Single-level awake transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a Mayo Clinic institutional experience and national analysis

Spinal Anesthesia for Multilevel Awake Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Awake minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) generates minimal surrounding tissue damage and has been shown to be a safe, time-effective, and cost-reductive technique in single-level procedures. The purpose of this study was to advocate for the utilization of multilevel MIS-TLIF even in challenging cases as it has demonstrated positive outcomes.

METHODS

Chart review was conducted for consecutive patients undergoing awake multilevel MIS-TLIF from 2020 to 2023. Various demographic, preoperative, and postoperative variables were collected and descriptively analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients underwent multilevel awake MIS-TLIF at our institution during the specified period. Among them, 87.5% underwent a two-level procedure and 12.5% a three-level procedure. The median age ± IQR was 69.5 ± 11 years, with a slight male predominance (56.25%). Common comorbidities included hypertension (56.25%), obesity (37.5%), sleep apnea (25%), and type 2 diabetes (18.75%). The American Society of Anesthesiologists risk was 2 in 43.75% of patients and 3 in 56.25%. All patients presented pain, and 12.5% showed motor deficit. Intraoperative data showed a median of 196 minutes in the operating room where 156 ± 27.75 minutes corresponded to actual procedure time. The median estimated blood loss was 50 ± 70 cc. In the immediate postoperative period, 1 patient had nausea and emesis, and 1 reported fatigue. The median pain score during this period was 4.6 ± 2.03. Pain control medications were required for various patients, with methocarbamol (50%), hydromorphone (37.5%), and oxycodone (25%) being the most commonly prescribed in the postanesthesia care unit. No patient had new neurological deficits after the surgical intervention. The median length of stay was 2 days ±1.25. All patients were discharged with no complications.

CONCLUSION

Multilevel awake MIS-TLIF emerges as a safe and effective technique for complex cases, enhancing patient quality of life with minimal blood loss and postoperative pain.

Awake Robotic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Under Spinal Anesthesia: A Prospective Study with 1-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

We describe our protocol and outcomes of awake robotic minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) under spinal anesthesia.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study of 10 consecutive patients undergoing awake robotic single-level MIS-TLIF with the Mazor X robot. We prospectively collected patient-reported outcomes (back and leg pain visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index) preoperatively at 1-month and 1-year follow-ups and assessed fusion and screw placement accuracy with a 1-year computed tomography (CT) scan.

RESULTS

Median age was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 57.7-66). Median body mass index was 27 kg/m2. No intraoperative complications were reported. Most (9/10) patients were discharged home, and 50% discharged on the day of surgery. Median length of stay was 16.5 hours (IQR = 5-35.5). Median follow-up was 12.5 months (IQR = 12-13.5), with 9 patients having at least 12-month follow-up, with CT scans documenting good screw placement (Gertzbein-Robbins grade A) and solid bony fusion. Median preoperative back pain visual analog scale score was 7.8 (IQR = 6.9-8) versus 1.5 (IQR = 0-3.2) at 1-month post operation, P < 0.01, and 0 (IQR = 0-1) at 1-year follow-up, P < 0.01; median preoperative leg pain 8 (IQR = 7.4-8) versus 0 (IQR = 0-1.2) at 1-month post operation, P < 0.01, and 0 (IQR = 0-2) at 1-year follow-up, P < 0.01; median preoperative Oswestry Disability Index 47.5 (IQR = 27.8-57.5) versus 4 (IQR = 0-16) at 1-month postoperation, P < 0.01, and 0 (IQR = 0-7) at 1-year follow-up, P < 0.01. Median preoperative disk height of the index level was 8 mm (IQR = 2.4-9.5) versus 11.4 mm (IQR = 9.2-11.2) postoperatively,P < 0.01. Median preoperative lordosis of the index level was 5 degrees (IQR = 3.4-8.5) versus 10.1 degrees (7.3-12.2) postoperatively, P < 0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes at 1-month and 1-year follow-ups after awake robotic MIS-TLIF, as well as solid bony fusion on CT scans.

Current Status of Awake Spine Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Spine surgery accounts for a large proportion of neurosurgical procedures, with approximately 313 million spine surgeries conducted annually worldwide. Considering delayed recovery and postoperative complications that are commonly reported, there has been a recent shift toward minimally invasive spine procedures conducted under local anesthesia. Despite proven success, there exists a limited body of literature on the use of awake surgery in spinal procedures.

METHODS

A bibliometric analysis was conducted to map the current landscape of work in this field. 190 articles were identified from the Web of Science (Clarivate, NY) database. A comprehensive bibliometric analysis was performed on a narrowed list of the most relevant articles using Bibliometrix, an R-based programming tool.

