No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVEEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) proposes a multimodal, evidence-based approach to perioperative care. Thanks to the improvement in care protocols and the fluidity of the patient pathway, the first goal of ERAS is the improvement of surgical outcomes and patient experience, with a final impact on a reduction in the hospital length of stay (LOS). The implementation of ERAS in spinal surgery is in the early stages. The authors report on their initial experience in applying an ERAS program to several degenerative spinal fusion procedures.METHODSThe authors selected two 2-year periods: the first from before any implementation of ERAS principles (pre-ERAS years 2012–2013) and the second corresponding to a period when the paradigm was applied widely (post-ERAS years 2016–2017). Patient groups in these periods were retrospectively compared according to three degenerative conditions requiring fusion: anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), and posterior lumbar fusion. Data were collected on patient demographics, operative and perioperative data, LOSs, 90-day readmissions, and morbidity. ERAS-trained nurses were involved to support patients at each pre-, intra-, and postoperative step with the help of a mobile application (app). A satisfaction survey was included in the app.RESULTSThe pre-ERAS group included 1563 patients (159 ALIF, 749 ACDF, and 655 posterior fusion), and the post-ERAS group included 1920 patients (202 ALIF, 612 ACDF, and 1106 posterior fusion). The mean LOS was significantly shorter in the post-ERAS group than in the pre-ERAS group for all three conditions. It was reduced from 6.06 ± 1.1 to 3.33 ± 0.8 days for the ALIF group (p < 0.001), from 3.08 ± 0.9 to 1.3 ± 0.7 days for the ACDF group (p < 0.001), and from 6.7 ± 4.8 to 4.8 ± 2.3 days for posterior fusion cases (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in overall complications between the two periods for the ALIF (11.9% pre-ERAS vs 11.4% post-ERAS, p = 0.86) and ACDF (6.0% vs 8.2%, p = 0.12) cases, but they decreased significantly for lumbar fusions (14.8% vs 10.9%, p = 0.02). Regarding satisfaction with overall care among 808 available responses, 699 patients (86.5%) were satisfied or very satisfied, and regarding appreciation of the mobile e-health app in the perceived optimization of care management, 665 patients (82.3%) were satisfied or very satisfied.CONCLUSIONSThe introduction of the ERAS approach at the authors’ institution for spinal fusion for three studied conditions resulted in a significant decrease in LOS without causing increased postoperative complications. Patient satisfaction with overall management, upstream organization of hospitalization, and the use of e-health was high. According to the study results, which are consistent with those in other studies, the whole concept of ERAS (primarily reducing complications and pain, and then reducing LOS) seems applicable to spinal surgery.

No abstract

Overall patient satisfaction was excellent. Mobile app provides an effective useful tool for outpatient spine surgery monitoring and minimizes the need for in-person visits for postoperative patients.

Background. Decompressive craniectomy can be proposed in the management of severe traumatic brain injury. Current studies report mixed results, preventing any clear conclusions on the place of decompressive craniectomy in traumatology. Methods. The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the results of all decompressive craniectomies performed between 2005 and 2011 for refractory intracranial hypertension after severe traumatic brain injury. Sixty patients were included. Clinical parameters (Glasgow scale, pupillary examination) and radiological findings (Marshall CT scale) were analysed. Complications, clinical outcome, and early and long-term Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) were evaluated after surgery. Finally, the predictive value of preoperative parameters to guide the clinician's decision to perform craniectomy was studied. Results. Craniectomy was unilateral in 58 cases and the mean bone flap area was 100 cm2. Surgical complications were observed in 6.7% of cases. Mean followup was 30 months and a favourable outcome was obtained in 50% of cases. The initial Glasgow Scale was the only statistically significant predictive factor for long-term outcome. Conclusion. Despite the discordant results in the literature, this study demonstrates that decompressive craniectomy is useful for the management of refractory intracranial hypertension after severe traumatic brain injury.