文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

与全身麻醉相比,脊髓麻醉用于腰椎融合手术患者的成本更低——一项匹配队列研究。

Spinal Anesthesia Results in Lower Costs Compared to General Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion-A Matched Cohort Study.

作者信息

Ononogbu-Uche Favour C, Saleh Abdullah Wael, Toussaint Felix, Wallace Taylor, Woo Joshua, Morris Matthew T, Shaffrey Christopher I, Bullock William M, Guinn Nicole R, Abd-El-Barr Muhammad M

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

Duke School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2025 May 30;14(11):3851. doi: 10.3390/jcm14113851.


DOI:10.3390/jcm14113851
PMID:40507611
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12155823/
Abstract

: Degenerative lumbar spine disease (DLSD) is increasingly managed with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and evolving anesthesia methods. While general anesthesia (GA) remains standard, spinal anesthesia (SA) may offer faster recovery and fewer side effects. This study compares the clinical and economic outcomes of GA versus SA in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). : A retrospective review of 18 TLIF patients (2018-2022) was performed, with 9 patients in each cohort. Patients were matched by demographics and procedure type. Data collected included operative time, blood loss, complications, postoperative opioid utilization, and 30-day readmissions. Costs were analyzed in categories: anesthesia, implants, inpatient care, operating room (OR) supplies, OR time, and PACU fees, using Wilcoxon Rank T-tests and Pearson Chi-Squared tests. : Clinical outcomes such as blood loss, and operative time were similar between groups. However, SA patients had significantly shorter LOS compared to GA (SA: 12 h vs. GA: 84 h, % difference: -150%, = 0.04). Additionally, SA patients had lower total direct costs ($27,881.85 vs. $35,669.01; = 0.027). Significant cost reductions with SA were noted in OR supplies/medications ($7367.93 vs. $10,879.46; = 0.039) and inpatient costs ($621.65 vs. $3092.66; = 0.027). Within these categories, reductions were observed for intravenous solutions, sedatives/anesthetics, pressure management, labs, imaging, evaluations, hospital care, and medications. Although costs for implants, anesthesia care, OR time, and PACU fees were lower with SA, these differences did not reach statistical significance. : In TLIF for DLSD, SA provides significant economic advantages over GA while yielding comparable clinical outcomes. These results support SA as a cost-effective alternative, warranting further prospective studies to confirm these findings.

摘要

退行性腰椎疾病(DLSD)越来越多地采用微创手术(MIS)和不断发展的麻醉方法进行治疗。虽然全身麻醉(GA)仍然是标准方法,但脊髓麻醉(SA)可能恢复更快且副作用更少。本研究比较了GA与SA在经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)中的临床和经济结果。

对18例TLIF患者(2018 - 2022年)进行了回顾性研究,每组9例患者。患者按人口统计学和手术类型进行匹配。收集的数据包括手术时间、失血量、并发症、术后阿片类药物使用情况和30天再入院情况。使用Wilcoxon秩和检验和Pearson卡方检验对麻醉、植入物、住院护理、手术室(OR)耗材、OR时间和PACU费用等类别进行成本分析。

两组之间的失血量和手术时间等临床结果相似。然而,与GA相比,SA患者的住院时间明显更短(SA:12小时 vs. GA:84小时,差异百分比:-150%,P = 0.04)。此外,SA患者的总直接成本更低(27,881.85美元 vs. 35,669.01美元;P = 0.027)。SA在OR耗材/药物(7367.93美元 vs. 10,879.46美元;P = 0.039)和住院成本(621.65美元 vs. 3092.66美元;P = 0.027)方面显著降低成本。在这些类别中,观察到静脉输液、镇静剂/麻醉剂、压力管理、实验室检查、影像学检查、评估、医院护理和药物方面的成本降低。虽然SA的植入物、麻醉护理、OR时间和PACU费用较低,但这些差异未达到统计学意义。

在DLSD的TLIF中,SA与GA相比具有显著的经济优势,同时产生可比的临床结果。这些结果支持SA作为一种具有成本效益的替代方案,需要进一步的前瞻性研究来证实这些发现。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80d6/12155823/2524433a2860/jcm-14-03851-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80d6/12155823/1034e7369307/jcm-14-03851-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80d6/12155823/2524433a2860/jcm-14-03851-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80d6/12155823/1034e7369307/jcm-14-03851-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80d6/12155823/2524433a2860/jcm-14-03851-g002.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Spinal Anesthesia Results in Lower Costs Compared to General Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion-A Matched Cohort Study.

J Clin Med. 2025-5-30

[2]
Spinal versus general anesthesia for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications on operating room time, pain, and ambulation.

Neurosurg Focus. 2021-12

[3]
Comparative outcome analysis of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia in lumbar fusion surgery.

J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020-11-27

[4]
A perioperative cost analysis comparing single-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Spine J. 2014-8-1

[5]
Comparative perioperative narcotic use in tlif patients: Spinal versus general anesthesia in a retrospective cohort study of 180 cases in hospital and ambulatory settings.

Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2025-4

[6]
Spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery in high risk patients: Perioperative hemodynamic stability, complications and costs.

J Clin Anesth. 2018-1-6

[7]
Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Versus Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spinal Pathology: Clinical Outcome Comparison in Patients With Predominant Back Pain.

Clin Spine Surg. 2024-12-1

[8]
Implications of anesthetic approach, spinal versus general, for the treatment of spinal disc herniation.

J Neurosurg Spine. 2018-11-2

[9]
Spinal Anesthesia Reduces Perioperative Polypharmacy and Opioid Burden in Patients Over 65 Who Undergo Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

World Neurosurg. 2024-5

[10]
Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive midline lumbar interbody fusion versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

J Neurosurg Spine. 2019-9-13

本文引用的文献

[1]
Spinal Anesthesia for Awake Spine Surgery: A Paradigm Shift for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery.

J Clin Med. 2024-9-9

[2]
Spinal anesthesia in ambulatory patients.

Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2024-12-1

[3]
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guidelines and Hospital Length of Stay, Readmission, Complications, and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

JAMA Netw Open. 2024-6-3

[4]
Evolution of the Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): From Open to Percutaneous to Patient-Specific.

J Clin Med. 2024-4-14

[5]
Comparative outcomes of awake spine surgery under spinal versus general anesthesia: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

Eur Spine J. 2024-3

[6]
Awake Spinal Fusion Is Associated with Reduced Length of Stay, Opioid Use, and Time to Ambulation Compared to General Anesthesia: A Matched Cohort Study.

World Neurosurg. 2023-8

[7]
Comparison of the hemodynamic effects of opioid-based versus lidocaine-based induction of anesthesia with propofol in older adults: a randomized controlled trial.

Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2023-8

[8]
Degenerative Lumbar Spine Surgeries Under Regional Anesthesia in a Developing Country: An Initial Case Series.

Cureus. 2023-1-22

[9]
Recent Updates on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: Techniques, Technologies, and Indications.

Asian Spine J. 2022-12

[10]
Intraoperative Electromyography in Awake Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Case Study on Nerve Activation Under the Effects of Local Anesthesia.

J Clin Neurophysiol. 2022-11-1

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索