RESULTS

There has been a rise in academic papers published on the topic of awake spine surgery since 2016, with an increase in publication count by approximately 18% annually and each article cited approximately ten times on average to date. The year 2022 saw an uptick in publications, with 9 throughout the entire year. The most impactful article, with a total of 95 citations, was published by Sairyo et al.1 Thematic analysis revealed that the terms "lumbar spine" and "stenosis" are well-developed topics in the literature, whereas the topics of "complications," "fusion," and "cost-analysis" are less well-developed topics.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a comprehensive overview of the most-cited articles in the field of awake spine surgery. Specifically, it identifies areas that are well represented in the literature and those which are underrepresented and should be areas of continued future research.

General Versus Nongeneral Anesthesia for Spinal Surgery: A Comparative National Analysis of Reimbursement Trends Over 10 Years

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Nongeneral anesthesia (non-GA) spine surgery is growing in popularity and has facilitated earlier postoperative recovery, reduced cost, and fewer complications compared with spine surgery under general anesthesia (GA). Changes in reimbursement policies have been demonstrated to correlate with clinical practice; however, they have yet to be studied for GA vs non-GA spine procedures. We aimed to investigate trends in physician reimbursement for GA vs non-GA spine surgery in the United States.

METHODS

We queried the ACS-NSQIP for GA and non-GA (regional, epidural, spinal, and anesthesia care/intravenous sedation) spine surgeries during 2011-2020. Work relative value units per operative hour (wRVUs/h) were retrieved for decompression or stabilization of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed using all baseline variables.

RESULTS

We included 474 706 patients who underwent spine decompression or stabilization procedures. GA was used in 472 248 operations, whereas 2458 operations were non-GA. The proportion of non-GA spine operations significantly increased during the study period. Operative times ( P < .001) and length of stays ( P < .001) were shorter in non-GA when compared with GA procedures. Non-GA lumbar procedures had significantly higher wRVUs/h when compared with the same procedures performed under GA (decompression; P < .001 and stabilization; P = .039). However, the same could not be said about cervicothoracic procedures. Lumbar decompression surgeries using non-GA witnessed significant yearly increase in wRVUs/h ( P < .01) contrary to GA ( P = .72). Physician reimbursement remained stable for procedures of the cervical or thoracic spine regardless of the anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Non-GA lumbar decompressions and stabilizations are associated with higher and increasing reimbursement trends (wRVUs/h) compared with those under GA. Reimbursement for cervical and thoracic surgeries was equal regardless of the type of anesthesia and being relatively stable during the study period. The adoption of a non-GA technique relative to the GA increased significantly during the study period.

Awake Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression Under Local Anesthesia for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in the Elderly: A Feasibility Study with Technique Note

Purpose

Here, we introduce a novel strategy of awake unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression, which applies conscious sedation combined with stepwise local anesthesia (LA) as an alternative to general anesthesia (GA). The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of awake UBE decompression for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) in elderly patients.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective study included 31 consecutive patients who received awake UBE decompression for DLSS in our institution from January 2021 to March 2022. Clinical results were evaluated using patient-reported outcomes measures (PROM) including visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria. The anesthesia effectiveness and intraoperative experience were evaluated by intraoperative VAS and satisfaction rating system.

Results

UBE decompression was successfully performed in all patients under LA combined with conscious sedation. 26 (83.9%) patients rated the intraoperative experience as satisfactory (excellent or good) and 5 (16.1%) as fair. The mean intraoperative VAS was 3.41±1.26. The VAS and ODI at each follow-up stage after surgery were significantly improved compared to preoperative scores (p < 0.01). At the last follow-up, 28 patients (90.3%) classified the surgical outcome as good or excellent, and 3 (9.7%) as fair. There were no serious complications or adverse reactions observed in the study.

Conclusion

Our preliminary results suggest that awake UBE decompression is a feasible and promising alternative for elderly patients with DLSS.

Regional anesthesia in spine surgery: A narrative review

Background: Regional anesthesia, which refers to the use of anesthetics to provide analgesia to a specific body part or nervous innervation territory, has become increasingly popular in the field of spine surgery. With the application of these techniques, it has been postulated that patients will require less systemic analgesia, intraoperatively and postoperatively. The authors of this narrative review discuss the common regional anesthetic modalities applied to spine surgery, in addition to patient selection criteria, success in patients with multiple comorbid illnesses, and its adoption by surgeons. Materials and Methods: An advanced search was performed in the PubMed database to obtain Englishlanguage articles discussing regional anesthesia, awake spine surgery, and postoperative complications. Articles were screened for relevance, and 47 articles were incorporated into this narrative review. Results: Classic neuraxial and paraspinal techniques have allowed surgeons to perform posterior decompression, fusion, and revision procedures. Transversus abdominus plane and quadratus lumborum blocks have enabled better pain control in patients undergoing surgeries requiring anterior or lateral approaches. Documented benefits of regional anesthesia include shorter operative time, improved pain control and hemodynamic stability, as well as decreased cost and length of stay. Several case series have demonstrated the success of these techniques in highly comorbid patients. Conclusion: Regional anesthesia provides an exciting opportunity to make surgical treatment possible for spine patients with significant comorbidities. Although additional randomized controlled trials are necessary to further refine patient selection criteria, current data demonstrates its safety and efficacy in the operating room.