Improving recovery after elective degenerative spine surgery: 5-year experience with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol

The impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) on opioid consumption and postoperative pain levels in elective spine surgery

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols were developed to counteract the adverse effects of the surgical stress response, aiming for quicker postoperative recovery. Initially applied in abdominal surgeries, ERAS principles have extended to orthopedic spine surgery, but research in this area is still in its infancy. The current study investigated the impact of ERAS on postoperative pain and opioid consumption in elective spine surgeries.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study of patients undergoing elective spine surgery from May 2019 to July 2020. Patients were categorized into two groups: those enrolled in the ERAS pathway and those adhering to traditional surgical protocols. Data on demographics, comorbidities, length of stay (LOS), surgical procedures, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), while opioid utilization was quantified in morphine milligram equivalents (MME). NRS and MME were averaged for each patient across all days under observation. Differences in outcomes between groups (ERAS vs. treatment as usual) were tested using the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables and Pearson's or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables.

RESULTS

The median of patient's mean daily NRS scores for postoperative pain were not statistically significantly different between groups (median = 5.55 (ERAS) and 5.28 (non-ERAS), p=.2). Additionally, the median of patients' mean daily levels of MME were similar between groups (median = 17.24 (ERAS) and 16.44 (non-ERAS), p=.3) ERAS patients experienced notably shorter LOS (median=2 days) than their non-ERAS counterparts (median=3 days, p=.001). The effect of ERAS was moderated by whether the patient had ACDF surgery. ERAS (vs. non-ERAS) patients who had ACDF surgery had 1.64 lower average NRS (p=.006). ERAS (vs. non-ERAS) patients who had a different surgery had 0.72 higher average NRS (p=.02) but had almost half the length of stay, on average (p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study underscores the dynamic nature of ERAS protocols within the realm of spine surgery. While ERAS demonstrates advantages such as reduced LOS and improved patient-reported outcomes, it requires careful implementation and customization to address the specific demands of each surgical discipline. The potential to expedite recovery, optimize resource utilization, and enhance patient satisfaction cannot be overstated. However, the fine balance between achieving these benefits and ensuring comprehensive patient care, especially in the context of postoperative pain management, must be maintained. As ERAS continues to evolve and find its place in diverse surgical domains, it is crucial for healthcare providers to remain attentive to patient needs, adapting ERAS protocols to suit individual patient populations and surgical contexts.

Designing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols in Neurosurgery: A Contemporary Narrative Review

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have revolutionized the approach to perioperative care in various surgical specialties. They reduce complications, improve patient outcomes, and shorten hospital lengths of stay. Implementation of ERAS protocols for neurosurgical procedures has been relatively underexplored and underutilized due to the unique challenges and complexities of neurosurgery. This narrative review explores the barriers to, and pioneering strategies of, standardized procedure-specific ERAS protocols, and the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration in neurosurgery and neuroanesthsia, patient-centered approaches, and continuous quality improvement initiatives, to achieve better patient outcomes. It also discusses initiatives to guide future clinical practice, research, and guideline creation, to foster the development of tailored ERAS protocols in neurosurgery.

Prospective same day discharge instrumented lumbar spine surgery - a forty patient consecutive series

PURPOSE

Outpatient lumbar decompression surgeries have been successfully performed in France for over twenty years, earning acceptance. However, outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures and arthroplasties are less documented. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficiency, and safety of outpatient lumbar instrumented surgery.

METHODS

A prospective single-center study involving three experienced surgeons was conducted from September 2020 to September 2021, with a minimum six-month postoperative follow-up. Inclusion criteria comprised patients aged 18 to 75 eligible for same-day discharge, undergoing single-level lumbar spinal fusion or arthroplasty via anterior or posterior Wiltse approach. The primary endpoint was assessing the percentage of successful outpatient discharges (within twelve hours), with secondary endpoints including perioperative/postoperative complications and discharge pain prescriptions in terms of frequency and severity.

RESULTS

Forty patients (mean age: 44 years; 16/24 male/female ratio) underwent surgery, including 18 lumbar arthroplasties, twelve ALIF, and ten TLIF procedures. The majority of surgeries were performed at L4-L5 (18 procedures) and L5-S1 levels (22 procedures). 95% (38/40) of patients were successfully discharged within twelve hours, with only two patients discharged the following day. No postoperative hematomas, serious adverse events, or revision surgeries were noted.

CONCLUSION

95% of patients were discharged successfully within twelve hours following outpatient lumbar fusion surgery, with a 100% patient satisfaction rate. Specific technical solutions were not necessary, and oral pain relief sufficed. Patient selection and education, including early pain management, played crucial roles in complication avoidance. This study underscores the safety of outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures, leading to cost reduction and expedited recovery.

Short-term outcomes of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for children with congenital scoliosis undergoing posterior spinal fusion: a case-control study of 70 patients

Increasing evidence demonstrates the advantages of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol; however, few studies have evaluated ERAS in pediatric patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of ERAS in pediatric patients with congenital scoliosis. Seventy pediatric patients with congenital scoliosis underwent posterior hemivertebra resection and fusion with pedicle screws and were prospectively randomly assigned to the ERAS group ( n  = 35) and control group ( n  = 35). ERAS management comprised 15 elements including a shortened fasting time, optimized anesthesia protocol, and multimodal analgesia. The control group received traditional perioperative management. Clinical outcome was evaluated by hospital stay, surgery-related indicators, diet, pain scores, laboratory tests, and complications. The surgical outcome showed a similar correction rate in the ERAS group (84.0%) and control group (89.0%; P  = 0.471). The mean fasting time was significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, the ERAS group had significantly shorter mean times to postoperative hospital stay, first anal exhaust and defecation, significantly lower mean pain scores in the first 2 days postoperatively ( P  < 0.05), and a significantly lower mean interleukin-6 concentration on postoperative day 1 ( P  < 0.001). The incidence of complications was similar in the ERAS group and control group ( P  > 0.05). The ERAS protocol is effective and safe for pediatric patients with congenital spinal deformity and may significantly improve the treatment efficacy compared with traditional perioperative management methods. Levels of Evidence: III.

Incidence and predictors of acute kidney injury after elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease: A 13-year analysis of the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a severe postoperative complication associated with poor clinical outcomes, including the development of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and death. This study aimed to investigate the incidence and determinants of AKI following elective surgeries for degenerative lumbar spine disease.

METHODS

All patient data were extracted from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. After surgery, AKI's incidence and risk factors were identified for lumbar degenerative disease. ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes defined lumbar spine degenerative disease, fusion, decompression, and AKI. The study cohort was categorized by type of surgery, that is, decompression alone or spinal fusion. Regression analysis was used to identify associations between AKI and risk factors organized by surgery type.

RESULTS

The incidence of AKI after decompression or fusion was 1.1% and 1.8%, respectively. However, the incidence of AKI in the United States is rising. The strongest predictor of AKI was underlying CKD, which was associated with an 9.0- to 12.9-fold more significant risk of AKI than in subjects without comorbid CKD. In this setting, older age, congestive heart failure, anemia, obesity, coagulopathy and hospital-acquired infections were also strong predictors of AKI. In contrast, long-term aspirin/anticoagulant usage was associated with lowered AKI risk.

