Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
-
Comparative Study Observational Study
Impact of obesity on complications and outcomes: a comparison of fusion and nonfusion lumbar spine surgery.
OBJECTIVE Prior studies have shown obesity to be associated with higher complication rates but equivalent clinical outcomes following lumbar spine surgery. These findings have been reproducible across lumbar spine surgery in general and for lumbar fusion specifically. Nevertheless, surgeons seem inclined to limit the extent of surgery, perhaps opting for decompression alone rather than decompression plus fusion, in obese patients. ⋯ Within the D+0 group, the nonobese patients had slightly better back pain scores at 2 years postoperatively. There may be a higher blood product requirement in obese patients following spine surgery, as well as an extended hospital stay, when fusion is performed. While obesity may influence the decision for or against surgery, the data suggest that obesity should not necessarily alter the appropriate procedure for well-selected surgical candidates.
-
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of supplementing long thoracolumbar posterior instrumented fusion (posterior spinal fusion, PSF) with lateral interbody fusion (LIF) of the lumbar/thoracolumbar coronal curve apex in adult spinal deformity (ASD). METHODS Two multicenter databases were evaluated. Adults who had undergone multilevel LIF of the coronal curve apex in addition to PSF with L5-S1 interbody fusion (LS+Apex group) were matched by number of posterior levels fused with patients who had undergone PSF with L5-S1 interbody fusion without LIF (LS-Only group). ⋯ CONCLUSIONS Long open posterior instrumented fusion with or without multilevel LIF is used to treat a variety of coronal and sagittal adult thoracolumbar deformities. The addition of multilevel LIF to open PSF with L5-S1 interbody support in this small cohort was often used in more severe coronal and/or lumbopelvic sagittal deformities and offered better correction of major Cobb angles, lumbopelvic parameters, and SVA than posterior-only operations. As these advantages came at the expense of more major complications, more leg weakness, greater blood loss, and longer operative times and hospital stays without an improvement in 2-year outcomes, future investigations should aim to more clearly define deformities that warrant the addition of multilevel LIF to open PSF and L5-S1 interbody fusion.
-
OBJECTIVE Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a common problem leading to morbidity and an increased hospital stay. There are limited data regarding its baseline incidence in patients undergoing spinal surgery and the risk factors with which it may be associated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of POUR in elective spine surgery patients and determine the factors associated with its occurrence. ⋯ CONCLUSIONS Awareness of the risk factors for POUR may be useful in perioperative Foley catheter management and in identifying patients who need particular vigilance when they are due to void postprocedure. A greater understanding of POUR may also prevent longer hospital stays in select at-risk patients. Postoperative retention is rarely caused by a postoperative cauda equina syndrome due to epidural hematoma, which is also associated with saddle anesthesia, leg pain, and weakness, yet the delineation of isolated POUR from this urgent complication is necessary for optimal patient care.
-
Pelvic ring fractures are defined as life-threatening injuries that can be treated surgically with external or internal fixation. The authors report on an 81-year-old woman with an unstable pelvic fracture accompanying multiple traumas that was successfully treated with a less invasive procedure. The patient was injured in a traffic accident and sustained a total of 20 fractures, including pelvic ring, bilateral rib, and lumbar transverse processes fractures, and multiple fractures of both upper and lower extremities. ⋯ Unstable pelvic ring fractures need to be sufficiently stabilized for good surgical outcome. However, to avoid postoperative complications, a less invasive treatment is preferred, particularly in cases with poor general condition. This procedure is less invasive and provides sufficient stabilization to the unstable pelvic ring fracture, and thus is the ideal surgical procedure for such cases.