Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1057
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3175
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background Context: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have been shown to accelerate patient recovery across various surgical fields. There are growing reports of the benefits of ERAS for lumbar fusion, but the majority rely on retrospective analysis.
Purpose: This study aimed to prospectively assess the impact of an ERAS protocol on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.
Study Design/setting: Prospective comparative cohort study conducted at a tertiary medical center in Taipei, Taiwan, between November 2020 and May 2023.
Patient Sample: The study included 242 patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative spinal conditions divided into ERAS and non-ERAS groups.
Outcome Measures: Main outcomes measured included operative duration, estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), analgesic use, and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score.
Methods: Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize confounders between the 2 groups. Differences between the 2 groups were assessed using the 2-sample independent t-test or nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables, and the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables.
Results: The ERAS group had significantly shorter operative time (202±68 min vs. 255±85 min) and EBL (480±302 ml vs. 641±387 ml) compared to the non-ERAS group. The ERAS group had significantly less total morphine-sulfate-equivalent (MSE) consumption (27±24 mg vs. 42±42 mg) and used patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) (97% vs. 41%) more frequently compared to the non-ERAS group. Notably, the ERAS group had a shorter time to ambulation and shorter time to removal of Foley catheters.
Conclusions: These data suggest that the employed ERAS protocol significantly enhances recovery trajectories and the need for analgesics in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2025.01.023 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!