CONCLUSION

Findings of this study inform risk stratification for AKI and may help to optimize treatment decisions and care planning after elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Safety and Effectiveness of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol in Patients Undergoing Burr Hole Evacuation for Chronic Subdural Hematoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery programs may be especially useful in patients with chronic subdural hematoma or hygroma (cSDH), who frequently exhibit frailty and multimorbidity. We aim to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of an enhanced recovery protocol in this population.

METHODS

From a prospective registry, burr hole evacuations for cSDH carried out under the protocol (including early thromboprophylaxis, no flat bed rest, early mobilization without drain clamping, and early resumption of antithrombotic medication) were extracted, along with those procedures carried out within the past year before protocol change. Propensity score-based matching was carried out. A range of clinical and imaging outcomes were analyzed, including modified Rankin Scale as effectiveness and Clavien-Dindo adverse event grading as safety primary end points.

RESULTS

Per group, 91 procedures were analyzed. At discharge, there was no significant difference in the modified Rankin Scale among the standard and enhanced recovery groups (1 [1; 2] vs 1 [1; 3], P = .552), or in Clavien-Dindo adverse event grading classifications of adverse events (P = .282) or occurrence of any adverse events (15.4% vs 20.9%, P = .442). There were no significant differences in time to drain removal (2.00 [2.00; 2.00] vs 2.00 [1.25; 2.00] days, P = .058), time from procedure to discharge (4.0 [3.0; 6.0] vs 4.0 [3.0; 6.0] days, P = .201), or total hospital length of stay (6.0 [5.0; 9.0] vs 5.0 [4.0; 8.0] days, P = .113). All-cause mortality was similar in both groups (8.8% vs 4.4%, P = .289), as was discharge disposition (P = .192). Other clinical and imaging outcomes were similar too (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

In a matched cohort study comparing perioperative standard of care with a novel enhanced recovery protocol focusing on evidence-based drainage, mobilization, and thromboprophylaxis regimens as well as changes to the standardized reuptake of oral anticoagulants and antiaggregants, no differences in safety or effectiveness were observed after burr hole evacuation of cSDH.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Spine Pathways and the Role of Perioperative Checklists

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) proposes a multimodal, evidence-based approach to perioperative care. ERAS pathways have been shown to help reduce complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission rates, pain scores, and ultimately surgical costs, while improving patient satisfaction scores and outcomes in multiple surgical subspecialties [1-6]. Numerous specialties have implemented ERAS programs across the globe, providing a foundation for spine surgeons to begin the process themselves. Over the last few years, a significant number of papers have been addressing ERAS pathways for spinal surgery [7-19]. The majority have addressed the lumbar spine [9, 20-26]. The number of cervical ERAS pathways has been limited [27-29]. Many spine programs have begun the implementation of ERAS pathways, incorporating principles and interventions to various spine surgical procedures. Although differences in implementation across programs exist, there are a few common elements that promote a successful enhanced recovery approach [11, 16, 23, 25, 30-33]. All spinal ERAS pathways have three major elements, which are preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative phases. Within these phases some common elements include preoperative and intraoperative surgical checklists. Intraoperative checklist in addition to the "surgical time out" has been integrated into the workflow of most hospitals doing surgeries and have become a standard of care. The surgical checklist is designed to help reduce surgical errors and prevent wrong site/patient surgeries. Several surgical checklists have been developed throughout the years. Despite these safety protocols wrong site/level and other surgical errors continue to occur. Many cases of wrong level spine surgery (WLSS) still occur even when intraoperative imaging is performed [34, 35]. One survey reported that about 50% of spine surgeons have performed at least one WLSS during their career [36, 37]. Another survey reported that 36% of spine surgeons had performed at least one WLSS that was not recognized intraoperatively [38]. On a similar account, about 30% of spine surgery fellows have experienced wrong-site surgery [39]. From raw incidence rates, WLSS may seem rare, but these surveys show that the experience of WLSS is rather common among spine surgeons. WLSS is not yet a "never event." This may be due to poor quality of the intraoperative images, hindering subsequent level identification [34, 35, 38, 40]. Errors in interpretation of the imaging may also occur, including inconsistency in numbering vertebrae, inconsistency in landmark usage for level counting, and problems with numbering vertebrae due to lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) and other anatomical variants [34, 38, 41-43]. This chapter will describe a framework for the development and implementation of ERAS pathway for patients undergoing spine surgery. In addition, we will propose preoperative imaging guidelines and a comprehensive spine surgical checklist to incorporate into the perioperative phase to help reduce further surgical errors and WLSS.

Early ambulation versus prolonged bed rest for incidental durotomies in spine procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Incidental durotomies are frequent complications of spine surgery associated with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak-related symptoms. Management typically involves prolonged bed rest to reduce CSF pressure at the durotomy site. However, early ambulation may be a safer, effective alternative. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus were systematically searched for studies comparing early ambulation (bed rest ≤ 24 h) with prolonged bed rest (> 24 h) for patients with incidental durotomies in spine surgeries. The outcomes of interest were CSF leak, hypotensive headache, additional surgical repair, pseudomeningocele, and pulmonary complications. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis were performed following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We included a total of 704 patients from 6 studies. There was a significant reduction in the incidence of pulmonary complications (RR 0.23; 95% CI 0.08-0.67; p = 0.007) in the early mobilization group. The incidence of CSF leak (RR 1.34; 95% CI 0.83-2.14; p = 0.23), hypotensive headache (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.27-1.90; p = 0.50), additional repair surgery (RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.76-2.2; p = 0.35), and pseudomeningocele (RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.20-8.48; p = 0.79) did not differ significantly. In patients with incidental durotomy following spinal surgery, early mobilization was associated with a lower incidence of pulmonary complications as compared with prolonged bed rest. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of CSF leak, need for additional repair, pseudomeningocele, and hypotensive headache.

Outcome Reporting in Spine Surgery: A Review of Historical and Emerging Trends

The general objectives of spine surgery are to alleviate pain, restore neurologic function, and prevent or treat spinal deformities or instability. The accumulating expanse of outcome measures has allowed us to more objectively quantify these variables and, therefore, gauge the success of treatments, ultimately improving the quality of the delivered health care. It has become increasingly evident that spinal conditions and their accompanying interventions affect all aspects of a patient's life, including their physical, mental, emotional, and social well-being. This underscores the challenge of creating clinically relevant and accurate outcome measures in spine care, and the reason why there is a growing recognition of the importance of subjective measures such as patient-reported outcome measures, that consider a patients' health-related quality of life. Subjective measures provide valuable insights into patient experiences and perceptions of treatment outcomes, whereas objective measures provide a reproducible glimpse into key radiographic and clinical parameters that are associated with a successful outcome. In this narrative review, we provide a detailed analysis of the most common subjective and objective outcome measures employed in spine surgery, with a special focus on their current role as well as the possible future of outcome reporting.

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.

Enhanced recovery after microdiscectomy: reductions in opioid use, length of stay and cost

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are widely used worldwide. Recently, studies of the ERAS program in spinal surgery subspecialties have been reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impacts of ERAS in minimally invasive microdiscectomy (MD) surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MD at a single center. From March 2018 to March 2021, 286 patients were in the ERAS group. A total of 140 patients from March 2017 to February 2018 were in the conventional group. The outcomes included length of stay (LOS), the postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS), complications, 30-day readmission rate, 30-day reoperation rate and cost. Moreover, perioperative factors were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional group, the LOS and cost were reduced in the ERAS group. There were no significant differences in the NRS, complication rate, 30-day readmission or reoperation rates between the groups. Furthermore, postoperative drainage volume, and postoperative opioid use were lower in the ERAS group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ERAS protocol for MD surgery reduces LOS, cost and opioid use and accelerates patient recovery.

