Stiles Elizabeth R, Chakraborty Ashish D, Varghese Priscilla, Burapachaisri Aonnicha, Kim Lindsay, Kim Yong H, Protopsaltis Themistocles Stavros, Fischer Charla
New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Int J Spine Surg. 2024 Jul 4;18(3):304-311. doi: 10.14444/8606.
The benefit of chemoprophylaxis (CPX) agents in preventing venous thromboembolism must be weighed against potential risks. Current literature regarding the efficacy of CPX after laminectomies with or without fusion is limited, with no clear consensus to inform guidelines.
This study evaluated the association between CPX and surgical complications after lumbar laminectomy with and without fusion.
Retrospective study of patients at a single large academic institution.
The medical records of patients who underwent lumbar laminectomies with or without lumbar fusion from 2018 to 2020 were reviewed for demographics, surgical characteristics, CPX agents, postoperative complications, epidural hematomas, and wound drainage. Patients receiving CPX ( = 316) were compared with patients not receiving CPX ( = 316) via test following propensity score matching, and patients on CPX were further stratified by fusion status.
The CPX group had higher body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists grades. Rates of venous thromboembolism, epidural hematomas, infections, postoperative incision and drainage, transfusions, wound dehiscence, and reoperation were not associated with CPX. Moist dressings were more frequent, and average days of drain duration were longer with CPX. Overall postoperative complication rate and length of stay (LOS) were greater with CPX. The fusion subgroup had a lower Charlson Comorbidity Index, had a lower American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, was younger, had more women, and underwent more minimally invasive laminectomies. While estimated blood loss, operative times, and LOS were significantly greater in the fusion group, there was no difference in rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications.
CPX after lumbar laminectomies with or without fusion was not associated with increased rates of epidural hematomas, wound complications, or reoperation. Patients receiving CPX had more postoperative cardiac complications, but it is possible that surgeons were more likely to prescribe CPX for higher-risk patients. They also had higher rates of ileus and moist dressings, greater LOS, and longer length of drain duration. Patients who underwent lumbar laminectomy with fusion on CPX tended to be lower risk yet incurred greater blood loss, operative times, LOS, cardiac complications, and hematomas/seromas than patients not undergoing fusion.
This retrospective study compared surgical complications of lumbar laminectomies in patients who received chemoprophylaxis vs patients who did not. Chemoprophylaxis was not associated with increased rates of epidural hematomas, wound complications, or reoperation, but it was associated with higher rates of postoperative cardiac complications and ileus.
化学预防(CPX)药物在预防静脉血栓栓塞方面的益处必须与潜在风险相权衡。目前关于CPX在有或无融合的椎板切除术后疗效的文献有限,尚无明确共识为指南提供依据。
本研究评估了CPX与有或无融合的腰椎椎板切除术后手术并发症之间的关联。
对一家大型学术机构的患者进行回顾性研究。
回顾了2018年至2020年接受有或无腰椎融合的腰椎椎板切除术患者的病历,以获取人口统计学、手术特征、CPX药物、术后并发症、硬膜外血肿和伤口引流情况。在倾向得分匹配后,通过t检验将接受CPX的患者(n = 316)与未接受CPX的患者(n = 316)进行比较,并根据融合状态对接受CPX的患者进一步分层。
CPX组的体重指数和美国麻醉医师协会分级更高。静脉血栓栓塞、硬膜外血肿、感染率、术后切口及引流、输血、伤口裂开和再次手术与CPX无关。CPX组使用湿敷料更频繁,引流平均天数更长。CPX组总体术后并发症发生率和住院时间更长。融合亚组的Charlson合并症指数较低,美国麻醉医师协会分级较低,年龄较小,女性更多,且接受更多的微创椎板切除术。虽然融合组的估计失血量、手术时间和住院时间显著更长,但术中及术后并发症发生率无差异。
有或无融合的腰椎椎板切除术后使用CPX与硬膜外血肿、伤口并发症或再次手术发生率增加无关。接受CPX的患者术后心脏并发症更多,但外科医生可能更倾向于为高危患者开具CPX。他们还存在更高的肠梗阻和湿敷料发生率、更长的住院时间和更长的引流持续时间。接受CPX且进行腰椎融合手术的患者风险往往较低,但与未进行融合的患者相比,失血量、手术时间、住院时间、心脏并发症以及血肿/血清肿发生率更高。
这项回顾性研究比较了接受化学预防和未接受化学预防的患者腰椎椎板切除术的手术并发症。化学预防与硬膜外血肿、伤口并发症或再次手术发生率增加无关,但与术后心脏并发症和肠梗阻发生率较高有关。