• Mohammad Daher, Gaby Kreichati, Khalil Kharrat, Ralph Maroun, Marven Aoun, Ralph Chalhoub, Bassel G Diebo, Alan H Daniels, and Amer Sebaaly.
• Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA; Faculty of medicine, Saint Joseph University, Beirut, Lebanon.
• World Neurosurg. 2024 Aug 1; 188: 939893-98.

BackgroundThe inclusion of 2 surgeons in spinal deformity surgery is considered beneficial by some. In fact, select studies indicate advantages such as reduced operation time and blood loss. Another observed decreased patient morbidity with a dual-surgeon approach, attributed to shorter operative times and reduced intraoperative blood losses. Therefore, this meta-analysis will assess the benefits of a having 2 surgeons compared to 1 surgeon during spine surgeries.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (page 1-20) were searched till January 2024. The clinical outcomes evaluated were the incidence of adverse events, the rate of transfusion, reoperation, and surgery-related parameters such as operative room time, length of stay (LOS), and estimated blood loss.ResultsThirteen studies were included. A greater rate of complications was seen in patients operated upon by 1 surgeon (odds ratio = 0.50; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.25-0.99, P = 0.05). Furthermore, operative room time (mean differences = -82.73; 95% CI: -111.42 to -54.03, P < 0.001) and LOS (mean differences = -0.91; 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.71, P < 0.001) were reduced in the dual surgeon scenario. No statistically significant difference was shown in the remaining analyzed outcomes.ConclusionsThe presence of 2 surgeons in the odds ratiowas shown to reduce complications, operative room time, and LOS. More cost-effectiveness studies are needed in order to substantiate the financial advantages associated with the dual-surgeon approach.Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.

18 keywords...

hide…