Frailty predicts hospital acquired infections after brain tumor resection: Analysis of 27,947 patients' data from a prospective multicenter surgical registry

BACKGROUND

Hospital acquired infections (HAIs) present a significant source of economic burden in the United States. The role of frailty as a predictor of HAIs has not been illustrated among patients undergoing craniotomy for brain tumor resection (BTR).

METHODS

The American College of Surgery National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried from 2015 to 2019 to identify patients who underwent craniotomy for BTR. Patients were categorized as pre-frail, frail and severely frail using the 5-factor Modified Frailty Index (mFI-5). Demographics, clinical and laboratory parameters, and HAIs were assessed. A multivariate logistic regression model was created to predict the occurrence of HAIs using these variables.

RESULTS

A total of 27,947 patients were assessed. 1772 (6.3 %) of these patients developed an HAI after surgery. Severely frail patients were more likely to develop an HAI in comparison to pre-frail patients (OR = 2.48, 95 % CI = 1.65-3.74, p < 0.001 vs. OR = 1.43, 95 % CI = 1.18-1.72, p < 0.001). Ventilator dependence was the strongest predictor of developing an HAI (OR = 2.96, 95 % CI = 1.86-4.71, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Baseline frailty, by virtue of its ability to predict HAIs, should be utilized in adopting measures to reduce the incidence of HAIs.

Recommendations for enhanced post-surgical recovery in the spine (REPOC)

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) constitutes a multimodal approach, based on available scientific evidence, that achieves better patient's functionality, reduces pain, and even lowers financial costs. The present consensus statement proposes the standards for the implementation of ERAS programs to lumbar fusion surgery, a meant benchmark we call REPOC.

METHODOLOGY

A multidisciplinary group of experts was set up ad hoc to review consensus recommendations for lumbar arthrodesis, using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

As a result, 23 recommendations were selected throughout the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of the surgical procedure. A 29-item checklist was also drawn up to implement REPOC protocols in spinal surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

This list of recommendations will facilitate the implementation of this multimodal approach as a safe and effective tool for reducing adverse events in our environment.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Ambulatory Setting with an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multidisciplinary approach to surgical care that aims to improve outcomes and reduce costs. Its application to spine surgery has been increasing in recent years, with a notable focus on lumbar fusion. This study describes the development, implementation, and outcomes of the first ERAS pathway for ambulatory spine surgery and the largest ambulatory minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) series to date.

METHODS

A comprehensive protocol for ambulatory lumbar fusion is described, including patient selection criteria, a multimodal analgesia regimen, and discharge assessment. Consecutive patients undergoing 1- or 2-level MIS TLIF using the described protocol at a single ambulatory surgery center (ASC) over a five-year period were queried.

RESULTS

A total of 215 patients underwent ambulatory MIS TLIF over the study period. There were no intraoperative or immediate postoperative complications. All but one patient (99.5%) were discharged home from the ASC. Almost three-quarters (71.2%) were discharged on the day of surgery. Thirty- and 90-day readmission rates were 1.4% and 2.8%, respectively. Only one readmission (0.5%) was for intractable back pain. There were no reoperations or mortalities within 90 days of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS TLIF can be performed safely in a freestanding ambulatory surgery center with minimal perioperative and short-term morbidity. The addition of comprehensive ERAS protocols to the ambulatory setting can promote the transition of fusion procedures to this lower cost environment in an effort to provide higher value care.

[Translated article] Recommendations for enhanced post-surgical recovery in the spine (REPOC)

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) constitutes a multimodal approach, based on available scientific evidence, that achieves better patient's functionality, reduces pain, and even lowers financial costs. The present consensus statement proposes the standards for the implementation of ERAS programmes to lumbar fusion surgery, a meant benchmark we call REPOC.

METHODOLOGY

A multidisciplinary group of experts was set up ad hoc to review consensus recommendations for lumbar arthrodesis, using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

As a result, 23 recommendations were selected throughout the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of the surgical procedure. A 29-item checklist was also drawn up to implement REPOC protocols in spinal surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

This list of recommendations will facilitate the implementation of this multimodal approach as a safe and effective tool for reducing adverse events in our environment.

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

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion enhanced the recovery of patients with the lumbar degenerative disease compared with the conventional posterior procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Minimally invasive endoscopic technique is an important component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol for neurosurgery. In recent years, unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) has been used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD). This study aims to investigate whether ULIF could enhance the recovery of patients with LDD compared with the conventional minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was performed for relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library database, China National Knowledge Internet, and Wanfang database. Surgical data, clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and surgical complications were compared between patients with LDD who underwent ULIF and those who underwent conventional MI-TLIF or PLIF.

Results

Notably, 12 studies, comprising 981 patients with LDD, were included. Of these patients, 449 underwent ULIF and 532 patients (355 MI-TLIF and 177 PLIF) were treated with conventional procedures. There was no significant difference in the fusion rate, cage subsidence rate, and surgical complications between the ULIF group and the MI-TLIF or PLIF group. Compared with MI-TLIF, the ULIF group presented a significantly reduced estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD, -106.00; 95% CI -140.99 to -71.10, P < 0.001) and shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) (WMD, -1.27; 95% CI -1.88 to -0.66, P < 0.001); better short-term improvement in ODI (WMD, -2.12; 95% CI -3.53 to -0.72, P = 0.003) and VAS score for back pain (VAS-BP) (WMD, -0.86; 95% CI -1.15 to -0.58, P < 0.001) at 1 month post-operatively. Compared with PLIF, the ULIF group presented a significantly reduced EBL (WMD, -149.22; 95% CI -284.98 to -13.47, P = 0.031) and shorter LOS (WMD, -4.40; 95% CI -8.04 to -0.75, P = 0.018); better short-term improvement in VAS-BP (WMD, -1.07; 95% CI -1.77 to -0.38, P = 0.002) and VAS score for leg pain (VAS-LP) (WMD, -0.40; 95% CI -0.72 to -0.08, P = 0.014) at 1-2 week post-operatively; enhanced short- and long-term improvement in ODI at 1 month post-operatively (WMD, -3.12; 95% CI -5.72 to -0.53, P = 0.018) and the final follow-up (WMD, -1.97; 95% CI -3.32 to -0.62, P = 0.004), respectively.

Conclusion

Compared with conventional MI-TLIF and PLIF, ULIF was associated with reduced EBL, shorter LOS, and comparable fusion rate as well as complication management. Compared with MI-TLIF, a better short-term improvement in VAS-BP and ODI was achieved by ULIF; compared with open PLIF, additional enhanced short-term improvement in VAS-LP and long-term improvement in ODI were observed in ULIF. ULIF could enhance the recovery of patients with LDD compared with conventional posterior procedures.

Systematic trial registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=230695, CRD42021230695.

