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

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976) ; 46(9): 617-623, 2021 May 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33290365

RESUMEN

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the short-term outcomes of laminectomy with/without fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar DS is a common cause of low back and radicular pain. Controversy remains over the safety and efficacy of fusion in addition to standard decompressive surgery. METHODS: Patients with lumbar DS who underwent laminectomy alone or laminectomy plus posterolateral fusion at a single level were identified from the 2012-2017 NSQIP database. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, major complication, reoperation, readmission, as well as operative duration, need for blood transfusion, length of stay (LOS), and discharge destination. Outcomes were compared between treatment groups by multivariable regression, adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities (modified Frailty Index). Effect sizes were reported by adjusted odds ratio (aOR) or mean difference (aMD). RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 1804 patients; of these, 802 underwent laminectomy alone and 1002 laminectomy plus fusion. On both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, there was no difference in 30-day mortality, major complications, reoperation, or readmission. However, laminectomy plus fusion was associated with longer operative time (170.0 vs. 152.7 minutes; aMD 16.00 minutes, P < 0.001), longer hospital LOS (3.2 vs. 2.5 days; aMD 0.68, P < 0.001), more frequent need for intra- or postoperative blood transfusion (6.8% vs. 3.1%; aOR 2.24, P = 0.001), and less frequent discharge home (80.7% vs. 89.2%; aOR 0.46, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We found single-level laminectomy plus fusion for lumbar DS to have a comparable short-term safety profile to laminectomy alone. However, fusion was associated with longer operative time and LOS, higher risk of blood transfusion, and greater need for inpatient rehabilitation. These factors should be recognized by clinicians and discussed with patients in the context of their values when weighing surgical treatment of lumbar DS.Level of Evidence: 3.


Asunto(s)
Bases de Datos Factuales , Hospitalización , Laminectomía/efectos adversos , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Fusión Vertebral/efectos adversos , Espondilolistesis/cirugía , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Bases de Datos Factuales/tendencias , Femenino , Hospitalización/tendencias , Humanos , Laminectomía/tendencias , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/diagnóstico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Fusión Vertebral/tendencias , Espondilolistesis/diagnóstico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto Joven
2.
J Neurosurg Spine ; : 1-8, 2020 Jun 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32534484

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the most common cause of spinal cord dysfunction in adults. Multilevel ventral compressive pathology is routinely managed through anterior decompression and reconstruction, but there remains uncertainty regarding the relative safety and efficacy of multiple discectomies, multiple corpectomies, or hybrid corpectomy-discectomy. To that end, using a large national administrative healthcare data set, the authors sought to compare the perioperative outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), and hybrid corpectomy-discectomy for multilevel DCM. METHODS: Patients with a primary diagnosis of DCM who underwent an elective anterior cervical decompression and reconstruction operation over 3 cervical spinal segments were identified from the 2012-2017 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were separated into those undergoing 3-level discectomy, 2-level corpectomy, or a hybrid procedure (single-level corpectomy plus additional single-level discectomy). Outcomes included 30-day mortality, major complication, reoperation, and readmission, as well as operative duration, length of stay (LOS), and routine discharge home. Outcomes were compared between treatment groups by multivariable regression, adjusting for age and comorbidities (modified Frailty Index). Effect sizes were reported by adjusted odds ratio (aOR) or mean difference (aMD) and associated 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 1298 patients; of these, 713 underwent 3-level ACDF, 314 2-level ACCF, and 271 hybrid corpectomy-discectomy. There was no difference in 30-day mortality, reoperation, or readmission among the 3 procedures. However, on both univariate and adjusted analyses, compared to 3-level ACDF, 2-level ACCF was associated with significantly greater risk of major complication (aOR 2.82, p = 0.005), longer hospital LOS (aMD 0.8 days, p = 0.002), and less frequent discharge home (aOR 0.59, p = 0.046). In contrast, hybrid corpectomy-discectomy had comparable outcomes to 3-level ACDF but was associated with significantly shorter operative duration (aMD -16.9 minutes, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The authors found multiple discectomies and hybrid corpectomy-discectomy to have a comparable safety profile in treating multilevel DCM. In contrast, multiple corpectomies were associated with a higher complication rate, longer hospital LOS, and lower likelihood of being discharged directly home from the hospital, and may therefore be a higher-risk operation.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA