Intra- versus postoperative initiation of pain control via a thoracic epidural catheter for lumbar spinal fusion surgery

[Anesthesia in spinal surgery]

Over the past 20 years improvements in surgical techniques and perioperative patient care have led to a considerable increase in surgical procedures of the spine worldwide. Therefore, the spectrum was extended from minimally invasive procedures up to complex operations over several segments of the spinal column with high loss of blood and complex perioperative management. This article presents the principal pillars of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative management relating to spinal surgery. Furthermore, procedure-specific features, such as airway management in cervical spine instability or implementation of intraoperative neuromonitoring are dealt with in detail.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in spine surgery

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are a set of interventions which are carried out in the preoperative and perioperative period. They are aimed to decrease the harmful effects of surgery on the body and help the patient recover better post-surgery. The effectiveness of ERAS has been well established in various other surgical specialities. Earlier spine surgery was thought to be very complex for application of ERAS protocols. However, this has changed over the last decade with (ERAS) protocols gaining widespread popularity in spine surgery. Initial studies involving ERAS in spine surgery were limited to lumbar spine. However, over the years the horizon of ERAS has expanded to include anterior cervical surgeries, spine deformity, spinal tumors and spine surgery in the elderly. ERAS has been shown to reduce the length of hospital stay, overall hospital costs, opioid consumption in perioperative and postoperative period and to lower complication rates in spine surgery. In this narrative review, we discuss various aspects of ERAS in spine surgery including the benefits of ERAS in spine surgery, the various components of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative measures of ERAS protocol.

Bilateral lumbar ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus local anaesthetic infiltration for perioperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain. We examined the analgesic efficacy of bilateral lumbar ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with ropivacaine compared with local infiltration.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective lumbar arthrodesis were randomly divided into two groups. Control group received 0.375 % ropivacaine 40 ml through the wound, and ESPB group received preoperative bilateral ESPB with 0.375 % ropivacaine 40 ml. Primary outcome was postoperative pain intensity at rest using a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes included difference in pain intensity between pre-intervention and defined timepoints, total amount of opioid analgesic requested by the patients at the same timepoints, the incidence of any adverse event, and the length of hospital stay (LOS) after surgery.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled in the study. After surgery we detected a NRS value of 1.9 ± 1.5 in ESPB group and 5.9 ± 1.6 in Control group (p<0.001). About the opioid consumption we found a total sufentanil tablets consumption of 17 ± six and 10 ± three at 48h for Control group and ESPB group, respectively (p<0.001). Concerning LOS, 30 (100%) patients in the control group and 22(73.3%) in ESPB group were discharged after 72 hours (p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral ultrasound-guided ESPB offers improved postoperative analgesia compared with local infiltration in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Lumbar Spinal Surgery With Regional Anesthesia: A Retrospective Review

Background

In the USA, spinal fusion surgery incurs the highest hospital cost. Despite the recent advances in the application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in these surgeries, the efficacy of these protocols in improving the perioperative outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective review as a quality improvement (QI) project to analyze the efficacy of the ERAS protocol with intraoperative modified thoracolumbar interfascial plane (mTLIP) block to determine whether these interventions reduce the length of stay (LOS) and opioid requirements during the postoperative period.

Methods

Retrospective reviews of adult patients (>18 yrs) who underwent elective lumbar spinal fusion or laminectomy at our institute were reviewed. Patients were administered oral gabapentin and acetaminophen preoperatively. Prior to incision, an mTLIP block was performed using liposomal bupivacaine. Intraoperatively, ketamine, ketorolac, and tranexamic acid were administered. Postoperative, pain control was treated with scheduled acetaminophen, ketorolac, and low-dose ketamine infusion. Hydromorphone and oxycodone were administered for breakthrough pain. Patients who underwent a similar procedure without ERAS protocol were chosen as controls to assess the efficacy of ERAS protocol. Data pertaining to patient demographics, operative and perioperative use of analgesics, LOS, 90-day readmissions, and morbidity were collected. Patients who underwent laminectomy and spinal fusion surgery were analyzed separately

Results

A total of 65 patients were identified; laminectomy (n- 24), spinal fusion surgery (n-41). In the laminectomy patients, treatment group (n-12) and the control group (n-12). Treatment group receiving the ERAS protocol with the regional anesthesia via the mTLIP (n= 12) opioid requirement was reduced by 51.42% [P = 0.03], and LOS was reduced by 2.04 days [P = 0.01] [0.75 days vs. 2.79 days]). In the spinal fusion patients, treatment group (n-15) and control group (n-26). Treatment group receiving the ERAS protocol with the use of regional anesthesia via the mTLIP group (n= 15), opioid requirement was reduced by 38.33% [P = 0.04]. No difference in LOS was observed at 5.4 days vs. 4.88 days (P = 0.28).

Conclusion

ERAS protocol in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery incorporated the use of regional anesthesia via the mTLIP block, we observed there is a statistically significant reduction in the LOS for lumbar laminectomy and a significant reduction in opioid administration for lumbar laminectomies and spinal fusion surgery.

Pain management after complex spine surgery: A systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations

BACKGROUND

Complex spinal procedures are associated with intense pain in the postoperative period. Adequate peri-operative pain management has been shown to correlate with improved outcomes including early ambulation and early discharge.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after complex spine surgery.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

A systematic review using the PROcedure SPECific postoperative pain managemenT methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language from January 2008 to April 2020 assessing postoperative pain after complex spine surgery using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Out of 111 eligible studies identified, 31 randomised controlled trials and four systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Pre-operative and intra-operative interventions that improved postoperative pain were paracetamol, cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 specific-inhibitors or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous ketamine infusion and regional analgesia techniques including epidural analgesia using local anaesthetics with or without opioids. Limited evidence was found for local wound infiltration, intrathecal and epidural opioids, erector spinae plane block, thoracolumbar interfascial plane block, intravenous lidocaine, dexmedetomidine and gabapentin.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic regimen for complex spine surgery should include pre-operative or intra-operative paracetamol and COX-2 specific inhibitors or NSAIDs, continued postoperatively with opioids used as rescue analgesics. Other recommendations are intra-operative ketamine and epidural analgesia using local anaesthetics with or without opioids. Although there is procedure-specific evidence in favour of intra-operative methadone, it is not recommended as it was compared with shorter-acting opioids and due to its limited safety profile. Furthermore, the methadone studies did not use non-opioid analgesics, which should be the primary analgesics to ultimately reduce overall opioid requirements, including methadone. Further qualitative randomised controlled trials are required to confirm the efficacy and safety of these recommended analgesics on postoperative pain relief.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a review article.

METHODS

Under the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.

The Efficacy of Tranexamic Acid on Blood Loss from Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of tranexamic acid to control blood loss from lumbar spinal fusion surgery remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of tranexamic acid on blood loss from lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Library databases through March 2018 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of tranexamic acid on blood loss from lumbar spinal fusion surgery. A meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials involving 394 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control group for lumbar spinal fusion surgery, tranexamic acid significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (standard mean difference [Std. MD] -0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.58 to -0.06; P = 0.02), and drain (Std. MD -1.12; 95% CI -1.59 to -0.64; P < 0.00001) but had no remarkable influence on hemoglobin (Std. MD -0.10; 95% CI -0.56 to 0.37; P = 0.68) and hematocrit (Std. MD -0.34; 95% CI -1.08 to 0.40; P = 0.37) 1 day after surgery and transfusion (risk ratio 0.44; 95% CI 0.16-1.19; P = 0.11). Duration of hospitalization was found to be shortened by tranexamic acid (Std. MD -1.00; 95% CI -1.68 to -0.32; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Tranexamic acid has an important ability to decrease intraoperative blood loss and hospitalization for lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Intravenous glucocorticoid for pain control after spinal fusion: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative pain was a common symptom after spinal surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether intravenous glucocorticoids has a beneficial role in reducing pain in patients following spinal fusion.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Google databases, from inception to March 2, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that comparing intravenous glucocorticoids with control treatment for spinal fusion were included. A meta-analysis was performed to generate pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for discontinuous outcomes (the occurrence of nausea and infection) and continuous outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] at 12, 24, and 48 h; total morphine consumption; and the length of hospital stay), respectively.

RESULTS

Eight clinical trials involving 918 patients (glucocorticoid group = 449, control group = 469) were finally included in this meta-analysis. Compared with control, intravenous glucocorticoids had significantly reduced VAS at 12, 24, and 48 hours with statistically significance (P < .05). Intravenous glucocorticoids can decrease the occurrence of nausea (RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.62, P = .000; I = 0.0%) and the length of hospital stay. No difference was noticed in the occurrence of infection between glucocorticoids intravenous and control (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence indicated that intravenous glucocorticoids have a beneficial role in decreasing early pain and the occurrence of nausea after spinal fusion surgery. In consideration of the limitation in current meta-analysis, more high-quality RCTs were needed to identify the optimal dose of glucocorticoids in spinal fusion patients.