy as well as to identify independent risk factors for a complication. Comparisons were made between 2 groups: (1) inpatient and (2) outpatient as determined by billing data.

RESULTS

A total of 18 076 single- and 2-level lumbar laminectomy cases were identified with 10 743 (59.4%) inpatient procedures and 7333 (40.6%) outpatient procedures. The incidence of any postoperative complication was significantly lower in the outpatient group than in the inpatient group among all cohorts including 1-level lumbar laminectomy (1.9% vs 6.7%), 2-level lumbar laminectomy (3.17% vs 7.38%), as well as in the combined cohort of 1- and 2-level laminectomies (2.47% vs 7.01%). Significant independent risk factors for complications after lumbar laminectomy were identified, including body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m², age ≥55 years, a functional status of partially dependent, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic steroid use, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 3 or 4, and operative time >90 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports a lower overall complication rate in the 30-day postoperative period following 1- and 2-level lumbar laminectomy performed in an outpatient versus inpatient setting. Significant risk factors for complications included BMI >30 kg/m², age ≥55 years, a functional status of partially dependent, COPD, chronic steroid use, ASA class 3 or 4, and operative time >90 minutes.

Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), still emerging for the spine, proposes a multimodal approach of perioperative care involving the optimization of every procedural step, with the patient in a proactive position regarding his/her management. We aimed to demonstrate a reduction in the length of hospital stay for ACDF without increasing the risk for patients by comparing 2 groups before and after ERAS implementation using propensity score (PS)-matched analysis.

METHODS

We selected 2 periods of 1 year, before (n = 268 patients) and after ERAS implementation (n = 271 patients). Data were collected on patient demographics, operative and perioperative details, 90-day readmissions and morbidity. ERAS-trained nurses were involved to support patients at each pre/per/postoperative step with the help of a mobile app. A satisfaction survey was included. PS analyses were used for dealing with confounding bias in this retrospective observational study.

RESULTS

After PS matching, the outcomes of 202 well-balanced pairs of patients were compared (conventional vs ERAS). LOS was reduced from 2.96 ± 1.35 to 1.40 ± 0.6 days (Student, p < 0.001). All 90-day surgical morbidity was similar between the 2 groups, including 30-day readmission (0.5% vs 0%; p = 1), 30- to 90-day readmission (0.5% vs 0.0%; p = 1), 90-day reoperation (0% vs 1%; p = 0.49), major complications (3.0% vs 3.5%; p = 1) and minor complications (2.0% vs 3.5%; p = 0.54). There was no significant difference concerning the satisfaction survey.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of ERAS for ACDF in our institution has resulted in a significant decrease in LOS, without causing an increase in postoperative complications and has maintained patients' satisfaction.

The Safety of Single and Multilevel Cervical Total Disc Replacement in Ambulatory Surgery Centers

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the safety profile of single- and multilevel cervical artificial disc replacement (ADR) performed in an outpatient setting.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

As healthcare costs rise, attempts are made to perform an increasing proportion of spine surgery in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). ASCs are more efficient, economically and functionally. Few studies have published on the safety profile of multilevel cervical ADR.

METHODS

We have performed an analysis of all consecutive cervical ADR surgeries that we performed in an ASC over a 9-month period, including multilevel and revision surgery. The pre-, intra-, and postoperative data recorded included age, sex, body mass index, tobacco use, and diabetes; level and procedure, operating room time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and complications; and discharge site, occurrence of reoperation, hospital admission, or any medical complication or infection over a 90-day period.

RESULTS

A total of 147 patients underwent 231 treated levels: 71 single-level, 76 multilevel: 69 two-level, 6 three-level, and 1 four-level. Average age was 50 ± 10 years; 71 women, 76 men. None of the patients had insulin-dependent diabetes, 4 were current smokers, and 16 were former smokers. Average body mass index was 26.8 ± 4.6 (range 18-40). Average total anesthesia time was 88 minutes (range 39-168 min). Average EBL was 15 mL (range 5-100 mL). Approximately 90.3% of patients were discharged directly home, 9.7% to an aftercare facility. In the 90-day postoperative period there were zero deaths and two hospital admissions (1.4%)-one for medical complication (0.7%) and one for a surgical site infection (0.7%).

