STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective comparative analysis of 64 patients with cauda equina syndrome (CES), who underwent either decompression alone (NF) or fusion (F) surgery. PURPOSE: We compared the outcomes and timing effects. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: CES can cause loss of autonomic control of vesicular function and lower limb neurological deficits. Prompt diagnosis and emergency surgery markedly improve outcome. Although decompression only is a mainstream technique, there is guarded recovery of vesicular dysfunction. Decompression ventrally in a narrow window requires manipulation of neural tissue in an already jeopardised critical canal and may accentuate irreversible damages. In F surgery, the adequate exposure leads to a lower neural manipulation. METHODS: Until January 2008, we treated CES with decompression (laminectomy and/or discectomy). However, from that month forward, all our single-level CES patients have received a fusion operation. In this study, characteristic categorical variables and outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: In a retrospective analysis of 64 patients, NF (n=37) and F (n=27) who received treatment, we found that both groups improved significantly on follow-up in all objective parameters. Although, the comparison of clinical and functional outcome data between the two groups was statistically insignificant, the average value of objective outcome such as vesicular function, low back pain (LBP), and complications was better for patients in F group compared with NF group. However, the patient satisfaction for the F group was also lower, in view of their residual symptoms and disabilities. Contrary to common perceptions, we found that the timing of surgery does not influence the recovery rate for either approach. CONCLUSIONS: Although both the techniques appear to be equally effective, the fusion approach overall showed a definite edge over non-fusion, with respect to reduced incidence of iatrogenic dural tears, LBP, and overall outcome, even despite the lower patient satisfaction.
Cauda Equina ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Decompression ; Diagnosis ; Diskectomy ; Emergencies ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Intervertebral Disc Displacement ; Low Back Pain ; Lower Extremity ; Patient Satisfaction ; Polyradiculopathy ; Retrospective Studies ; Spinal Fusion ; Tears

Background: s/Aims: The implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has demonstrated significant advantages for patients by mitigating surgical stress and expediting recovery across a spectrum of surgical procedures worldwide. This investigation seeks to assess the effectiveness of the ERAS protocol specifically in the context of major liver resections within our geographical region. Methods: Our department conducted retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, gathered from consenting individuals who underwent liver resections from January 2018 to December 2023. The assessment encompassed baseline characteristics, preoperative indications, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications among patients undergoing liver surgery. Results: Among the included 184 patients (73 standard care, 111 ERAS program), the baseline characteristics were similar. Median postoperative hospital stay differed significantly: 5 days (range: 3–13 days) in ERAS, and 11 days (range: 6–22 days) in standard care (p < 0.001). Prophylactic abdominal drainage was less in ERAS (54.9%) than in standard care (86.3%, p < 0.001). Notably, in ERAS, 88.2% initiated enteral feeding orally on postoperative day 1, significantly higher than in standard care (47.9%, p < 0.001). Early postoperative mobilization was more common in ERAS (84.6%) than in standard care (36.9%, p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were 21.9% in standard care, and 8.1% in ERAS (p = 0.004). Conclusions Our investigation highlights the merits of ERAS protocol; adherence to its diverse components results in significant reduction in hospital length of stay, and reduced occurrence of postoperative complications, improving short-term recovery post liver resection

Background: s/Aims: The implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has demonstrated significant advantages for patients by mitigating surgical stress and expediting recovery across a spectrum of surgical procedures worldwide. This investigation seeks to assess the effectiveness of the ERAS protocol specifically in the context of major liver resections within our geographical region. Methods: Our department conducted retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, gathered from consenting individuals who underwent liver resections from January 2018 to December 2023. The assessment encompassed baseline characteristics, preoperative indications, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications among patients undergoing liver surgery. Results: Among the included 184 patients (73 standard care, 111 ERAS program), the baseline characteristics were similar. Median postoperative hospital stay differed significantly: 5 days (range: 3–13 days) in ERAS, and 11 days (range: 6–22 days) in standard care (p < 0.001). Prophylactic abdominal drainage was less in ERAS (54.9%) than in standard care (86.3%, p < 0.001). Notably, in ERAS, 88.2% initiated enteral feeding orally on postoperative day 1, significantly higher than in standard care (47.9%, p < 0.001). Early postoperative mobilization was more common in ERAS (84.6%) than in standard care (36.9%, p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were 21.9% in standard care, and 8.1% in ERAS (p = 0.004). Conclusions Our investigation highlights the merits of ERAS protocol; adherence to its diverse components results in significant reduction in hospital length of stay, and reduced occurrence of postoperative complications, improving short-term recovery post liver resection

Background: s/Aims: The implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has demonstrated significant advantages for patients by mitigating surgical stress and expediting recovery across a spectrum of surgical procedures worldwide. This investigation seeks to assess the effectiveness of the ERAS protocol specifically in the context of major liver resections within our geographical region. Methods: Our department conducted retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, gathered from consenting individuals who underwent liver resections from January 2018 to December 2023. The assessment encompassed baseline characteristics, preoperative indications, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications among patients undergoing liver surgery. Results: Among the included 184 patients (73 standard care, 111 ERAS program), the baseline characteristics were similar. Median postoperative hospital stay differed significantly: 5 days (range: 3–13 days) in ERAS, and 11 days (range: 6–22 days) in standard care (p < 0.001). Prophylactic abdominal drainage was less in ERAS (54.9%) than in standard care (86.3%, p < 0.001). Notably, in ERAS, 88.2% initiated enteral feeding orally on postoperative day 1, significantly higher than in standard care (47.9%, p < 0.001). Early postoperative mobilization was more common in ERAS (84.6%) than in standard care (36.9%, p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were 21.9% in standard care, and 8.1% in ERAS (p = 0.004). Conclusions Our investigation highlights the merits of ERAS protocol; adherence to its diverse components results in significant reduction in hospital length of stay, and reduced occurrence of postoperative complications, improving short-term recovery post liver resection

Background: s/Aims: The implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has demonstrated significant advantages for patients by mitigating surgical stress and expediting recovery across a spectrum of surgical procedures worldwide. This investigation seeks to assess the effectiveness of the ERAS protocol specifically in the context of major liver resections within our geographical region. Methods: Our department conducted retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, gathered from consenting individuals who underwent liver resections from January 2018 to December 2023. The assessment encompassed baseline characteristics, preoperative indications, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications among patients undergoing liver surgery. Results: Among the included 184 patients (73 standard care, 111 ERAS program), the baseline characteristics were similar. Median postoperative hospital stay differed significantly: 5 days (range: 3–13 days) in ERAS, and 11 days (range: 6–22 days) in standard care (p < 0.001). Prophylactic abdominal drainage was less in ERAS (54.9%) than in standard care (86.3%, p < 0.001). Notably, in ERAS, 88.2% initiated enteral feeding orally on postoperative day 1, significantly higher than in standard care (47.9%, p < 0.001). Early postoperative mobilization was more common in ERAS (84.6%) than in standard care (36.9%, p < 0.001). Overall complication rates were 21.9% in standard care, and 8.1% in ERAS (p = 0.004). Conclusions Our investigation highlights the merits of ERAS protocol; adherence to its diverse components results in significant reduction in hospital length of stay, and reduced occurrence of postoperative complications, improving short-term recovery post liver resection