Post-operative neurosurgery outcomes by race/ethnicity among enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) participants

OBJECTIVE

Prior work reveals that Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs decrease opioid use, improve mobilization, and shorten length of stay (LOS) among patients undergoing spine surgery. The impact of ERAS on outcomes by race/ethnicity is unknown. This study examined outcomes by race/ethnicity among neurosurgical patients enrolled in an ERAS program.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective spine or peripheral nerve surgeries at a multi-hospital university health system from April 2017 to November 2020 were enrolled in an ERAS program that involves preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative phases focused on improving outcomes through measures such as specialty consultations for co-morbidities, multimodal analgesia, early mobilization, and wound care education. The following outcomes for ERAS patients were compared by race/ethnicity: length of stay, discharge disposition, complications, readmission, pain level at discharge, and post-operative health rating. We estimated the association between race/ethnicity and the outcomes using linear and logistic regression models adjusting for age, sex, insurance, BMI, comorbid conditions, and surgery type.

RESULTS

Among participants (n = 3449), 2874 (83.3%) were White and 575 (16.7%) were Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC). BIPOC patients had significantly longer mean length of stay compared to White patients (3.8 vs. 3.4 days, p = 0.005) and were significantly more likely to be discharged to a rehab or subacute nursing facility compared to White patients (adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 3.01 (2.26-4.01), p < 0.001). The complication rate did not significantly differ between BIPOC and White patients (13.7% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.29). BIPOC patients were not significantly more likely to be readmitted within 30 days compared to White patients in the adjusted model (adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 1.30 (0.91-1.86), p = 0.15) CONCLUSION: BIPOC as compared to White ERAS participants in ERAS undergoing neurosurgical procedures had significantly longer hospital stays and were significantly less likely to be discharged home. ERAS protocols present an opportunity to provide consistent high quality post-operative care, however while there is evidence that it improves care in aggregate, our results suggest significant disparities in outcomes by patient race/ethnicity despite enrollment in ERAS. Future inquiry must identify contributors to these disparities in the recovery pathway.

Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Short-Level Lumbar Fusion Surgery After Implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis Focusing on Young-Old and Old-Old

Background

There were exponentially increased studies focused on revealing the satisfactory outcomes after implementing enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of chronologic age alone on perioperative outcomes.

Methods

In the present study, patients were dichotomized into two groups: young-old (65-79 years), and old-old (80 years and older). Given the heterogeneity and age-related comorbidities in this population and the need to compare similar groups, we performed propensity score matching for gender, body mass index (BMI), operation time, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), fusion levels and frail status. Perioperative outcomes were compared between two groups.

Results

In our study, we found there were significant discrepancies in length of stay (LOS) (7.17 ± 2.81 vs 8.11 ± 3.57 days, p = 0.031) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (3.7% vs 11.0%, p = 0.038); however, there were no significant differences in C-reactive protein (21.50 ± 26.52 vs 19.22 ± 22.04 mg/L, p = 0.490), overall complication rates (24.8% vs 33.0%, p = 0.179), ambulation time (2.89 ± 1.34 vs 2.55 ± 1.49 days, p = 0.078) or removal of urinary catheter time (2.47 ± 1.44 vs 2.32 ± 1.40 days, p = 0.446).

Conclusion

There were few differences in perioperative outcomes between young-old and old-old groups. Despite similar postoperative complication rates, the old-old group might experience longer LOS when complications occur. More importantly, current outcomes suggested that chronologic age alone does not appear to have the capacity to reflect the tolerance of elderly patients to surgery.

Patient outcomes following implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for patients with metastatic spine tumors

BACKGROUND

Metastatic spine tumor surgery consists of palliative operations performed on frail patients with multiple medical comorbidities. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs involve an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach to improve perioperative outcomes. This study presents clinical outcomes of a metastatic spine tumor ERAS pathway implemented at a tertiary cancer center.

METHODS

The metastatic spine tumor ERAS program launched in April 2019, and data from January 2018 to May 2020 were reviewed. Measured outcomes included the following: hospital length of stay (LOS), time to ambulation, urinary catheter duration, time to resumption of diet, intraoperative fluid intake, estimated blood loss (EBL), and intraoperative and postoperative day 0-5 cumulative opioid use (morphine milligram equivalent [MME]).

RESULTS

A total of 390 patients were included in the final analysis: 177 consecutive patients undergoing metastatic spine tumor surgery enrolled in the ERAS program and 213 consecutive pre-ERAS patients. Although the mean case durations were similar in the ERAS and pre-ERAS cohorts (265 vs. 274 min; p = .22), the ERAS cohort had decreased EBL (157 vs. 215 ml; p = .003), decreased postoperative day 0-5 cumulative mean opioid use (178 vs. 396 MME; p < .0001), earlier ambulation (mean, 34 vs. 57 h; p = .0001), earlier discontinuation of urinary catheters (mean, 36 vs. 56 h; p < .001), and shorter LOS (5.4 vs. 7.5 days; p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a multidisciplinary ERAS program designed for metastatic spine tumor surgery led to improved clinical quality metrics, including shorter hospitalizations and significant reductions in opioid consumption.

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

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

Neurosurgeons Relate Heterogeneous Practices Regarding Activity and Return to Work After Spine Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Given the paucity of relevant data, the Council of State Neurosurgical Societies Workforce Committee launched a survey of neurosurgeons to assess patterns in activity restriction recommendations following spine surgery; the ultimate goal was to optimize and potentially standardize these recommendations. The aim of this initial study was to determine current practices in activity restrictions and return to work guidelines following common spinal procedures.

METHODS

The survey included questions regarding general demographics and practice data, postoperative bracing/orthosis utilization, and guidelines for postoperative return to different levels of activity/types of work following specific spine surgery interventions. A spectrum of typical spine surgeries was assessed, including microdiscectomy, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), and lumbar fusion, both open and minimal invasive surgery (MIS) approaches.

RESULTS

There was significant interprocedure and intraprocedure variation in the neurosurgeons' recommendations for postoperative activity and return to work recommendations after various spinal surgery procedures. Comparisons of the different surgical procedures evaluated revealed significant differences in cervical collar use (more often used following ≥2-level ACDF than single-level ACDF; P < 0.001), return to both sedentary and light physical work (greater restriction with ≥2-level ACDF than with single-level ACDF; P < 0.001), and return to a light exercise regimen (sooner following MIS versus open lumbar fusion; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey demonstrated little consistency regarding return to work recommendations, general activity restrictions, and orthosis utilization following common spinal surgical procedures. Addressing this issue also has significant implications for the societal and personal costs of spine surgery.

Validation of the Benefits of Ambulation Within 8 Hours of Elective Cervical and Lumbar Surgery: A Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative Study

BACKGROUND

Early ambulation is considered a key element to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol after spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether ambulation less than 8 hours after elective spine surgery is associated with improved outcome.

METHODS

The Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative database was queried to track all elective cervical and lumbar spine surgery between July 2018 and April 2021. In total, 7647 cervical and 17 616 lumbar cases were divided into 3 cohorts based on time to ambulate after surgery: (1) <8 hours, (2) 8 to 24 hours, and (3) >24 hours.

RESULTS

For cervical cases, patients who ambulated 8 to 24 hours (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.38; 95% CI 1.11-1.70; P = .003) and >24 hours (aOR 2.20; 95% CI 1.20-4.03; P = .011) after surgery had higher complication rate than those who ambulated within 8 hours of surgery. Similar findings were noted for lumbar cases with patients who ambulated 8 to 24 hours (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.12-1.54; P < .001) and >24 hours (aOR 1.96; 95% CI 1.50-2.56; P < .001) after surgery having significantly higher complication rate than those ambulated <8 hours after surgery. Analysis of secondary outcomes for cervical cases demonstrated that <8-hour ambulation was associated with home discharge, shorter hospital stay, lower 90-day readmission, and lower urinary retention rate. For lumbar cases, <8-hour ambulation was associated with shorter hospital stay, satisfaction with surgery, lower 30-day readmission, home discharge, and lower urinary retention rate.

