• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

2至3节腰椎后路融合术的适当失血量是多少?

How Much Blood Loss Is Appropriate for a 2- to 3-Level Posterior Lumbar Fusion?

作者信息

Chen Jeffrey W, Chanbour Hani, Roth Steven G, Stephens Byron F, Abtahi Amir M, Zuckerman Scott L

机构信息

Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.

Department of Neurological Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.

出版信息

Int J Spine Surg. 2023 Apr;17(2):241-249. doi: 10.14444/8423. Epub 2023 Feb 24.

DOI:10.14444/8423
PMID:36828635
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10165640/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite the known association between higher estimated blood loss (EBL) and suboptimal outcomes, the threshold of EBL that negatively impacts outcomes following elective spine surgery remains unknown. In an open 2- and 3-level posterolateral lumbar fusion, we sought to find a threshold of surgeon-reported EBL associated with length of stay (LOS), 30-day complications, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study was performed for 2- and 3-level open posterolateral lumbar fusions between October 2010 and April 2021. Surgeon-reported EBL (milliliters) was the primary independent variable for predicting LOS (days). Secondary outcomes included 30-day complications and PROs as the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Multivariable regression and receiver operating characteristic curve with Youden's Index were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 557 patients underwent 2-level fusions. Multivariable regression found EBL to be a significant risk factor for prolonged LOS. A threshold of 375 mL was associated with LOS beyond postoperative day 2 (POD2) (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.64, 95% CI 0.58-0.70, < 0.001). A total of 287 patients underwent 3-level fusions. Similarly, EBL was a significant risk factor for prolonged LOS, with a threshold of 675 mL to predict LOS beyond POD2 (AUC = 0.63, 95% CI 0.54-0.73, = 0.012). EBL was associated with increased odds of 30-day complications, with a threshold of 538 mL (AUC = 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.76, < 0.001). For both 2- and 3-level fusions, EBL was not significantly associated with MCID for any of the PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing open, posterolateral lumbar fusions, surgeon-reported EBL thresholds at 375 mL for 2-level fusions and 675 mL for 3-level fusions were moderately associated with LOS beyond POD2. In 3-level lumbar fusions, EBL above 538 mL showed a potential association with an increased odds of 30-day complications.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Surgeons should improve their ability to manage blood loss and implement methods to keep EBL below the provided thresholds to decrease LOS and minimize the risk of complications.

摘要

背景

尽管已知估计失血量(EBL)较高与欠佳的预后相关,但择期脊柱手术后对预后产生负面影响的EBL阈值仍不清楚。在开放性2节段和3节段腰椎后外侧融合手术中,我们试图找出外科医生报告的与住院时间(LOS)、30天并发症及患者报告结局(PROs)相关的EBL阈值。

方法

对2010年10月至2021年4月期间进行的2节段和3节段开放性腰椎后外侧融合手术进行单中心回顾性队列研究。外科医生报告的EBL(毫升)是预测LOS(天数)的主要独立变量。次要结局包括30天并发症和作为最小临床重要差异(MCID)的PROs。计算多变量回归和采用约登指数的受试者工作特征曲线。

结果

共有557例患者接受了2节段融合手术。多变量回归发现EBL是LOS延长的显著危险因素。375毫升的阈值与术后第2天(POD2)之后的LOS相关(曲线下面积[AUC]=0.64,95%CI 0.58 - 0.70,P<0.001)。共有287例患者接受了3节段融合手术。同样,EBL是LOS延长的显著危险因素,675毫升的阈值可预测POD2之后的LOS(AUC = 0.63,95%CI 0.54 - 0.73,P = 0.012)。EBL与30天并发症的发生几率增加相关,阈值为538毫升(AUC = 0.63,95%CI 0.51 - 0.76,P<0.001)。对于2节段和3节段融合手术,EBL与任何PROs的MCID均无显著相关性。

结论

在接受开放性腰椎后外侧融合手术的患者中,外科医生报告的2节段融合手术EBL阈值为375毫升、3节段融合手术为675毫升,与POD2之后的LOS存在中度相关性。在3节段腰椎融合手术中,EBL高于538毫升显示出与30天并发症发生几率增加存在潜在关联。

