scholarly journals Establishment and Verification of a Perioperative Blood Transfusion Model After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Study Based on Data From a Local Hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Liu ◽  
Junpeng Pan ◽  
Hui Zong ◽  
Zhijie Wang
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Medical History ◽  
Calibration Curve ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Validation Set ◽  
Elder People

Objective: We aimed to analyze the related risk factors for blood transfusion and establish a blood transfusion risk model during the per-ioperative period of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). It could provide a reference for clinical prevention and reduction of the risk of blood transfusion during the peri-operative period.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 4,378 patients who underwent PLIF in our hospital. According to whether they were transfused blood or not, patients were divided into the non-blood transfusion group and the blood transfusion group. We collected variables of each patient, including age, sex, BMI, current medical history, past medical history, surgical indications, surgical information, and preoperative routine blood testing. We randomly divide the whole population into training group and test group according to the ratio of 4:1. We used the multivariate regression analyses get the independent predictors in the training set. The nomogram was established based on these independent predictors. Then, we used the AUC, calibration curve and DCA to evaluate the nomogram. Finally, we verified the performance of the nomogram in the validation set.Results: Three or more lumbar fusion segments, preoperative low hemoglobin, with hypertension, lower BMI, and elder people were risk factors for blood transfusion. For the training and validation sets, the AUCs of the nomogram were 0.881 (95% CI: 0.865–0.903) and 0.890 (95% CI: 0.773–0.905), respectively. The calibration curve shows that the nomogram is highly consistent with the actual observed results. The DCA shows that the nomogram has good clinical application value. The AUC of the nomogram is significantly larger than the AUCs of independent risk factors in the training and validation set.Conclusion: Three or more lumbar fusion segments, preoperative low hemoglobin, with hypertension, lower BMI, and elder people are associated with blood transfusion during the peri-operative period. Based on these factors, we established a blood transfusion nomogram and verified that it can be used to assess the risk of blood transfusion after PLIF. It could help clinicians to make clinical decisions and reduce the incidence of peri-operative blood transfusion.

scholarly journals Prolonged length of stay and discharge disposition to rehabilitation facilities following single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for acquired spondylolisthesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 411
Author(s):  
Joshua Alexander Benton ◽  
Rafael De La Garza Ramos ◽  
Yaroslav Gelfand ◽  
Jonathan D. Krystal ◽  
Vijay Yanamadala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Prolonged Length ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Rehabilitation Facilities ◽  
Perioperative Blood Transfusion

Background: Acquired lumbar spondylolisthesis is often treated with interbody fusion. However, few studies have evaluated predictors for prolonged length of stay (LOS) and disposition to rehabilitation facilities after posterior single-level lumbar interbody fusion for acquired spondylolisthesis. Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program database was queried for adults with acquired spondylolisthesis who underwent single-level lumbar interbody fusion through a posterior approach (posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF]). We utilized multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify predictors of prolonged LOS and disposition in this patient population. Results: Among 2080 patients identified, 700 (33.7%) had a prolonged LOS (≥4 days), and 306 (14.7%) were discharged postoperatively to rehabilitation facilities. Predictors for prolonged LOS included: American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) class ≥3, anemia, prolonged operative time, perioperative blood transfusion, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, and return to the operating room. The following risk factors predicted discharge to postoperative rehabilitation facilities: age ≥65 years, male sex, ASA class ≥3, modified frailty score ≥2, perioperative blood transfusion, and prolonged LOS. Conclusion: Multiple partial-overlapping risk factors predicted prolonged LOS and discharge to rehabilitation facilities after single-level TLIF/PLIF performed for acquired spondylolisthesis.

Risk Factors for Poor Patient-Reported Quality of Life Outcomes After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Spine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (19) ◽  
pp. 1502-1510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takahiro Makino ◽  
Takashi Kaito ◽  
Hiroyasu Fujiwara ◽  
Hirotsugu Honda ◽  
Yusuke Sakai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Life Outcomes ◽  
Poor Patient ◽  
Quality Of Life Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals A comparative study of functional outcome between posterior lumbar fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in spondylolisthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 544
Author(s):  
Harpreet Singh ◽  
Dhruv Patel ◽  
Sangam Tyagi ◽  
Krushna Saoji ◽  
Tilak Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Tertiary Care Centre ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Fusion

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Spondylolisthesis is condition in which one vertebra slips over other vertebra. This study has been done to compare the functional outcome and complications of two techniques: posterior lumbar fusion (intertransverse fusion) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Total 20 patients with spondylolisthesis admitted in a tertiary care centre in Rajasthan were allotted alternatively in posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) group and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) group. In PLF, fusion was done by placing bone graft between transverse processes and around facets. In PLIF, fusion was bone by placing cage in between vertebral bodies.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> 20 patients were included in our study with female predominance (65%). Mean age was 54.2 years (PLF=58.4 and PLIF=50.2). 70% patients have L4-L5 level spondylolisthesis. Average operative time was less in PLF group, which is statistically significant. Functional outcome was measured by using visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Japanese orthopedics association score (JOAS) at 3 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. There is a significant decrease between preoperative VAS and at 6 months, in both PLF and PLIF group. JOAS was significantly increased at 6 months in both PLF and PLIF group as compared to preoperative score. But difference in JOAS at 6 months is not significant between PLF and PLIF.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Both PLF and PLIF are equally effective for spondylolisthesis. Both techniques have same satisfactory results. As PLIF is more invasive technique, more operative time and more complications are seen.</p>

