Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) in Patients Over 60 Years Old.
anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
enhanced recovery after surgery
old
Journal
Clinical interventions in aging
ISSN: 1178-1998
Titre abrégé: Clin Interv Aging
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101273480
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
22
05
2023
accepted:
22
09
2023
medline:
5
10
2023
pubmed:
4
10
2023
entrez:
4
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is currently widely used in many surgical specialties, but there is still a lack of concern about the cervical ERAS program for old patients (>60 years old). We aimed to determine whether our ERAS program significantly improved satisfaction and outcomes in old patients (>60 years old) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). This is a retrospective cohort study. The study enrolled patients if they were over the age of 60 years old underwent ACDF from July 2019 and June 2021 (ERAS group) and from January 2018 and June 2019 (non-ERAS group). Data including demographic, comorbidity, and surgical information were collected. We also evaluated ERAS process compliance, primary outcome, surgical complication, and length of stay (LOS). There were 135 patients in the ERAS group, and 122 patients in the non-ERAS group were included. A comparison of the demographic data revealed that there were no statistically significant intergroup differences observed between the group. Overall, ERAS pathway compliance was 91.9%. There were no significant differences in the fusion levels, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative VAS score, and complications between the ERAS and non-ERAS groups. In addition, there was no significant difference in readmission and mortality at 30-day follow-up between the two groups. However, we observed a statistically significant decrease in the LOS in the ERAS group (8.68±2.34 of ERAS group versus 10.43±4.05 in non-ERAS group, p=0.013). This report describes the first ERAS protocol used in old patients with ACDF. Our ERAS program is safe and associated with incremental benefits with respect to LOS in old patients with ACDF.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is currently widely used in many surgical specialties, but there is still a lack of concern about the cervical ERAS program for old patients (>60 years old). We aimed to determine whether our ERAS program significantly improved satisfaction and outcomes in old patients (>60 years old) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This is a retrospective cohort study. The study enrolled patients if they were over the age of 60 years old underwent ACDF from July 2019 and June 2021 (ERAS group) and from January 2018 and June 2019 (non-ERAS group). Data including demographic, comorbidity, and surgical information were collected. We also evaluated ERAS process compliance, primary outcome, surgical complication, and length of stay (LOS).
Results
UNASSIGNED
There were 135 patients in the ERAS group, and 122 patients in the non-ERAS group were included. A comparison of the demographic data revealed that there were no statistically significant intergroup differences observed between the group. Overall, ERAS pathway compliance was 91.9%. There were no significant differences in the fusion levels, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative VAS score, and complications between the ERAS and non-ERAS groups. In addition, there was no significant difference in readmission and mortality at 30-day follow-up between the two groups. However, we observed a statistically significant decrease in the LOS in the ERAS group (8.68±2.34 of ERAS group versus 10.43±4.05 in non-ERAS group, p=0.013).
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
This report describes the first ERAS protocol used in old patients with ACDF. Our ERAS program is safe and associated with incremental benefits with respect to LOS in old patients with ACDF.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37790741
doi: 10.2147/CIA.S422418
pii: 422418
pmc: PMC10543997
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1619-1627Informations de copyright
© 2023 Wang et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no financial and non-financial competing interests in this work.
Références
Br J Anaesth. 1997 May;78(5):606-17
pubmed: 9175983
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012 Jan-Feb;37(1):79-98
pubmed: 22030723
Neurosurg Focus. 2019 Apr 1;46(4):E6
pubmed: 30933923
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2007 Mar;21(1):65-83
pubmed: 17489220
J Neurosurg Spine. 2019 Dec 17;:1-9
pubmed: 31846935
Clin Nutr. 2017 Jun;36(3):623-650
pubmed: 28385477
Anaesthesia. 2019 Jan;74 Suppl 1:80-89
pubmed: 30604415
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2017 Jan;21(1):5
pubmed: 28150136
Neurosurg Focus. 2019 Apr 1;46(4):E9
pubmed: 30933926
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Mar 15;23(1):252
pubmed: 35292011
Anesthesiol Clin. 2017 Jun;35(2):e115-e143
pubmed: 28526156
Anaesthesia. 2014 Jan;69 Suppl 1:61-9
pubmed: 24303862
Surg Endosc. 2020 May;34(5):2067-2075
pubmed: 31385073
Clin Nutr. 2021 Jul;40(7):4745-4761
pubmed: 34242915
BMC Surg. 2015 Jul 07;15:83
pubmed: 26148685
Br J Nutr. 2004 Nov;92(5):799-808
pubmed: 15533269
Nutr Clin Pract. 2015 Oct;30(5):660-4
pubmed: 26197803
Ann Surg. 2013 Jan;257(1):8-14
pubmed: 23235393
Proc Nutr Soc. 2019 Aug;78(3):372-379
pubmed: 30501651
Spine J. 2018 Jul;18(7):1180-1187
pubmed: 29155340
Eur Spine J. 2021 Feb;30(2):560-567
pubmed: 32409887
PLoS Med. 2020 Aug 6;17(8):e1003180
pubmed: 32760065
J Orthop Surg Res. 2020 Aug 6;15(1):299
pubmed: 32762762
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019 Feb;26(2):327-343
pubmed: 30580100
Minerva Anestesiol. 2011 Jun;77(6):637-46
pubmed: 21617627
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Jul 15;42(14):1044-1049
pubmed: 28697092
Arch Esp Urol. 2018 Mar;71(2):178-186
pubmed: 29521264