CONCLUSION

Ambulation within 8 hours after surgery is associated with significant improved outcome after elective cervical and lumbar spine surgery.

Retrospective Data Analysis for Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol for Elderly Patients with Long-Level Lumbar Fusion

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for spinal surgery is new; specifically, an ERAS program for elderly patients is lacking. Geriatric patients have special characteristics that result in further harm by surgical stress. ERAS interventions are designed to improve recovery after surgery and can result in substantial benefits in clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to determine whether ERAS significantly improved satisfaction and outcomes in elderly patients with long-level lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Patients >70 years old with lumbar disc herniation or lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent lumbar fusion of ≥3 levels from July 2019 to June 2021 (ERAS group) and from January 2018 to June 2019 (non-ERAS group) were enrolled. Demographic, comorbidity, and surgical data were collected from electronic medical records. ERAS interventions were categorized as preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative. We also evaluated primary outcome, surgical complications, and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

The study included 154 patients, 72 in the ERAS group and 82 case-matched patients in the non-ERAS group. Overall, ERAS pathway compliance was 91%. There were no significant differences in readmission and mortality rates at 30-day follow-up between the ERAS and non-ERAS groups. Statistically significant decreases were observed in the ERAS group in complications (6 in ERAS group vs. 19 in non-ERAS group, P = 0.013) and LOS (17.74 ± 5.56 days in ERAS group vs. 22.13 ± 12.21 days in non-ERAS group, P = 0.041). Multivariable linear regression showed that implementation of ERAS (P = 0.002) was correlated with LOS. Multivariable logistic regression showed that implementation of ERAS (P = 0.004) was correlated with complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The ERAS protocol used in elderly patients after long-level lumbar fusion surgery was safe and associated with incremental benefits regarding complications and LOS.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Patients Older Than 75 Years Undergoing Polysegmental Lumbar Fusion Surgery Can also Benefit from Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program

Purpose

To compare pain scores (visual analog scale) on postoperative days 1–3 and length of stay after implementing enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in elderly patients undergoing multi-segments lumbar fusion surgery.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, patients older than 75 years were enrolled in the study. We selected two periods, before (Pre-ERAS, n =54 patients) and after (ERAS, n =46 patients) implementation of ERAS. Data were collected on patient demographics, operative and perioperative details, 30-day readmission. The primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS), and the secondary outcomes were postoperative mean pain scores on postoperative days (POD) 1–3 and 30-day readmission rates.

Results

A total of 100 patients (46 in ERAS and 54 in pre-ERAS) were enrolled in this study. There were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking and comorbidities between the groups. However, there was a significant difference in pain on postoperative day (POD) 1 (5.31 ± 1.98 vs 4.37 ± 0.85, p = 0.002), while there was no difference in postoperative complications. The mean LOS was significantly shorter in the ERAS than in the pre-ERAS group, it reduced from 12.29 ± 3.93 to 9.45 ± 2.72 days (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first ERAS protocol used in patients (older than 75 years) undergoing polysegmental lumbar fusion surgery. Pain scores on POD 1 and LOS were significantly lower without increased adverse events after implementation of ERAS. This finding suggests that elderly people (>75 years of age) undergoing polysegmental lumbar fusion surgery could also benefit from ERAS.

Overweight and smoking promote recurrent lumbar disk herniation after discectomy

PURPOSE

Recurrent lumbar disk herniation (rLDH) following lumbar microdiscectomy is common. While several risk factors for primary LDH have been described, risk factors for rLDH have only sparsely been investigated. We evaluate the effect of Body mass index (BMI) and smoking on the incidence and timing of rLDH.

METHODS

From a prospective registry, we identified all patients undergoing primary tubular microdiscectomy (tMD), with complete BMI and smoking data, and a minimum 12-month follow-up. We defined rLDH as reherniation at the same level and side requiring surgery. Overweight was defined as BMI > 25, and obesity as BMI > 30. Intergroup comparisons and age- and gender-adjusted multivariable regression were carried out. We conducted a survival analysis to assess the influence of BMI and smoking on time to reoperation.

RESULTS

Of 3012 patients, 166 (5.5%) underwent re-microdiscectomy for rLDH. Smokers were reoperated more frequently (6.4% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.007). Similarly, rLDH was more frequent in obese (7.5%) and overweight (5.9%) than in normal-weight patients (3.3%, p = 0.017). Overweight smokers had the highest rLDH rate (7.6%). This effect of smoking (Odds ratio: 1.63, 96% CI: 1.12-2.36, p = 0.010) and BMI (Odds ratio: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.02-1.17, p = 0.010) persisted after controlling for age and gender. Survival analysis demonstrated that rLDH did not occur earlier in overweight patients and/or smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

BMI and smoking may directly contribute to a higher risk of rLDH, but do not accelerate rLDH development. Smoking cessation and weight loss in overweight or obese patients ought to be recommended with discectomy to reduce the risk for rLDH.

Effect of Different Anesthesia and Puncture Methods of Percutaneous Kyphoplasty on More Than 90-Year-Old Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: Advantages of the ERAS Concept

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) is an effective minimally invasive technique for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) in recent years. This study focuses on the analysis of PKP surgery and anesthesia in osteoporotic vertebral facture patients over 90 years old with the concept of "enhanced recovery after surgery."

METHODS

This study reviewed 239 patients who were diagnosed with OVF retrospectively between October 2015 and June 2019. According to the method of anesthesia, these patients were divided into Group A (n = 125) and Group B (n = 114). According to the pedicle puncture approach, these patients were divided into Group C (n = 102) and Group D (n = 137). The anterior vertebral height (AVH) and local kyphosis angle (LKA) were used to evaluate the degree of vertebral damage and restoration. The visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were used for assessing functional outcomes. Some parameters were used to assess the perioperative conditions such as operation time, amount of bone cement perfusion, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, anesthesia recovery time, time out of the bed, hospital stay, hospitalization cost, and complications.

RESULTS

The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), anterior vertebral height (AVH), and local kyphosis angle (LKA) 1 day, 1 year after surgery, and at the last follow-up all showed significant improvement (P < 0.05) in comparison with those before surgery both in Groups A and B and Groups C and D. The ODI 1 day after surgery was significantly better in Group B than Group A (P < 0.05). Compared with Group B, Group A required longer time of anesthesia, operation time, anesthesia recovery time, time to get out of bed, and length of hospital stay and more hospitalization costs (P < 0.05). Group D required longer operation time, longer time to get out of bed, more bone cement volume, fluoroscopy time, and more operation hospitalization costs compared with Group C (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We recommend unilateral puncture under local anesthesia for OVF in the patients aged over 90 from the perspective of rapid recovery.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Evaluation of enhanced recovery after spine surgery: Specificities in an academic public hospital

INTRODUCTION

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been well described in many surgical specialties, including orthopedics. Application in spine surgery, on the other hand, is more recent and not yet precisely assessed. The present study aimed to assess the implementation of an ERAS program in a European spine surgery department and its impact on length of hospital stay and complications rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comparative observational study was conducted on patient progression with and without ERAS. As of the launch date of the program, all eligible patients were included over a 6-month period. A retrospective control group comprised patients managed over the same 6-month period of the previous year, matched for pathology, comorbidity and individual surgeon. Endpoints comprised mean length of stay and major complications (i.e., requiring readmission or revision surgery within 90days).

