Retrospective Data Analysis and Literature Review for a Development of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Pathway for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

• Published in: Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) Vol. 12; no. 2; p. e6930
• Main Authors: Mesfin, Fassil B, Hoang, Stanley, Ortiz Torres, Michael, Ngnitewe Massa'a, Ruben, Castillo, Raul
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Cureus Inc 10.02.2020; Cureus
• Subjects: Anesthesiology; Antibiotics; Body mass index; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Dysphagia; Hospitals; Infections; Literature reviews; Males; Neurosurgery; Orthopedics; Patients; Recovery (Medical); Standard deviation; Steroids; Surgery; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; enhanced recovery after surgery; multimodal analgesia
• ISSN: 2168-8184; 2168-8184
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.6930

Objective While enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are associated with shorter length of stay and improved outcomes in multiple surgical specialties, its application to spine surgery has been limited. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common spinal procedure with a relative efficacy and safety profile that makes it suitable for the application of ERAS principles. Reviewing our outcomes and practice and incorporating evidence-based clinical studies, we propose the development of an ERAS pathway for ACDF. Methods This is a retrospective review of ACDF cases performed at a single institution by a single surgeon from 2014 to 2017. Primary outcome measures included length of stay, complications, and 30-day readmission rates. The 1- and 2-level and the 3- and 4-level groups were also each consolidated into a single cohort for comparison. A comprehensive review of evidence-based literature pertaining to ACDF was then performed. Best-practice recommendations derived from the literature were incorporated into the proposed ERAS protocol. Results In this series of 75 1-level, 77 2-level, 44 3-level and 20 4-level ACDF procedures, the average surgical time (minutes) was 68, 90, 118 and 141; length of stay (days) was 1, 1, 1.4, and 1.7; drain usage (%) was 1.3, 2.6, 13.6 and 10; and 30-day readmission rates (%) were 2.7, 3.9, 4.5, and 15, respectively. Combining the 1- and 2-level as a single group and 3- and 4-level as another cohort, the 3- and 4-level cohort had a significantly higher rate of drain usage and estimated blood loss (EBL) but there was not a difference in length-of-stay, complications or 30-day readmission rates. Conclusions Given the relative equivalent safety profile between 1- and 2-level as compared to 3- and 4-level ACDF, the proposed ERAS pathway can be applied to all patients, and not just restricted to 1-level or 2-level ACDF. Taking into account feasibility parameters as deduced from a review of institutional outcomes, this pathway can streamline same-day discharge and improve the patient experience. Its success will be predicated on an iterative improvement process deriving from optimal prospective outcome measurements.