Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Global Spine J ; 9(7): 743-753, 2019 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31552156

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess patient-reported outcomes-physical function, pain, and quality of life-in patients who underwent resection of a mobile spine chondrosarcoma. (2) To assess complications (90 days), readmissions, reoperations, oncological outcomes, and neurologic status. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with spinal conventional chondrosarcoma resection between 1984 and 2014 at one hospital were included. The primary outcome measures were-minimally 6 months after surgery-the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ5D), PROMIS-Physical Function, PROMIS-Pain Intensity, and Oswestry (ODI) Disability Index, or Neck (NDI) Disability established in 14 out of 20 alive (70.0%) patients. Complications, readmission, reoperations, oncological outcomes, and neurological status were reported for the complete cohort of 33 patients. RESULTS: After spine chondrosarcoma resection, patients (n = 14) reported worse physical function (median 43, range 22-61, P = .026), worse quality of life (median EQ5D 0.70, range 0.04-1, P = .022), and comparable pain intensity (median 47, range 31-56, P = .362) when compared with US general population values. The median NDI/ODI was 25 (range 0-72) indicating mild to moderate disability. Patients undergoing reoperation had worse patient-reported outcomes than those who did not. Eighteen (55.5%) out of 33 patients suffered complications (90 days), 14 (42.4%) had unplanned readmission, and 13 (39.4%) underwent reoperation. Intralesional resection was associated with increased readmission, reoperation, and recurrence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Chondrosarcoma affects quality of life and physical function and its treatment frequently results in complications and reoperations. Our findings can be used to inform future patients about expected outcomes.

2.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 41(19): 1542-1547, 2016 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27689761

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relation between exposure to epidural steroid injection (ESI) before surgery and occurrence of surgical site infection (SSI) for degenerative lumbar spine conditions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The effect of local ESI on the occurrence of SSI is controversial. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for degenerative lumbar spine conditions at two centers between 2005 and 2015 were identified. Primary outcome measure was SSI within 90 days requiring surgical intervention. RESULTS: A total of 5311 patients (age 57 ±â€Š16 years) were analyzed of which 945 (18%) had at least one ESI within 90 days of surgery. One hundred thirty-four (2.5%) patients developed an SSI requiring reoperation. No association of exposure or dose-response relationship was identified between ESI and SSI for any of the time periods (90-, 30-, and 30-90-day). Five (1.7%) of the 290 patients who had at least one ESI within 30 days before surgery had a postoperative infection compared to 129 (2.6%) of the 5021 in the non-ESI group (unadjusted odds ratio: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.27-1.64, P = 0.376). Fifteen (2.0%) of the 761 patients who had at least one ESI within 30 to 90 days before surgery had a postoperative infection, compared to 119 (2.6%) of the 4550 in the non-ESI group (unadjusted odds ratio: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.44-1.29, P = 0.296). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study we investigated whether an ESI and its timing influences the postoperative risk of an SSI. We found no association-exposure or dose-response relationship-between ESI and postoperative infection, even after adjusting for potential confounders, for any of the time periods (90-, 30-, and 30-90-day ESI). In addition, we did find that longer hospital stay, greater EBL, posterior approach, and drain placement were associated with higher infection rates.Level of Evidence: 3.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA