Cargando…
Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery
STUDY DESIGN: Single-center retrospective cohort study OBJECTIVES: To evaluate inpatient MME administration associated with different lumbar spinal fusion surgeries METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of Grade I or II spondylolisthesis, stenosis, degenerative disc disease or pars def...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10538336/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35379014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682221089244 |
_version_ | 1785113302365372416 |
---|---|
author | Zabat, Michelle A. Mottole, Nicole A. Ashayeri, Kimberly Norris, Zoe A. Patel, Hershil Sissman, Ethan Balouch, Eaman Maglaras, Constance Protopsaltis, Themistocles S. Buckland, Aaron J. Fischer, Charla R. |
author_facet | Zabat, Michelle A. Mottole, Nicole A. Ashayeri, Kimberly Norris, Zoe A. Patel, Hershil Sissman, Ethan Balouch, Eaman Maglaras, Constance Protopsaltis, Themistocles S. Buckland, Aaron J. Fischer, Charla R. |
author_sort | Zabat, Michelle A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Single-center retrospective cohort study OBJECTIVES: To evaluate inpatient MME administration associated with different lumbar spinal fusion surgeries METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of Grade I or II spondylolisthesis, stenosis, degenerative disc disease or pars defect who underwent one-level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) or one-level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) or Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) through traditional MIS, anterior-posterior position or single position approaches between L2-S1. Outcome measures included patient demographics, surgical procedure and approach, perioperative clinical characteristics, incidence of ileus and inpatient MME. Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA with a post-hoc Tukey Test and Kruskal–Wallis Test with post-hoc Mann–Whitney test. MME was calculated as per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and previous literature. Significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Mean age differed significantly between MIS TLIF (55.6 ± 12.5 years) and all other groups (Open TLIF 57.1 ± 12.5, SP ALIF/LLIF 57.9 ± 9.9, TP ALIF/LLIF 50.9 ± 12.7, Open ALIF/LLIF 58.4 ± 15.5). MIS TLIF had the shortest LOS compared to all groups except SP ALIF/LLIF. Total MME was significantly different between MIS TLIF and Open ALIF/LLIF (172.5 MME vs 261.1 MME, P = .044) as well as MIS TLIF and TP ALIF/LLIF (172.5 MME vs 245.4 MME, P = .009). There were no significant differences in MME/hour and incidence of ileus between all groups. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing MIS TLIF had lower inpatient opioid intake compared to TP and SP ALIF/LLIF, as well as shorter LOS compared to all groups except SP ALIF/LLIF. Thus, it appears that the advantages of minimally invasive surgery are seen in minimally invasive TLIFs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10538336 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105383362023-09-29 Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery Zabat, Michelle A. Mottole, Nicole A. Ashayeri, Kimberly Norris, Zoe A. Patel, Hershil Sissman, Ethan Balouch, Eaman Maglaras, Constance Protopsaltis, Themistocles S. Buckland, Aaron J. Fischer, Charla R. Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Single-center retrospective cohort study OBJECTIVES: To evaluate inpatient MME administration associated with different lumbar spinal fusion surgeries METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of Grade I or II spondylolisthesis, stenosis, degenerative disc disease or pars defect who underwent one-level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) or one-level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) or Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) through traditional MIS, anterior-posterior position or single position approaches between L2-S1. Outcome measures included patient demographics, surgical procedure and approach, perioperative clinical characteristics, incidence of ileus and inpatient MME. Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA with a post-hoc Tukey Test and Kruskal–Wallis Test with post-hoc Mann–Whitney test. MME was calculated as per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and previous literature. Significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Mean age differed significantly between MIS TLIF (55.6 ± 12.5 years) and all other groups (Open TLIF 57.1 ± 12.5, SP ALIF/LLIF 57.9 ± 9.9, TP ALIF/LLIF 50.9 ± 12.7, Open ALIF/LLIF 58.4 ± 15.5). MIS TLIF had the shortest LOS compared to all groups except SP ALIF/LLIF. Total MME was significantly different between MIS TLIF and Open ALIF/LLIF (172.5 MME vs 261.1 MME, P = .044) as well as MIS TLIF and TP ALIF/LLIF (172.5 MME vs 245.4 MME, P = .009). There were no significant differences in MME/hour and incidence of ileus between all groups. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing MIS TLIF had lower inpatient opioid intake compared to TP and SP ALIF/LLIF, as well as shorter LOS compared to all groups except SP ALIF/LLIF. Thus, it appears that the advantages of minimally invasive surgery are seen in minimally invasive TLIFs. SAGE Publications 2022-04-05 2023-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10538336/ /pubmed/35379014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682221089244 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Zabat, Michelle A. Mottole, Nicole A. Ashayeri, Kimberly Norris, Zoe A. Patel, Hershil Sissman, Ethan Balouch, Eaman Maglaras, Constance Protopsaltis, Themistocles S. Buckland, Aaron J. Fischer, Charla R. Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery |
title | Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery |
title_full | Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery |
title_fullStr | Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery |
title_short | Comparative Analysis of Inpatient Opioid Consumption Between Different Surgical Approaches Following Single Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery |
title_sort | comparative analysis of inpatient opioid consumption between different surgical approaches following single level lumbar spinal fusion surgery |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10538336/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35379014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682221089244 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zabatmichellea comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT mottolenicolea comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT ashayerikimberly comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT norriszoea comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT patelhershil comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT sissmanethan comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT baloucheaman comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT maglarasconstance comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT protopsaltisthemistocless comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT bucklandaaronj comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery AT fischercharlar comparativeanalysisofinpatientopioidconsumptionbetweendifferentsurgicalapproachesfollowingsinglelevellumbarspinalfusionsurgery |