Marijuana Use is Not a Contraindication for Tranexamic Acid Utilization in Lumbar Spine Surgery

Study Design Retrospective cohort study Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate safety in lumbar spinal fusion with tranexamic acid (TXA) utilization in patients using marijuana. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study involving a single surgeon’s cases of 1 to 4 level lumbar fusion procedures. Two hundred and ninety-four patients were followed for ninety days post-operatively. Consecutive patients were self-reported for daily marijuana use (n = 146) and compared to a similar cohort of patients who denied usage of marijuana (n = 146). Outcomes were collected, which included length of stay (LOS), estimated blood loss (EBL), post-operative myocardial infarction, seizures, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolus, death, readmission, need for further surgery, infection, anaphylaxis, acute renal injury, and need for blood product transfusion. Results Patients in the marijuana usage cohort had similar age (58.9 years ±12.9 vs 58.7 years ±14.8, P = .903) and distribution of levels fused ( P = .431) compared to the non-usage cohort. Thromboembolic events were rare in both groups (marijuana usage: 1 vs non-usage: 2). Compared to the non-usage cohort, the marijuana usage cohort had a similar average EBL (329.9 ± 298.5 mL vs 374.5 ± 363.8 mL; P = .254). Multivariate regression modeling demonstrated that neither EBL (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.64-2.49) nor need for transfusion (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.43-5.72) varied between cohorts. The non-usage cohort had twice the risk of prolonged LOS compared to the marijuana usage cohort (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.15-3.63). Conclusion Marijuana use should not be considered a contraindication for TXA utilization in lumbar spine surgery.

Regional Anesthesia for Lumbar Spine Surgery: Can It Be a Standard in the Future?

This paper is an overview of various features of regional anesthesia (RA) and aims to introduce spine surgeons unfamiliar with RA. RA is commonly used for procedures that involve the lower extremities, perineum, pelvic girdle, or lower abdomen. However, general anesthesia (GA) is preferred and most commonly used for lumbar spine surgery. Spinal anesthesia (SA) and epidural anesthesia (EA) are the most commonly used RA methods, and a combined method of SA and EA (CSE). Compared to GA, RA offers numerous benefits including reduced intraoperative blood loss, arterial and venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, perioperative cardiac ischemic incidents, renal failure, hypoxic episodes in the postanesthetic care unit, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and decreased incidence of cognitive dysfunction. In spine surgery, RA is associated with lower pain scores, postoperative nausea and vomiting, positioning injuries, shorter anesthesia time, and higher patient satisfaction. Currently, RA is mostly used in short lumbar spine surgeries. However, recent findings illustrate the possibility of applying RA in spinal tumors and spinal fusion. Various researches reveal that SA is an effective alternative to GA with lower minor complications incidence. Comprehensive insight on RA will promote spine surgery under RA, thereby broadening the horizon of spine surgery under RA.

Regional variations in lumbar spine surgery in Finland

Introduction The regional variation in spine surgery rates has been shown to be large both within and between countries. This variation has been reported to be less in studies from countries with spine registers. The aim of this study was to describe the regional variation in lumbar spine surgery in Finland. Materials and methods This is a retrospective register study. Data from the Finnish National Hospital Discharge Register (NHDR) were used to calculate and compare the rates of lumbar disc herniation (LDH), decompression, and fusion surgeries in five University Hospital catchment areas, covering the whole Finnish population, from January 1, 1997, through December 31, 2018. Results A total of 138,119 lumbar spine operations (including LDH, decompression, and fusion surgery) were performed in Finland between 1997 and 2018. The regional differences in the rate of LDH surgery were over fourfold (18 vs. 85 per 100,000 person years), lumbar decompression surgery over threefold (41 vs. 129 per 100,000 person years), and lumbar fusion surgery over twofold (14 vs. 34 per 100,000 person years) in 2018. The mean age of the patients increased in all regions during the study period. Conclusions In Finland, the regional variations in spine surgeries were vast. In a country with a publicly funded healthcare system, this finding was surprising. The recently created national spine register may serve to shed more light on the reasons for this regional variation.