CONCLUSION

In this consecutive case series we performed 231 ADRs in 147 patients in the outpatient setting, including multilevel and revision procedures, with 2 minor postoperative complications resulting in hospital unplanned admissions within 90 days. We believe that these procedures are safe to perform in an ASC. An efficient surgical team and careful patient selection criteria are critical in making this possible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Cervical spine pathology and treatment: a global overview

Cervical spine pathology is becoming increasingly prevalent with an aging world population and is associated with significant morbidity, affecting all areas of the world. This review was undertaken to provide a global perspective on cervical spine pathology, including epidemiology, burden of disease, access to care, and plan of care in both developed and developing low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We found that epidemiology, access to care, plan of care, and health outcomes were relatively similar between nations with similar economies. However, these aspects change dramatically when comparing developing nations to LMICs, with LMICs displaying substantial barriers to care and subsequently higher rates of morbidity and mortality. There is currently a need for large-scale, global, prospective multicenter studies that analyze not only the epidemiology and treatment of cervical spine pathology, but also consider patient outcomes.

Improving blood product utilization at an ambulatory surgery center: a retrospective cohort study on 50 patients with lumbar disc replacement

Background

There is minimal literature discussing anterior lumbar spine surgery in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). The main concern with the anterior approach to the lumbar spine is the potential for injury to great vessels. In our facility, there are two units of crossmatched blood available in addition to cell saver during the procedure. We retrospectively looked at 50 cases of lumbar total disc arthroplasty (TDA) in our ASC to determine utilization of blood products.

Methods

Medical records of 50 consecutive patients who underwent a lumbar TDA at a single ASC were reviewed. Surgeries completed at the ASC were all transferred from the post anesthesia care unit to an attached convalescence care center which allows up to 3 days of observation. Patients who had either a 1 or 2 level lumbar TDA were included in the study. Data consisting of demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status Classification System, length of stay, estimated blood loss, cell saver volume, transfusion, perioperative and postoperative complications were recorded. Preoperative, perioperative and postoperative medical records were reviewed.

Results

Medical records of 50 consecutive patients were reviewed. The mean age was 40.86 ± 9.45. Of these, 48 (96%) had a 1-level lumbar TDA, 1(2%) had a 2-level lumbar TDA, 1 (2%) had a lumbar TDA at L4/5 and an anterior lumbar interbody fusion at L5/S1. There were no mortalities; no patient had recorded perioperative complications. No patients received allogeneic blood transfusion, 4 (8%) were re-transfused with cell saver (2 receiving approximately 400 ml and 2 receiving approximately 200 ml of re-transfused blood). All 50 (100%) were discharged home in stable condition. We had 30-day follow-up data on 35 of 50 patients. Of the 35 patients reviewed, three (8.5%) of the patients were readmitted to the hospital. One additional patient was seen in the emergency department and discharged home after negative testing. No patient was readmitted for post-operative anemia.

Conclusion

The routine use of both cell saver and crossmatched blood in the operating suite for lumbar TDA may be an over-utilization of healthcare resources. In our review of 50 patients, we had no need for transfusion of allogeneic packed red blood cells (PRBCs) and only four of the 50 patients had enough blood output for re-transfusion from the cell saver. This opens the conversation for alternatives to crossmatched PRBCs being held in the operating room. Such alternatives may be the use of cell salvage, only type O blood in a cooler for each patient or keeping type O blood on constant hold in ASCs.

Perioperative complications of inpatient and outpatient single-level posterior cervical foraminotomy: a comparative retrospective study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) is a relatively safe procedure for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Though most often performed as an inpatient procedure, there is an increasing number of patients treated in an outpatient setting.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the perioperative complication rates associated with inpatient and outpatient single-level PCF.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective database study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients with cervical radiculopathy who underwent inpatient or outpatient single-level PCF between 2007 to the first quarter of 2016.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was used as a broad measure of comorbidity. Surgical complications included cervical nerve root injury, dural tear, wound complications, infection, dysphagia, cervicalgia, and revision surgery. Medical complications included pulmonary embolism and lower limb deep vein thrombosis, acute myocardial infarction, acute respiratory failure, pneumonia, sepsis, and urinary complications.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of patients who received single-level PCF from 2007 to the first quarter of 2016 as either outpatients or inpatients using the Humana subset of the PearlDiver Patient Record Database. The incidence of perioperative medical and surgical complications was queried using relevant International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM) and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age, gender, and CCI, was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) of complications among inpatients relative to outpatients treated with PCF. Propensity score matching was done, and comparisons were made for postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Throughout the time period, 1,469 and 1,192 patients received inpatient and outpatient single-level PCF, respectively. The mean CCIs±standard deviation of inpatient and outpatient groups undergoing PCF were 2.83±3.11 and 1.46±2.21, respectively (p<.001). After propensity score matching, patients who received PCF in an inpatient setting showed significantly higher rates of wound complications (OR=1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.04-2.23; p=.029), infection (OR=1.91, CI=1.15-3.15; p=.012), acute respiratory failure (OR=2.50, CI=1.23-5.08; p=.011), and urinary tract infections and incontinence (OR=2.11, CI=1.32-3.38; p=.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient single-level PCF was associated with a lower rate of perioperative medical and surgical complications. The PCF in the outpatient setting can potentially be a safe procedure for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy with appropriate patient selection.

No S.C.A.R.E. Protocol: A Streamlined Safety Protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite the proven success of anterior cervical surgery (ACS) postoperative issues can arise, with retropharyngeal hematoma (RH) being one of the most feared. A recent USA Today article highlighted the failed management and subsequent death of patients developing RH after ACS. The article calls into question the safety of performing ACS in an outpatient setting.

METHODS

We tested the knowledge of 20 healthcare professionals (4 surgeons, 16 ancillary providers) regarding ways to minimize the post-ACS complications. We used a multiple-choice and fill-in-the-blank test. We then developed a No S.C.A.R.E. safety protocol and after teaching the same professionals, re-administered the examination to assess improvement.

RESULTS

We identified large gaps in knowledge between spine surgeons and other providers (92.3% versus 31.2%) on preintervention testing. Postintervention testing showed significant improvement in nonsurgeon scores (31.2% to 86.1%, P < 0.01). Improvement was also seen in provider confidence after completion of the education module.

CONCLUSION

Previous studies demonstrate that the incidence of RH necessitating evacuation after ACS is extremely small (<1%). For rare complications, healthcare teams may benefit from educational modules and standardized protocols. After implementation of our No S.C.A.R.E. protocol, provider knowledge and confidence markedly improved. We recommend similar education modules and protocols be used at other institutions performing ACS.

Minimally invasive lumbar decompression in an ambulatory surgery center

Background

There is limited data regarding clinical and surgical outcomes of minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MIS LD) as an outpatient procedure. In this context, our purpose is to evaluate a single surgeon's experience with performing MIS LD in the outpatient versus inpatient setting and determining if there are differences in surgical and clinical outcomes.

Methods

Patients undergoing primary, one- to three-level MIS LD were retrospectively reviewed and stratified by surgical setting: ambulatory surgical center (ASC) versus hospital. The cohorts were compared with respect to demographics, perioperative characteristics, complications, postoperative pain and narcotics consumption, and improvements in patient-reported outcomes.

Results

Five hundred and nine patients were included: 332 patients underwent surgery at an ASC and 177 patients underwent surgery at a hospital. The ASC patients were younger, more likely to be male, and carry Workers' Compensation insurance. The hospital patients were older, more likely to be diabetic, and had a greater comorbidity burden. Patients undergoing MIS LD in an ASC were less likely to have multi-level procedures and more likely to have decompression with discectomy compared to patients in the hospital cohort. There were two cases of superficial wound infection in the ASC cohort and a single case of a pulmonary embolus in the hospital cohort. Additionally, a total of 28 patients had recurrent herniated nucleus pulposus in the ASC cohort compared to 12 patients in the hospital cohort. There was one case of residual stenosis in the ASC cohort compared to eight cases in the hospital cohort. Both cohorts demonstrated similar preoperative ODI, VAS back pain, and VAS leg pain scores through 12-month follow-up.

