scholarly journals Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in Oblique lumbar interbody fusion(OLIF): a case-controlled study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renjie Li ◽  
Xiaofeng Shao ◽  
Weimin Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Financial Costs ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Eras Protocol

Abstract Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) attempts to decrease the surgical stress response to minimize postoperative complications and improve functional rehabilitation after major surgery, but it have not been widely utilized in spinal surgery. This study is to evaluate the implementation of an ERAS pathway for patients undergoing oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery.Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of patient who underwent OLIF in 2018 prior to ERAS (“pre-ERAS” ,n=23) and in 2019 after ERAS was instituted (“ERAS”, n=24). Major outcomes were collected included demographics, length of hospital stay, financial cost, postoperative complications, off-bed time and perioperative factors. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the pain. The ERAS pathway and compliance with pathway elements were also recorded.Results After ERAS implementation, we found no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. In our study, the mean stay in the hospital was significantly lower (p= 0.033) in the ERAS group (15.3±3.9 days) compared to the standard pathway group (13.0±3.1 days). In comparison to the standard group, we also found a variation between the financial costs of surgery and hospitalization [(16446.5±4353.3)vs(14237.7±2784.9) USD, P < 0.05]. The ERAS group manifested a lower blood loss compared with the pre-ERAS group with statistical significance [(68.3±57.1)vs(119.3±104.8) ml, P < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in operative time, complications, and 30-d readmission rates ( P > 0.05 ). Pain scores between the two groups showed a significant difference during the 3th hour and 6th hour (P < 0.05).Conclusion Institution of an ERAS protocol appears to accelerate functional recovery and reduce length of stay, financial costs and decreased pain.

scholarly journals An Attempt of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion(OLIF)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renjie Li ◽  
Xiaofeng Shao ◽  
Weimin Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Standard Group ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Financial Costs ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Eras Protocol

Abstract Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) attempts to decrease the surgical stress response to minimize postoperative complications and improve functional rehabilitation after major surgery, but it have not been widely utilized in spinal surgery. This study is to evaluate the implementation of an ERAS pathway for patients undergoing oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery.Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of patient who underwent OLIF in 2018 prior to ERAS (“pre-ERAS” ,n=23) and in 2019 after ERAS was instituted (“ERAS”, n=24). Major outcomes were collected included demographics, length of hospital stay, financial cost, postoperative complications, off-bed time and perioperative factors. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the pain. The ERAS pathway and compliance with pathway elements were also recorded.Results After ERAS implementation, we found no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. In our study, the mean stay in the hospital was significantly lower (p= 0.033) in the ERAS group (15.3±3.9 days) compared to the standard pathway group (13.0±3.1 days). In comparison to the standard group, we also found a variation between the financial costs of surgery and hospitalization [(116312.1±30787.4)vs(100691.2±19695.1) yuan, P < 0.05]. The ERAS group manifested a lower blood loss compared with the pre-ERAS group with statistical significance [(68.3±57.1)vs(119.3±104.8) ml, P < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in operative time, complications, and 30-d readmission rates ( P > 0.05 ). Pain scores between the two groups showed a significant difference during the 3th hour and 6th hour (P < 0.05).Conclusion Institution of an ERAS protocol appears to accelerate functional recovery and reduce length of stay, financial costs and decreased pain.

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.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery for Radical Cystectomy Decreases Postoperative Complications at Different Times

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
François Lannes ◽  
Jochen Walz ◽  
Thomas Maubon ◽  
Stanislas Rybikowski ◽  
Sami Fakhfakh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Radical Cystectomy ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Fast Recovery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Eras Protocol ◽  
Over Time

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> This study aimed to assess whether enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) improves, at different time points, postoperative complications in patients undergoing radical cystectomy. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We performed a retrospective monocentric study using prospectively maintained databases including all patients treated by radical cystectomy between January 2015 and July 2019. An ERAS protocol was applied in all patients from February 2018. We analyzed and compared between non-ERAS and ERAS groups early and 90-day postoperative complications and 90-day readmission. ERAS was analyzed to know its implication in fast recovery improvement over time. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 150 patients underwent radical cystectomy, 74 without ERAS and 76 with ERAS protocol. ERAS decreased significantly early (<i>p</i> = 0.039) and 90-day (0.012) postoperative complications. In multivariate analysis, ERAS was an independent factor associated with less early (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25–0.96; <i>p</i> = 0.37) and 90-day (OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14–0.68; <i>p</i> = 0.004) postoperative complications. There was no significant difference between groups for 90-day readmission (<i>p</i> = 0.349). Mean length of stay did not differ significantly between ERAS and non-ERAS groups (12.7 ± 6.2 and 13.1 ± 5.7 days, respectively; <i>p</i> = 0.743). <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> Our study shows that ERAS has an early positive impact that lasts over time on postoperative complications. ERAS implementation has decreased early and 90-day postoperative complications without increasing 90-day readmission. In our cohort, length of stay was not improved with ERAS protocol.

