RESUMEN
Cauda equina syndrome (CES) associated with acute disc extrusion or spinal stenosis often requires emergency surgery. Analysis of the Pubmed, Medline and eLibrary databases revealed a few studies devoted to long-term postoperative outcomes in patients with CES caused by degenerative spine disease. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term postoperative results and predictors of clinical and neurological outcomes in patients with CES caused by degenerative lumbar spine disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS. D: Ecompressive and decompressive-stabilizing procedures were performed in 211 patients with CES caused by degenerative lumbar spine disease between 2000 and 2020. Long-term clinical parameters were available in 174 patients with mean follow-up period of 7 years. Sixty-eight patients had unsatisfactory postoperative outcomes. We assessed postoperative clinical and neurological outcomes in patients with CES and predictors of these outcomes. RESULTS: We identified the following predictors of clinical and neurological outcomes using binary logistic regression model: period between clinical manifestation and surgery >48 hours, preoperative neurological impairment, spinal canal diameter, surgical procedure, dimension of herniated disc, ASA score and long-term postoperative analgesia with narcotic analgesics. CONCLUSION: Preoperative planning and possible correction of the above-mentioned risk factors will potentially improve postoperative outcomes in patients with CES caused by degenerative lumbar spine disease.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome de Cauda Equina , Cauda Equina , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral , Enfermedades de la Columna Vertebral , Estenosis Espinal , Humanos , Síndrome de Cauda Equina/cirugía , Síndrome de Cauda Equina/complicaciones , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral/cirugía , Estenosis Espinal/cirugía , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugíaRESUMEN
The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the accelerated recovery program for patients with polysegmental degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. Materials and Methods: This prospective study included 53 patients who underwent two-level transforaminal interbody fusion in the LII-SI segments. Two groups were identified: in group 1 (n=24), operations were performed using the accelerated recovery program; in group 2 (n=29), open rigid stabilization was used under traditional intravenous anesthesia. The end-point parameters were the number of bed-days spent in the hospital after the operation, the number of perioperative surgical complications and adverse effects of anesthesia, and the number of re-hospitalizations within 90 days. We also recorded the time of patient activation, the level of pain around the operated zone (using a visual analogue scale), and the quality of life in the long-term postoperative period (median 18 months); the latter was assessed using the SF-36 questionnaire (physical and psychological components of health). Results: Patients under the accelerated recovery program were found to have a shorter duration of surgery and anesthesia, less blood loss, lower amounts of injected opioids, faster verticalization, and a reduced period of inpatient treatment (p<0.05 for all parameters). As compared to group 2, patients in group 1 had a lower level of pain in the surgery zone (p<0.05), better long-term indicators of the physical and psychological components of health (p<0.05), a lower number of anesthesia-associated adverse events (p<0.05), and a lower rate of postoperative complications (p<0.05). During the 90-day postoperative observation, four patients of group 2 (13.8%) were urgently referred to a medical institution for additional medical care. Conclusion: The accelerated recovery program for two-level interbody fusion showed its safety and high clinical efficiency in the treatment of patients with polysegmental degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. The program can be used in any center for spine surgery where effective interaction between polyvalent medical and nursing teams is maintained.
Asunto(s)
Calidad de Vida , Fusión Vertebral , Humanos , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Estudios Prospectivos , Fusión Vertebral/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of laser and radiofrequency denervation in patients with primary trigeminal neuralgia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 50 patients with primary trigeminal neuralgia who were operated on by laser (group I, n=25) or radiofrequency denervation (group II, n=25) in the period from 2018 to 2019. To assess the clinical efficacy, we analyzed the dynamics of the pain syndrome level according to the scale of facial pain and the quality of life according to the Short Form Medical Outcomes Study (SF-36), as well as patient satisfaction with the operation according to the Macnab scale, the presence of postoperative surgical complications and adverse effects of anesthesia. RESULTS: In the postoperative period, according to the scale of facial pain, a decrease in its intensity was noted in both study groups (p<0.001). Comparative analysis showed a comparable level of pain in the early postoperative period: at discharge (p=0.43) and 6 months after surgery (p=0.07). At the same time, after 12 months, lower scores on the scale of facial pain were noted in patients of group I (p=0.02). According to SF-36, a significant improvement in the physical and psychological components of health was determined in group I (p<0.001) and group II (p<0.05). Comparison of SF-36 scores in the long-term postoperative period revealed the best indicators in group I (p=0.02 and p=0.01, respectively). Comparative analysis verified a greater subjective satisfaction with the operation in group I, compared with group II (p<0.001). A comparable number of adverse effects of anesthesia was determined in both groups. Comparative analysis revealed a significantly greater number of postoperative surgical complications in group II (p=0.0017). CONCLUSION: Laser denervation and radiofrequency denervation are highly effective methods of minimally invasive treatment of primary trigeminal neuralgia.
Asunto(s)
Neuralgia del Trigémino , Desnervación , Humanos , Rayos Láser , Calidad de Vida , Resultado del Tratamiento , Neuralgia del Trigémino/cirugíaRESUMEN
Minimally invasive procedures reduce the trauma of spine surgery. However, they are associated with high complexity of manipulations, long learning curve, need for expensive equipment for intraoperative navigation and significant irradiation. Various options for surgical approaches are being developed to reduce irradiation of medical staff and patients, surgery time and the number of drugs administered for general anesthesia. Simultaneous surgical interventions (SiSI) is one of these options. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of simultaneous and staged minimally invasive dorsal decompression-stabilization procedures in patients with lumbar spine degenerative diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study included 67 patients (41 men and 26 women) aged 48 (34; 56) years who underwent a single-level minimally invasive spinal root decompression and transforaminal interbody fusion via Wiltse posterior-lateral approach. Two study groups were distinguished: group I (simultaneous surgical interventions, SiSI) (n=29), in which guide spokes and transpedicular screws were installed simultaneously by two surgeons within one x-ray session from two sides; group II (staged surgical interventions, StSI) (n=38), in which staged transpedicular stabilization was performed (decompression side followed by contralateral side). Mean follow-up was 14 months in group I and 20 months in group II. We considered intraoperative fluoroscopy and irradiation dose, duration of surgery and anesthesia with calculation of doses of opioid drugs, blood loss, time of activation, hospital-stay and perioperative morbidity. Clinical outcomes were studied in long-term postoperative period. RESULTS: Simultaneous approach ensured less time of intraoperative fluoroscopy (p=0.029) and irradiation dose (p=0.035), duration of surgery (p=0.01) and anesthesia (p=0.02), amount of opioid drugs during anesthesia (p=0.017). Blood loss, duration of activation and hospitals-stay were similar in both groups (p=0.35, p=0.12 and p=0.57, respectively). There was comparable improvement in VAS score of pain in the lumbar spine and lower extremities in both groups (p=0.63 and p=0.31, respectively). According to SF-36 questionnaire, there was no between-group difference in physical and psychological components (p=0.44 and p=0.72, respectively). There was significantly greater number of adverse effects of anesthesia in the StSI group (26.2% vs. 6.8%, p=0.003). At the same time, the number of surgical postoperative complications was similar in both groups (3.4% vs. 5.3%, p=0.62). CONCLUSION: Simultaneous minimally invasive dorsal decompression-stabilization procedures have some significant advantages over staged approach regarding intraoperative parameters and adverse effects of anesthesia in patients with lumbar spine degenerative diseases. Nevertheless, there were similar clinical data and small incidence of surgical perioperative complications.