Safety of early discharge after elective lumbar spine surgery with subfascial drains and association with significant reduction in length of stay.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine Pub Date : 2024-05-17 Print Date: 2024-08-01 DOI:10.3171/2024.3.SPINE231338
Hani Chanbour, Gabriel A Bendfeldt, Lakshmi Suryateja Gangavarapu, Amanda H Wright, Silky Chotai, Raymond J Gardocki, Jacob P Schwarz, Amir M Abtahi, Byron F Stephens, Scott L Zuckerman, Richard A Berkman
{"title":"Safety of early discharge after elective lumbar spine surgery with subfascial drains and association with significant reduction in length of stay.","authors":"Hani Chanbour, Gabriel A Bendfeldt, Lakshmi Suryateja Gangavarapu, Amanda H Wright, Silky Chotai, Raymond J Gardocki, Jacob P Schwarz, Amir M Abtahi, Byron F Stephens, Scott L Zuckerman, Richard A Berkman","doi":"10.3171/2024.3.SPINE231338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>After lumbar spine surgery, postoperative drain removal often delays discharge. Whether inpatient drain removal reduces the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) or hematoma remains controversial. Therefore, in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery, the authors sought to determine the impact of inpatient versus outpatient drain removal on the following variables: 1) length of hospital stay (LOS), and 2) postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-center retrospective cohort study in which the authors used prospectively collected data of patients undergoing primary, elective, 1- or 2-level lumbar spine decompression and/or fusion was undertaken between 2016 and 2022. Patients with intraoperative or postoperative CSF leaks were excluded. The primary exposure variable was inpatient versus outpatient drain removal. The primary outcome was LOS, and secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, including 90-day postoperative SSI or hematoma. Multivariable logistic and linear regression were performed, controlling for age, body mass index, instrumentation, number of levels, antibiotics at discharge, and surgeons involved.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 483 patients included, 325 (67.3%) had inpatient drain removal and 158 (32.7%) had outpatient drain removal. Patients with outpatient drain removal were significantly younger (58.6 ± 12.4 vs 61.2 ± 13.2 years, p = 0.040); more likely to have 1-level surgery (75.9% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001); and less likely to receive instrumentation (50.6% vs 69.5%, p < 0.001). Postoperatively, patients with outpatient drain removal had a shorter LOS (0.7 ± 0.6 vs 2.3 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.001); were more likely to be discharged home (98.1% vs 92.3%, p = 0.015); were more likely to be discharged on antibiotics (76.6% vs 3.1%, p < 0.001); were less likely to be on opioids (32.3% vs 88.3%, p < 0.001); and were more likely to have Jackson-Pratt compared to Hemovac drains (96.2% vs 34.5%, p < 0.001). No difference was found in SSI (3.7% vs 3.8%, p > 0.999) or hematoma (0.9% vs 0.6%, p > 0.999), as well as reoperation or readmission due to SSI or hematoma. On multivariable regression, outpatient drain removal was significantly associated with shorter LOS (β = -1.15, 95% CI -1.56 to -0.73, p < 0.001). No association was found with SSI/hematoma (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Outpatient drain removal after elective lumbar spine surgery was associated with a significantly decreased LOS without a significant increase in postoperative SSI or hematoma. Although the choice of drain removal and the LOS may be subject to surgeons' preference, these results may support the feasibility and safety of outpatient drain removal, and the potential cost savings resulting from shortened hospital stays. Drawbacks may exist regarding added burden to the patient and the surgeon's team to accommodate 1-week follow-up appointments for drain removal.</p>","PeriodicalId":16562,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery. Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.3.SPINE231338","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: After lumbar spine surgery, postoperative drain removal often delays discharge. Whether inpatient drain removal reduces the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) or hematoma remains controversial. Therefore, in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery, the authors sought to determine the impact of inpatient versus outpatient drain removal on the following variables: 1) length of hospital stay (LOS), and 2) postoperative complications.

Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study in which the authors used prospectively collected data of patients undergoing primary, elective, 1- or 2-level lumbar spine decompression and/or fusion was undertaken between 2016 and 2022. Patients with intraoperative or postoperative CSF leaks were excluded. The primary exposure variable was inpatient versus outpatient drain removal. The primary outcome was LOS, and secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, including 90-day postoperative SSI or hematoma. Multivariable logistic and linear regression were performed, controlling for age, body mass index, instrumentation, number of levels, antibiotics at discharge, and surgeons involved.

