2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.wnsx.2022.100120
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Surgery Reduces Length of Hospital Stay and Inpatient Narcotic Use

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the ERAS pathway, a return visit was made to correctly evaluate the patients’ pain after the operation. It is beneficial for wound healing and will speed up recovery if analgesia is given in a preventive, timely, and multimode manner ( 26 ). ERAS has been shown to allow patients to move out of bed sooner ( 27 , 28 ) and reduce the length of stay in hospital ( 29 , 30 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the ERAS pathway, a return visit was made to correctly evaluate the patients’ pain after the operation. It is beneficial for wound healing and will speed up recovery if analgesia is given in a preventive, timely, and multimode manner ( 26 ). ERAS has been shown to allow patients to move out of bed sooner ( 27 , 28 ) and reduce the length of stay in hospital ( 29 , 30 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our quality assessment for spine surgery the 44% [ 15 , 23 , 27 , 29 , 32 38 , 40 – 42 , 46 49 , 51 , 55 , 56 , 61 , 67 , 68 , 70 ] of the studies were rated strong, 25% [ 17 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 28 , 31 , 39 , 43 , 44 , 60 , 62 , 63 , 65 ] were rated moderate, and 32% [ 16 , 19 , 20 , 24 , 26 , 30 , 45 , 50 , 52 54 , 57 59 , 64 , 66 , 69 , 71 ] were rated weak. Methodological weaknesses that led to moderate or weak quality scores often included the lack of a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates, the lack of subjects selected or recruited from the same population, the lack of results evaluation more than once over in time, the lack of blinded assessor and the lack of measurement of potential confounding variables.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…=levels fused, Hb level, pain score, complications Young et al 2021 [ 63 ] Retrospective 243 patients: -Fast-track group ( n = 97, mean age 62 ± 14, 49 females); −Non-fast-track group ( n = 146, mean age 59 ± 13, 66 females) Yes ACDF, PCDF, lumbar decompression, posterior lumbar fusion, lumbar microdiscectomy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5+ NR NR 51 ± 30 h 3 incidental durotomy, 2 surgical site infection 1 instrumentation misplacement requiring operative revision, 1 disc herniation requiring reoperation 30 days ↓Opioid use at day 1 (26 ± 33 vs. 42 ± 409 MMEs) and in opiate-naive patients (16 ± 21 vs. 38 ± 36 MMEs), LOS (51 ± 30 vs. 62 ± 49 h) in fast-track group vs. non-fast-track group. =complications, 30 days readmission, 30 days reoperation time operation Band et al 2022 [ 64 ] Prospective 32 patients: -Fast-track group (n = 16); −Non-fast-track group ( n = 16) Yes Single-level MIS-TLIF for degenerative disease NR diabetes, hypertension NR 1.6 days NR NR NR ↓LOS (1.6 vs. 2.4 days), opioid consumption (51 mg MME vs. 320 mg MME) in fast-track group vs. non-fast-track group Chen et al 2022 [ 65 ] Retrospective 207 patients: -Fast-track group ( n = 112, mean age 52.86 ± 11.55, 49% females); −Non-fast-track group (n = 95, mean age 54.77 ± 11.66, 60% females) Yes Short-level (1- or 2-level) primary open PLIF for lumbar disc herniation, lumbar stenosis, and spondylolisthesis NR NR NR 10.44 ± 3.07 Urinary retention (3.57%), constipation (10.71%), nausea and vomiting (5.36%), wound infection, venous thrombosis, fever, urinary tract infection, paravertebral hematoma, delirium 30-day readmission rate (4.46%), 30-day reoperation rate (2.68%) 30 days ↓LOS (10.44 ± 3.07 vs. 15.29 ± 3.57 days), off-bed time (7.53 ± 2.80 vs. 13.82 ± 3.44 days), complications (28.57% vs. 42.11%), urinary retention (3.57% vs. 11.58%), constipation (10.71% vs. 22.11%), nausea and vomiting (5.36% vs. 13.68%), drainage tube removal time (2 ± 0.65 vs. 3.53 ± 0.63), catheter removal time (1.79 ± 0.68 vs. 3.97 ± 1.15), surgical drainage at day 1–3 (165.20 ± 40.85 vs. 351.31 ± 32.49), intraoperative blood loss (126.61 ± 34.49 vs. 145.24 ± 22.52), financial cost (57,905.94 ± 12,463.50 vs. 62,683.68 ± 12,583.34 yuan), opioid consumption (18.98 ± 11.40 vs. 36.89 ± 15.30 mg), VAS score at day 3 (2.67 ± 1.02,vs. 3.51 ± 0.88), ODI score at day 3 (37.43 ± 10.22 vs. 41.19 ± 8.29), and ↑satisfaction (89.29% vs. 77.89%) in fast...…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations