Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion Research Articles

Surgical vs ultrasound-guided lumbar erector spinae plane block for pain management following lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Spinal surgery is associated with severe diffuse pain in the postoperative period. Effective pain management plays an essential role in reducing morbidity and mortality. This study is designed to compare the ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block and surgical infiltrative ESP block for postoperative analgesia management after lumbar spinal fusion surgery. The patients who underwent two or three levels of posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery were randomly allocated into one of three groups with 30 patients each (Group SE = Surgical ESP block; Group UE = ultrasound-guided ESP block; Group C = Controls). The primary aim was to compare postoperative opioid consumption, and the secondary aim was to evaluate postoperative dynamic and static pain scores and the incidence of opioid-related adverse effects. There was a significant difference in terms of opioid consumption, rescue analgesia on demand, and both static and dynamic pain scores between groups at all time periods (p < 0.05). Group SE and Group UE had lower pain scores and consumed fewer opioids than the controls (p < 0.05). However, the Group UE had lower pain scores and opioid consumption than the Group SE. The sedation level of patients was significantly higher in the control group than in the other two groups. Also, nausea was more common in controls than in the other groups. While both surgical and ultrasound-guided ESP blocks reduced opioid consumption compared to the controls, the patients who received ultrasound-guided ESP blocks experienced better postsurgical pain relief than those in the other groups (surgical ESP and controls).

Association of modic changes and postoperative surgical site infection after posterior lumbar spinal fusion.

Postoperative surgical site infection is one of the most serious complications following spine surgery. Previous studies have reported Modic changes (MC) represent a subclinical infection. This study aims to investigate the relation between Modic changes and surgical site infection after posterior lumbar fusion surgery. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 424 patients who received posterior lumbar fusion. Preoperative clinical and radiological parameters were recorded. Primary outcome was the rate of postoperative surgical site infection. Covariates included age, body mass index (BMI), sex, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, Pfirrmann classification, fused levels, and operation duration. The presence of Modic changes was used as an exposition variable, and adjusted for other risk factors in multivariate analyses. Of the 424 patients, 30 (7%) developed an acute surgical site infection. Infection had no relation to age, sex, BMI, and comorbidities. There were 212 (50%) patients with MC, and 23 (10.8%) had a surgical site infection, compared to 212 (50%) patients without MC in which there were 7 (3.3%) surgical site infections. MC was associated with surgical site infection in univariate analysis (odds ratio [OR] = 3.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.49-8.50, p = 0.004) and multivariate logistic regression analysis (OR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.26-7.37, p = 0.013). There was statistically significant between specific type (p = 0.035) and grade of MCs (p = 0.0187) and SSI. MCs may be a potential risk factor for SSI following posterior lumbar spinal intervertebral fusion. Type I and grade C MCs showed a higher infection rate compared with other MC types and grades.

Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Reducing Opioid Use After Posterior Lumbar Spinal Decompression and Fusion.

Despite improvements in drug therapy and treatment of lumbar spinal disorders, dependence on opioid medication for postoperative pain control remains a concern nationwide. This study assessed the ability to diminish the reliance on opioid medication postoperatively with the Food and Drug Administration-approved local anesthetic liposomal bupivacaine in open posterior lumbar decompression and fusion procedures. In addition, the possible effects of this modality on other parameters were studied regarding patients and their recovery. A retrospective chart review of 198 patients who underwent an open posterior lumbar laminectomy and fusion surgery with instrumentation treated by a single surgeon in a single institution was conducted. Ninety-nine patients who received liposomal bupivacaine administered intraoperatively were then matched by age, sex, and procedure with the same number of patients treated prior to the availability of liposomal bupivacaine. We evaluated how the use of liposomal bupivacaine affected the requirement for postoperative opioid medication, as well as related changes in length of stay, the use of antiemetics, and urinary retention postoperatively. The patients who received liposomal bupivacaine required less than half of the morphine milligram equivalents of narcotic medications during their hospital stay compared with patients who did not receive liposomal bupivacaine (approximately 57% reduction). The findings of this study suggest that the addition of liposomal bupivacaine to traditional pain management modalities can augment pain management for patients undergoing posterior lumbar surgery, as evidenced by the significant decrease in postoperative morphine milligram equivalents required. [Orthopedics. 202x;4x(x):xx-xx.].

