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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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