Vertebral osteolytic defect due to cellulose particles derived from gauze fibers after posterior lumbar interbody fusion

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 877-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shota Takenaka ◽  
Yoshihiro Mukai ◽  
Noboru Hosono ◽  
Kosuke Tateishi ◽  
Takeshi Fuji
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Histopathological Examination ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Body Type ◽  
Initial Surgery

Vertebral cystic lesions may be observed in pseudarthroses after lumbar fusion surgery. The authors report a rare case of pseudarthrosis after spinal fusion, accompanied by an expanding vertebral osteolytic defect induced by cellulose particles. A male patient originally presented at the age of 69 years with leg and low-back pain caused by a lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis. He underwent a posterior lumbar interbody fusion, and his neurological symptoms and pain resolved within a year but recurred 14 months after surgery. Radiological imaging demonstrated a cystic lesion on the inferior endplate of L-5 and the superior endplate of S-1, which rapidly enlarged into a vertebral osteolytic defect. The patient underwent revision surgery, and his low-back pain resolved. A histopathological examination demonstrated foreign body–type multinucleated giant cells, containing 10-μm particles, in the sample collected just below the defect. Micro–Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy revealed that the foreign particles were cellulosic, presumably originating from cotton gauze fibers that had contaminated the interbody cages used during the initial surgery. Vertebral osteolytic defects that occur after interbody fusion are generally presumed to be the result of infection. This case suggests that some instances of vertebral osteolytic defects may be aseptically induced by foreign particles. Hence, this possibility should be carefully considered in such cases, to help prevent contamination of the morselized bone used for autologous grafts by foreign materials, such as gauze fibers.

A Compaction Bone Grafting Technique Leads to Early Bone Fusion in Cases of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-38
Author(s):  
Mikinobu Takeuchi ◽  
Norimitsu Wakao ◽  
Mitsuhiro Kamiya ◽  
Atsuhiko Hirasawa ◽  
Shuntaro Hanamura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Psoas Muscle ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Impaction Bone Grafting ◽  
Computed Tomographic ◽  
Bone Fusion ◽  
Grafting Technique

Abstract BACKGROUND The impaction bone grafting technique is a popular approach for achieving complete bone fusion during hip surgery or total knee arthroplasty. We hypothesized that compaction bone grafting (CBG), a modified version of impaction bone grafting, could be applied to lumbar fusion surgery. OBJECTIVE To compare the bone fusion rates and durations achieved using the CBG technique and a conventional loose bone grafting technique. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed 89 patients who underwent single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion at the university hospital; 35 other posterior lumbar interbody fusion recipients were excluded due to undergoing multilevel fusion, prior lumbar surgery, trauma, infection, or inadequate computed tomographic data. Computed tomographic-based bone fusion assessments were obtained using the Brantigan, Steffee, and Fraser criteria at 1 and 2 years after surgery. RESULTS The baseline characteristics of the CBG (n = 42) and loose bone grafting (n = 47) groups did not significantly differ. Fusion assessments indicated that significantly superior bone fusion rates were achieved at 1 year after surgery in the CBG group than in the loose bone grafting group (P = .04, χ2 test). However, the bone fusion rates of the 2 groups at 2 years after surgery did not significantly differ (P = .3). A nonsymptomatic surgical complication occurred in the CBG group when a spacer was inserted into the intervertebral space; specifically, the spacer slipped out of the right psoas muscle because a large quantity of compaction bone grafts disrupted the cage's pathway. CONCLUSION In posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgeries, bone fusion was achieved more quickly with the CBG technique than with the conventional technique.

Pedicle screw fixation for isthmic spondylolisthesis: does posterior lumbar interbody fusion improve outcome over posterolateral fusion?

2003 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni La Rosa ◽  
Alfredo Conti ◽  
Fabio Cacciola ◽  
Salvatore Cardali ◽  
Domenico La Torre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Pedicle Screw Fixation ◽  
Posterolateral Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Isthmic Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fine Print

Object. Posterolateral fusion involving instrumentation-assisted segmental fixation represents a valid procedure in the treatment of lumbar instability. In cases of anterior column failure, such as in isthmic spondylolisthesis, supplemental posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) may improve the fusion rate and endurance of the construct. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion is, however, a more demanding procedure and increases costs and risks of the intervention. The advantages of this technique must, therefore, be weighed against those of a simple posterior lumbar fusion. Methods. Thirty-five consecutive patients underwent pedicle screw fixation for isthmic spondylolisthesis. In 18 patients posterior lumbar fusion was performed, and in 17 patients PLIF was added. Clinical, economic, functional, and radiographic data were assessed to determine differences in clinical and functional results and biomechanical properties. At 2-year follow-up examination, the correction of subluxation, disc height, and foraminal area were maintained in the group in which a PLIF procedure was performed, but not in the posterolateral fusion—only group (p < 0.05). Nevertheless, no statistical intergroup differences were demonstrated in terms of neurological improvement (p = 1), economic (p = 0.43), or functional (p = 0.95) outcome, nor in terms of fusion rate (p = 0.49). Conclusions. The authors' findings support the view that an interbody fusion confers superior mechanical strength to the spinal construct; when posterolateral fusion is the sole intervention, progressive loss of the extreme correction can be expected. Such mechanical insufficiency, however, did not influence clinical outcome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document