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were included: 44 per group. Demographic characteristics did not significantly differ between groups. Mean length of stay, taking all pathologies together, was 3.3days in ERAS versus 6days in the control group (p<0.001). Complications rates did not significantly differ between groups (p=1).

DISCUSSION

The introduction of the ERAS program gave care teams the opportunity to think over good practices and set up a number of concomitant measures generally agreed to be effective in isolation. The present study showed ERAS to be perfectly feasible in a public-sector structure, reducing length of stay without increasing the rate of complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV CEBM.

Neurosurgery perception of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are widespread in several fields, particularly general surgery, and attempt to deliver surgical care at a lower cost while also improving patient outcomes. However, few institutions have implemented ERAS protocols in neurosurgery. As such, a survey of neurosurgeons on the current state of ERAS in neurosurgery was conducted to provide insight on scaling the practice nationally. A 15-question survey was designed to assess the implementation of andsatisfaction with ERAS protocols at individual institutions. A total of 39 responses were collected from 38 unique institutions. 58.9%(N = 23) reported implementation of neurosurgical ERAS protocols. 52.1% (N = 12) of the responses were neurosurgeons at academic institutions withneurosurgical residency programs. Most neurosurgeons used ERAS protocolsfor spine cases (N = 23), with only 17.3% (N = 4) employing ERAS protocolsfor cranial cases. 69.5% (N = 16) of survey participants reported that thedesign and implementation of ERAS was a multidisciplinary effort acrossmany departments, including neurosurgery, anesthesia, and pharmacy.Decreased costs and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were reported tobe unanticipated benefits of ERAS implementation. Unanticipated challenges to implementation of new protocols included difficulties withelectronic medical record (EMR) integration, agreement of protocoldetails amongst stakeholders, uniform implementation of protocols by allneurosurgeons, and lack of adaptability by multidisciplinary staff. Meandepartment satisfaction with ERAS protocol implementation was 4.00 +/- 0.81 (N = 22) on a 5-point Likert scale.

Perioperative Care of Patients Undergoing Major Complex Spinal Instrumentation Surgery: Clinical Practice Guidelines From the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care

Evidence-based standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery can improve outcomes such as enhanced patient satisfaction, reduced intensive care and hospital length of stay, and reduced costs. The Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SNACC) tasked an expert group to review existing evidence and generate recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery, defined as surgery on 2 or more thoracic and/or lumbar spine levels. Institutional clinical management protocols can be constructed based on the elements included in these clinical practice guidelines, and the evidence presented.

Patient-Specific Factors Drive Intensive Care Unit and Total Hospital Length of Stay in Operative Patients with Brain Tumor

BACKGROUND

Hospital length of stay (LOS) is an important cost driver in neurosurgery. Broader surgical literature has shown that patient-related factors, including comorbidities, and procedure-related factors, such surgeon experience, may be associated with LOS. Because value optimization strategies may be targeted toward either domain, this study investigated the contributions of patient-related and procedure-related factors in predicting prolonged intensive care unit LOS (iLOS) and total hospital LOS (tLOS).

METHODS

Data for adult patients undergoing brain tumor surgery (2017-2019) were collected. Bivariate analyses for iLOS and tLOS were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher exact test. Variables associated with either outcome with P < 0.10 were included in patient-only, procedure-only, and patient+procedure factor multivariate linear regression models. Model discrimination was quantified using C-statistics.

RESULTS

Our 654 patients had a mean age of 57.54 years (standard deviation, ± 14.34 years). For iLOS, the patient-only model significantly outperformed the procedure-only model (P < 0.0001) and performed similarly to the patient+procedure model (P = 0.50). Other than tumor diagnosis, 5-Factor Modified Frailty Index score was the only factor associated with iLOS (P < 0.001) and tLOS (P < 0.001) on multivariate analysis. When predicting prolonged tLOS, the patient-only model significantly outperformed the procedure-only model (P < 0.0001), and performed similarly to patient+procedure models (P = 0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-specific factors are the main drivers of prolonged iLOS and tLOS among patients with brain tumor. Frailty was significantly associated with both iLOS and tLOS on multivariate analysis. Efforts to improve care value should focus on strategies to optimize patient status, such as prehabilitation and enhanced recovery after surgery.

Tranexamic acid given into wound reduces postoperative drainage, blood loss, and hospital stay in spinal surgeries: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although intravenous tranexamic acid administration (ivTXA) has prevailed in clinical antifibrinolytic treatment, whether it increases thromboembolic risks has remained controversial. As a potent alternative to ivTXA, topical use of TXA (tTXA) has been successfully applied to attenuate blood loss in various surgical fields while minimizing systemic exposure to TXA. This meta-analysis was conducted to gather scientific evidence for tTXA efficacy on reducing postoperative drainage, blood loss, and the length of hospital stay in spine surgeries.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether topical use of TXA (tTXA) reduces postoperative drainage output and duration, hidden blood loss, hemoglobin level drop, hospital stay, and adverse event rate, we reviewed both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that assessed the aforementioned efficacies of tTXA compared with placebo in patients undergoing cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spinal surgeries.

METHODS

An exhaustive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from January 2000 through March 2020. Measurable outcomes were pooled using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.0 in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Significantly reduced postoperative drainage output (weighted mean difference [WMD]= - 160.62 ml, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [- 203.41, - 117.83]; p < .00001) and duration (WMD= - 0.75 days, 95% CI [- 1.09, - 0.40]; p < .0001), perioperative hidden blood loss (WMD= - 91.18ml, 95% CI [- 121.42, - 60.94]; p < .00001), and length of hospital stay (WMD= - 1.32 days, 95% CI [- 1.90, - 0.74]; p < .00001) were observed in tTXA group. Pooled effect for Hb level drop with tTXA vs placebo crossed the equivalent line by a mere 0.05 g/dL, with the predominant distribution of 95% confidence interval (CI) favoring tTXA use.

CONCLUSIONS

With the most comprehensive literature inclusion up to the present, this meta-analysis suggests that tTXA use in spinal surgeries significantly reduces postoperative drainage, hidden blood loss, and hospital stay duration. The pooled effect also suggests that tTXA appears more effective than placebo in preserving postoperative Hb level, which needs further validation by future studies.

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

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, comparative.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to design an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for elective lumbar spine fusion by posterior approach, and to compare the results after ERAS implementation in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine fusion with conventional perioperative care.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite wide adoption in other surgical disciplines, ERAS has only been recently implemented in spine surgery. The integrated multidisciplinary approach of ERAS aims to reduce surgical stress to achieve better outcomes.