Conclusions

MIS LD is a safe and effective procedure in an ASC, however, appropriate patient selection and postoperative protocols are imperative in minimizing complications and optimizing safety and efficacy in the outpatient setting.

Spine centers of excellence: applications for the ambulatory care setting

Centers of excellence (COE) are designed to deliver high-quality, cost-effective healthcare by providing specialized and comprehensive multidisciplinary care for a given condition and have become attractive option to both insurers and healthcare providers given their promise of creating value. The criteria that constitute and define a COE may be delineated by a number of entities with a stake in value-based healthcare delivery including professional societies, the federal government, insurers and businesses seeking to control costs while guaranteeing outcomes for their employees. COEs accomplish this goal through a number of means, the first and most essential of which is centralization of organization wherein a variety of specialists are integrated under a single hospital system to improve communication between providers and decrease overall variability of care delivery. In this system, the patient is tracked throughout the entire spectrum of care from diagnosis, through non-operative or surgical intervention, and postoperative care. The centralized model in turn allows for standardization of protocols and multidisciplinary team input which helps to inform case selection, improve patient screening, make treatment more uniform and ultimately allow for dynamic and continual modification of best practices. This model lends itself particularly well to orthopedic subspecialties where patients often require specialized pre-, intra- and post-operative care from a variety of providers. However, despite their apparent benefits, studies evaluating outcomes after implementation of COEs have been less than favorable, and further research is needed in this area to support their widespread adoption. The growth of the ambulatory surgery center in orthopedics provides a new opportunity for the development, evaluation and evolution of spine COEs. Although the direct value of COEs is yet to be firmly established, they provide guidelines for best practices in outpatient spine surgery and a framework for how spine care can be transitioned safely and effectively to the outpatient setting.

Complication avoidance and management in ambulatory spine surgery

The positive safety profile and potential cost savings associated with ambulatory spine surgery have resulted in an increasing number of spine procedures being performed on an outpatient basis. As indications become more inclusive and the variety and volume of ambulatory procedures grow, the incidence of complications may rise. Limiting adverse events in the outpatient setting starts with patient selection. Surgeons should be aware of the potential complications and associated risk factors for common ambulatory spine procedures and employ strategies to limit and appropriately manage them. Protocols which include patient education, multimodal anesthesia and analgesia, standardized post-operative monitoring, and safe discharge planning are also essential for maximizing safety in the ambulatory setting.

Retrospective single-centre series of 1300 consecutive cases of outpatient cervical spine surgery: complications, hospital readmissions, and reoperations

Background: Outpatient surgery is becoming more common and is more cost-effective than inpatient surgery. Nonetheless, many surgeons and health care administrators are still hesitant to accept outpatient surgery for cervical degenerative spinal disease (C-DSD). This study assesses the types and rates of complications, hospital admissions, and reoperations after outpatient surgery of C-DSD.Methods: Complications, hospital admissions within 90 days of surgery, and reoperations within one year of surgery were recorded retrospectively in 1300 outpatients undergoing microsurgical decompression for C-DSD at the Oslofjord Clinic from 2008 to 2017. The surgical procedures performed were anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) in 1083 patients and posterior cervical foraminotomy in 217 patients.Results: The surgical mortality rate was 0%. Sixteen major complications were recorded in 15/1300 (1.2%) patients. The complications were neurological deterioration in four patients, postoperative hematoma in two, dural lesions with cerebrospinal fluid leakage in one, deep surgical-site infection in one, persistent hoarseness in three, and persistent dysphagia in five. The two potentially life-threatening hematomas were detected within the planned six-hour observation period. Two (0.2%) patients were admitted to hospital within hours of surgery completion with stroke-like signs and symptoms, and four (0.3%) patients were admitted to hospital within 90 days due to surgery-related events. The rate of reoperations for cervical radiculopathy within 12 months was 25/1171 (2%); eight patients' reoperations were due to inadequate primary decompression, one was due to recurrent disc herniation at the same level and side, and 16 were due to new-onset radiculopathy from an adjacent level or other side.Conclusions: Outpatient microsurgical decompression of the degenerative cervical spine in carefully selected patients appears to be safe and carries a low major complication rate, low hospital admission rate, and low one-year reoperation rate.

