-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Volume replacement with colloid solution and topical α-2 agonists may each moderate the progressive increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) during prone surgery. The authors tested the hypotheses that during prolonged prone surgery, IOP increases less with goal-directed intravenous administration of 5% albumin than with goal-directed administration of lactated Ringer's solution, and with topical α-2 agonist brimonidine than with placebo eye drops.
Patients having complex prone spine surgery were factorially randomized to albumin and topical placebo (n = 15); albumin and topical brimonidine (n = 16); lactated Ringer's solution and topical placebo (n = 13); and lactated Ringer's solution and topical brimonidine (n = 16). IOP was measured with a pneumotonometer. The primary outcome was time-weighted average intraoperative IOP.
Prone positioning increased IOP a mean ± SD of 12 ± 6 mmHg. IOP increased to 38 ± 10 mmHg at the end of anesthesia (approximately 5.5 h). Time- weighted average intraoperative IOP in the brimonidine group was 4 (95% CI: 1, 8) mmHg lower than in the placebo group (P = 0.023), but no different in the crystalloid and albumin groups (mean difference (95% CI) of -2 (-5, 2) mmHg (P = 0.34). There was no interaction between the two randomized factors.
Brimonidine slightly reduced the primary outcome of intraoperative time-weighted average IOP, whereas there was no significant difference between goal-directed albumin or crystalloid administration. Brimonidine thus helps reduce IOP during spine surgery, but maintaining adequate blood pressure might play a more important role.
Anesthesiology 02/2012; 116(4):807-15. · 5.36 Impact Factor
-
Samuel T Chao,
Taisei Kobayashi,
Edward Benzel,
Chandana A Reddy,
Glen H J Stevens,
Richard A Prayson, Iain Kalfas,
Richard Schlenk,
Ajit Krishnaney,
Michael P Steinmetz,
William Bingaman,
Joseph Hahn,
John H Suh
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: the goal in this study was to determine the role of radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of spinal myxopapillary ependymomas (MPEs).
thirty-seven patients with histologically verified spinal MPEs were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazard regression were used to determine what patient and treatment factors influenced overall survival (OS) and recurrence.
at the time of initial diagnosis, the median age was 33 years and the Karnofsky Performance Scale score was 80. In 86.5% of cases, the most common presenting symptom was pain. All patients received surgery as their initial treatment. Nine patients also received RT along with surgery, with a median total dose of 50.2 Gy. The mean survival time was 12.2 years; however, only 4 of 37 patients had died at the time of this study. None of the patient or treatment parameters significantly correlated with OS. Sixteen patients (43.2%) were found to have a recurrence, with a median time to recurrence of 7.7 years. None of the patient or treatment parameters correlated with recurrence-free survival for an initial recurrence. The median time to the second recurrence (recurrence following therapy for initial recurrence) was 1.6 years. Use of RT as salvage therapy after initial recurrence significantly correlated with longer times to a second recurrence. The median recurrence-free survival time before the second recurrence was 9.6 years for those who received RT versus 1.1 years for those who did not receive RT (p = 0.0093). None of the other parameters significantly correlated with a second recurrence.
radiation therapy may have a role as salvage therapy in delaying recurrences of spinal MPEs.
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine 01/2011; 14(1):59-64. · 1.61 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Spine surgery remains one of the most common procedures for patients with a wide variety of spine disorders. Postoperative pain after major spine surgery is moderate to severe. We retrospectively reviewed 245 medical records of adult patients undergoing major spine surgery who received either patient-controlled epidural analgesia based on local anesthetics and opioids or patient-controlled intravenous analgesia as postoperative pain management. Several outcomes were analyzed including pain intensity, opioid consumption, time to endotracheal extubation, the incidence of deep venous thrombosis, and length of stay in the hospital. We found that the use of patient-controlled epidural analgesia provided better postoperative analgesia [median (quartiles) verbal analog scale score of 4 (3, 5) vs. 5 (3, 6)] and decreased the amount of opioid consumption postoperatively [median of 0 mg (0, 3) vs. 35 mg (0, 150)] compared with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia. Also, a substantially higher number of patients in the patient-controlled intravenous group required opioids as rescue analgesia. Incidences of deep venous thrombosis, operating room extubation, and length of stay in the hospital were not associated with the analgesic technique. The results of this study suggest that the use of neuroaxial analgesia for the management of postoperative pain associated with major spine surgery may have some beneficial properties over intravenous analgesia. The use of a reduced amount of opioids by patients with epidural analgesia may be relevant because of potential fewer side effects mainly in elderly patients. Several limitations related to the retrospective nature of the study are described. Prospective randomized-controlled trials are needed to understand and elucidate the optimum regimen of postoperative pain management after major spine surgery.
Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology 11/2008; 20(4):256-60. · 2.41 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Despite a history of safety and efficacy, spinal anesthesia is rarely used in lumbar surgery. Application of regional anesthetics is widely preferred for lower-extremity surgery, but general anesthesia is used almost exclusively in spine surgery, despite evidence that spinal anesthesia is as safe and may offer some advantages.
In this case-controlled study the authors analyzed outcomes obtained in 400 patients in whom either spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia was induced to perform a lumbar decompression. Patients were matched for anesthesia-related class, preoperative diagnosis, surgical procedure, and perioperative protocols. All aspects of surgery, recovery, postanesthesia care, and pain management were uniform irrespective of the anesthetic type. Case complexity was equivalent. An independent observer performed analysis of the data. Data from the intraoperative period through hospital discharge were collected and compared. Two hundred consecutive patients meeting inclusion criteria were included in each group. Patients were treated for either lumbar stenosis or herniated nucleus pulposus. Demographically, both groups were well matched. Anesthetic and operative times were longer for patients receiving a general anesthetic (p < 0.05), in whom more nausea and greater requirements for antiemetics and pain medication were also present during recovery (p < 0.05). Overall complication rates and, specifically, the incidences of urinary retention were significantly lower in spinal anesthesia--induced patients (p < 0.05). There were no neural injuries in either group, and the incidence of spinal headache was lower in patients receiving a spinal anesthetic (1.5% compared with 3%).
Spinal anesthesia was as safe and effective as general anethesia for patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy. Potential advantages of spinal anesthsia include a shorter anesthesia duration, decreased nausea, antiemetic and analgesic requirements, and fewer complications. Successful surgery can be performed using either anesthesia type.
Journal of Neurosurgery Spine 02/2005; 2(1):17-22. · 1.53 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A case-controlled, comparative study of 400 patients undergoing lumbar surgery, treated with either spinal or general anesthesia. An independent observer analyzed outcomes.
To determine the rate and type, of perioperative complications associated with each anesthetic method among lumbar surgery patients.
Spinal anesthesia is infrequently used for spinal procedures. While complications associated with spinal anesthesia are rare, some authors have suggested that spinal anesthesia may exacerbate existing neurologic disease and have recommended against its use in lumbar disc surgery. Others have found the technique safe and effective. General anesthesia may be preferred because it is seen as the routine accepted practice, because of greater patient acceptance and the ability to perform longer operations, or because of a general sense that general anesthesia is "safer" in these procedures.
Patients treated between 1994 and 1998 were matched for anesthetic class, preoperative diagnosis, surgical procedure, and perioperative protocols. All patients were treated according to a uniform protocol and recovered in the same perianesthetic environment. Data from the intraoperative period through hospital discharge were collected and compared.
A total of 200 patients were included in each group. Overall complication rates and time to discharge were significantly lower in spinal anesthetic patients. Total anesthetic and operative times were significantly longer for general anesthetic patients, and perioperative heart rate and mean arterial pressures were elevated compared with those in spinal anesthetic patients. Nausea, requirements for antiemetic medication, and the incidence of urinary retention were significantly increased among general anesthesia patients. Spinal anesthesia patients had fewer spinal headaches compared with the general anesthetic group, but statistical significance was not obtained.
For patients undergoing decompressive lumbar surgery, spinal anesthesia is at least comparable to general anesthetic with respect to complications. Specific advantages to spinal anesthesia include decreased nausea and antiemetic requirements, reduced analgesic requirements, and reduced overall complication rate.
Spine 12/2004; 29(22):2542-7. · 2.08 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Retrospective case series review of patients with Parkinson's disease undergoing elective spine surgery at a single tertiary referral center.
