Subject: Medicine & Pharmacology, Allergology Keywords: adult spinal deformity; lumbosacral junction; anterior lumbar interbody fusion; bone morphogenetic protein; beta-tricalcium phosphate
Online: 28 December 2020 (12:06:09 CET)
Achievement of solid fusion of the lumbosacral junction (L5-S1 level) is an important factor in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. The purpose of this study is to explore the effectiveness and feasibility of injectable rhBMP-2 (a combination of Eschericia coli-derived rhBMP-2 and hydrogel type β-TCP carrier; NOVOSIS Inject) as a bone substitute for the fusion of lumbosacral junction. 20 patients (average age 69.1 years) diagnosed with ASD with sagittal imbalance who underwent surgical treatment including anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in the L5-S1 level were evaluated. Injectable rhBMP-2 was applied in L5-S1 ALIF and followed-up for 1-year. Solid fusion rates and changes of clinical outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Visual Analog Scale [VAS] of back and leg) were measured and analyzed at 6 and 12 months after surgery. All postoperative adverse events were evaluated about the association with injectable rhBMP-2. Fusion rates were 68.4% and 100% at 6 and 12 months after surgery. Compared to baseline, ODI were improved to 45.8% and 63.7%, VAS(back) were improved to 69.2% and 72.8%, and VAS(leg) were improved to 49.2% and 64.8% at 6 and 12 months after surgery (p<0.001, respectively). There were no adverse events associated with injectable rhBMP-2. Thus, injectable rhBMP-2 may be a suitable choice of a bone graft substitute when achieving solid interbody fusion in the lumbosacral junction.
ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints201811.0005.v1
Subject: Medicine & Pharmacology, Anesthesiology Keywords: anaesthesia, general; anaesthesia recovery period; single dose of rocuronium; sugammadex; neostigmine
Online: 8 November 2018 (14:00:01 CET)
There is a lack of data comparing sugammadex with anticholinesterase for the quality of anaesthesia recovery, especially following a single bolus dose of rocuronium. Thus, we evaluated the influence of reversal with sugammadex or neostigmine on post-operative quality of recovery by using the Post-operative Quality Recovery Scale (PQRS). A total of 86 patients undergoing trans-pars plana vitrectomy (TPPV) under general anaesthesia were intubated following a single bolus dose of rocuronium (0.6 mg/kg). At the end of surgery, patients were received either neostigmine or sugammadex. The quality of recovery was assessed using the PQRS at 15 minutes and 40 minutes after surgery, and on post-operative day 1. The recovery rate in the physiological domain was higher in the sugammadex group at 15 minutes after surgery (P = 0.02). Though there were no significant differences in the overall cognitive recovery domain, patients in the sugammadex group could recall more numbers in reverse order. However, there were no significant differences between the groups in the other domains of the PQRS. The use of sugammadex may increase the quality of the post-operative physiological recovery at early post-operative periods compared with neostigmine use following a single bolus dose of rocuronium in patients undergoing TPPV with general anaesthesia.