Current trends in ambulatory spine surgery: a systematic review

Spine surgery continues to move into the ambulatory setting in an effort to pair high-quality care delivery with low-cost facilities. The purpose of this review was to assess the current literature for trends in the practice of ambulatory spine surgery. A systematic review of the English language literature from the past five years was performed utilizing PRISMA standards. The results demonstrate that current focus of research emphasizes the safety of ambulatory surgery-with several studies commenting on complication rates, patient selection, and postoperative protocols to prevent readmissions or complications. Research is also focused on quality of care, and ensuring non-inferiority of ambulatory surgery when compared with traditional inpatient hospitalizations. Importantly, no level I or II literature has been published on the topic in the past five years, suggesting a renewed need for high quality prospective studies.

Future endeavors in ambulatory spine surgery

Due to the high societal and financial burden of spinal disorders, spine surgery is thought to be one of the most impactful targets for healthcare cost reduction. One avenue for cost-reduction that is increasingly being explored not just in spine surgery but across specialties is the performance of surgeries in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). Despite potential cost-savings, the utilization of ASCs for spine surgery remains largely limited to high-volume centers in the US, and predominantly for single- or two-level lumbar microdiscectomy and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) procedures. Factors most commonly cited for the lack of wider adoption include the risk of life-threatening complications, paucity of guidelines, and limited accessibility of these procedures to various patient populations. Thus, the future growth and adoption of ambulatory spine surgery depends on addressing these concerns by developing evidence-based guidelines for patient- and procedure selection, creating risk-stratification tools, devising appropriate discharge recommendations, and optimizing care protocols to ensure that safety, efficacy and outcomes are maintained. Other avenues that may allow for more widespread use of ASCs include the use of electronic health tools for post-operative monitoring after discharge from the ASC, increasing accessibility of ambulatory procedures to eligible populations, and identifying systemic inefficiencies and implementing process-improvement measures to optimize patient-selection, scheduling and peri-operative management. The success of ambulatory surgery ultimately depends not only on the surgical procedure, but also on its organization upstream and downstream. It provides an exciting and burgeoning avenue for innovation, cost-reduction and value-creation.

Feasibility and Safety of Outpatient Lumbar Microscopic Discectomy in a Developing Country

Study Design

Prospective study.

Purpose

To verify the feasibility and safety of outpatient microscopic lumbar discectomy (MLD) in a developing country.

Overview of Literature

Outpatient MLD is advantageous in terms of cost effectiveness and avoidance of nosocomial infections. Safety of outpatient MLD has been well established in the developed nations of North America and Europe. There is no published study of outpatient MLD from the rest of the world, especially in developing countries.

Methods

Fifty-eight consecutive patients undergoing outpatient MLD with a median follow-up time of 12 months (range, 6–21 months) were included in this study. Simultaneous patient counseling was done by a surgical and anesthetic team preoperatively and pre-discharge. We collected and analyzed data pertaining to the demography, socioeconomic status, perioperative parameters, complications, and outcome assessment scores of the patients.

Results

The average patient age was 37.8±9.6 years (39 males, 19 females). Unilateral discectomy was performed in 55 patients, and bilateral discectomy in three. The majority (80.3%) of the patients were classified to lower middle (III) or upper lower (IV) class on the Modified Kuppuswamy Scale. The average operative time was 41.0±8.4 minutes with an average blood loss of 42.6±14.9 mL. The average postoperative stay was 5.5±0.7 hours and the successful discharge rate was 100%. Complications noted were postoperative nausea (n=8), urinary retention (n=2), meralgia paresthetica (n=3), delayed wound healing (n=2), and recurrence (n=1). The successful outcome rates were Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score leg pain, 93.1%; VAS score back pain, 89.6%; Oswestry Disability Index score, 91.3%; return to activities of daily living, 94.8%; return to work, 79.3%; patient satisfaction rate, 82.7%; and overall success rate, 88.4%.

