Literature DB >> 29155341

Outpatient elective posterior lumbar fusions appear to be safely considered for appropriately selected patients.

Patawut Bovonratwet1, Taylor D Ottesen1, Raj J Gala1, Daniel R Rubio1, Nathaniel T Ondeck1, Ryan P McLynn1, Jonathan N Grauer2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: There has been growing interest in performing posterior lumbar fusions (PLFs) in the outpatient setting to optimize patient satisfaction and reduce cost. Although still done in only a small percentage of cases, this has been more possible because of advances in surgical techniques and anesthesia. However, data on the perioperative course of outpatient compared with inpatient PLF in a large sample size are scarce.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare perioperative complications between outpatient and inpatient PLF in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: A retrospective cohort comparison study was carried out. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients undergoing PLF with or without interbody fusion from the 2005 to 2015 NSQIP database comprised the sample. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were postoperative complications within 30 days and readmission within 30 days.
METHODS: Patients who underwent PLF with or without interbody fusion were identified in the 2005-2015 NSQIP database. Outpatient procedures were defined as cases that had hospital length of stay (LOS)=0 days, whereas inpatient procedures were defined as LOS=1-30 days. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, and procedural variables (inclusion of interbody fusion, instrumentation, and number of levels fused) were compared between the two cohorts. Propensity score-matched comparisons were then performed for postoperative complications and 30-day readmissions between the two groups.
RESULTS: The current study included 360 outpatient and 36,610 inpatient PLF cases. After propensity matching to control potential confounding factors, statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in postoperative adverse events other than significantly lower blood transfusions in the outpatient group (2.78% vs. 10.83%, p<.001). Notably, the rate of readmissions was not different between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the lack of differences in rates of most perioperative complications and 30-day readmissions between the outpatient and inpatient cohorts, it seems that outpatient PLF may be appropriately considered for select patients. However, extremely careful patient selection should be exercised.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complications; NSQIP; Outpatient; Posterior lumbar fusion; Readmissions; Same-day discharge

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29155341     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.11.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  10 in total

1.  Outpatient Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Using Multimodal Analgesic Management in the Ambulatory Surgery Setting.

Authors:  James M Parrish; Nathaniel W Jenkins; Thomas S Brundage; Nadia M Hrynewycz; Jeffrey Podnar; Asokumar Buvanendran; Kern Singh
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12-29

2.  Ambulatory spine surgery.

Authors:  Michael C Gerling; Steven D Hale; Claire White-Dzuro; Katherine E Pierce; Sara A Naessig; Waleed Ahmad; Peter G Passias
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-09

Review 3.  Current trends in ambulatory spine surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Edward M DelSole; Heeren S Makanji; Mark F Kurd
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-09

4.  Increased hip arthroscopy operative duration is an independent risk factor for overnight hospital admission.

Authors:  Patawut Bovonratwet; Venkat Boddapati; Benedict U Nwachukwu; Daniel D Bohl; Michael C Fu; Shane J Nho
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Complication avoidance and management in ambulatory spine surgery.

Authors:  Evan D Sheha; Peter B Derman
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-09

Review 6.  Lumbar spinal fusion in the outpatient setting: an update on management, surgical approaches and planning.

Authors:  Bryce A Basques; Joseph Ferguson; Kyle N Kunze; Frank M Phillips
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-09

7.  Recoup From Home? Comparison of Relative Cost Savings for ACDF, Lumbar Discectomy, and Short Segment Fusion Performed in the Inpatient Versus Outpatient Setting.

Authors:  Christopher M Mikhail; Murray Echt; Stephen R Selverian; Samuel K Cho
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2021-04

8.  Underweight patients are an often under looked "At risk" population after undergoing posterior cervical spine surgery.

Authors:  Taylor D Ottesen; Paul S Bagi; Rohil Malpani; Anoop R Galivanche; Arya G Varthi; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2020-12-10

9.  Correlation of Patient Reported Satisfaction With Adverse Events Following Elective Posterior Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Single Institution Analysis.

Authors:  Michael R Mercier; Anoop R Galivanche; Ryan McLean; Alexander J Kammien; Courtney S Toombs; Daniel R Rubio; Arya G Varthi; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2022-08-13

10.  Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Morbidity Between Lumbar Disc Arthroplasty Performed in the Inpatient and Outpatient Settings Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP Dataset.

Authors:  Austen David Katz; Dean Cosmo Perfetti; Alan Job; Max Willinger; Jeffrey Goldstein; Daniel Kiridly; Peter Olivares; Alexander Satin; David Essig
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-07-31
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.