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.

Efficacy of Gelatin Sponge Impregnated with Ropivacaine on Postoperative Pain After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparative Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanxi Wang ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Xiaojun Yu ◽  
Tian Ma ◽  
Jiyuan Yan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Diclofenac Sodium ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Saline Group ◽  
Gelatin Sponge ◽  
Functional Score ◽  
Functional Evaluation ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to investigated the efficacy of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine on postoperative pain after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases.Methods A total of 127 patients were evaluated in this retrospective study. All patients underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Based on whether they were administered by gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine or saline during operation, patients were divided into ropivacaine group or saline group. The two groups were compared in reference to bedridden period, hospital stay, postoperative complications, visual analog scale (VAS) scores and functional score. The consumption of postoperative diclofenac sodium suppository use was also recorded. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores were used for functional evaluation at 1 year postoperatively. Results The mean bedridden period and hospital day in the ropivacaine group were 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 suppositor 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 is a safe and effective method, which can effectively control the postoperative pain and promote the functional recovery of patients.

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>

scholarly journals Preliminary Results of Expandable Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cages

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-40
Author(s):  
Kyriakos Kitsopoulos ◽  
Bernd Wiedenhoefer ◽  
Stefan Hemmer ◽  
Christoph Fleege ◽  
Mohammad Arabmotlagh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Life Outcomes ◽  
Disc Disease ◽  
Cage Subsidence ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Expandable Titanium Cage ◽  
Segmental Lordosis

Background: Compared with static cages, expandable cages for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF), are thought to require less posterior bony removal and nerve root retraction. They may allow the creation of a greater lordotic angle and lordosis restoration. Objective: This study investigated whether TLIF using an expandable lordotic interbody cage facilitates an improvement in both segmental lordosis and the restoration of intradiscal height. Methods: A total of 32 patients with 40 operated segments underwent TLIF surgery for lumbar degenerative disc disease and were consecutively included in this prospective observational study. Of those patients, 25 received monosegmental treatment, six were treated bisegmentally, and one was treated trisegmentally. All patients were assessed clinically and radiographically preoperatively, as well as one week, six months, and two years postoperatively. Results: Two patients required revision for screw loosening and pseudarthrosis. In four patients, the endplate was violated intraoperatively due to cage placement. Postoperatively, cage subsidence was observed in four patients. Significant improvement in the mean degree of spondylolisthesis was noted at the two-year mark. Mean segmental lordosis improved postoperatively. A significant increase in mean disc height of the treated segment was also found. Overall, with the exception of pain, no significant clinical or radiographic changes were reported between the first postoperative week and the two-year year follow-up mark. The mean pain, functional, and quality of life outcomes improved significantly from the preoperative to postoperative period, with no deterioration between six months and two years. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that favorable outcomes can be achieved by using an expandable titanium cage in TLIF procedures.

Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini–open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 560-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjay S. Dhall ◽  
Michael Y. Wang ◽  
Praveen V. Mummaneni
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Open Group ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mini Open

Object As minimally invasive approaches gain popularity in spine surgery, clinical outcomes and effectiveness of mini–open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) compared with traditional open TLIF have yet to be established. The authors retrospectively compared the outcomes of patients who underwent mini–open TLIF with those who underwent open TLIF. Methods Between 2003 and 2006, 42 patients underwent TLIF for degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis; 21 patients underwent mini–open TLIF and 21 patients underwent open TLIF. The mean age in each group was 53 years, and there was no statistically significant difference in age between the groups (p = 0.98). Data were collected perioperatively. In addition, complications, length of stay (LOS), fusion rate, and modified Prolo Scale (mPS) scores were recorded at routine intervals. Results No patient was lost to follow-up. The mean follow-up was 24 months for the mini-open group and 34 months for the open group. The mean estimated blood loss was 194 ml for the mini-open group and 505 ml for the open group (p < 0.01). The mean LOS was 3 days for the mini-open group and 5.5 days for the open group (p < 0.01). The mean mPS score improved from 11 to 19 in the mini-open group and from 10 to 18 in the open group; there was no statistically significant difference in mPS score improvement between the groups (p = 0.19). In the mini-open group there were 2 cases of transient L-5 sensory loss, 1 case of a misplaced screw that required revision, and 1 case of cage migration that required revision. In the open group there was 1 case of radiculitis as well as 1 case of a misplaced screw that required revision. One patient in the mini-open group developed a pseudarthrosis that required reoperation, and all patients in the open group exhibited fusion. Conclusions Mini–open TLIF is a viable alternative to traditional open TLIF with significantly reduced estimated blood loss and LOS. However, the authors found a higher incidence of hardware-associated complications with the mini–open TLIF.

Unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and bilateral anterior-column fixation with two Brantigan I/F cages per level: clinical outcomes during a minimum 2-year follow-up period

2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 198-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Taneichi ◽  
Kota Suda ◽  
Tomomichi Kajino ◽  
Akira Matsumura ◽  
Hiroshi Moridaira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Anterior Column ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Anterior Column Support ◽  
The Mean

Object There are no published reports of unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in which two Brantigan I/F cages were placed per level through a single portal to achieve bilateral anterior-column support. The authors describe such a surgical technique and evaluate the clinical outcomes of this procedure. Methods Data obtained in 86 (93.5%) of the first 92 consecutive patients who underwent the procedure were retrospectively reviewed; the minimum follow-up duration was 2 years. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system. Disc height, disc angle, cage positioning in the axial plane, and fusion status were radiographically evaluated. The mean follow-up period was 33.8 months. The mean improvement in the JOA score was 77.2%. Fusion was successful in 93% of the cases. According to the Farfan method, the mean anterior and posterior disc heights increased from 20.2 and 16.9% preoperatively to 35.9 and 22.7% at follow up, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean disc angle increased from 4.8° preoperatively to 7.5° at last follow-up examination (p < 0.01). Two cages were correctly placed to achieve bilateral anterior-column support in greater than 85% of the cases. The following complications occurred: hardware migration in two patients and deep infection cured by intravenous antibiotic therapy in one patient. Conclusions Unilateral TLIF involving the placement of two Brantigan cages per level led to good clinical results. Two Brantigan cages were adequately placed via a single portal, and reliable bilateral anterior-column support was achieved. Although the less invasive unilateral approach was used, the outcomes were as good as those in many reported series of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in which the Brantigan cages were placed via the bilateral approach.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 218-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jee-Soo Jang ◽  
Sang-Ho Lee
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Level Fusion ◽  
Fine Print

Object. The purpose of this study was to introduce a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) technique that involves ipsilateral pedicle screw (PS) and contralateral facet screw (FS) fixation. Methods. Eight men and 15 women (mean age 59.5 years, range 48–68) underwent the aforementioned TLIF procedure for degenerative spondylolisthesis and uni- or bilateral radiculopathy. Twenty-two patients underwent one-level fusion and one patient two-level fusion (L4—S1). In all cases the various procedures were undertaken via one small incision. There were no intraoperative complications. The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 310 ml, and the mean operative time was 150 minutes in cases of one-level fusion. The follow-up period ranged from 13 to 28 months (mean 19 months). The mean Numeric Rating Scale score reflected improvement-reductions from 7.5 (back pain) and 7.4 (leg pain) to 2.3 and 0.7, respectively (p < 0.0001). The mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores also reflected improved status (ODI of 33.1 before the surgery to 7.6 after the surgery; p < 0.0001). Examination indicated that 22 of 24 fusion sites exhibited osseous union. At the last follow-up examination, satisfactory outcomes were observed in 21 out of 23 patients. Conclusions. The TLIF with ipsilateral PS and contralateral FS fixation has the advantages over the conventional TLIF of reduced EBL and diminished soft-tissue injury.

scholarly journals Spinal versus general anesthesia for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications on operating room time, pain, and ambulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. E3
Author(s):  
Gaetano De Biase ◽  
Shaun E. Gruenbaum ◽  
James L. West ◽  
Selby Chen ◽  
Elird Bojaxhi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Operating Room ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Procedure Time ◽  
The Mean

OBJECTIVE There has been increasing interest in the use of spinal anesthesia (SA) for spine surgery, especially within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols. Despite the wide adoption of SA by the orthopedic practices, it has not gained wide acceptance in lumbar spine surgery. Studies investigating SA versus general anesthesia (GA) in lumbar laminectomy and discectomy have found that SA reduces perioperative costs and leads to a reduction in analgesic use, as well as to shorter anesthesia and surgery time. The aim of this retrospective, case-control study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS)–transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) after administration of SA with those who underwent MIS-TLIF under GA. METHODS Overall, 40 consecutive patients who underwent MIS-TLIF by a single surgeon were analyzed; 20 patients received SA and 20 patients received GA. Procedure time, intraoperative adverse events, postoperative adverse events, postoperative length of stay, 3-hour postanesthesia care unit (PACU) numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, opioid medication, and time to first ambulation were collected for each patient. RESULTS The two groups were homogeneous for clinical characteristics. A decrease in total operating room (OR) time was found for patients who underwent MIS-TLIF after administration of SA, with a mean OR time of 156.5 ± 18.9 minutes versus 213.6 ± 47.4 minutes for patients who underwent MIS-TLIF under GA (p < 0.0001), a reduction of 27%. A decrease in total procedure time was also observed for SA versus GA (122 ± 16.7 minutes vs 175.2 ± 10 minutes; p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found in intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. There was a difference in the mean maximum NRS pain score during the first 3 hours in the PACU as patients who received SA reported a lower pain score compared with those who received GA (4.8 ± 3.5 vs 7.3 ± 2.7; p = 0.018). No significant difference was observed in morphine equivalents received by the two groups. A difference was also observed in the mean overall NRS pain score, with 2.4 ± 2.1 for the SA group versus 4.9 ± 2.3 for the GA group (p = 0.001). Patients who received SA had a shorter time to first ambulation compared with those who received GA (385.8 ± 353.8 minutes vs 855.9 ± 337.4 minutes; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS The results of this study have pointed to some important observations in this patient population. SA offers unique advantages in comparison with GA for performing MIS-TLIF, including reduced OR time and postoperative pain, and faster postoperative mobilization.