METHODS

Hospital records of adult patients who underwent one- to three-level elective lumbar spine fusion by posterior approach at a single center were retrospectively studied. An ERAS protocol was designed based on the prevalent hospital practices, local resources and supportive evidence from literature. The ERAS protocol was implemented at our institute in December 2016-dividing patients into pre-ERAS and post-ERAS groups. The outcome measures for comparison were: length of hospital stay (LOS), postoperative complications, 60-day readmission rate, 60-day reoperation rate, and patient-reported outcome measures (visual analogue scale [VAS] and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score) at stipulated time intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 812 patients were included - 496 in the pre-ERAS group and 316 in the post-ERAS group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in baseline demographic, clinical, and surgery-related variables. Patients in the post-ERAS group had a significantly shorter LOS (2.94 vs. 3.68 days). The rate of postoperative complications (13.5% vs. 11.7%), 60-day readmission (1.8% vs. 2.2%), and 60-day reoperation (1.2% vs. 1.3%) did not differ significantly between the pre-ERAS and post-ERAS groups. The VAS and ODI scores, similar at baseline, were significantly lower in the post-ERAS group (VAS: 49.8 ± 12.0 vs. 44 ± 10.8, ODI: 31.6 ± 14.2 vs. 28 ± 12.8) at 4 weeks after surgery. This difference however was not significant at intermediate-term follow-up (6 months and 12 months).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an ERAS protocol is feasible for elective lumbar spine fusion, and leads to shorter LOS and improved early pain and functional outcome scores.Level of Evidence: 3.

Reduction of Postoperative Opioid Use After Elective Spine and Peripheral Nerve Surgery Using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have previously been shown to be feasible and safe in elective spinal procedures. As publications on ERAS pathways have recently emerged in elective neurosurgery, long-term outcomes are limited. We report on our 18-month experience with an ERAS pathway in elective spinal surgery.

METHODS

A historical cohort of 149 consecutive patients was identified as the control group, and 1,141 patients were prospectively enrolled in an ERAS protocol. The primary outcome was the need for opioid use one month postoperation. Secondary outcomes were opioid and nonopioid consumption on postoperative day (POD) 1, opioid use at three and six months postoperation, inpatient pain scores, patient satisfaction scores, postoperative Foley catheter use, mobilization/ambulation on POD0-1, length of stay, complications, and intensive care unit admissions.

RESULTS

There was significant reduction in use of opioids at one, three, and six months postoperation (38.6% vs 70.5%, P < 0.001, 36.5% vs 70.9%, P < 0.001, and 23.6% vs 51.9%, P = 0.008) respectively. Both groups had similar surgical procedures and demographics. PCA use was nearly eliminated in the ERAS group (1.4% vs 61.6%, P < 0.001). ERAS patients mobilized faster on POD0 compared with control (63.5% vs 20.7%, P < 0.001). Fewer patients in the ERAS group required postoperative catheterization (40.7% vs 32.7%, P < 0.001). The ERAS group also had decreased length of stay (3.4 vs 3.9 days, P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocols for all elective spine and peripheral nerve procedures are both possible and effective. This standardized approach to patient care decreases opioid usage, eliminates the use of PCAs, mobilizes patients faster, and reduces length of stay.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery strategies for elective craniotomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has led to a paradigm shift in perioperative care through multimodal interventions. Still, ERAS remains a relatively new concept in neurosurgery, and there is no summary of evidence on ERAS applications in cranial neurosurgery.

METHODS

The authors systematically reviewed the literature using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for ERAS protocols and elements. Studies had to assess at least one pre-, peri-, or postoperative ERAS element and evaluate at least one of the following outcomes: 1) length of hospital stay, 2) length of ICU stay, 3) postoperative pain, 4) direct and indirect healthcare cost, 5) complication rate, 6) readmission rate, or 7) patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

A final 27 articles were included in the qualitative analysis, with mixed quality of evidence ranging from high in 3 cases to very low in 1 case. Seventeen studies reported a complete ERAS protocol. Preoperative ERAS elements include patient selection through multidisciplinary team discussion, patient counseling and education to adjust expectations of the postoperative period, and mental state assessment; antimicrobial, steroidal, and antiepileptic prophylaxes; nutritional assessment, as well as preoperative oral carbohydrate loading; and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis. Anesthesiology interventions included local anesthesia for pin sites, regional field block or scalp block, avoidance or minimization of the duration of invasive monitoring, and limitation of intraoperative mannitol. Other intraoperative elements include absorbable skin sutures and avoidance of wound drains. Postoperatively, the authors identified early extubation, observation in a step-down unit instead of routine ICU admission, early mobilization, early fluid de-escalation, early intake of solid food and liquids, early removal of invasive monitoring, professional nutritional assessment, PONV management, nonopioid rescue analgesia, and early postoperative imaging. Other postoperative interventions included discharge criteria standardization and home visits or progress monitoring by a nurse.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide range of evidence-based interventions are available to improve recovery after elective craniotomy, although there are few published ERAS protocols. Patient-centered optimization of neurosurgical care spanning the pre-, intra-, and postoperative periods is feasible and has already provided positive results in terms of improved outcomes such as postoperative pain, patient satisfaction, reduced length of stay, and cost reduction with an excellent safety profile. Although fast-track recovery protocols and ERAS studies are gaining momentum for elective craniotomy, prospective trials are needed to provide stronger evidence.

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.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a review article.

METHODS

Under the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.

Enhanced recovery pathway in adult patients undergoing thoracolumbar deformity surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Enhanced recovery (ERAS) pathways can help hospitals maximize the incentives of bundled payment models while maintaining high-quality patient care. A key component of an enhanced recovery pathway is the ability to predictably reduce inpatient length of stay, as this is a critical component of the cost equation.

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of an enhanced recovery pathway on reducing length of stay after thoracolumbar adult deformity surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Single surgeon retrospective review of prospectively-collected data.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Forty adult deformity patients who underwent ≥5 levels of fusion to the pelvis (two to L5) with a single surgeon before and after implementation of an ERAS pathway.

METHODS

The pathway involved participation by anesthesiology, hospital medicine, and physical therapy, and was designed to achieve goals previously associated with decreased LOS (eg, EBL<1200 mL, procedure time <4.5 hours, avoidance of ICU postoperatively, and mobilization POD0-1). Patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 to a historical cohort (enhanced recovery [ER] and historical [H] cohorts), based on demographics, medical comorbidities, radiographic alignment parameters, and surgical factors. Outcomes were compared to determine the effect of the enhanced recovery pathway. Primary outcomes included LOS and 90-day complications and readmissions.

RESULTS

After matching, gender, BMI, ASA class, preoperative opioid dependence, day of surgery, sagittal alignment parameters, rate of revision surgery, three-column osteotomies, and interbody fusions were comparable between the cohorts (p>.05). In the ER cohort, there was reduced EBL (920±640 vs. 1437±555, p=.004) and no ER patient went to the ICU immediately following surgery, compared with 30% of H patients (p=.022). The ER cohort also had a greater number of patients ambulating by POD1 compared to the H cohort (100% vs. 55%, p=.010). ER patients had a shorter LOS (4.5±1.3 vs. 7.3±4.4 days, p=.010). A 90-day readmission and complications were comparable between the cohorts (p>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The creation of an ERAS pathway for patients undergoing thoracolumbar adult deformity surgery reduced length of stay without negatively affecting short-term morbidity and complications. Given the specificity of this pathway to a single surgeon and hospital, the resources and staffing changes that were instrumental in creating the pathway may not be generalizable to other centers.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Reduces Postoperative Opioid Use and 90-Day Readmission Rates After Open Thoracolumbar Fusion for Adult Degenerative Deformity

BACKGROUND

The role of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways implementation has not been previously explored in adult deformity patients.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of ERAS pathways implementation in adult patients undergoing open thoraco-lumbar-pelvic fusion for degenerative scoliosis on postoperative outcome, opioid consumption, and unplanned readmission rates.

METHODS

In this retrospective single-center study, we included 124 consecutive patients who underwent open thoraco-lumbar-pelvic fusion from October 2016 to February 2019 for degenerative scoliosis. Primary outcomes consisted of postoperative supplementary opioid consumption in morphine equivalent dose (MED), postoperative complications, and readmission rates within the postoperative 90-d window.

