The outcome of enhanced recovery after surgery vs. a traditional pathway in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: A retrospective comparative study

Enhanced recovery after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a revised systematic review and meta‑analysis

PURPOSE

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery (AIS) is often associated with high costs and significant recovery challenges. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to improve outcomes, reducing hospital stays and complications compared to traditional (TD) pathways. This study evaluates the impact of ERAS protocols on AIS treatment.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review identified 30 studies (n = 15,954 patients). Search terms included "ERAS," "adolescent idiopathic scoliosis," and "posterior spinal fusion." Outcomes assessed included surgical metrics, recovery milestones, complications, and pain. A meta-analysis was performed, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the MINORS score.

RESULTS

ERAS patients (n = 5582) had shorter surgical durations (- 23 min, p = 0.08) and reduced blood loss (- 126 mL, p = 0.033) compared to TD patients (n = 7916). Recovery milestones improved, including earlier ambulation (- 37.4 h, p < 0.0001), patient-controlled analgesia discontinuation (- 1.1 days, p < 0.0001), catheter removal (- 0.75 days, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (- 1.7 days, p < 0.0001). Complications were lower in the ERAS group (4% vs. 8%, p = 0.0074), while wound-related complications and 30-day readmission rates were comparable. Pain scores were significantly reduced from surgery day to postoperative day 2 (p < 0.0181).

CONCLUSION

ERAS protocols improve recovery and reduce complications in AIS surgery, with shorter hospital stays and enhanced patient outcomes. These findings support broader implementation and further randomized trials to evaluate long-term benefits and patient satisfaction.

A team approach to improve outcomes in pediatric scoliosis surgery: a review of the current literature

STUDY DESIGN

Review article.

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on the effect of specialized pediatric spine teams on clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were identified in the review. There were 11 studies discussing the efficacy of the dual-surgeon strategy, 5 studies discussing the benefits of adult dedicated spine teams, 3 studies discussing the benefits of dedicated pediatric spine teams, 8 studies discussing the healthcare professional composition of multidisciplinary spine teams, and 20 studies discussing various clinical markers evaluating the efficacy of new team- or protocol-based interventions.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric spinal deformity surgery is a highly invasive procedure with room for intervention to minimize surgical complications and enhance patient outcomes. The use of standardized spine teams, comprising surgeons and various healthcare professionals from diverse disciplines, has proven to be an effective strategy for improving both quality and efficiency of care. Furthermore, implementing uniform protocols among these teams has led to reductions in surgical duration, hospitalization periods, and risks such as infections at the surgical site and excessive bleeding. Further studies are necessary to evaluate additional benefits that specialized pediatric spine teams can offer in terms of clinical outcomes.

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

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

Impact of a quality improvement initiative and monthly multidisciplinary meetings on outcomes after posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have demonstrated the benefits of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) undergoing posterior spinal instrumented fusion (PSIF). However, there are relatively few studies investigating the effect of regular multidisciplinary team meetings on level selection, surgical performance parameters, and patient outcomes after PSIF for AIS. The aim of this study was to assess changes in intra- and postoperative outcomes following multidisciplinary team meeting implementation for patients undergoing PSIF for AIS.

METHODS

The medical records of 96 adolescents (10 to 18 years old) diagnosed with AIS and undergoing PSIF at a major academic institution from 2017 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. A quality improvement (QI) initiative was implemented in February 2020, including institution of monthly multidisciplinary conferences focusing on preoperative indications, level selection, postoperative review of surgical performance parameters for previous cases, and discussion and optimization of postoperative ambulation and pain control protocols. Patients were placed into "Pre-QI" (treated pre-February 2020) and "Post-QI" (treated post-February 2020) cohorts. Patient demographics, comorbidities, deformity characteristics, intraoperative variables, ambulation status, postoperative complications, length of stay (LOS), and unplanned readmission rates were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 96 study patients, 44 (45.8%) were in the Pre-QI cohort, and 52 (54.2%) were in the Post-QI cohort. Mean major curve was not significantly different between the two cohorts (Pre-QI: 58.0 ± 7.3° vs Post-QI: 57.9 ± 14.5°, p = 0.169). The Pre-QI cohort had a greater mean minor curve degree (Pre-QI: 42.7 ± 11.8° vs Post-QI: 36.8 ± 12.4, p = 0.008). The Pre-QI cohort had significantly greater mean spinal levels fused (Pre-QI: 11.7 ± 1.7 vs Post-QI: 10.4 ± 2.6, p = 0.009), significantly greater mean estimated blood loss (Pre-QI: 1063.6 ± 631.5 ml vs. Post-QI: 415.8 ± 189.9 ml, p < 0.001), significantly greater mean operative time normalized to levels fused (Pre-QI: 0.6 ± 0.1 h/level fused vs Post-QI: 0.4 ± 0.1 h/level fused, p < 0.001), and a significantly greater proportion of patients with intraoperative drain placement (Pre-QI: 93.2% vs Post-QI: 5.8%, p < 0.001). The Post-QI cohort had significantly shorter time to postoperative ambulation (Pre-QI: 2.1 ± 0.9 days vs Post-QI: 1.3 ± 0.5 days, p < 0.001). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the Pre-QI cohort developed any postoperative complication (Pre-QI: 72.7% vs Post-QI: 34.6%, p < 0.001), and mean LOS was significantly greater among Pre-QI patients (Pre-QI: 4.5 ± 1.1 days vs Post-QI: 3.2 ± 0.8 days, p < 0.001). Discharge disposition (p = 0.758) and 30-day unplanned readmissions (p = 0.207) were similar between the cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that monthly multidisciplinary pediatric spine team meetings may improve patient care. Further studies exploring the incorporation of QI implementation with frequent multidisciplinary team meetings into existing ERAS protocols are merited.