Postoperative Outcomes After Degenerative Lumbar Spine Surgery in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients -a Propensity Score-matched Analysis

Background. Although treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have evolved significantly since the introduction of biologic agents, degenerative lumbar disease in RA patients remains a major challenge. Well-controlled comparisons between RA patients and their non-RA counterparts have not yet been reported. The objective of the present study was to compare postoperative outcomes of lumbar spine surgery between RA and non-RA patients by a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.Methods. Patients who underwent primary posterior spine surgery for degenerative lumbar disease in our prospective multicenter study group between 2017 and 2020 were enrolled. Demographic data including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, diabetes mellitus, smoking, steroid usage, number of spinal levels involved, and preoperative patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores (numerical rating scale [NRS] for back pain and leg pain, Short Form-12 physical component summary [PCS], EuroQOL 5-dimension [EQ-5D], and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) were used to calculate a propensity score for RA diagnosis. One-to-one matching was performed and 1-year postoperative outcomes were compared between groups.Results. Among the 4567 patients included, 90 had RA (2.0%). RA patients in our cohort were more likely to be female, with lower BMI, higher ASA grade and lower current smoking rate than non-RA patients. Preoperative NRS scores for leg pain, PCS, EQ-5D, and ODI were worse in RA patients. Propensity score matching generated 61 pairs of RA and non-RA patients who underwent posterior lumbar surgery. After background adjustment, RA patients reported worse postoperative PCS (28.4 vs. 37.2, p=0.008) and EQ-5D (0.640 vs. 0.738, p=0.03), although these differences were not significant between RA and non-RA patients not on steroids.Conclusions. RA patients showed worse postoperative outcomes after posterior surgery for degenerative lumbar disease, while steroid-independent RA cases showed equivalent outcomes to non-RA patients.

Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Local Infiltration Following Lumbar Decompression Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

This systematic review aims to appraise available clinical evidence on the efficacy and safety of wound infiltration with adjuvants to local anesthetics (LAs) for pain control after lumbar spine surgery. A database search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertinent to wound infiltration with analgesics or miscellaneous drugs adjunctive to LAs compared with sole LAs or placebo. The outcomes of interest were postoperative rescue analgesic consumption, pain intensity, time to first analgesic request, and the occurrence of adverse events. Twelve double-blind RCTs enrolling 925 patients were selected for qualitative analysis. Most studies were of moderate-to-good methodological quality. Dexmedetomidine reduced analgesic requirements and pain intensity within 24 h postoperatively, while prolonged pain relief was reported by one RCT involving adjunctive clonidine. Data on local magnesium seem promising yet difficult to interpret. No clear analgesic superiority could be attributed to steroids. Τramadol co-infiltration was equally effective as sole tramadol but superior to LAs. No serious adverse events were reported. Due to methodological inconsistencies and lack of robust data, no definite conclusions could be drawn on the analgesic effect of local infiltrates in patients undergoing lumbar surgery. The probable positive analgesic efficacy of adjunctive dexmedetomidine and magnesium needs further evaluation.

An Evidence-based General Anesthesia and Prone Position Nursing Checklist: Development and Testing

Background and Aim: Prone positioning during general anesthesia is one of the most difficult practices for the perioperative nurse. Patients in this position are vulnerable to many preventable complications. However, no studies have developed an evidenced-based tool to improve nursing practice during general anesthesia and prone positioning. This study aimed to develop and test a general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist for use by the circulating nurse. Methods: The WHO checklist development model and evidence-based methods guided the checklist development process. A prospective pre-post study was performed between November 2020 and March 2021. We prospectively observed circulating nurses that attended to prone general anesthesia during posterior lumbar spine surgery for three months before and after the introduction of the general anesthesia and prone position nursing risk checklist. The main outcomes were successful delivery of essential prone positional nursing practices during each surgery and the nurse's opinion of the checklist’s efficacy and utility. Results: A general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist comprised of 4 pause points and 22 necessary nursing practices was developed. Seventy-two nurses participated in this study. Use of the checklist significantly increased the average performance of essential practices during each surgery from 72.72% to 95.45%. Three measures had a compliance rate of 100%. The delivery rate of 14 measures was significantly improved, 91.7% of nurses considered the checklist easy to use, and 94.4% nurses would want the checklist to be used if they underwent a prone position and general anesthesia operation. Conclusions: A general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist was developed. The instrument was found to be an effective and positively received tool for facilitating key measures of prone positioning during nursing care, translating evidence into practice, and standardizing the nursing process.