Key result
Prophylactic norepinephrine infusion during posterior lumbar spinal fusion reduced in-hospital complications compared to control (18.3% vs 40.0%; RR 2.182; 95% CI 1.177-4.045; P=0.015).
Why the study?
The study explored the effect of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion on postoperative complications and hospitalization time in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion.
Does prophylactic norepinephrine infusion reduce postoperative complications and hospitalization time in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion?
RCT (n=129)
randomized
No
Does prophylactic norepinephrine infusion reduce postoperative complications and hospitalization time in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion?
Relative Risk: 2.182 (95% CI 1.177–4.045)
Absolute Event Rate: 18.3% vs 40%
p-value: p=0.015
Prophylactic norepinephrine infusion during general anesthesia for posterior lumbar spinal fusion in elderly patients significantly reduces postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.
Does not support routine norepinephrine prophylaxis in lumbar fusion; leaves open need for confirmatory RCTs.
This single‐center prospective randomized controlled trial explores the effect of prophylactic norepinephrine infusion on the incidence of complications and hospitalization time in elderly patients (60‐85 years old) undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion. In total, 129 elderly patients were randomized into two groups: a group that received norepinephrine during general anesthesia and a control group not receiving norepinephrine. The primary outcomes were in‐hospital complications and 90‐day postoperative complications and hospitalization time. The results show that in‐hospital complications occurred in 24 of 60 patients (40%) in the control group versus 11 of 60 patients (18.3%) in the norepinephrine group (RR, 2.182; 95% CI, 1.177–4.045; P = 0.015). Cardiac events occurred significantly more frequently in the control than in the norepinephrine group. Total number of patients experiencing complications within 90 days postoperatively was lower in the norepinephrine (11 of 60; 18.3%) than in the control group (26 of 60; 43.3%; RR, 2.364; 95% CI, 1.288–4.339; P = 0.005). The median length of hospital stay was 17 days (11–27) in the control group and 15 days (10– 23) in the norepinephrine group ( P = 0.01). The secondary outcomes were serum levels of syndecan‐1, hyaluronic acid, heparan sulfate, and brain natriuretic peptide. Logistic regression analysis is used to describe the relationship between selected independent variables and in‐hospital complications. Intraoperative total fluid, crystalloid, and colloid volumes were significantly higher in the control than in the norepinephrine group. The patients in the norepinephrine group had a higher MAP but a lower heart rate than those in the control group after the induction of anesthesia and intraoperatively. Syndecan‐1, hyaluronic acid, and heparan sulfate serum levels showed a different course in the two groups. In conclusion, prophylactic norepinephrine infusion during posterior lumbar spinal fusion is preferable for elderly patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion under general anesthesia. It can reduce postoperative complications and hospitalization time by reducing the injury to the vascular endothelium. This trial is registered with Clinical Trial Registration http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=33660 , identifier ChiCTR-1900021309 .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liang et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion (n=129). prophylactic norepinephrine infusion vs. control group not receiving norepinephrine was evaluated on in-hospital complications (RR 2.182, 95% CI 1.177-4.045, p=0.015). Prophylactic norepinephrine infusion during posterior lumbar spinal fusion reduced in-hospital complications compared to control (18.3% vs 40.0%; RR 2.182; 95% CI 1.177-4.045; P=0.015).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: