scholarly journals Bisphosphonates May Reduce Intraoperative Blood Loss in Surgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Vol Volume 16 ◽  
pp. 1943-1953
Author(s):  
Hao-Ran Zhang ◽  
Yun-Long Zhao ◽  
Rui-Qi Qiao ◽  
Ji-Kai Li ◽  
Yong-Cheng Hu
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Spinal Disease

scholarly journals Anaesthetic challenges for pelvic reconstruction with custom three-dimensional-printed titanium implants: A retrospective cohort study

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-377
Author(s):  
Alfred WY Chua ◽  
Matthew J Chua ◽  
Peter CA Kam ◽  
Demien Broekhuis ◽  
Sascha Karunaratne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Titanium Implants ◽  
Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Prolonged Surgery

Custom 3D printed titanium implant pelvic reconstructive surgery was implemented as a novel technique at our institutions in the last five years. It provided an option for pelvic bone malignancy patients who were previously deemed unsuitable for re-implantation of irradiated resected bone segments, as well as in revision total hip arthroplasty associated with excessive acetabular bone loss. A retrospective cohort study of the anaesthetic management of patients who underwent pelvic reconstructive surgery using custom 3D printed titanium implants from August 2013 to July 2018 was conducted. Twenty-seven patients were included in the study; 23 patients completed single-stage procedures with a mean (standard deviation) duration of surgery of 7.5 (3.3) hours (median 6.8, range 3.0–15.8 hours), and mean intraoperative blood loss of 5400 (3100) mL (median 6000, range 1400–10,000 mL). Surgery involving the sacrum ( n = 7) was associated with longer intensive care stay, longer total length of hospital stay and, in three cases, unplanned two-stage procedures. The twenty procedures not involving the sacrum were successfully completed in a single stage. The major anaesthetic challenges included massive blood loss, prolonged surgery, interventions to prevent calf compartment syndrome, and perioperative thromboembolism. Preoperative pelvic radiotherapy, malignant tumours, and procedures involving the sacrum were associated with massive intraoperative blood loss and more prolonged surgery.

scholarly journals Comparison between microendoscopic laminectomy and open posterior decompression surgery for single-level lumbar spinal stenosis: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nozomu Ohtomo ◽  
Hideki Nakamoto ◽  
Junya Miyahara ◽  
Yuichi Yoshida ◽  
Hiroyuki Nakarai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Open Group ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Satisfaction Rate ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background Microendoscopic laminectomy (MEL), in which a 16-mm tubular retractor with an internal scope is used, has shown excellent surgical results for patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. However, no reports have directly compared MEL with open laminectomy. This study aimed to elucidate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and perioperative complications in patients undergoing MEL versus open laminectomy. Methods This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study of prospectively registered patients who underwent lumbar spinal surgery at one of the six high-volume spine centers between April 2017 and September 2018. A total of 258 patients who underwent single posterior lumbar decompression at L4/L5 were enrolled in the study. With regard to demographic data, we prospectively used chart sheets to evaluate the diagnosis, operative procedure, operation time, estimated blood loss, and complications. The follow-up period was 1-year. PROs included a numerical rating scale (NRS) for lower back pain and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), and patient satisfaction with the treatment. Results Of the 258 patients enrolled, 252 (97%) completed the 1-year follow-up. Of the 252, 130 underwent MEL (MEL group) and 122 underwent open decompression (open group). The MEL group required a significantly shorter operating time and sustained lesser intraoperative blood loss compared with the open group. The MEL group showed shorter length of postoperative hospitalization than the open group. The overall complication rate was similar (8.2% in the MEL group versus 7.7% in the open group), and the revision rate did not significantly differ. As for PROs, both preoperative and postoperative values did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, the satisfaction rate was higher in the MEL group (74%) than in the open group (53%) (p = 0.02). Conclusions MEL required a significantly shorter operating time and resulted in lesser intraoperative blood loss compared with laminectomy. Postoperative PROs and complication rates were not significantly different between the procedures, although MEL demonstrated a better satisfaction rate.

scholarly journals Comparison Between Microendoscopic Laminectomy and Open Posterior Decompression Surgery for Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nozomu Ohtomo ◽  
Hideki Nakamoto ◽  
Junya Miyahara ◽  
Yuichi Yoshida ◽  
Hiroyuki Nakarai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Open Group ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Satisfaction Rate ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract BackgroundMicroendoscopic laminectomy (MEL), in which a 16-mm tubular retractor with an internal scope is used, has shown excellent surgical results for patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. However, no reports have directly compared MEL with open laminectomy. This study aimed to elucidate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and perioperative complications in patients undergoing MEL versus open laminectomy.MethodsThis is a multicenter retrospective cohort study of prospectively registered patients who underwent lumbar spinal surgery at one of the six high-volume spine centers between April 2017 and September 2018. A total of 258 patients who underwent single posterior lumbar decompression at L4/L5 were enrolled in the study. With regard to demographic data, we prospectively used chart sheets to evaluate the diagnosis, operative procedure, operation time, estimated blood loss, and complications. PROs included a numerical rating scale (NRS) for lower back pain and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), and patient satisfaction with the treatment. ResultsOf the 258 patients enrolled, 252 (97%) completed the 1-year follow-up. Of the 252, 130 underwent MEL (MEL group) and 122 underwent open decompression (open group). The MEL group required a significantly shorter operating time and sustained lesser intraoperative blood loss compared with the open group. The overall complication rate was similar (8.2% in the MEL group versus 7.7% in the open group), and the revision rate did not significantly differ. As for PROs, both preoperative and postoperative values did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, the satisfaction rate was higher in the MEL group (74%) than in the open group (53%) (p = 0.02). ConclusionsMEL required a significantly shorter operating time and resulted in lesser intraoperative blood loss compared with laminectomy. Postoperative PROs and complication rates were not significantly different between the procedures, although MEL demonstrated a better satisfaction rate.