scholarly journals Comparison of Incidence of Adjacent Segment Pathology between Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Treatments for Lumbosacral Junction

Tomography ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 855-865
Author(s):  
Po-Kuan Wu ◽  
Meng-Huang Wu ◽  
Cheng-Min Shih ◽  
Yen-Kuang Lin ◽  
Kun-Hui Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbosacral Junction ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Anterior Interbody Lumbar Fusion

This research compared the incidence of adjacent segment pathology (ASP) between anterior interbody lumbar fusion (ALIF) treatment and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) treatment. Seventy patients were included in this retrospective study: 30 patients received ALIF treatment, and 40 patients received TLIF treatment at a single medical center between 2011 and 2020 with a follow-up of at least 12 months. The outcomes were radiographic adjacent segment pathology (RASP) and clinical adjacent segment pathology (CASP). The mean follow-up period was 42.10 ± 22.61 months in the ALIF group and 56.20 ± 29.91 months in the TLIF group. Following single-level lumbosacral fusion, ALIF is superior to TLIF in maintaining lumbar lordosis, whereas the risk of adjacent instability in the ALIF group is significantly higher. Regarding ASP, the incidence of overall RASP and CASP did not differ significantly between ALIF and TLIF groups.

scholarly journals Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Provides Sustained Improvements in Clinical and Radiological Outcomes up to 5 Years Postoperatively in Patients with Neurogenic Symptoms Secondary to Spondylolisthesis

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamid Rahmatullah Bin Abd Razak ◽  
Priyesh Dhoke ◽  
Kae-Sian Tay ◽  
William Yeo ◽  
Wai-Mun Yue
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Cage Subsidence ◽  
The Mean

<sec><title>Study Design</title><p>Retrospective review of prospective registry data.</p></sec><sec><title>Purpose</title><p>To determine 5-year clinical and radiological outcomes of single-level instrumented minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in patients with neurogenic symptoms secondary to spondylolisthesis.</p></sec><sec><title>Overview of Literature</title><p>MIS-TLIF and open approaches have been shown to yield comparable outcomes. This is the first study to assess MIS-TLIF outcomes using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) criterion.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>The outcomes of 56 patients treated by a single surgeon, including the Oswestry disability index (ODI), neurogenic symptom score, short-form 36 questionnaire (SF-36), and visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain (BP), and leg pain (LP), were collected prospectively for up to 5 years postoperatively. Radiological outcomes included adjacent segment degeneration, fusion, cage subsidence, and screw loosening rates.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>Our patients were predominantly female (71.4%) and had a mean age of 53.7±11.3 years and mean body mass index of 25.7±3.7 kg/m<sup>2</sup>. The mean operative time, blood loss, time to ambulation, and hospitalization were 167±49 minutes, 126±107 mL, 1.2±0.4 days, and 2.8±1.1 days, respectively. The mean fluoroscopic time was 58.4±33 seconds, and the mean postoperative intravenous morphine dose was 8±2 mg. Regarding outcomes, postoperative scores improved relative to preoperative scores, and this was sustained across various time points for up to 5 years (<italic>p</italic>&lt;0.001). Improvements in ODI, SF-36, VAS-BP, and VAS-LP all met the MCID criterion. Notably, 5.4% of our patients developed clinically significant adjacent segment disease during follow-up, and 7 minor complications were reported.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusions</title><p>Single-level instrumented MIS-TLIF is suitable for patients with neurogenic symptoms secondary to lumbar spondylolisthesis and is associated with an acceptable complication rate. Both clinical and radiological outcomes were sustained up to 5 years postoperatively, with many patients achieving an MCID.</p></sec>

scholarly journals Clinical results of percutaneous biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion with application of enhanced recovery after surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. E18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Hwa Heo ◽  
Choon Keun Park
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

OBJECTIVEThe aims of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are to improve surgical outcomes, shorten hospital stays, and reduce complications. The objective of this study was to introduce ERAS with biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and to investigate the clinical results.METHODSPatients were divided into two groups based on the fusion procedures. Patients who received microscopic TLIF without ERAS were classified as the non-ERAS group, whereas those who received percutaneous biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS were classified as the ERAS group. The mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were compared between the two groups. In addition, demographic characteristics, diagnosis, mean operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), fusion rate, readmissions, and complications were investigated and compared.RESULTSForty-six patients were grouped into the non-ERAS group (microscopic TLIF without ERAS) and 23 patients into the ERAS group (biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS). The VAS score for preoperative back pain on days 1 and 2 was significantly higher in the non-ERAS group than in the ERAS group (p < 0.05). The mean operative duration was significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group, while the mean EBL was significantly lower in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in fusion rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). Readmission was required in 2 patients who were from the non-ERAS group. Postoperative complications occurred in 6 cases in the non-ERAS group and in 2 cases in the ERAS group.CONCLUSIONSPercutaneous biportal endoscopic TLIF with an ERAS pathway may have good aspects in reducing bleeding and postoperative pain. Endoscopic fusion surgery along with the ERAS concept may help to accelerate recovery after surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document