scholarly journals The Effect of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared with Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined with Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Program on Patients with Lumbar Degenerative Disease at Short-Term Follow-Up

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Wenxiang Chen ◽  
Huiying Yang ◽  
Xuesheng Jiang ◽  
Shunwu Fan
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Reference Ranges ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Purpose. Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) approach has been increasingly frequently performed in recent years. However, neither studies of OLIF approach nor the researches of the application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in spinal surgery are relatively rare. Here, our study is aimed at investigating the therapeutic effects of the application of OLIF compared with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) approach combined with ERAS in dealing with this disorder at short-term follow-up. Material and Methods. Thirty-eight patients who undergone OLIF and forty patients who undergone TLIF with pedicle screws were included in our study. The concept of ERAS was applied in the perioperative period of the patients. Preoperative and postoperative laboratory test indexes of blood were examined and evaluated in all individuals. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and Clinical Symptom Score of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) were used in preoperative evaluation and postoperative follow-up. Satisfaction survey was also performed after surgery. Result. The postoperative results of red blood count, C-reaction protein, D-dimer, and albumin were still within the reference ranges in most of the patients. It was shown that objective evaluations including VAS score, ODI index, and JOA score were significantly improved after OLIF and TLIF surgery. The follow-up of 6 months after surgery showed that VAS, ODI, and JOA were improved more in the OLIF group than that in the TLIF group. The overall satisfaction (satisfied and very satisfied) was 95% and 97.4% in the TLIF group and the OLIF group, respectively, and there was no difference between the two groups. Conclusion. This study indicated that OLIF and TLIF approach were both rather effective therapies for patients with lumbar degenerative diseases. The effect of OLIF procedure could be better than TLIF procedure in the early stage after surgery.

Comparison between oblique lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a retrospective clinical study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
chaojun Xu ◽  
Yingjie HAO ◽  
Lei YU ◽  
Guangduo ZHU ◽  
Zhinan REN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cobb Angle ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Vertical Axis ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Scoliosis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Abstract Backgroud Few studies compared radiographic and clinical outcomes between oblique lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Methods This study retrospectively analyzed the case data of 40 patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis in our hospital from July 2016 to October 2018. Among which,19 cases underwent oblique lumbar Interbody fusion(OLIF group) and 21 cases underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF group). The duration of the operation, volume of intraoperative hemorrhage, incision length, bed rest time, length of hospital stay, and complications were recorded for all patients. The clinical effects of 40 patients were evaluated by VAS for back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and The radiographic parameters were evaluated using the lumbar scoliosis Cobb angle, sagittal vertical axis(SVA), coronal vertical axis(CVA), lumbar lordosis(LL), pelvic tilt(PT), sacral slope(SS), and Disc height(DH). Results The duration of the operation, the volume of intraoperative hemorrhage, incision length, bed rest time, length of hospital stay of the OLIF group were shorter than the PLIF group( P ＜ 0.05 ). The VAS scores for back pain, the ODI of the two groups were significantly decreased, which compared with the preoperative( P ＜ 0.05 )，which in OLIF group was significantly more decreased than in PLIF( P ＜ 0.05 ) at 7 days and 3 months postoperatively, but at the last follow-up there were no significant difference between the two groups( P ＞ 0.05 ); The lumbar scoliosis Cobb angle, SVA, CVA, PT, LL, SS were significantly improved postoperatively( P ＜ 0.05 ). The OLIF group showed higher DH, smaller Cobb angle, and greater LL than the PLIF group at any time point( P ＜ 0.05 ). but there were no significant difference in SVA, CVA, PT and SS between the two groups at any follow-up points( P ＞ 0.05 ). The overall complication rate was slightly higher in the PLIF group（47.62%）than in the OLIF group（26.32%）without significant difference(x 2 =1.931, P =0.165). But the incidence of major complications in the PLIF group was significantly higher than that in the OLIF group (Fisher, P =0.026). Conclusion OLIF provides an alternative minimally invasive treatment for DLS, which compared with PLIF. It has the characteristics of a small incision, rapid recovery, fewer complications related to the surgical approach, and satisfactory orthopedics. Keywords : Minimally invasive, Oblique lumbar interbody fusion, Degenerative adult lumbar scoliosis , Posterior lumbar interbody fusion

scholarly journals Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol compliance on patients’ outcome in benign hysterectomy and establishment of a predictive nomogram model

