Effects of local intraoperative epidural use of triamcinolone acetonide-soaked Gelfoam on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

OBJECTIVE: Prior evidence has supported the use of local intraoperative epidural steroids in lumbar discectomy for improvements in postoperative pain and outcomes. However, currently there is a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of local epidural steroids in spinal fusion procedures. The present investigation aimed to evaluate the impact of local epidural administration of triamcinolone acetonide-soaked Gelfoam on postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients were randomly divided into two groups (treatment and control). Patients in the treatment group received a Gelfoam carrier soaked in 1 ml of triamcinolone acetonide (40 mg), which was placed over the nerve roots in the epidural space before the closure. Patients in the control group received a Gelfoam carrier soaked in normal saline in a similar fashion to the treatment group. Patients were followed up during their hospital stay and at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was early postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain both at rest and with movement. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were recruited in this study and were randomly allocated to the treatment or control group. No significant difference was found in baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical characteristics between the two groups. Postoperative VAS scores for pain both at rest and with movement were comparable between the treatment and control groups. Cumulative morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative complications such as surgical site infection were also similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes including VAS scores for back and leg pain as well as the Oswestry Disability Index at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. The proportion of patients who achieved a minimum clinically important difference for patient-reported outcomes were also similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the existing literature on the beneficial use of local intraoperative epidural steroids in conventional lumbar discectomy, the present study did not demonstrate such significant efficacy for the use of local epidural steroids in instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion. However, there is still a lack of evidence in this regard and further high-quality clinical trials are required to evaluate the efficacy of local epidural steroids in this group of patients.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion with the Amulet device: The impact of device disc position upon periprocedural and long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion device positioning upon periprocedural and long-term outcomes. BACKGROUND: The Amulet device is designed to cover the ostium of the LAA. Prolapse of the device into the neck of the LAA is not uncommon resulting in incomplete coverage of the ostium. The clinical consequences of this remain uncertain. METHODS: Outcomes of 87 patients with successful LAA closure were analyzed according to Amulet disc position: group A (n = 45) had complete LAA ostium coverage; group B (n = 42) had incomplete ostium coverage because of disc prolapse. Periprocedural major adverse events (MAE) (composite of all cause death, tamponade, device/air embolization, cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding not related to vascular access complications) and total device-related periprocedural adverse events (defined as MAE and pericardial effusion) were evaluated. All patients were followed up longitudinally with long-term events defined as a composite of: cardiovascular death, cerebrovascular events, systemic embolization, and major bleeding requiring transfusion or intervention. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 234 days (IQR 150-436 days). There was a trend toward more periprocedural MAE in group B (P = 0.07) with deep implantation of the Amulet device associated with significantly more periprocedural adverse events (P = 0.03). There were no differences in reposition attempts (P = 0.9) or long-term events (P = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that suboptimal device positioning may be associated with worse periprocedural outcomes but no difference in long-term clinical outcomes. The results of this relatively small cohort does not seem to be affected by repositioning attempts during the index procedure.

Upper Limb Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Case Report of an Increasingly Common Condition.

Upper limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a less common phenomenon than lower limb DVT. Repeated trauma secondary to sport- or job-related arm movements and positions has been recognized as the predisposing factor for upper limb DVT. We describe a 38-year-old male computer programmer admitted with swelling and pain in his left upper limb. Venous duplex ultrasound confirmed the presence of axillary vein thrombosis. Coagulation studies for secondary thrombosis were unremarkable. The patient was treated with full anticoagulation using low molecular weight heparin and warfarin. On subsequent follow-up at 3 months, the patient was symptom free and duplex sonography showed no evidence of thrombosis.