scholarly journals Wound infiltration with ropivacaine as an adjuvant to patient controlled analgesia for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kunpeng Li ◽  
Changbin Ji ◽  
Dawei Luo ◽  
Hongyong Feng ◽  
Keshi Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Surgical Trauma ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Patient Controlled Analgesia ◽  
Wound Infiltration ◽  
Rescue Analgesia

Abstract Background Surgical procedure usually causes serious postoperative pain and poor postoperative pain management negatively affects quality of life, function and recovery time. We aimed to investigate the role of wound infiltration with ropivacaine as an adjuvant to patient controlled analgesia (PCA) in postoperative pain control for patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Methods One hundred twelve patients undergoing lumbar fusion were retrospectively reviewed and divided into two groups (ropivacaine and control groups) according to whether received wound infiltration with ropivacaine or not. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, analgesics consumption, number of patients requiring rescue analgesic, hospital duration and incidence of complications were recorded. Surgical trauma was assessed using operation time, intraoperative blood loss and incision length. Results The amount of sufentanil consumption in ropivacaine group at 4 h postoperatively was lower than that of control group (24.5 ± 6.0 μg vs 32.1 ± 7.0 μg, P < 0.001) and similar results were observed at 8, 12, 24, 48 and 72 h postoperatively(P < 0.001). Fewer patients required rescue analgesia within 4 to 8 h postoperatively in ropivacaine group (10/60 vs 19/52, P = 0.017). Length of postoperative hospital durations were shorter in patients receiving ropivacaine infiltration compared to control cohorts (6.9 ± 0.9 days vs 7.4 ± 0.9 days, P = 0.015). The incidence of PONV in ropivacaine group was lower than that in control group (40.4% vs 18.3%, P = 0.01). However, VAS scores were similar in two groups at each follow-up points postoperatively, and no difference was observed(P > 0.05). Conclusion Wound infiltration with ropivacaine effectively reduces postoperative opioid consumption and PONV and may be a useful adjuvant to PCA to improve recovery for patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery.

scholarly journals Does Subcutaneous Infiltration of Liposomal Bupivacaine Following Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery Improve Immediate Postoperative Pain Control?

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Tomov ◽  
Kevin Tou ◽  
Rose Winkel ◽  
Ross Puffer ◽  
Mohamad Bydon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Control Cohort ◽  
Liposomal Bupivacaine ◽  
Single Level ◽  
The Impact

<sec><title>Study Design</title><p>Retrospective case-control study using prospectively collected data.</p></sec><sec><title>Purpose</title><p>Evaluate the impact of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) on postoperative pain management and narcotic use following standardized single-level low lumbar transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).</p></sec><sec><title>Overview of Literature</title><p>Poor pain control after surgery has been linked with decreased pain satisfaction and increased economic burden. Unfortunately, opioids have many limitations and side effects despite being the primary treatment of postoperative pain. LB may be a form of pre-emptive analgesia used to reduce the use of postoperative narcotics as evidence in other studies evaluating its use in single-level microdiskectomies.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>The infiltration of LB subcutaneously during wound closure was performed by a single surgeon beginning in July 2014 for all single-level lumbar TLIF spinal surgeries at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. This cohort was compared against a control cohort of patients who underwent the same surgery by the same surgeon in the preceding 6 months. Statistical analysis was performed on relevant variables including: morphine equivalents of narcotic medication used (primary outcome), length of hospitalization, Visual Analog Scale pain scores, and total time spent on a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>A total of 30 patients were included in this study; 16 were in the intervention cohort and 14 were in the control cohort. The morphine equivalents of intravenous narcotic use postoperatively were significantly less in the LB cohort from day of surgery to postoperative day 3. Although the differences lost their statistical significance, the trend remained for total (oral and intravenous) narcotic consumption to be lower in the LB group. The patients who received the study intervention required an acute pain service consult less frequently (62.5% in LB cohort vs. 78.6% in control cohort). The amount of time spent on a PCA pump in the LB group was 31 hours versus 47 hours in the control group (<italic>p</italic>=0.1506).</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusions</title><p>Local infiltration of LB postoperatively to the subcutaneous tissues during closure following TLIF significantly decreased the amount of intravenous narcotic medication required by patients. Well-powered prospective studies are still needed to determine optimal dosing and confirm benefits of LB on total narcotic consumption and other measures of pain control following major spinal surgery.</p></sec>

