A New Neuroanesthetic Protocol of Rendering Specialized Care in Treating Degenerative Lumbar Spine Diseases in High-Risk Patients: Prospective Analysis of the Results

А. А. Калинин, V.Yu. Goloborodko, Yu. Ya. Pestryakov, Rustem A. Kundubayev, M.Yu. Biryuchkov, А. В. Щеголев, Vadim A. Byvaltsev

2024

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.17691/stm2024.16.3.06
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

is to assess the effectiveness of a new neuroanesthetic protocol for treating degenerative lumbar spine diseases in high-risk patients. Materials and Methods: Two groups of patients with a high risk of anesthesia and surgery determined by the authors' clinical decision support system (CDSS) have been prospectively studied. A new neuroanesthetic protocol was used in the experimental group (EG, n=25), while the control group (CG, n=25) underwent intravenous anesthesia based on propofol and fentanyl. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was performed in all cases. Changes of the intraoperative mean arterial pressure and heart rate, intensity of the local pain syndrome, amount of the opiates used, presence of cognitive disorders, adverse effects of anesthesia, and surgical complications have been compared. Results: The groups were representative (p>0.05) in terms of the age-gender parameters, anthropological data, comorbid background, involvement in smoking, preoperative characteristics of the lumbar spine, as well as the level of cognitive functions. No statistically significant changes of the mean arterial pressure (p=0.17) were registered in EG patients relative to the CG (p=0.0008). Intraoperative reduction of the heart rate in patients of the CG was not noted (p=0.49) in comparison with the EG (p=0.03). In the postoperative period, the best indicators of cognitive functions on the FAB test (p=0.02) and MoCA test (p=0.03) were revealed in EG. A significantly less amount of perioperative opiates (p=0.005) at a low level of the local pain syndrome was also noted (p=0.01). The intergroup analysis has shown fewer adverse effects of anesthesia in EG compared to CG (p=0.01) with a comparable number of postoperative surgical complications (p=0.42). Conclusion: A new neuroanesthetic protocol of rendering a specialized care to patients with a high risk of anesthesia and surgery, assessed by the authors-developed CDSS, has resulted in effective elimination of the local postoperative pain syndrome, reduction of perioperative application of opioids, and stabilization of intraoperative indicators of cardiovascular activity. In addition, no postoperative cognitive disorders, anesthetic side-effects, adverse pharmacological consequences of the complex usage of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, prolonged local anesthetics, alpha-2-agonist, and non-narcotic analgesics have been registered.