Addition of Ketorolac to Local Anesthesia for Wound Infiltration in Multilevel Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-controlled Trial.

Randomized double-blind controlled trial. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of pain control and opioid consumption after administration of ketorolac directly to paraspinal muscle after spinal fusion. Ketorolac is added to multimodal analgesia regimens to improve pain control, reduce opioid consumption following Orthopaedics and spine surgery. However, evidence of efficacy of adding ketorolac to local anesthesia for intrawound infiltration after spine surgery is still limited. The patients who underwent multilevel lumbar decompression and posterolateral fusion were recruited and randomized to the control group which received 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride injected into paraspinal muscles before wound closure, and the ketorolac group which received 30mg ketorolac in addition to 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride. Post-operative numerical rating scale (NRS) for back pain, leg pain, morphine consumption, and adverse events were recorded. A total of 47 patients were randomized (24 in the ketorolac group and 23 in the control group). The mean age was 60.9±6.9 years old. The mean NRS for back pain at 6 hours after surgery was 5.8±3.0 points for the control group and 3.3±2.1 points for the ketorolac group (P<0.01). The ketorolac group consumed lesser morphine than the control group by 9.1mg in the first 24 hours, 13.8mg at 48 hours, 14.3mg at 72 hours, and 13.9mg at 96 hours after the surgery (P<0.05). Post-operative complications were not different between the two groups. The addition of ketorolac to bupivacaine for wound infiltration after posterior lumbar spine decompression and fusion reduces early post-operative pain and total morphine consumption as compared to bupivacaine alone.

Effects of Preoperative Use of Povidone-Iodine–Impregnated Dressing on Postoperative Rate of Surgical Site Infection in Patients Undergoing Posterolateral Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Randomized, Nonblinded, Active-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: No study has evaluated the efficacy of using preoperative antiseptic dressings in reducing the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) in spine surgery thus far. To investigate the efficacy of the use of preoperative povidone-iodine–impregnated antiseptic dressings in patients undergoing instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion. METHODS: This was a randomized, nonblinded, active-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. Patients were randomly assigned to the 2 study groups, including treatment and control. Patients in the treatment group received povidone-iodine–impregnated antiseptic dressing applied to the anticipated incision site 12 hours before the operation. The control group merely received the standard perioperative care with no additional intervention or placebo. Patients were followed up for 90 days, and SSIs were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were included in this study (100 in each arm). Three cases of SSI were observed in the treatment group compared with 12 in the control one. A significant reduction in the postoperative rate of SSI was observed in the treatment group compared with the control one (P = .029). In addition to study intervention (P = .029), body mass index (P = .005), smoking status (P = .005), duration of the procedure (P = .003), American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P = .002), and diabetes mellitus (P &lt; .001) were significantly associated with the postoperative rate of SSI. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this study for the first time showed that preoperative use of antiseptic dressings is significantly effective in reducing the rate of SSI in instrumented posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy of different preparations or the effectiveness of the present one in patients undergoing spine procedures with other surgical characteristics.

Posterior lumbar fusion surgery doesn’t change sexual activities in patients with lumbar degenerative disease: an observational study

BackgroundThere are few studies about sexual function in the patient with posterior lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar disease. The aim of this study is to investigate sexual activities in patients with lumbar degenerative disease before and after lumbar fusion surgery.MethodsWe recruited 35 patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion at the age of 55 years or younger. They were 17 men and 18 women with a mean age of 47.4 years. After informed consent, the patients were asked to complete anonymous questionnaire concerning sexual desire, activity, and satisfaction before and after surgery.ResultsIn the presick period, 69% of the patients had sexual desire, and 79% achieved satisfaction during sexual activity. Lumbar degenerative disease decreased sexual desire and frequency of sexual activity in 40%, and 74% respectively. Before surgery, satisfaction in sexual activities decreased in 53%, and 55% of the patients felt discomfort during sexual activity. Adjustment in sexual position was required in 44% of man and 54% of woman. After surgery, Sexual desire, frequency of sexual activity and satisfaction did not regain after surgery in 94%, 93% and 92%, respectively.Those who did not feel discomfort after surgery was significantly lower VAS in both low back pain and leg pain than the patients felt discomfort (low back pain; p = 0.024, leg pain; p = 0.046).ConclusionThis study demonstrated that lumbar degenerative diseases decreased sexual desire, frequency of sexual activity and satisfaction, and little of the patients regained their sexual activities after posterior lumbar fusion surgery in the middle-aged patients.

Socioeconomic disadvantage is correlated with worse PROMIS outcomes following lumbar fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXTSocioeconomic status (SES) has been associated with differential healthcare outcomes and may be proxied using the area-deprivation index (ADI). Few studies to date have investigated the role of ADI on patient-reported outcomes and clinically meaningful improvement following lumbar spine fusion surgery. PURPOSEThe purpose of this study is to investigate the role of SES on lumbar fusion outcomes using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) surveys. STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective review of a single institution cohort. PATIENT SAMPLEAbout 205 patients who underwent elective one-to-three level posterior lumbar spine fusion. OUTCOME MEASURESChange in PROMIS scores and achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID). METHODSPatients 18 years or older undergoing elective one-to-three level lumbar spine fusion secondary to spinal degeneration from January 2015 to September 2021 with minimum one year follow-up were reviewed. ADI was calculated using patient-supplied addresses and patients were grouped into quartiles. Higher ADI values represent worse deprivation. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds were calculated using distribution-based methods. Analysis of variance testing was used to assess differences within and between the quartile cohorts. Multivariable regression was used to identify features associated with the achievement of MCID. RESULTSAbout 205 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The average age of our cohort was 66±12 years. The average time to final follow-up was 23±8 months (range 12–36 months). No differences were observed between preoperative baseline scores amongst the four quartiles. All ADI cohorts showed significant improvement for pain interference (PI) at final follow-up (p<.05), with patients who had the lowest socioeconomic status having the lowest absolute improvement from preoperative baseline physical function (PF) and PI (p=.01). Only those patients who were in the lowest socioeconomic quartile failed to significantly improve for PF at final follow-up (p=.19). There was a significant negative correlation between socioeconomic level and the absolute proportion of patients reaching MCID for PI (p=.04) and PF (p=.03). However, while ADI was a significant predictor of achieving MCID for PI (p=.02), it was nonsignificant for achieving MCID for PF. CONCLUSIONSOur study investigated the influence of ADI on postoperative PROMIS scores and identified a negative correlation between ADI quartile and the proportion of patients reaching MCID. Patients in the worse ADI quartile had lower chances of reaching clinically meaningful improvement in PI. Policies focused on alleviating geographical deprivation may augment clinical outcomes following lumbar surgery.

Progress in minimally invasive surgery for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion

Adjacent segment disease (ASDis) is a common complication of posterior lumbar spine fusion and often requires surgical treatment. In the treatment of ASDis, percutaneous spinal endoscopy can be used for simple decompression without removal of the original internal fixation, or for posterior fixation and fusion under the scope or in combination with other access fixation and fusion techniques, with the advantages of less surgical trauma, less bleeding, and faster postoperative recovery. Traditional trajectory screw technique is one of the risk factors for adjacent segment degeneration because of its tendency to cause damage to the adjacent synovial joint during surgery. In contrast, the cortical tone trajectory (CBT) screw placement technique not only reduces the damage to the articular joint during the screw placement process, but also preserves the original internal fixation in the treatment of ASDis, which significantly reduces the surgical trauma. Secondly, the implantation of CBT screws with the aid of digital technologies such as three-dimentinal printed guides, CT navigation, and robotics allows for more precise "double nailing" of ASDis patients to complete the fusion of adjacent segments, and is a minimally invasive procedure to be considered for patients who meet the clinical indications for fusion. This article reviews the literature on the use of percutaneous spinal endoscopy and CBT in the surgical management of ASDis.

Trend of unplanned reoperation rates after lumbar degenerative surgery from 2011 to 2019: a large patient population study.