The identification of risk factors for increased postoperative pain following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 1304-1310
Author(s):  
Nathaniel W. Jenkins ◽  
James M. Parrish ◽  
Benjamin C. Mayo ◽  
Nadia M. Hrynewycz ◽  
Thomas S. Brundage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion

scholarly journals Impact of local steroid application in a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: results of a prospective, randomized, single-blind trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany E. Haws ◽  
Benjamin Khechen ◽  
Dil V. Patel ◽  
Mundeep S. Bawa ◽  
Junyoung Ahn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Inpatient Stay ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Acute Postoperative Pain ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Patient Reported

OBJECTIVELocal epidural steroid application may be associated with decreased pain and narcotic use in the immediate postoperative period following lumbar discectomy. However, local steroid delivery following lumbar fusion procedures has not been well characterized. This study aims to characterize the effect of local intraoperative depomedrol application on perioperative and postoperative outcomes following a single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF).METHODSA prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was performed. A priori power analysis determined that 86 patients were needed to detect a difference of 1 point in the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score between groups. Ninety-three patients were randomized into depomedrol (DEPO) and no depomedrol (NODEPO) cohorts. Prior to surgical closure, DEPO patients received 1 ml depomedrol (80 mg) applied directly to the surgical site by using a Gelfoam carrier. NODEPO patients received 1 ml saline on the same Gelfoam carrier. Perioperative outcomes including acute postoperative pain and narcotic use were assessed for the duration of inpatient stay. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) questionnaires including VAS back and leg pain scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were administered preoperatively and at 6-week, 12-week, and 6-month follow-up. Outcomes for DEPO and NODEPO cohorts were compared using linear regression controlled for sex.RESULTSOf the 93 patients, 45 (48.4%) were randomized to DEPO and 48 (51.6%) to NODEPO. A greater percentage of DEPO patients were female (53.3% vs 27.1%, p = 0.010). There were no other significant differences in patient baseline characteristics. Similarly, operating time, estimated blood loss, and length of inpatient stay did not differ between cohorts. Patients in the DEPO cohort consumed fewer hourly narcotics on postoperative day 0 (5.3 vs 6.3 oral morphine equivalents/hour, p = 0.034). However, no differences in acute postoperative pain or total narcotics consumption were observed between groups. Preoperative VAS leg scores were statistically different between cohorts (p = 0.027). However, preoperative ODI and VAS back scores did not differ between groups. Additionally, DEPO and NODEPO groups experienced similar improvements in PROs at all postoperative time points.CONCLUSIONSLocal depomedrol use did not lead to decreases in acute postoperative pain or narcotics consumption after MIS TLIF. Additionally, local depomedrol was not associated with postoperative improvements in PROs. The findings of this randomized trial suggest that surgical and clinical outcomes following MIS TLIF may not be impacted by intraoperative application of depomedrol.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT03308084 (clinicaltrials.gov)

scholarly journals Efficacy of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine on postoperative pain after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanxi Wang ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Xiaojun Yu ◽  
Tian Ma ◽  
Mubotu C. Ntambale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Diclofenac Sodium ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Saline Group ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Gelatin Sponge ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine on postoperative pain after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent TLIF in our department between August 2018 and January 2020. Patients were divided to ropivacaine group and saline group. A ropivacaine group whom received gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine during operation, and a saline group whom were intraoperatively administered by gelatin sponge impregnated with saline. The two groups were compared in reference to postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. The consumption of postoperative diclofenac sodium suppository use was also recorded. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were used for functional evaluation at 1 year postoperatively. Result A total of 127 patients were evaluated in this retrospective study. The mean postoperative hospital stay in the ropivacaine group was significantly lower than saline group. The VAS score was significantly lower in patients receiving gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine as compared with patients in saline group on postoperative day 1, 2, 3 and 4. The number of patients who need the administration of diclofenac sodium suppository and the mean consumption of postoperative diclofenac sodium suppository was significantly lower in the ropivacaine group as compared with saline group. Conclusion The application of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine around the nerve root in patients undergoing TLIF can effectively control the postoperative pain and reduce postoperative hospital stay.

