3.8 Review

Optimizing Preoperative Chronic Pain Management in Elective Spine Surgery Patients: A Narrative Review of Outcomes with Opioid and Adjuvant Pain Therapies

Journal

JBJS REVIEWS
Volume 11, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.23.00156

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic preoperative opioid use has negative effects on spine surgery outcomes. A consistent definition and higher level evidence studies are needed to understand the risks and establish weaning periods and dose thresholds. Spinal cord stimulators and intrathecal drug delivery devices show promise in managing chronic back pain, but further investigation on their mechanisms is necessary.
>> Chronic preoperative opioid use negatively affects outcomes after spine surgery, with increased complications and reoperations, longer hospital stays, decreased return-to-work rates, worse patient-reported outcomes, and a higher risk of continued opioid use postoperatively.>> The definition of chronic opioid use is not consistent across studies, and a more specific and consistent definition will aid in stratifying patients and understanding their risk of inferior outcomes.>> Preoperative weaning periods and maximum dose thresholds are being established, which may increase the likelihood of achieving a meaningful improvement after surgery, although higher level evidence studies are needed.>> Spinal cord stimulators and intrathecal drug delivery devices are increasingly used to manage chronic back pain and are equivalent or perhaps even superior to opioid treatment, although few studies exist examining how patients with these devices do after subsequent spine surgery.>> Further investigation is needed to determine whether a true mechanistic explanation exists for spine-related analgesia related to spinal cord stimulators and intrathecal drug delivery devices.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available