Conclusions

Outpatient MLD can be safely performed with success, even in the setting of a developing country, if the prerequisites of appropriate patient selection, arduous adherence to outpatient surgery protocol, competent surgical/anesthetic team, and infrastructure needed for conduction of microsurgery are met.

Narcotic Consumption Following Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression: A Comparison Between Hospital and Ambulatory-Based Surgery Centers

Background

Several studies have compared outcomes between hospital-based centers (HBCs) and ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) following minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MIS LD). However, the association between narcotic consumption and pain in the immediate postoperative period has not been well characterized. As such, this study aims to examine pain, narcotic consumption, and length of stay (LOS) among patients discharged on postoperative day 0 following a 1-level MIS LD between HBCs or ASCs.

Methods

Patients who underwent a primary, 1-level MIS LD were retrospectively reviewed and stratified by operative location. Differences between groups in patient demographics were assessed using independent-sample t tests for continuous variables and χ² analysis for categoric variables. The operative location and its effect on perioperative characteristics, inpatient pain scores, and narcotics consumption were analyzed using multivariate linear regression adjusted for significant patient characteristics.

Results

There were 235 patients identified, of whom 90 and 145 underwent surgery at an HBC or ASC, respectively. The HBC cohort exhibited an increased comorbidity burden and had a greater percentage of privately insured patients. The HBC cohort recorded shorter operative time and greater total estimated blood loss. Patients in the HBC cohort experienced prolonged LOS, and consumed greater total oral morphine equivalents compared with the ASC cohort. No differences were observed in the remaining outcomes.

Conclusions

The results of the current study suggest that patients who underwent MIS LD at an ASC received fewer narcotics than patients treated at an HBC, which may contribute to shortened LOS. Additionally, there was no difference in patient-reported pain between cohorts despite the differences in narcotic use. As such, postoperative narcotics administration varied, indicating HBC patients perhaps required more narcotic pain medications to achieve the same pain scores that were sufficient enough to allow patient discharge, thus prolonging LOS.

Level of Evidence

III.

Safety and Efficacy of Revision Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression in the Ambulatory Setting

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate differences in perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing revision minimally invasive lumbar spine decompression (MIS LD) in the ambulatory and hospital-based surgical settings.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Revision LD has been associated with an increased risk of complications compared with primary LD. Furthermore, ambulatory primary LD has been demonstrated to be a safe and viable option in appropriately selected patients. However, there is a paucity of information comparing hospital-based versus ambulatory outcomes in revision LD.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained surgical registry of patients undergoing revision MIS lumbar laminectomy and/or discectomy for degenerative pathology from 2013 to 2017 was retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for measured confounding variables, including patient age, comorbidity burden as measured by Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative diagnosis. Differences in operative variables, complication rates, pain scores, narcotics consumption, and reoperation rates were assessed using Pearson Chi-squared analysis (categorical) and Student t test (continuous).

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included, of whom 35 underwent revision MIS LD at a hospital-based center (HBC), and 35 underwent surgery at an ambulatory surgical center (ASC). HBC and ASC patients demonstrated similar postoperative visual analog scale pain scores and hourly narcotics consumption during surgical stay (P < 0.001). ASC patients exhibited a significantly shorter length of stay than hospital-based patients (2.7 vs. 11.6 hours, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing revision MIS LD in an ASC demonstrated similar perioperative outcomes as compared to patients undergoing revision MIS LD in a HBC. These results suggest that revision MIS LD can be performed safe and effectively in the ambulatory setting in an appropriately selected surgical population. Further study of patient outcomes following spine surgery performed outside of the traditional hospital setting is crucial, as the delivery of care in the ambulatory setting continues to grow in popularity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

A Comparison of Narcotic Consumption Between Hospital and Ambulatory-Based Surgery Centers Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

Background

Several studies have compared outcomes between hospital-based (HBCs) and ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). However, the association between narcotic consumption and pain in the early postoperative period has not been well characterized. As such, the purpose of this study is to compare pain, narcotic consumption, and length of stay (LOS) between HBC and ASC patients undergoing same-day-discharge following ACDF.

