http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Ahmed Aoude (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Ahmed Aoude,Sultan Aldebeyan,Maryse Fortin,Anas Nooh,Peter Jarzem,Jean A. Ouellet,Michael H. Weber 대한척추외과학회 2017 Asian Spine Journal Vol.11 No.6
Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the rate of blood transfusion after cervical fusion surgery, and its effect on complication rates. Overview of Literature: Cervical spine fusions have gained interest in the literature since these procedures are now ever more frequently being performed in an outpatient setting with few complications. Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was used to identify patients that underwent cervical fusion from 2010 to 2013. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine postoperative complications associated with transfusion and cervical fusion. Results: We identified 11,588 patients who had cervical fusion between 2010 and 2013. The rate of blood transfusion following cervical fusion found to be 1.47%. All transfused patients were found to have increased risk of venous thromboembolism (TBE) (odds ratio [OR], 3.19; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.16–8.77), myocardial infarction (MI) (OR, 9.12; 95% CI, 2.53–32.8), increased length of stay (LOS) (OR, 28.03; 95% CI, 14.28–55.01) and mortality (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 1.44–11.93). Single level fusion had increased risk of TBE (OR, 3.37; 95% CI, 1.01–11.33), MI (OR, 10.5; 95% CI, 1.88–59.89), and LOS (OR, 14.79; 95% CI, 8.2–26.67). Multilevel fusion had increased risk of TBE (OR, 5.64; 95% CI, 1.15–27.6), surgical site infection (OR, 16.29; 95% CI, 3.34–79.49), MI (OR, 10.84; 95% CI, 2.01–58.55), LOS (OR, 26.56; 95% CI, 11.8–59.78), and mortality (OR, 10.24; 95% CI, 2.45–42.71). Patients who had anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery and received a transfusion had an increased risk of TBE (OR, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.04–22.82), surgical site infection (OR, 9.73; 95% CI, 2.14–44.1), MI (OR, 9.88; 95% CI, 1.87–52.2), increased LOS of more than 2 days (OR, 28.34; 95% CI, 13.79–58.21) and increase in mortality (OR, 6.3; 95% CI, 1.76–22.48). While, transfused patients who had posterior fusion surgery had increased risk of MI (OR, 10.45; 95% CI, 1.42–77.12) and increased LOS of more than 6 days (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 2.68–7.29). Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that although cervical fusions can be done as outpatient procedures special precautions and investigations should be done for patients who receive transfusion after cervical fusion. These patients are demonstrated to have higher rate of MI, TBE, wound infection and mortality when compared to those who do not receive transfusion.
-
Ahmed Aoude,Saber Ghadakzadeh,Hamzah Alhamzah,Maryse Fortin,Peter Jarzem,Jean A. Ouellet,Michael H. Weber 대한척추외과학회 2018 Asian Spine Journal Vol.12 No.1
Study Design: This study was designed as a survey amongst Canadian spine surgeon to determine a scoring system to standardize pedicle screw placement assessment. Purpose: This study aimed to obtain and analyze the opinions of spine surgeons regarding the assessment of pedicle screw accuracy, with the goal of establishing clinical guidelines for interventions for malpositioned pedicle screws. Overview of Literature: Accurate placement of pedicle screws is challenging, and misalignment can lead to various complications. To date, there is no recognized gold standard for assessing pedicle screw placement accuracy. The literature is lacking studies attempting to standardize pedicle screw placement accuracy assessment. Methods: A survey of the clinical methods and imaging criteria that are used for assessing pedicle screw placement accuracy was designed and sent to orthopedic and neurosurgery spine surgeons from the Canadian Spine Society for their anonymous participation. Results: Thirty-five surgeons completed the questionnaire. The most commonly used modalities for assessing pedicle screw position postoperatively were plain X-rays (97%) and computed tomography (CT, 97%). In both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, the most and least worrisome breaches were medial and anterior breaches, respectively. The majority of surgeons tended not to re-operate on asymptomatic breaches. More than 60% of surgeons would re-operate on patients with new-onset pain and a ≤4-mm medial or inferior breach in both thoracic and lumbar regions. If a patient experienced sensory loss and a breach on CT, in either the thoracic or lumbar levels, 90% and 70% of the surgeons would re-operate for a medial breach and an inferior breach, respectively. Conclusions: Postoperative clinical presentation and imaging findings are crucial for interpreting aberrant pedicle screw placement. This study presents a preliminary scoring system for standardizing the classification of pedicle screws.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