临床意义

外科医生应提高其控制失血的能力,并采用方法使EBL保持在规定阈值以下,以缩短LOS并将并发症风险降至最低。

相似文献

1
How Much Blood Loss Is Appropriate for a 2- to 3-Level Posterior Lumbar Fusion?2至3节腰椎后路融合术的适当失血量是多少?
Int J Spine Surg. 2023 Apr;17(2):241-249. doi: 10.14444/8423. Epub 2023 Feb 24.
2
How Much Blood Loss Is Too Much for a 1-Level Open Lumbar Fusion?对于单节段开放性腰椎融合术来说,多少失血量算过多?
Int J Spine Surg. 2023 Feb;17(1):146-155. doi: 10.14444/8395. Epub 2023 Feb 8.
3
Can the American College of Surgeons Risk Calculator Predict 30-day Complications After Spine Surgery?美国外科医师学院风险计算器能否预测脊柱手术后 30 天的并发症?
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 May 1;45(9):621-628. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003340.
4
Is the use of minimally invasive fusion technologies associated with improved outcomes after elective interbody lumbar fusion? Analysis of a nationwide prospective patient-reported outcomes registry.选择性腰椎椎间融合术后使用微创融合技术是否与更好的疗效相关?一项全国性前瞻性患者报告结局登记研究的分析。
Spine J. 2017 Jul;17(7):922-932. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.02.003. Epub 2017 Feb 27.
5
Minimally invasive versus open fusion for Grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.I度退行性腰椎滑脱症的微创与开放融合手术:质量结果数据库分析
Neurosurg Focus. 2017 Aug;43(2):E11. doi: 10.3171/2017.5.FOCUS17188.
6
Single position lateral decubitus anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior fusion reduces complications and improves perioperative outcomes compared with traditional anterior-posterior lumbar fusion.与传统的前后路腰椎融合术相比,单节段侧卧位前路腰椎椎间融合术(ALIF)联合后路融合术可减少并发症并改善围手术期结局。
Spine J. 2022 Mar;22(3):419-428. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.09.009. Epub 2021 Sep 30.
7
Should long-segment cervical fusions be routinely carried into the thoracic spine? A multicenter analysis.长节段颈椎融合术是否应常规延伸至胸椎?一项多中心分析。
Spine J. 2018 May;18(5):782-787. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.09.010. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
8
Factors affecting length of stay after elective posterior lumbar spine surgery: a multivariate analysis.影响择期腰椎后路手术后住院时间的因素:一项多因素分析
Spine J. 2015 Jun 1;15(6):1188-95. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.022. Epub 2013 Nov 1.
9
Single position circumferential fusion improves operative efficiency, reduces complications and length of stay compared with traditional circumferential fusion.与传统的环形融合相比,单体位环形融合可提高手术效率,减少并发症和住院时间。
Spine J. 2021 May;21(5):810-820. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.11.002. Epub 2020 Nov 13.
10
Optimal hemoglobin A1C target in diabetics undergoing elective cervical spine surgery.糖尿病患者择期行颈椎手术时的最佳糖化血红蛋白目标值。
Spine J. 2022 Jul;22(7):1149-1159. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.02.014. Epub 2022 Mar 5.

引用本文的文献

1
Safety and Efficacy of Tranexamic Acid in Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.氨甲环酸在脊柱手术中的安全性和有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Spine Surg Relat Res. 2023 Dec 27;8(3):253-266. doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2023-0244. eCollection 2024 May 27.
2
Percutaneous lordoplasty for the treatment of severe osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with kyphosis.经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗伴有后凸畸形的严重骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折。
Front Neurol. 2023 Jul 28;14:1132919. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1132919. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Adverse Effects of Perioperative Blood Transfusion in Spine Surgery.脊柱手术围手术期输血的不良反应。
World Neurosurg. 2021 May;149:73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.01.093. Epub 2021 Feb 2.
2
A novel lumbar total joint replacement may be an improvement over fusion for degenerative lumbar conditions: a comparative analysis of patient-reported outcomes at one year.一种新型腰椎全关节置换术可能优于融合术治疗退行性腰椎疾病:一年时患者报告结局的比较分析。
Spine J. 2021 May;21(5):829-840. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.12.001. Epub 2020 Dec 17.
3
Measuring clinically relevant improvement after lumbar spine surgery: is it time for something new?测量腰椎手术后临床相关的改善:是否需要新的方法?
Spine J. 2020 Jun;20(6):847-856. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2020.01.010. Epub 2020 Jan 28.
4
Perioperative blood loss: estimation of blood volume loss or haemoglobin mass loss?围手术期失血:估计血容量丢失还是血红蛋白质量丢失?
Blood Transfus. 2020 Jan;18(1):20-29. doi: 10.2450/2019.0204-19. Epub 2019 Nov 27.
5
Predictors of Prolonged Length of Stay After Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Multicenter Study.腰椎椎间融合术后住院时间延长的预测因素:一项多中心研究
Global Spine J. 2019 Aug;9(5):466-472. doi: 10.1177/2192568218800054. Epub 2018 Sep 13.
6
Open versus minimally invasive TLIF: literature review and meta-analysis.经皮椎间孔镜下腰椎间融合术与微创经椎间孔腰椎间融合术的对比:文献回顾和荟萃分析。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Jul 22;14(1):229. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1266-y.
7
Hidden blood loss following 2- to 3-level posterior lumbar fusion.后路 2-3 节段腰椎融合术后隐性失血。
Spine J. 2019 Dec;19(12):2003-2006. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2019.07.010. Epub 2019 Jul 18.
8
Hidden blood loss and its possible risk factors in cervical open-door laminoplasty.颈椎单开门椎板成形术中的隐匿性失血及其可能的危险因素
J Int Med Res. 2019 Aug;47(8):3656-3662. doi: 10.1177/0300060519856987. Epub 2019 Jun 24.
9
Elective lumbar fusion in the United States: national trends in inpatient complications and cost from 2002-2014.美国择期腰椎融合术:2002年至2014年住院并发症及费用的全国趋势。
J Neurosurg Sci. 2021 Oct;65(5):503-512. doi: 10.23736/S0390-5616.19.04647-2. Epub 2019 Apr 2.
10
Multisociety Consensus Quality Improvement Revised Consensus Statement for Endovascular Therapy of Acute Ischemic Stroke: From the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS), American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR), Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe (CIRSE), Canadian Interventional Radiology Association (CIRA), Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS), European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT), European Society of Neuroradiology (ESNR), European Stroke Organization (ESO), Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS), and World Stroke Organization (WSO).急性缺血性脑卒中血管内治疗多学会共识质量改进修订共识声明:源自美国神经外科医师协会(AANS)、美国神经放射学会(ASNR)、欧洲心血管和介入放射学会(CIRSE)、加拿大介入放射学会(CIRA)、神经外科医师大会(CNS)、欧洲微创神经治疗学会(ESMINT)、欧洲神经放射学会(ESNR)、欧洲卒中组织(ESO)、心血管造影和介入学会(SCAI)、介入放射学会(SIR)、神经介入外科学会(SNIS)以及世界卒中组织(WSO)。
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2018 Apr;29(4):441-453. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2017.11.026. Epub 2018 Mar 1.