Does prophylactic use of topical gelatin-thrombin matrix sealant affect postoperative drainage volume and hematoma formation following microendoscopic spine surgery?: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masanari Takami ◽  
Munehito Yoshida ◽  
Akihito Minamide ◽  
Hiroshi Hashizume ◽  
Yasutsugu Yukawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Drainage Volume ◽  
Hematoma Formation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Postoperative Drainage ◽  
Prophylactic Use

Spinal Cord Stimulation versus Repeated Lumbosacral Spine Surgery for Chronic Pain: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Neurosurgery ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard B. North ◽  
David H. Kidd ◽  
Farrokh Farrokhi ◽  
Steven A. Piantadosi
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Work Status ◽  
Lumbosacral Spine ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Persistent or recurrent radicular pain after lumbosacral spine surgery is often associated with nerve root compression and is treated by repeated operation or, as a last resort, by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to test our hypothesis that SCS is more likely than reoperation to result in a successful outcome by standard measures of pain relief and treatment outcome, including subsequent use of health care resources. METHODS: For an average of 3 years postoperatively, disinterested third-party interviewers followed 50 patients selected for reoperation by standard criteria and randomized to SCS or reoperation. If the results of the randomized treatment were unsatisfactory, patients could cross over to the alternative. Success was based on self-reported pain relief and patient satisfaction. Crossover to the alternative procedure was an outcome measure. Use of analgesics, activities of daily living, and work status were self-reported. RESULTS: Among 45 patients (90%) available for follow-up, SCS was more successful than reoperation (9 of 19 patients versus 3 of 26 patients, P < 0.01). Patients initially randomized to SCS were significantly less likely to cross over than were those randomized to reoperation (5 of 24 patients versus 14 of 26 patients, P = 0.02). Patients randomized to reoperation required increased opiate analgesics significantly more often than those randomized to SCS (P < 0.025). Other measures of activities of daily living and work status did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: SCS is more effective than reoperation as a treatment for persistent radicular pain after lumbosacral spine surgery, and in the great majority of patients, it obviates the need for reoperation.

scholarly journals Minimal Access vs. Open Spine Surgery in Patients With Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression - A One–Center Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (10) ◽  
pp. 5673-5678
Author(s):  
SØREN SCHMIDT MORGEN ◽  
LARS VALENTIN HANSEN ◽  
TURE KARBO ◽  
ROBERT SVARDAL-STELMER ◽  
MARTIN GEHRCHEN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Spinal Cord Compression ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cord Compression ◽  
Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression ◽  
Minimal Access ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document