Unplanned reoperation is commonly performed due to postoperative complications. Previous studies have reported the incidence of unplanned reoperation following lumbar spinal surgery. But few study focused on the trend of reoperation rates, and the reasons of unplanned reoperation were not clear. In this study, we conducted a retrospective study to determine the trend of unplanned reoperation rates after degenerative lumbar spinal surgery from 2011 to 2019, and the reasons and risk factors of unplanned reoperation were also determined. Data of patients who were diagnosed with degenerative lumbar spinal disease and underwent posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery in our institution from January 2011 to December 2019 were reviewed. Those who received unplanned reoperation during the primary admission were identified. The demographics, diagnosis, surgical segments and postoperative complications of these patients were recorded. The rates of unplanned reoperation from 2011 to 2019 were calculated, and the reasons of unplanned reoperation were statistically analysed. A total of 5289 patients were reviewed. Of them, 1.91% (n = 101) received unplanned reoperation during the primary admission. The unplanned reoperation rates of degenerative lumbar spinal surgery firstly increased from 2011 to 2014, with a peak rate in 2014 (2.53%). Then, the rates decreased from 2014 to 2019, with the lowest one in 2019 (1.46%). Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis have a higher rate of unplanned reoperation (2.67%) compared with those diagnosed as lumbar disc herniation (1.50%) and lumbar spondylolisthesis (2.04%) (P < 0.05). The main reasons for unplanned reoperation were wound infection (42.57%), followed by wound hematoma (23.76%). Patients who underwent 2-segment spinal surgery had a higher unplanned reoperation rate (3.79%) than those receiving other segments surgery (P < 0.001). And different spine surgeons had different reoperation rates. The rates of unplanned reoperation after lumbar degenerative surgery increased at first and then decreased during past 9 years. Wound infection was the major reason for unplanned reoperation. 2-segment surgery and surgeon's surgical skills were related to the reoperation rate.

Prosthetic Hip Dislocations in Direct Anterior Versus Posterior Approach in Patients With Instrumented Lumbar Fusion

BackgroundInstrumented posterior lumbar spinal fusion (IPLSF) has been demonstrated to contribute to instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is unclear whether a supine direct anterior (DA) approach reduces the risk of instability. MethodsA retrospective review of 1,773 patients who underwent THA through either a DA approach or a posterior approach at our institution over a 7-year period was performed. Radiographic and chart reviews were then used to identify our primary group of interest comprised of 111 patients with previous IPLSF. Radiographic review, chart review, and phone survey was performed. Dislocation rates in each approach group were then compared within this cohort of patients with IPLSF. ResultsWithin the group of patients with IPLSF, 33.3% (n = 37) received a DA approach while 66.6% (n = 74) received a posterior approach. None of the 9 total dislocations in the DA group had IPLSF, whereas 4 of the 16 total dislocations in the posterior approach group had IPLSF (P = .78). When examining the larger group of patients, including those without IPLSF, patients undergoing a DA approach had a lower BMI and were likely have a smaller head size implanted (P < .001 for both). Using Fischer’s exact test, fusion was associated with dislocation in the posterior approach group (P < .01), whereas fusion was not associated with dislocation in the anterior approach group (P = 1.0). ConclusionsWhile there was no significant difference in dislocation rates between posterior and anterior approach groups, in patients with IPLSF, the anterior approach had a lower percentage of dislocation events compared to the posterior approach.

Body Mass Index and Risk of Complications After Posterior Lumbar Spine Fusion: A Matched Cohort Analysis Investigating Underweight and Obese Patients.

Previous studies have demonstrated that obesity is associated with increased complications after lumbar fusion. However, there are little published data on the effect of being underweight on lumbar fusion outcomes. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the effect of being underweight versus obese on outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion. Lumbar spinal fusion patients were identified through the PearlDiver Mariner database between 2010 and 2020. Study groups were created using International Classification of Diseases codes to identify preoperative body mass index (BMI) category as morbid obesity (BMI > 40), obesity (BMI 30 to 40), normal BMI (BMI 20 to 30), and underweight (BMI < 20) cohorts. Complications that occurred within 1 year postoperatively in this study and matched control groups were then isolated. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Pearson chi square method. A total of 62,616 patients were identified in this analysis. This included 1,258 underweight patients (4.0%), 17,996 obese patients (57.5%), and 12,054 morbidly obese patients (38.5%). The number of patients to experience any postoperative complication was 766 (60.9%), 9,440 (52.4%), and 6,982 (57.9%) for the underweight, obese, and morbidly obese cohorts, respectively. Underweight patients showed an increased likelihood of complications related to instrumentation (odds ratio [OR] 1.85, P = 0.0237), revision fusion (OR 1.34, P = 0.04061), pulmonary complications (OR 1.43, P < 0.001), and sepsis (OR 1.91, P < 0.001). Obese patients with BMI 30 to 40 showed increased odds of the following complications: hemorrhages and hematomas (OR 1.20, P = 0.02634), surgical site complications (OR 1.27, P < 0.001), thromboembolism (OR 1.78, P < 0.001), and urinary complications (OR 1.08, P < 0.001). Morbidly obese patients with BMI > 40 showed increased odds of all complications analyzed in this study. This investigation indicates that both underweight and obese patients are at elevated risk of complications after lumbar fusion. Similar to obese patients, underweight patients may benefit from preoperative optimization by nutrition counseling to avoid potential complications. III.

Anterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery associated with lower risk of stroke, pneumonia, and infection compared to posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery

BackgroundPrior studies, comparing anterior and posterior approaches to lumbar fusion surgery, found similar fusion rates and clinical outcomes, but are limited by sample size. Further evaluation of the postoperative complications of each approach is necessary. MethodsThe MSpine database by PearlDiver was queried using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT codes to identify patients who had undergone single-level anterior or posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Readmission rates, ileus, lower extremity DVT, infection, pneumonia, and stroke were used to compare post-operative complications of an anterior vs. posterior approach. Results112,023 patients were included in this study, with 38,529 (34.4%) in the anterior group (ALIF/LLIF) and 73,494 (65.6%) in the posterior group (PLIF/TLIF). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing an anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion had a higher odds ratio of lower extremity DVT (30-day OR: 1.19, 90-day OR: 1.16; P<0.05) and ileus complication (30-day OR: 1.87, P= <.05; 90-day OR: 1.81, P<.05). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing a posterior approach had a higher odds ratio of stroke (30-day: OR: 0.79, 90-day OR: 0.87; P<0.05), transfusion (30-day OR: 0.66, 90-day OR: 0.69; P<.05), infection (30-day OR: 0.88, 90-day OR: 0.91; P <.05), and pneumonia (30-day OR: 0.85, 90-day OR: 0.90; P<.05). There was no statistically significant difference in myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism between both approaches at 30 and 90-days postoperative. ConclusionsAnterior and posterior approaches for lumbar interbody fusion were associated with differences in postoperative complications at 30 and 90-days. The complication profiles associated with each approach can inform surgeon treatment decisions based on patient profiles.

Letter to the Editor Regarding “Malnutrition, Body Mass Index, and Associated Risk of Complications After Posterior Lumbar Spine Fusion: A 3:1 Matched Cohort Analysis”

Letter to the Editor Regarding “Malnutrition, Body Mass Index, and Associated Risk of Complications After Posterior Lumbar Spine Fusion: A 3:1 Matched Cohort Analysis”

In Reply to the Letter to the Editor Regarding “Malnutrition, Body Mass Index, and Associated Risk of Complications After Posterior Lumbar Spine Fusion: A 3:1 Matched Cohort Analysis”

In Reply to the Letter to the Editor Regarding “Malnutrition, Body Mass Index, and Associated Risk of Complications After Posterior Lumbar Spine Fusion: A 3:1 Matched Cohort Analysis”

Utility of Erector Spinae Plane Blocks for Postoperative Pain Management and Opioid Reduction Following Lumbar Fusions.

Retrospective. The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of the erector spinae plane regional anesthesia (ESP) block in reducing opioid medication usage and postanesthesia care unit length of stay (PACU-LOS) for patients undergoing either a posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (PLIF/TLIF). Posterior lumbar spine fusion is a common surgical procedure typically associated with significant postoperative pain. Poorly controlled postoperative pain can lead to a number of poor outcomes. Although opioids are a mainstay for pain control, they are associated with adverse effects and a risk of dependence. Therefore, multimodal pain control has become more prevalent in orthopedics and combines traditional opioid and nonopioid pain mediation with general anesthesia protocols and regional nerve blocks. A retrospective chart review was conducted for patients undergoing PLIFs or TLIFs between 2019 and 2021. Patients were placed into 2 groups, those receiving an ESP block and those that did not. T tests assuming unequal variances were used to assess differences in pain scores, opioid consumption, and PACU-LOS between groups. The study group demonstrated a 35% reduction in opioid use ( P =0.016), a 16% reduction in pain with activity ( P =0.042), and a 9.7% reduction in pain at rest ( P =0.219) compared with the control group. There were no significant differences in PACU-LOS between groups ( P =0.314). The use of an ESP block for patients undergoing PLIFs and TLIFs appears to be a safe and effective means to manage postoperative pain and reduce opioid consumption.

Are Octogenarians at Higher Risk of Complications After Elective Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery? Analysis of a Cohort of 7880 Patients From the Kaiser Permanente Spine Registry.

A retrospective cohort study with chart review. To determine if there is a difference in risk of adverse outcomes following elective posterior instrumented lumbar spinal fusions for patients aged 80 years and above compared with patients aged 50 to 79 years. Patients aged 80 years and above are undergoing elective lumbar spinal fusion surgery in increasing numbers. There are conflicting data on the risks of intraoperative and postoperative complications in these patients. Patients aged 80 years and above were compared with 50 to 79 years (reference group) using time-dependent multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression with a competing risk of death for longitudinal outcomes and multivariable logistic regression for binary outcomes. Outcome measures used were: (1) intraoperative complications (durotomy), (2) postoperative complications: 30-day outcomes (pneumonia); 90-day outcomes (deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, emergency room visits, readmission, reoperations, and mortality); and two-year outcomes (reoperations and mortality). The cohort consisted of 7880 patients who underwent primary elective posterior instrumented lumbar spinal fusion (L1-S1) for degenerative disk disease or spondylolisthesis. This was subdivided into 596 patients were aged 80 years and above and 7284 patients aged 50 to 79. After adjustment, patients aged 80 years and above had a higher likelihood of durotomy [odds ratio (OR)=1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.02-2.02] and 30-day pneumonia (OR=1.81, 95% CI=1.01-3.23). However, there was a lower risk of reoperation within two years of the index procedure (hazard ratio=0.69, 95% CI=0.48-0.99). No differences were observed for mortality, readmissions, emergency room visits, pulmonary embolism, or deep vein thrombosis. In a cohort of 7880 elective posterior instrumented lumbar fusion patients for degenerative disk disease or spondylolisthesis, we did not observe any significant risks of adverse events between patients aged 80 years and above and those aged 50 to 79 except for higher durotomies and 30-day pneumonia in the former. We believe octogenarians can safely undergo lumbar fusions, but proper preoperative screening is necessary to reduce the risks of 30-day pneumonia.

The Influence of High Blood Pressure on Developing Symptomatic Lumbar Epidural Hematoma after Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery: Clinical Data Warehouse Analysis.

Background: Determining the risk factors for symptomatic lumbar epidural hematoma (SLEH) is important for preventing postoperative SLEH. However, the relationship between blood pressure and SLEH is still debatable. The purpose of our study was to determine the risk factors for postoperative SLEH, to assess the influence of high blood pressure on developing SLEH after posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery, and to evaluate the usefulness of big data analysis utilizing a clinical data warehouse (CDW). Methods: The clinical data of patients who had undergone posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery were acquired from the CDW of Hallym University Medical Center. The acquired clinical data were compared between patients without postoperative SLEH and with postoperative SLEH. Results: Postoperative SLEH that required hematoma evacuation surgery within 72 h after posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery occurred in 17 (1.3%) of 1313 patients. According to the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the risk factors for postoperative SLEH are platelet count difference (OR 1.28, p = 0.03), postoperative international normalized ratio (INR) difference (OR 31.4, p = 0.028), and postoperative systolic blood pressure (SBP) difference (≥10 mmHg) (OR 1.68, p = 0.048). An increase in postoperative SBP (OR 1.68, p = 0.048) had a statistically significant influence on the occurrence of postoperative SLEH. Conclusions: Big data analysis utilizing a CDW could be useful for extending our knowledge of the risk factors for postoperative SLEH and preventing postoperative SLEH after posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Is Sarcopenia a Risk Factor for Postoperative Surgical Site Infection After Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion?

This retrospective observational study aimed to evaluate the impact of sarcopenia on surgical site infection (SSI) risk in patients who undergo posterior lumbar fusion. While many studies have investigated the impact of sarcopenia on postoperative morbidity both in general and orthopedic surgery, none of them examined the risk of postoperative infection after lumbar spine surgery in sarcopenic vs nonsarcopenic patients. Consecutive 55- to 75-year-old patients who underwent short posterior lumbar fusion for degenerative pathology between 2004 and 2019 were included. Charts were reviewed, and the psoas:lumbar vertebral index (PLVI) was used as a measure of central sarcopenia. Patients were stratified according to low vs high PLVI and then according to postoperative infection status. SSI was assessed as an outcome. A statistical analysis was performed to identify risk factors for infection. A total of 304 patients were included; 24 (7.9%) developed postoperative SSI. The average follow-up was 26.2 months. The sarcopenic group was found to not have a higher likelihood of experiencing postoperative SSI (P = 0.947). Only Charlson Comorbidity Index and American Society of Anesthesiology score were significantly associated with infectious complications (P = 0.008 and P = 0.017, respectively). Low PLVI was not associated with postoperative SSI in this study. This finding is in contrast with the findings of other authors who found sarcopenia to be a risk factor for postoperative complications. However, these studies did not consider SSI as the only primary endpoint, and patients were not stratified by indication (degeneration, infection, tumor, and trauma) or surgical procedure. Low PLVI was not associated with postoperative SSI in patients who undergo short posterior lumbar fusion for degenerative pathology.

Cefazolin prophylaxis in spine surgery: patients are frequently underdosed and at increased risk for infection

BACKGROUND CONTEXTPerioperative antibiotics are critical in reducing the risk of postoperative spine infections. However, the efficacy and optimal weight-based prophylactic cefazolin dosing is unclear. PURPOSETo determine (1) if inadequate weight-based prophylactic dosing of cefazolin affects infection rates after spinal fusions, and (2) identify the optimal dosing of cefazolin. STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGSingle center retrospective cohort PATIENT SAMPLEPatients undergoing posterior cervical or lumbar spinal fusion between January 2000 and October 2020 OUTCOME MEASURESPostoperative surgical site infection status METHODSPatients were grouped based on our institutionally derived dosing adequacy standards, 1 g for <60 kg, 2 g for 60 to 120 kg, and 3 g for >120 kg. Univariate comparisons and multivariate regressions identified the effect of inadequate dosing on infection rate. Patients were subsequently regrouped into cefazolin dose (grams) administered and logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were compiled to determine the probability of infection based on cefazolin dose and patient weight. Alpha was set at 0.05. RESULTSA total of 2,643 patients met inclusion criteria and 95 infections (3.6%) were identified. The infection rate was higher in the inadequate dosing group (5.86% vs. 2.58%, p<.001). Adequate dosing was a predictor of decreased infections after lumbar fusion (OR: 0.43, p<.001), but not posterior cervical fusions (OR: 0.47, p=.065). Patients were subsequently regrouped into 1 g or 2 g of cefazolin administered resulting in a 5.01% and 2.77% infection rate, respectively (p=.005). The area under the curve (AUC) and 95% confidence interval for one (0.850 [0.777–0.924]) and two (0.575 [0.493–0.657]) g of cefazolin demonstrated lower infection rates for patients given 2 g cefazolin. CONCLUSIONSPatients receiving an inadequate weight-based dose of preoperative cefazolin had an increased risk of infection following spinal fusion surgery. Two grams prophylactic cefazolin significantly reduces the likelihood of infection.

Cannabis Use Is Associated With Increased Use of Prescription Opioids Following Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery.

Retrospective review. Cannabis is an antinociceptive which has been evaluated as a possible adjunct or substitute for opioid use in the treatment of acute pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between preoperative cannabis usage and consumption of opioids for postoperative analgesia. Patients who underwent one- or two-level posterior lumbar fusion surgery were categorized as cannabis users or non-cannabis users based on preoperative diagnoses of cannabis use. Total morphine equivalent dose was calculated for both in-house opioid consumption and postoperative prescription opioid usage. Age, ASA, BMI, depression, tobacco use, estimated blood loss, OR time, LOS, disposition to rehab, 30-day readmission, in-house opioid consumption and postoperative prescription opioid usage were compared between groups using t-tests. Of the 220 opioid naïve patients, 29 (13%) patients were identified as cannabis users while 191 (87%) were non-cannabis users. There were no significant associations between opioid naïve cannabis usage and ASA, BMI, tobacco use, EBL, OR time, LOS, disposition to rehab, or readmission. Opioid naïve cannabis users had greater association with depression (31.3% vs 13.7%, P=.017) and younger age (56.37 years vs 65.37 years, P<.001). Interestingly, cannabis use was associated with a lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), with 1.38 vs 2.49 (P=.002). Cannabis users were found to have increased postoperative prescription opioid usage (2545.41 POST-MED vs 1379.72 POST-MED, P=.019). Cannabis usage is associated with increased usage of opioids postoperatively, both while in-patient and post-discharge, after posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery.