Literature DB >> 30547113

A comparison of narcotic usage and length of post-operative hospital stay in open versus minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screws.

Darshan Vora1, Matthew Kinnard1, David Falk1, Michael Hoy1, Sachin Gupta1, Christine Piper1, Warren Yu1, Faisal Siddiqui2, Joseph O'Brien3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Instrumented lumbar fusion can be accomplished through open or minimally invasive techniques. The focus of this study was to compare perioperative narcotic usage and length of hospital stay between patients undergoing open versus minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS).
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 110 patients who underwent instrumented lumbar fusion over 2 years at our institution. These patients were divided into two groups: those that received open transforaminal interbody fusion (n=69), and those whose surgeries were performed minimally invasively with lateral lumbar transpsoas interbody fusion (LLIF) and percutaneous pedicle screws (n=41). Narcotic usage was recorded for both groups intra-operatively and post-operatively throughout their hospital stay. These values were standardized using an equianalgesia chart.
RESULTS: Average narcotic usage post-operatively was significantly lower for the LLIF group relative to those who underwent open lumbar fusion (278.48 vs. 442.06 mg, P=0.03). The average length of post-operative hospital stay was significantly shorter for patients who underwent LLIF compared to those who had an open procedure (4.10 vs. 6.19 days, P=0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) LLIF had decreased overall use of opioids in the perioperative period and shorter hospital stays when compared to patients who underwent the open transforaminal interbody fusion approach. These findings support pre-existing literature in favor of LLIF MISS with regards to the above stated outcome measures. The long-term benefits of MISS with regards to narcotic usage in spine patients are not yet known.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Minimally invasive surgery; lumbar fusion; narcotics; pain; spine

Year:  2018        PMID: 30547113      PMCID: PMC6261750          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2018.08.04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  23 in total

1.  Equianalgesic dosing of opioids.

Authors:  Hildegarde J Berdine; Suzanne A Nesbit
Journal:  J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother       Date:  2006

2.  Evaluation of cost and length of stay, linked to complications associated with major surgical procedures.

Authors:  M Pirson; F Dehanne; J Van den Bulcke; P Leclercq; D Martins; A De Wever
Journal:  Acta Clin Belg       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 1.264

3.  Short-term and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: is there a difference?

Authors:  Jason S Cheng; Priscilla Park; Hai Le; Lori Reisner; Dean Chou; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.047

4.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Kong Hwee Lee; Wai Mun Yue; William Yeo; Henry Soeharno; Seang Beng Tan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  A comparison of three types of postoperative pain control after posterior lumbar spinal surgery.

Authors:  Meng-Huang Wu; Chung-Hang Wong; Chi-Chien Niu; Tsung-Ting Tsai; Lih-Huei Chen; Wen-Jer Chen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 6.  Opioid conversions in acute care.

Authors:  Asad E Patanwala; Jeremiah Duby; Dustin Waters; Brian L Erstad
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  2007-02-13       Impact factor: 3.154

7.  Perioperative nonopioid agents for pain control in spinal surgery.

Authors:  Anna Rivkin; Mark A Rivkin
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 2.637

8.  Expenditures and health status among adults with back and neck problems.

Authors:  Brook I Martin; Richard A Deyo; Sohail K Mirza; Judith A Turner; Bryan A Comstock; William Hollingworth; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 9.  Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Christina L Goldstein; Kevin Macwan; Kala Sundararajan; Y Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2015-11-13

10.  Minimal invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Arvind G Kulkarni; Hussain Bohra; Abhilash Dhruv; Abhishek Sarraf; Anupreet Bassi; Vishwanath M Patil
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.251

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  State of the art advances in minimally invasive surgery for adult spinal deformity.

Authors:  Ibrahim Hussain; Kai-Ming Fu; Juan S Uribe; Dean Chou; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2020-08-06

2.  Lumbar Laminectomy in the Outpatient Setting Is Associated With Lower 30-Day Complication Rates.

Authors:  Teja R Karukonda; Nickolas Mancini; Austen Katz; Mark P Cote; Isaac L Moss
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-05-20

3.  The usefulness and safety of the simultaneous parallel anterior and posterior combined lumbar spine surgery using intraoperative 3D fluoroscopy-based navigation (SPAPS).

Authors:  Hisanori Ikuma; Tomohiko Hirose; Shinichiro Takao; Kazutoshi Otsuka; Keisuke Kawasaki
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2020-12-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.