Biomechanical evaluation of different asymmetrical posterior stabilization methods for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Schleicher ◽  
Paavo Beth ◽  
Andreas Ottenbacher ◽  
Robert Pflugmacher ◽  
Matti Scholz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Soft Tissues ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Interference Screw ◽  
Surgical Trauma ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Stabilization ◽  
Stabilization Methods ◽  
Significant Difference

Object Beside several other advantages, the transforaminal approach for lumbar interbody fusion offers the possibility of reducing surgical trauma by limiting the approach to only 1 side. This requires posterior stabilization methods, which are applied without the need to damage contralateral muscles and soft tissues. The goal in this study was to compare different posterior stabilization methods for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) biomechanically. Methods Stiffness testing was performed in 8 fresh-frozen human cadaveric lumbar spine motion segments, including the following sequentially tested configurations: 1) native motion segment; 2) TLIF and bilateral pedicle screw (PS) construct; 3) TLIF and ipsilateral PS construct; 4) TLIF and ipsilateral PSs plus contralateral translaminar facet screws according to the Magerl technique; and 5) TLIF and ipsilateral PSs plus contralateral lumbar facet interference screw (LFIS). Results In extension, the unilateral range of motion (uROM) and elastic zone (EZ) were significantly lower than native motion segments for bilateral PS and LFIS. There were no significant differences among the different stabilization methods. In flexion, uROM and EZ were significantly lower than the native segment in the spines treated with bilateral PSs and translaminar facet screws. The LFIS differed from the native segment in EZ only. Again, there were no significant differences between the different posterior stabilization methods. In lateral bending, the EZ of spines treated with uni- and bilateral PS differed significantly. There were no additional significant differences. In rotation, the stiffness values of bilateral PS were significantly higher than native, unilateral PS, and LFIS. The comparison between ipsi- and bilateral PS showed a tendency, but not a significant difference for uROM and EZ. There was no statistically significant evidence that the TLIF method led to an asymmetrical motion behavior in our study. Conclusions Bilateral PS augmentation offers significantly more stability than unilateral PSs in the majority of the test modes. There was no significant difference between the other tested methods. All tested stabilization methods could achieve at least the stability of the native segment.

Do we need a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage to increase the stability of functional spinal unit when comparing unilateral and bilateral fixation?

2018 ◽  
Vol 232 (7) ◽  
pp. 655-664
Author(s):  
Murat Ulutaş ◽  
Mustafa Özkaya ◽  
Onur Yaman ◽  
Teyfik Demir
Keyword(s):  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Axial Compression ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Cage ◽  
Interbody Fusion Cage

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was an alternative to posterior lumbar interbody fusion for decompression surgeries. This study investigates the biomechanical responses of the unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixations with/without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cages under axial compression, flexion, and torsional loads. Ovine vertebrae were used in this study. Cadavers, randomly divided into five, were intact control group, bilateral pedicle screw fixation group, bilateral pedicle screw fixation group with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage, unilateral pedicle screw fixation group, and unilateral pedicle screw fixation group with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage. Axial compression, flexion, and torsion tests were performed on specimens. All study groups provided higher stiffness and yield load values than control group under axial compression. Addition of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage to bilateral fixation increased the stiffness under axial compression. Moreover, additional use of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in unilateral fixation increased the yield load values under axial compression. Control group was the stiffest in flexion test. Placing a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage to both unilateral and bilateral fixations did not significantly change the stiffness values. Additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage increased the yield moment of the bilateral fixation. In torsion test, control group had the highest stiffness and yield torque. The facet joints are the most important parts of the vertebrae on the stability. When comparing the bilateral and unilateral fixations with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion addition, the more facet preserving approach has significantly higher stability under axial compression, flexion, and torsion. Unilateral fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage can be said biomechanically stable and advantageous fixation system because of the advantage on the less facet and soft tissue resection compared to bilateral fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document