Low profile posterior lumbar-sacral interbody fusion for lumbosacral degenerative diseases: a technical note

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to report our surgical experience in patients with lumbosacral degenerative diseases who underwent posterior decompression and interbody fusion fixed with cortical bone trajectory screw and sacral alar screw, which is known as low-profile posterior lumbosacral interbody fusion (LP-PLSIF).

METHODS

Patients with lumbosacral degenerative disease who underwent LP-PLSIF and traditional PLSIF (control group) internally fixed with pedicle screws were included retrospectively. Patients' demographic data, operative parameters, and perioperative complications were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients were enrolled in this study, which included 9 patients (5 male and 4 female) who underwent LP-PLSIF, and 9 patients (4 male and 5 female) who underwent traditional PLSIF. There wasn't a significant difference in the average age between the two groups, 56.78 ± 10.92 years in the LP-PLSIF group and 60.22 ± 8.21 years in the PLSIF group (p = 0.460). The bone mineral density (BMD) of the two groups of patients were -2.00 ± 0.26 T and -2.13 ± 0.19 T, respectively (P = 0.239). The mean postoperative follow-up time was 12.7 months (range, 12-14 months). The mean operation time was 142.78 ± 11.21 min and 156.11 ± 13.41 min in the LP-PLSIF group and PLSIF group respectively (P < 0.05). The average blood loss was 137.78 ± 37.09 ml in the LP-PLSIF group, and 150.00 ± 27.84 ml in the PLSIF group (P = 0.441). The average postoperative drainage was 85.56 ± 37.45 ml and 122.22 ± 22.24 ml in the LP-PLSIF group and control group respectively (P < 0.05). Patients in the LP-PLSIF group had shorter incision length compared with the control group, 61.44 ± 10.56 mm vs. 74.56 ± 10.22 mm (P < 0.05). The average length of hospitalization of 11.33 ± 2.92 days in the LP-PLSIF group, and 11.11 ± 1.62 days in the PLSIF group (p = 0.844). All patients had significant improvement in VAS pain score, ODI, and JOA evaluation. However, patients in the LP-PLSIF group had better improvement in terms of VAS back pain and ODI in the short term after the operation. There were no neurological complications or wound infection. The fusion rate at the last follow-up was 100% (9 of 9) in the LP-PLSIF group, and 88.89% (8 of 9) in the control group based on CT scans. 1 patient in the control group had asymptomatic sacral pedicle screw loosening.

CONCLUSIONS

LP-PLSIF is a safe and effective surgical technique for patients with lumbosacral degenerative disease, which has the potential strength of less invasive and better clinical improvement.

Accelerated Protocols in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Surgery

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the most common form of scoliosis. Treatment depends on the degree of curvature, skeletal maturity, and age of the patient. Once the curve reaches 50 degrees, posterior spinal fusion (PSF) is necessary to stabilize the spine and prevent further progression of the curve. PSF causes significant trauma to the tissues and often results in significant pain postoperatively. The purpose of this article is to provide the audience with a review of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative pain control with an accelerated protocol in patients with AIS undergoing PSF.

Application of laparoscopic surgery in gallbladder carcinoma

Gallbladder carcinoma (GC) is a rare type of cancer of the digestive system, with an incidence that varies by region. Surgery plays a primary role in the comprehensive treatment of GC and is the only known cure. Compared with traditional open surgery, laparoscopic surgery has the advantages of convenient operation and magnified field of view. Laparoscopic surgery has been successful in many fields, including gastrointestinal medicine and gynecology. The gallbladder was one of the first organs to be treated by laparoscopic surgery, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the gold standard surgical treatment for benign gallbladder diseases. However, the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for patients with GC remain controversial. Over the past several decades, research has focused on laparoscopic surgery for GC. The disadvantages of laparoscopic surgery include a high incidence of gallbladder perforation, possible port site metastasis, and potential tumor seeding. The advantages of laparoscopic surgery include less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and fewer complications. Nevertheless, studies have provided contrasting conclusions over time. In general, recent research has tended to support laparoscopic surgery. However, the application of laparoscopic surgery in GC is still in the exploratory stage. Here, we provide an overview of previous studies, with the aim of introducing the application of laparoscopy in GC.