Results: Of 483 patients included, 325 (67.3%) had inpatient drain removal and 158 (32.7%) had outpatient drain removal. Patients with outpatient drain removal were significantly younger (58.6 ± 12.4 vs 61.2 ± 13.2 years, p = 0.040); more likely to have 1-level surgery (75.9% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001); and less likely to receive instrumentation (50.6% vs 69.5%, p < 0.001). Postoperatively, patients with outpatient drain removal had a shorter LOS (0.7 ± 0.6 vs 2.3 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.001); were more likely to be discharged home (98.1% vs 92.3%, p = 0.015); were more likely to be discharged on antibiotics (76.6% vs 3.1%, p < 0.001); were less likely to be on opioids (32.3% vs 88.3%, p < 0.001); and were more likely to have Jackson-Pratt compared to Hemovac drains (96.2% vs 34.5%, p < 0.001). No difference was found in SSI (3.7% vs 3.8%, p > 0.999) or hematoma (0.9% vs 0.6%, p > 0.999), as well as reoperation or readmission due to SSI or hematoma. On multivariable regression, outpatient drain removal was significantly associated with shorter LOS (β = -1.15, 95% CI -1.56 to -0.73, p < 0.001). No association was found with SSI/hematoma (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: Outpatient drain removal after elective lumbar spine surgery was associated with a significantly decreased LOS without a significant increase in postoperative SSI or hematoma. Although the choice of drain removal and the LOS may be subject to surgeons' preference, these results may support the feasibility and safety of outpatient drain removal, and the potential cost savings resulting from shortened hospital stays. Drawbacks may exist regarding added burden to the patient and the surgeon's team to accommodate 1-week follow-up appointments for drain removal.

择期腰椎手术后使用筋膜下引流管提前出院的安全性以及与显著缩短住院时间的关系。
目的:腰椎手术后,术后引流管的拔除往往会推迟出院时间。住院患者拔除引流管是否能降低手术部位感染(SSI)或血肿的风险仍存在争议。因此,对于接受择期腰椎手术的患者,作者试图确定住院与门诊引流管拔除对以下变量的影响:1)住院时间(LOS);2)术后并发症:作者在2016年至2022年期间进行了一项单中心回顾性队列研究,使用了前瞻性收集的数据,研究对象是接受初级、择期、1或2级腰椎减压和/或融合术的患者。排除了术中或术后出现 CSF 渗漏的患者。主要暴露变量为住院与门诊引流管移除。主要结果是住院时间,次要结果是术后并发症,包括术后90天的SSI或血肿。在控制年龄、体重指数、器械、层次数、出院时使用的抗生素和外科医生的情况下,进行了多变量逻辑回归和线性回归:在纳入的483名患者中,325人(67.3%)在住院期间拔除了引流管,158人(32.7%)在门诊拔除了引流管。在门诊拔除引流管的患者明显更年轻(58.6 ± 12.4 岁 vs 61.2 ± 13.2 岁,P = 0.040);更有可能接受单层手术(75.9% vs 56.6%,P < 0.001);更不可能接受器械治疗(50.6% vs 69.5%,P < 0.001)。术后,在门诊拔除引流管的患者的住院时间更短(0.7 ± 0.6 vs 2.3 ± 1.6 天,p < 0.001);更有可能出院回家(98.1% vs 92.3%,p = 0.015);更有可能使用抗生素出院(76.6% vs 3.1%,p < 0.001);使用阿片类药物的可能性较低(32.3% vs 88.3%,p < 0.001);使用 Jackson-Pratt 引流管的可能性高于 Hemovac 引流管(96.2% vs 34.5%,p < 0.001)。在 SSI(3.7% 对 3.8%,P > 0.999)或血肿(0.9% 对 0.6%,P > 0.999)以及因 SSI 或血肿导致的再次手术或再次入院方面没有发现差异。在多变量回归中,门诊引流管拔除与较短的生命周期显著相关(β = -1.15, 95% CI -1.56 to -0.73,p < 0.001)。结论:结论:择期腰椎手术后在门诊拔除引流管可显著缩短患者的住院时间,但术后SSI或血肿的发生率并未显著增加。虽然引流管拔除的选择和住院时间可能取决于外科医生的偏好,但这些结果支持了门诊引流管拔除的可行性和安全性,以及缩短住院时间可能带来的成本节约。缺点是可能会增加患者和外科医生团队的负担,因为要满足一周的引流管移除复诊预约。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine
Journal of neurosurgery. Spine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.70%
发文量
396
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Primarily publish original works in neurosurgery but also include studies in clinical neurophysiology, organic neurology, ophthalmology, radiology, pathology, and molecular biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信