To assess the rate of complications of spine surgery in the population with Parkinson's disease and characterize the causes of failure and special needs of this unique population.
Patients with Parkinson's disease experience a combination of poor bone quality and a severe neuromuscular disorder. There is little information in the literature about outcomes of spine surgery in this population. Preliminary review suggests that these patients have a high rate of instrument-related complications that has not been reported previously.
A computerized search using diagnostic and procedural codes identified 14 patients with Parkinson's disease who underwent spine surgery from January 1993 through December 2000. Their charts and radiographs were reviewed, and those not examined within twelve months were invited for follow-up review. The remaining patients were being followed on a regular basis by their spine surgeon, the Movement Disorders Clinic, or both and were seen and examined during their routine follow-up observation. INDICATIONS AND EXTENT OF INDEX SURGERY VARIED: Complications, revisions, and radiographic evidence of loosening were assessed. Causes of failure were sought with respect to surgical and clinical factors. All patients underwent surgical care by a fellowship-trained spine surgeon.
The mean follow-up period from index procedure was 66.8 months; the median follow-up period was 38 months. Of 14 patients, 12 (86%) required additional surgery, undergoing a total of 31 reoperations. Eleven patients (79%) underwent 22 additional procedures at the same or adjacent level for instability, including four patients (29%) who had hardware failure or pullout, necessitating 10 reoperations. The one other patient who required additional surgery had a successful index procedure but underwent another operation to address instability at a remote spinal segment. Of five patients whose index procedure involved only one spinal level, three (60%) required additional procedures, all at that level. Two patients (14%) developed wound infections during the course of treatment but not as the cause of initial treatment failure. The primary mechanisms of failure were relentless kyphosis or segmental instability at the operated-on or adjacent levels.
Patients with Parkinson's disease undergoing spine surgery in a single tertiary referral center had a very high reoperation rate associated with technical complications. Patients should be appropriately counseled regarding the increased risk of operative complications and closely followed for incipient failure.
Spine 10/2004; 29(18):2006-12. · 2.08 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Study Design. Retrospective case series review of patients with Parkinson’s disease undergoing elective spine surgery at a single tertiary referral center.
Objectives. To assess the rate of complications of spine surgery in the population with Parkinson’s disease and characterize the causes of failure and special needs of this unique population.
Summary of Background Data. Patients with Parkinson’s disease experience a combination of poor bone quality and a severe neuromuscular disorder. There is little information in the literature about outcomes of spine surgery in this population. Preliminary review suggests that these patients have a high rate of instrument-related complications that has not been reported previously.
Methods. A computerized search using diagnostic and procedural codes identified 14 patients with Parkinson’s disease who underwent spine surgery from January 1993 through December 2000. Their charts and radiographs were reviewed, and those not examined within twelve months were invited for follow-up review. The remaining patients were being followed on a regular basis by their spine surgeon, the Movement Disorders Clinic, or both and were seen and examined during their routine follow-up observation.
Indications and Extent of Index Surgery Varied. Complications, revisions, and radiographic evidence of loosening were assessed. Causes of failure were sought with respect to surgical and clinical factors. All patients underwent surgical care by a fellowship-trained spine surgeon.
Results. The mean follow-up period from index procedure was 66.8 months; the median follow-up period was 38 months. Of 14 patients, 12 (86%) required additional surgery, undergoing a total of 31 reoperations. Eleven patients (79%) underwent 22 additional procedures at the same or adjacent level for instability, including four patients (29%) who had hardware failure or pullout, necessitating 10 reoperations. The one other patient who required additional surgery had a successful index procedure but underwent another operation to address instability at a remote spinal segment. Of five patients whose index procedure involved only one spinal level, three (60%) required additional procedures, all at that level. Two patients (14%) developed wound infections during the course of treatment but not as the cause of initial treatment failure. The primary mechanisms of failure were relentless kyphosis or segmental instability at the operated-on or adjacent levels.
Conclusion. Patients with Parkinson’s disease undergoing spine surgery in a single tertiary referral center had a very high reoperation rate associated with technical complications. Patients should be appropriately counseled regarding the increased risk of operative complications and closely followed for incipient failure.
Spine 09/2004; 29(18):2006-2012. · 2.08 Impact Factor
