No abstract

Background: Information regarding the treatment of high-grade spondylolisthesis (HGS) in adults has been previously described; however, previous descriptions of the evaluation and surgical management of HGS do not represent more recent and now established approaches. The purpose of the current review is to discuss current concepts in the evaluation and management of patients with HGS. Methods: Literature review. Results: HGS is diagnosed in up to 11.3% of adults with spondylolisthesis and typically presents as nonspecific lower back pain. Regarding evaluation, a thorough history and physical examination should be performed, which may help predict the presence of HGS. Diagnostic imaging, and specifically the use of spino-pelvic parameters, are now commonly implicated in guiding treatment course and prognosis. When surgical intervention is indicated, surgical approaches include in situ fusion variations, reduction and partial reduction with fusion, and vertebrectomy. Although the majority of studies suggest improvements with these approaches, the literature is limited by a low level of evidence with regards to the superiority of one technique when compared with others. Conclusions: HGS is a unique cause of low back pain in adults that carries considerable morbidity, but rarely presents with neurologic symptoms. Although the definitions, classifications, and methods of diagnosis of this spinal deformity have been established and accepted, the ideal surgical management of this deformity remains highly debated. Fusion in situ techniques are often technically easier to perform and provide lower risk of neurologic complications, whereas reduction and fusion techniques offer greater restoration of global spino-pelvic balance. Preoperative spinopelvic parameters may have utility in assisting in procedural selection; however, future, higher-quality and longer-term studies are warranted to determine the optimal surgical intervention among the widely available techniques currently used, and to better define the indications for these interventions.

Background: Patients who undergo hip arthroscopy inevitably experience pain postoperatively; however, the efficacy and safety of adjunct analgesia to prevent or reduce pain are not well-understood. Purpose: To perform a comprehensive qualitative synthesis of available randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of adjunct analgesia on postoperative (1) pain, (2) opioid use, and (3) length of stay (LOS) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: PubMed, OVID/MEDLINE, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials were queried for studies pertaining to analgesia interventions for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. Two authors independently assessed article bias and eligibility. Data pertaining to changes in pain scores, additional analgesia requirements, length of hospital stay, and complications were extracted and qualitatively reported. Network meta-analyses were constructed to depict mean pain, opioid use, and LOS among the 3 analgesia categories (blocks, local infiltration analgesia, and celecoxib). Results: Fourteen level 1 studies were included; 12 (85.7%) reported pain reductions in the immediate and perioperative period after hip arthroscopy. Of the 7 studies that assessed an intervention (2 celecoxib, 1 fascia iliaca block, 1 lumbar plexus block, 1 femoral nerve block, 1 intra-articular bupivacaine, 1 extracapsular bupivacaine) versus placebo, more than half reported that patients who received an intervention consumed significantly fewer opioids postoperatively than patients who received placebo (lowest P value = .0006). Of the same 7 studies, 2 reported significantly shortened LOS with interventions, while 4 reported no statistically significant difference in LOS and 1 did not report LOS as an outcome. Conclusion: The majority of studies concerning adjunct analgesia for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy suggest benefits in pain reduction early in the postoperative period. There is mild evidence that adjunct analgesia reduces postoperative opioid use and currently inconclusive evidence that it reduces length of hospital stay. Furthermore, it appears that local infiltration analgesia may provide the greatest benefits in reductions in pain and opioid consumption. We recommend the use of adjunct analgesia in appropriately selected patients undergoing hip arthroscopy without contraindication who are at a high risk of severe postoperative pain.

3.

No abstract