Literature DB >> 30947010

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Mild-to-Moderate Adult Spinal Deformities: Impact on Intensive Care Unit and Hospital Stay.

Dean Chou1, Gregory Mundis2, Michael Wang3, Kai-Ming Fu4, Christopher Shaffrey5, David Okonkwo6, Adam Kanter6, Robert Eastlack2, Stacie Nguyen7, Vedat Deviren8, Juan Uribe9, Richard Fessler10, Pierce Nunley11, Neel Anand12, Paul Park13, Praveen Mummaneni14.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare circumferential minimally invasive (cMIS) versus open surgeries for mild-to-moderate adult spinal deformity (ASD) with regard to intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital lengths of stay (LOS).
METHODS: A retrospective review of 2 multicenter ASD databases with 426 ASD (sagittal vertical axis <6 cm) surgery patients with 4 or more fusion levels and 2-year follow-up was conducted. ICU stay, LOS, and estimated blood loss (EBL) were compared between open and cMIS surgeries.
RESULTS: Propensity matching resulted in 88 patients (44 cMIS, 44 open). cMIS were older (61 vs. 53 years, P = 0.005). Mean levels fused were 6.5 in cMIS and 7.1 in open (P = 0.368). Preoperative lordosis was higher in open than in cMIS (42.7° vs. 40.9°, P = 0.016), and preoperative visual analog score back pain was greater in open than in cMIS (7 vs. 6.2, P = 0.033). Preoperative and postoperative spinopelvic parameters and coronal Cobb angles were not different. EBL was 534 cc in cMIS and 1211 cc in open (P < 0.001). Transfusions were less in cMIS (27.3% vs. 70.5%, P < 0.001). ICU stay was 0.6 days for cMIS and 1.2 days for open (P = 0.009). Hospital LOS was 7.9 days for cMIS versus 9.6 for open (P = 0.804).
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with mild-to-moderate ASD, cMIS surgery had a significantly lower EBL and shorter ICU stay. Major and minor complication rates were lower in cMIS patients than open patients. Overall LOS was shorter in cMIS patients, but did not reach statistical significance.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Deformity; Length of stay; MIS; Minimally invasive; Scoliosis; Spinal deformity

Year:  2019        PMID: 30947010     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.03.237

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  5 in total

Review 1.  Minimally invasive versus open surgery for the correction of adult degenerative scoliosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Asad M Lak; Nayan Lamba; Farrah Pompilus; Ismaeel Yunusa; Andrella King; Ihtisham Sultan; James Amamoo; Nawaf M Al-Otaibi; Mohammed Alasmari; Iman Zaghloul; Linda Aglio; Christian D Cerecedo-Lopez; Ian Tafel; Timothy R Smith; Rania A Mekary; Hasan Zaidi
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 2.  Less Invasive Pediatric Spinal Deformity Surgery: The Case for Robotic-Assisted Placement of Pedicle Screws.

Authors:  Kyle W Morse; Hila Otremski; Kira Page; Roger F Widmann
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2021-07-08

3.  Development of a decision-making pathway for utilizing standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Dominik Adl Amini; Manuel Moser; Lisa Oezel; Jiaqi Zhu; Jennifer Shue; Andrew A Sama; Frank P Cammisa; Federico P Girardi; Alexander P Hughes
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-10-28       Impact factor: 2.721

4.  Utility of the MISDEF2 Algorithm and Extent of Fusion in Open Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Bo Li; Gregory Hawryluk; Praveen V Mummaneni; Michael Wang; Ratnesh Mehra; Minghao Wang; Darryl Lau; Rory Mayer; Kai-Ming Fu; Dean Chou
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2021-12-31

5.  Is Less Really More? Economic Evaluation of Minimally Invasive Surgery.

Authors:  Andrew S Chung; Alexander Ballatori; Brandon Ortega; Elliot Min; Blake Formanek; John Liu; Patrick Hsieh; Raymond Hah; Jeffrey C Wang; Zorica Buser
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-09-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.