No abstract

No abstract

Combinations of various nonopioid analgesics have been used to decrease pain and opioid consumption postoperatively allowing for faster recovery, improved patient satisfaction, and decreased morbidity. These opioid alternatives include acetaminophen, NSAIDs, COX-2 specific inhibitors, gabapentinoids, local anesthetics, dexamethasone, and ketamine. Each of these drugs presents its own advantages and disadvantages which can make it difficult to implement universally. In addition, ambiguous administration guidelines for these nonopioid analgesics lead to a difficult implementation of standardization protocols in spine surgery. A focus on the efficacy of different pain modalities specifically within spine surgery was implemented to assist with this standardized protocol endeavor and to educate surgeons on limiting opioid prescribing in the postoperative period. The purpose of this review article is to investigate the various opioid sparing medications that have been used to decrease morbidity in spine surgery and better assist surgeons in managing postoperative pain. Methods. A narrative review of published literature was conducted using the search function in Google scholar and PubMed was used to narrow down search criteria. The keywords “analgesics,” “spine,” and “pain” were used.

Study Design Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Objective Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a common complication following lumbar spine surgery (LSS) and timely recognition is imperative to avoid long-term consequences. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to systematically review the literature in order to identify risk factors associated with POUR after LSS. Methods In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of the literature was performed using Pubmed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE database for articles on POUR following LSS. A meta-analysis was performed comparing patients with and without POUR; and the factors associated with this adverse event were analyzed. The pooled data were reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI; P < .05). Heterogeneity among the studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic. Results The meta-analysis included 10 studies compromised of 30,300 patients. Based on our analysis, patients who were male, were older in age, underwent instrumented fusion, had diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, or benign prostatic hypertrophy had significantly higher risk of developing POUR. Additionally, patients in who developed POUR had significantly longer surgical times and higher volumes of intra-operative fluid administration, as compared with non-POUR patients. The POUR patients also had a significantly higher association with urinary tract infection. Prior surgery, BMI, length of stay, and smoking status did not reveal any statistical association with POUR. Conclusions Risk factors associated with POUR following LSS include male gender, older age, longer surgical times, fusion procedures, larger volumes of intraoperative infusions, and associated comorbidities like DM, CAD, and BPH.

No abstract