RESULTS

There were 67 patients in the ERAS group, and 57 patients served as pre-ERAS controls. Average patient age was 69 yr. The groups had comparable demographic and intraoperative variables. ERAS patients had a significantly lower rate of postoperative supplemental opioid consumption (248.05 vs 314.05 MED, P = .04), a lower rate of urinary retention requiring catheterization (5.97% vs 19.3%, P = .024) and of severe constipation (1.49% vs 31.57%, P < .0001), and fewer readmissions after their surgery (2.98% vs 28.07%, P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

A comprehensive multidisciplinary approach to complex spine surgery can reduce opioid intake, postoperative urinary retention and severe constipation, and unplanned 90-d readmissions in the elderly adult population.

Pathway for enhanced recovery after spinal surgery-a systematic review of evidence for use of individual components

Background

Enhanced recovery in spinal surgery (ERSS) has shown promising improvements in clinical and economical outcomes. We have proposed an ERSS pathway based on available evidence. We aimed to delineate the clinical efficacy of individual pathway components in ERSS through a systematic narrative review.

Methods

We included systematic reviews and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled studies, and observational studies in adults and pediatric patients evaluating any one of the 22 pre-defined components. Our primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, morbidity outcomes (e.g., pulmonary, cardiac, renal, surgical complications), patient-reported outcomes and experiences (e.g., pain, quality of care experience), and health services outcomes (e.g., length of stay and costs). Following databases (1990 onwards) were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). Two authors screened the citations, full-text articles, and extracted data. A narrative synthesis was provided. We constructed Evidence Profile (EP) tables for each component of the pathway, where appropriate information was available. Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, we did not conduct a meta-analyses. GRADE system was used to classify confidence in cumulative evidence for each component of the pathway.

Results

We identified 5423 relevant studies excluding duplicates as relating to the 22 pre-defined components of enhanced recovery in spinal surgery. We included 664 studies in the systematic review. We identified specific evidence within the context of spinal surgery for 14/22 proposed components. Evidence was summarized in EP tables where suitable. We performed thematic synthesis without EP for 6/22 elements. We identified appropriate societal guidelines for the remainder of the components.

Conclusions

We identified the following components with high quality of evidence as per GRADE system: pre-emptive analgesia, peri-operative blood conservation (antifibrinolytic use), surgical site preparation and antibiotic prophylaxis. There was moderate level of evidence for implementation of prehabilitation, minimally invasive surgery, multimodal perioperative analgesia, intravenous lignocaine and ketamine use as well as early mobilization. This review allows for the first formalized evidence-based unified protocol in the field of ERSS.

Further studies validating the multimodal ERSS framework are essential to guide the future evolution of care in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01281-1.

Multidisciplinary care in surgery: Are team-based interventions cost-effective?

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary care has been shown to improve outcomes for patients, and interprofessional collaboration has been demonstrated to be beneficial for providers. In the field of surgery, although a large number of multidisciplinary care teams have been described, no study to date has examined whether or not these team-based interventions are generally cost-effective. This is the first systematic review to examine cost savings attributable to multidisciplinary care across all surgical fields.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review of articles published on cost outcomes associated with multidisciplinary surgical teams was performed. Selected articles reported on cost outcomes directly attributable to a collaborative intervention. Cost savings were totaled on a per-patient basis. Each article was also reviewed to determine whether the authors ultimately recommended the team-based intervention described.

RESULTS

A total of 1421 articles were identified in the initial query, of which 43 met inclusion criteria. Thirty-nine studies (91%) reported multidisciplinary care to be cost effective, with an average cost savings among all studies of $5815 per patient. No significant differences in the amount of savings achieved were found between different intervention subtypes. All studies ultimately recommended (40) or gave mixed reviews (3) of multidisciplinary care, regardless of whether cost savings were achieved.

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary surgical care is beneficial not only in terms of patient and provider outcomes, but also in reference to its cost-effectiveness. Well-designed multidisciplinary teams tend to optimize perioperative care for all involved parties. Efforts to improve surgical care should employ multidisciplinary teams to promote both quality and cost-effective care.

Revision Discectomy with or without Fusion for the Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Nationwide Analysis of Risk Profiles and Short-Term Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

We compared the demographics, risk factors, and complications for adult patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) undergoing revision discectomy with or without concurrent fusion.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients who had undergone revision discectomy with or without simultaneous fusion. The demographic variables and various peri- and postoperative complications were compared between these 2 patient groups.

RESULTS

A total of 6901 discectomy patients were included in the present study, of whom 2996 (43.4%) had undergone revision discectomy with fusion and 3905 (56.6%) had undergone revision discectomy alone. The revision discectomy with fusion group was significantly more likely to be older, female, and White or Black and to have a higher average body mass index than was the revision discectomy alone group. The discectomy with fusion group had longer hospital lengths of stay and was more likely to have a diagnosis of hypertension, insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In addition, the patients who had undergone discectomy with fusion were significantly more likely to develop pneumonia, require ventilation for >48 hours, require a blood transfusion, and to develop urinary tract infection, myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism compared with the patients who had undergone revision discectomy only.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings reveal that older patients with more comorbidities were more likely to undergo revision discectomy with fusion. Also, this surgical group experienced more adverse events after their procedure compared with the revision discectomy only group.

Experience with an Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery protocol at an academic community hospital

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have rapidly gained popularity in multiple surgical specialties and are recognized for their potential to improve patient outcomes and decrease hospitalization costs. However, they have only recently been applied to spinal surgery. The goal in the present work was to describe the development, implementation, and impact of an Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery (ERASS) protocol for patients undergoing elective spine procedures at an academic community hospital.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team, drawing on prior publications and spine surgery best practices, collaborated to develop an ERASS protocol. Patients undergoing elective cervical or lumbar procedures were prospectively enrolled at a single tertiary care center; interventions were standardized across the cohort for pre-, intra-, and postoperative care using standardized order sets in the electronic medical record. Protocol efficacy was evaluated by comparing enrolled patients to a historic cohort of age- and procedure-matched controls. The primary study outcomes were quantity of opiate use in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) on postoperative day (POD) 1 and length of stay. Secondary outcomes included frequency and duration of indwelling urinary catheter use, discharge disposition, 30-day readmission and reoperation rates, and complication rates. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine whether ERASS protocol use was independently predictive of opiate use on POD 1.

RESULTS

In total, 97 patients were included in the study cohort and were compared with a historic cohort of 146 patients. The patients in the ERASS group had lower POD 1 opiate use than the control group (26 ± 33 vs 42 ± 40 MMEs, p < 0.001), driven largely by differences in opiate-naive patients (16 ± 21 vs 38 ± 36 MMEs, p < 0.001). Additionally, patients in the ERASS group had shorter hospitalizations than patients in the control group (51 ± 30 vs 62 ± 49 hours, p = 0.047). On multivariable regression, implementation of the ERASS protocol was independently predictive of lower POD 1 opiate consumption (β = -7.32, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors found that the development and implementation of a comprehensive ERASS protocol led to a modest reduction in postoperative opiate consumption and hospital length of stay in patients undergoing elective cervical or lumbar procedures. As suggested by these results and those of other groups, the implementation of ERASS protocols may reduce care costs and improve patient outcomes after spine surgery.