scholarly journals Antithrombotic drugs have a minimal effect on intraoperative blood loss during emergency surgery for generalized peritonitis: a nationwide retrospective cohort study in Japan

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadashi Matsuoka ◽  
Nao Ichihara ◽  
Hiroharu Shinozaki ◽  
Kenji Kobayashi ◽  
Alan Kawarai Lefor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Emergency Surgery ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Confounding Factors ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Antithrombotic Drugs ◽  
Generalized Peritonitis ◽  
Blood Loss Volume

Abstract Background The effect of antithrombotic drugs on intraoperative operative blood loss volume in patients undergoing emergency surgery for generalized peritonitis is not well defined. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of antithrombotic drugs on intraoperative blood loss in patients with generalized peritonitis using a nationwide surgical registry in Japan. Method This retrospective cohort study used a nationwide surgical registry data from 2011 to 2017 in Japan. Propensity score matching for the use of antithrombotic drugs was used for the adjustment of age, gender, comorbidities, frailty, preoperative state, types of surgery, surgical approach, laboratory data, and others. The main outcome was intraoperative blood loss: comparison of intraoperative blood loss, ratio of intraoperative blood loss after adjusted for confounding factors, and variable importance of all covariates. Results A total of 70,105 of the eligible 75,666 patients were included in this study, and 2947 patients were taking antithrombotic drugs. Propensity score matching yielded 2864 well-balanced pairs. The blood loss volume was slightly higher in the antithrombotic drug group (100 [10–349] vs 70 [10–299] ml). After adjustment for confounding factors, the use of antithrombotic drugs was related to a 1.30-fold increase in intraoperative blood loss compared to non-use of antithrombotic drugs (95% CI, 1.16–1.45). The variable importance revealed that the effect of the use of antithrombotic drugs was minimal compared with surgical approach or type of surgery. Conclusion This study shows that while taking antithrombotic drugs is associated with a slight increase in intraoperative blood loss in patients undergoing emergency surgery for generalized peritonitis, the effect is likely of minimal clinical significance.

scholarly journals Comparison Between Bilateral Simultaneous Total Hip Arthroplasty With and Without Drainage; a Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min-Gwang Kim ◽  
Taek-Rim Yoon ◽  
Kyung-Soon Park
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Postoperative Bleeding ◽  
Total Blood Loss ◽  
Postoperative Blood Loss ◽  
Consecutive Series ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
Total Blood

Abstract BackgroundThere are many reports staged bilateral THA without drainage is a better method than with drainage in many ways. However, there is little report regarding bilateral simultaneous THA (BSTHA) without drainage. This study aimed to evaluate the differences in the clinical outcomes and complication rate of BSTHA with drainage and without drainage.MethodsBetween October 2015 and April 2019, a retrospective cohort study was conducted with modified minimally invasive two-incision method and a consecutive series of 41 BSTHA performed with drainage were compared to 37 BSTHA performed without drainage. It was assessed clinically and radiographically for a mean of 2.1 ± 0.8 years (range, 1.0-4.8 years). Postoperative hematologic values (Hgb drop, Hct drop, total blood loss, transfusion rate), pain susceptibility, functional outcome, and complication were compared in the drained group and the non-drained group. All patients preoperatively received intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA) and intraoperatively received intra-articular TXA on each hip. Statistical analyses were performed using the independent t tests, Chi-squared or Fisher’s exact tests. A significance level of ≤ 0.05 was used for all statistical tests.Results Mean postoperative Hgb (g/dL, p < 0.001) & Hct drop (%, p < 0.001), mean total blood loss (ml, p < 0.001) and mean transfusion unit (IU, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the BSTHA without drainage than in the BSTHA with drainage group. But the mean dose of morphine equivalent (mg, p < 0.001) was significantly larger in BSTHA without drainage.ConclusionBSTHA without drainage can reduce postoperative blood loss and the requirement for transfusion without increasing other complication. But BSTHA without drainage is more painful method than BSTHA with drainage. Therefore, BSTHA without drainage will be a good option to reduce the burden on the patient by reducing postoperative bleeding if it can control pain well after surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document