Methods

A surgical registry of patients who underwent a primary, 1- or 2-level ACDF during 2013-2015 was reviewed. Patients were stratified by operative location. Differences in demographics were assessed using independent-sample t tests and chi-square analysis. The presence of an association between operative location and outcomes was analyzed using Poisson regression with robust error variance or linear regression adjusted for preoperative characteristics.

Results

A total of 76 patients were identified, of which 42 and 34 underwent surgery at an HBC or ASC, respectively. The HBC cohort had greater total (P < .001) and hourly (P = .034) narcotic consumption and prolonged LOS (P < .001). Over 90% of ASC patients consumed less than or equal to the 30th percentile (32.0 mg) of oral morphine equivalents (OME), whereas over 57% of HBC patients consumed greater than 32.0 mg OME. The HBC cohort consumed greater average doses of fentanyl and oxycodone (P < .001 for each).

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that patients undergoing same-day surgery for primary 1- or 2-level ACDF received more narcotics at HBCs compared to at ASCs. The increased narcotic consumption at HBCs may have resulted in longer LOS; however, this did not impact long-term pain, complications, or clinical outcomes.

Clinical Relevance

Patients scheduled to be discharged on postoperative day 0 following ACDF at HBCs may be able to receive fewer narcotics and be discharged sooner without compromising pain control or increasing their risk for complications.

Safety and Efficiency of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty in Ambulatory Surgery Centers vs. Hospital Settings

Background

Outpatient surgery has been shown safe and effective for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), and more recently, for 1-level cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA). The purpose of this analysis is to compare the safety and efficiency of 1-level and 2-level CDA performed in an ambulatory surgery center (ASC) and in a hospital setting.

Methods

The study was a retrospective collection and analysis of data from consecutive CDA patients treated in ASCs compared to a historical control group of patients treated in hospital settings who were classified as outpatient (0 or 1-night stay) or inpatient (2 or more nights). Surgery time, blood loss, return to work, adverse events (AEs), and subsequent surgeries were compared.

Results

The sample consisted of 145 ASC patients, 348 hospital outpatients, and 65 hospital inpatients. A greater proportion of 2-level surgeries were performed in hospital than ASC. Surgery times were significantly shorter in ASCs than outpatient or inpatient 1-level (63.6 ± 21.6, 86.5 ± 35.8, and 116.7 ± 48.4 minutes, respectively) and 2-level (92.4 ± 37.3, 126.7 ± 43.8, and 140.3 ± 54.5 minutes, respectively) surgeries. Estimated blood loss was also significantly less in ASC than outpatient and inpatient 1-level (18.5 ± 30.6, 43.7 ± 35.9, and 85.7 ± 98.0 mL, respectively) and 2-level (21.1 ± 12.3, 67.8 ± 94.9, and 64.9 ± 66.1 mL). There were no hospital admissions and no subsequent surgeries among ASC patients. ASC patients had 1 AE (0.7%) and hospital patients had 10 AEs (2.4%). Working patients returned to work after a similar number of days off, but fewer ASC patients had returned to work by the end of the 90-day period.

Conclusions

Both 1- and 2-level CDA may be performed safely in an ASC. Surgeries in ASCs are of shorter duration and performed with less blood loss without increased AEs.

30-day complication rates and patient-reported outcomes following day case primary lumbar microdiscectomy in a regional NHS spinal centre

INTRODUCTION

Advances in surgical and anaesthesia technique have reduced length of stay for lumbar discectomy. Current evidence suggests that daycase surgery is associated with improved patient satisfaction, faster recovery, reduced infection rates and financial savings. We present our microdiscectomy daycase protocol, together with 30-day postoperative complication rates and patient reported outcomes in an NHS setting.