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yiwei Shen ◽  
Feng Lv ◽  
Su Min ◽  
Gangming Wu ◽  
Juying Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Postoperative Complication ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ◽  
Early Mobilization ◽  
Urinary Drainage ◽  
Eras Protocol

Abstract Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been shown to improve clinical outcomes after surgery. Considering the importance of patient experience for patients with benign surgery, this study evaluated whether improved compliance with ERAS protocol modified for gynecological surgery which recommended by the ERAS Society is associated with better clinical outcomes and patient experience, and to determine the influence of compliance with each ERAS element on patients’ outcome after benign hysterectomy. Methods A prospective observational study was performed on the women who underwent hysterectomy between 2019 and 2020. A total of 475 women greater 18 years old were classified into three groups according to their per cent compliance with ERAS protocols: Group I: < 60% (148 cases); Group II:≥60 and < 80% (160 cases); Group III: ≥80% (167 cases). Primary outcome was the 30-day postoperative complications. Second outcomes included QoR-15 questionnaire scores, patient satisfaction on a scale from 1 to 7, and length of stay after operation. After multivariable binary logistic regression analyse, a nomogram model was established to predict the incidence of having a postoperative complication with individual ERAS element compliance. Results The study enrolled 585 patients, and 475 completed the follow-up assessment. Patients with compliance over 80% had a significant reduction in postoperative complications (20.4% vs 41.2% vs 38.1%, P < 0.001) and length of stay after surgery (4 vs 5 vs 4, P < 0.001). Increased compliance was also associated with higher patient satisfaction and QoR-15 scores (P < 0.001),. Among the five dimensions of the QoR-15, physical comfort (P < 0.05), physical independence (P < 0.05), and pain dimension (P < 0.05) were better in the higher compliance groups. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (P < 0.001), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis (P < 0.001), early mobilization (P = 0.031), early oral nutrition (P = 0.012), and early removal of urinary drainage (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with less complications. Having a postoperative complication was better predicted by the proposed nomogram model with high AUC value (0.906) and sensitivity (0.948) in the cohort. Conclusions Improved compliance with the ERAS protocol was associated with improved recovery and better patient experience undergoing hysterectomy. MIS, PONV prophylaxis, early mobilization, early oral intake, and early removal of urinary drainage were of concern in reducing postoperative complications. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR1800019178. Registered on 30/10/2018.

scholarly journals Efficacy and radiographic analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Menghui Wu ◽  
Jia Li ◽  
Mengxin Zhang ◽  
Xufeng Ding ◽  
Dongxu Qi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Radiographic Analysis ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Abstract Background To compare the clinical efficacy and radiographic analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods Grade I DLS patients admitted to the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University were retrospectively reviewed. In sum, 78 patients that underwent OLIF (n = 31) and PLIF (n = 47) treatment of DLS were recruited. Clinical data including clinical and radiological evaluations were collected pre-operatively and at each follow-up. Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), lumbar lordosis (LL), disc height (DH), and fusion rates were compared between the OLIF and PLIF groups. Results The operation time for both groups was 131.3 ± 14.6 min in the OLIF group and 156.9 ± 37.4 min in the PLIF group (P < 0.001). The intraoperative blood loss was 163.6 ± 63.9 ml in the OLIF group and 496.8 ± 122.6 ml in the PLIF group (P < 0.001). The length of the surgical incision was 4.63 ± 0.57 cm in the OLIF group and 11.83 ± 1.37 cm in the PLIF group (P < 0.001). The number of intraoperative and post-operative complications for both groups was 10 in the OLIF group and 20 in the PLIF group. Significant clinical improvement (P < 0.05) was observed in JOA scores and ODI when comparing pre-operative evaluation and final follow-up. After statistical analysis, there was no significant difference in the preoperative JOA scores between the two groups. There was no significant difference when comparing pre-operative LL and DH for either group. Post-operative reexamination was improved as compared to pre-operative exams. And the improvement of DH was better in the OLIF group as compared to the PLIF group. Conclusions For DLS patients, both OLIF and PLIF can achieve good results. Furthermore, OLIF displays marked advantages including smaller surgical incisions, shorter anesthesia times, decreased intraoperative blood loss, and post-operative pain better relieved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document