{"title":"一项关于印度人接受小开腹斜行腰椎椎间融合术与开腹经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术的围手术期疼痛、失血量和住院时间的比较研究。","authors":"Suma Rabab Ahmad, Mantu Jain, Auroshish Sahoo, Narayan Prasad Mishra, Neha Singh, Sumanta Kumar Dansana","doi":"10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_59_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are several approaches for lumbar fusion, although there is yet to be a consensus on which approach is the best. This study aimed to evaluate the intraoperative blood loss and acute postoperative pain in single-level mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries for the degenerative spine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-two patients were assigned by the surgeon to OLIF or TLIF groups - 16 in mini-open OLIF and 16 in open TLIF groups. The intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hemoglobin, numerical rating scale (NRS) at proposed time intervals for 24 h postoperative, and rescue analgesics used were compared among the groups. The operative duration and hospital stay in both groups were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The OLIF group showed significantly higher postoperative hemoglobin (11.5 vs. 10.5 g %, <i>P</i> = 0.04), lower 24-h postoperative pain scores on movement, (NRS 4 vs. 5.5, <i>P</i> = 0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (4.5 vs. 7 days, <i>P</i> = 0.003) than TLIF group. However, the surgery duration was significantly longer in OLIF than in TLIF (190 vs. 150 min, <i>P</i> = 0.005). Intraoperative hemodynamics, other postoperative pain scores at variable time points, and rescue analgesics given were comparable among groups (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Intraoperative blood loss was lower in OLIF than TLIF (275 vs. 500 mL) but was not statistically significant (<i>P</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mini-open OLIF has favorable perioperative outcomes compared to open TLIF. Patients have higher postoperative hemoglobin and lesser pain on movement on the first postoperative day, leading to earlier mobilization and a shorter hospital stay.</p>","PeriodicalId":13938,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science","volume":"14 1","pages":"37-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11073639/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of perioperative pain, blood loss, and hospital stay in an Indian population undergoing mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.\",\"authors\":\"Suma Rabab Ahmad, Mantu Jain, Auroshish Sahoo, Narayan Prasad Mishra, Neha Singh, Sumanta Kumar Dansana\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_59_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are several approaches for lumbar fusion, although there is yet to be a consensus on which approach is the best. This study aimed to evaluate the intraoperative blood loss and acute postoperative pain in single-level mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries for the degenerative spine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-two patients were assigned by the surgeon to OLIF or TLIF groups - 16 in mini-open OLIF and 16 in open TLIF groups. The intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hemoglobin, numerical rating scale (NRS) at proposed time intervals for 24 h postoperative, and rescue analgesics used were compared among the groups. The operative duration and hospital stay in both groups were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The OLIF group showed significantly higher postoperative hemoglobin (11.5 vs. 10.5 g %, <i>P</i> = 0.04), lower 24-h postoperative pain scores on movement, (NRS 4 vs. 5.5, <i>P</i> = 0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (4.5 vs. 7 days, <i>P</i> = 0.003) than TLIF group. However, the surgery duration was significantly longer in OLIF than in TLIF (190 vs. 150 min, <i>P</i> = 0.005). Intraoperative hemodynamics, other postoperative pain scores at variable time points, and rescue analgesics given were comparable among groups (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Intraoperative blood loss was lower in OLIF than TLIF (275 vs. 500 mL) but was not statistically significant (<i>P</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mini-open OLIF has favorable perioperative outcomes compared to open TLIF. Patients have higher postoperative hemoglobin and lesser pain on movement on the first postoperative day, leading to earlier mobilization and a shorter hospital stay.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13938,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"37-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11073639/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_59_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_59_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:腰椎融合术有多种方法,但哪种方法最好尚未达成共识。本研究旨在评估单水平小开腹斜行腰椎椎体间融合术(OLIF)与开腹经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)治疗退行性脊柱手术的术中失血量和术后急性疼痛情况:32名患者被外科医生分配到OLIF或TLIF组,其中16名患者为小开放式OLIF组,16名患者为开放式TLIF组。比较了各组患者的术中失血量、术后血红蛋白、术后 24 小时拟议时间间隔的数字评分量表(NRS)以及所用的镇痛药。两组的手术时间和住院时间也进行了比较:结果:与 TLIF 组相比,OLIF 组的术后血红蛋白明显更高(11.5 vs. 10.5 g %,P = 0.04),术后 24 小时活动疼痛评分更低(NRS 4 vs. 5.5,P = 0.0001),住院时间更短(4.5 vs. 7 天,P = 0.003)。不过,OLIF 组的手术时间明显长于 TLIF 组(190 分钟对 150 分钟,P = 0.005)。各组的术中血流动力学、不同时间点的其他术后疼痛评分和所使用的镇痛药相当(P > 0.05)。OLIF的术中失血量低于TLIF(275毫升对500毫升),但无统计学意义(P > 0.05):结论:与开放式TLIF相比,小开腹OLIF的围手术期疗效更佳。患者术后血红蛋白较高,术后第一天活动时疼痛较轻,因此可以更早地活动,住院时间也更短。
A comparative study of perioperative pain, blood loss, and hospital stay in an Indian population undergoing mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.
Background: There are several approaches for lumbar fusion, although there is yet to be a consensus on which approach is the best. This study aimed to evaluate the intraoperative blood loss and acute postoperative pain in single-level mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries for the degenerative spine.
Methods: Thirty-two patients were assigned by the surgeon to OLIF or TLIF groups - 16 in mini-open OLIF and 16 in open TLIF groups. The intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hemoglobin, numerical rating scale (NRS) at proposed time intervals for 24 h postoperative, and rescue analgesics used were compared among the groups. The operative duration and hospital stay in both groups were also compared.
Results: The OLIF group showed significantly higher postoperative hemoglobin (11.5 vs. 10.5 g %, P = 0.04), lower 24-h postoperative pain scores on movement, (NRS 4 vs. 5.5, P = 0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (4.5 vs. 7 days, P = 0.003) than TLIF group. However, the surgery duration was significantly longer in OLIF than in TLIF (190 vs. 150 min, P = 0.005). Intraoperative hemodynamics, other postoperative pain scores at variable time points, and rescue analgesics given were comparable among groups (P > 0.05). Intraoperative blood loss was lower in OLIF than TLIF (275 vs. 500 mL) but was not statistically significant (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: Mini-open OLIF has favorable perioperative outcomes compared to open TLIF. Patients have higher postoperative hemoglobin and lesser pain on movement on the first postoperative day, leading to earlier mobilization and a shorter hospital stay.
期刊介绍:
IJCIIS encourages research, education and dissemination of knowledge in the field of Critical Illness and Injury Science across the world thus promoting translational research by striking a synergy between basic science, clinical medicine and public health. The Journal intends to bring together scientists and academicians in the emergency intensive care and promote translational synergy between Laboratory Science, Clinical Medicine and Public Health. The Journal invites Original Articles, Clinical Investigations, Epidemiological Analysis, Data Protocols, Case Reports, Clinical Photographs, review articles and special commentaries. Students, Residents, Academicians, Public Health experts and scientists are all encouraged to be a part of this initiative by contributing, reviewing and promoting scientific works and science.