METHODS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied all patients that met a locally agreed daycase protocol for lumbar microdiscectomy and were operated upon and discharged on the same calendar day between 1 March 2013 and 31 December 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients underwent primary daycase microdiscectomy (70 males, 64 females). The cohort had a mean age of 41 years (range 16-82 years). Some 96% (n = 129) were single-level procedures, 93% were unilateral (n = 125) and 81% (n = 109) took place at either L4/L5 or L5/S1. All patients were discharged on the same day as admission and operation. Four patients re-presented to hospital within 30 days and three were discharged from the emergency department within four hours following a clinical review. One patient required an inpatient stay for a washout of a superficial postoperative infection. Significant improvements (P < 0.05) were found postoperatively for back pain and leg pain on self-reported visual analogue scores and Oswestry Disability Index.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we present a safe and effective protocol for day case lumbar microdiscectomy. Our 30-day postoperative complication rate of under 1% is comparable to that of traditional inpatient primary lumbar microdiscectomy. Patient-reported outcome measures revealed significant improvement in both pain and functional scores.

Outpatient anterior cervical discectomy: A French study and literature review

INTRODUCTION

In France, surgery for lumbar disc herniation is now being done in the outpatient ambulatory setting at select facilities. However, surgery for the cervical spine in this setting is controversial because of the dangers of neck hematoma. We wanted to share our experience with performing ambulatory anterior cervical discectomy in 30 patients at our facility.

RESULTS

Since 2014, 30 patients (16 men, 14 women; mean age of 47.2 years) with cervical radiculopathy due to single-level cervical disc disease (19 at C5-C6 and 11 at C6-C7) were operated at our ambulatory surgery center. After anterior cervical discectomy, cervical disc replacement was performed in 13 patients and fusion in 17 patients. The mean operative time was 38minutes and the mean duration of postoperative monitoring was 7hours 30minutes. The patients stayed at the healthcare facility for an average of 10hours 10minutes. One female patient (3%) was transferred to a standard hospital unit due to a neurological deficit requiring surgical revision with no cause identified. Two patients (7%) were rehospitalized on Day 1 due to dysphagia that resolved spontaneously. Thus the "ambulatory success rate" was 90% (27/30). There were no other complications and the overall satisfaction rate was excellent (9.6/10).

DISCUSSION

Outpatient anterior cervical discectomy is now widely performed in the United States. Ours is the first study of French patients undergoing this procedure. The complication rate was very low (<2%) and even lower than patients treated in an inpatient hospital setting in comparative studies. Note that our patients were carefully selected for outpatient surgery as certain risk factors for complications have previously been identified (age, 3+levels, comorbidities/ASA>2). No deaths in the first 30 days postoperative have been reported in the literature. Wound hematoma leading to airway compromise is rare in the ambulatory setting (0.2%). The few cases that occurred were detected early and the hematoma drained before the patient was discharged. Dysphagia is actually the most common complication (8 to 30%).

CONCLUSION

Cervical spine surgery can be performed in an ambulatory surgery center in carefully selected patients. Our criteria are patients less than 65 years of age, single-level disease, ASA<2, and standard cervical morphology. The complication and readmission rates are low. Careful hemostasis combined with close postoperative monitoring for at least 6hours helps to reduce the risk of neck hematoma. Prevention of postoperative dysphagia must be a focus of the care provided.

Option for transverse midline incision and other factors that determine patient's decision to have cervical spine surgery

BACKGROUND

Authors aim to determine patients' preference for surgical incision and factors affecting the decision for surgery to the anterior neck.

METHODS

A questionnaire was presented prior to evaluation and if preceded to surgery followup given.

RESULTS

243 patients completed questionnaire, with 60% female population and younger than 50 years. 151 patients preferred a transverse midline incision with a statistically significant increase in outcomes and cosmesis importance and a decrease in the importance of board certification.

CONCLUSION

Findings of questionnaire demonstrate that patients' prefer a transverse midline anterior neck incision, with surgical outcomes being the overall factor affecting decision making.