SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “spinal pain”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

239 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Comparison of Ketamine and Pregabalin on Postoperative Opioid Usage and Pain Management in Spinal Fusion: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Spinal fusion is associated with substantial early postoperative pain and opioid exposure. Both ketamine and pregabalin are widely incorporated into Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols as opioid-sparing adjuncts. However, their comparative efficacy and safety in this specific setting remain uncertain. Our objective was to compare ketamine and pregabalin indirectly for early postoperative opioid consumption, pain, and adverse events in adults undergoing spinal fusion. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials were searched from inception through October 2025. Eligible studies were randomized trials enrolling adults undergoing instrumented spinal fusion, randomized to perioperative ketamine, pregabalin, or control, and reported extractable 24-hour opioid consumption or pain outcomes. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences in MME or VAS units, and adverse events were reported descriptively. A connected treatment network was analyzed using random-effects models. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (n=879) were included: ketamine (n=210), pregabalin (n=271), and control (n=398). Six trials contributed opioid data (3 ketamine, 3 pregabalin). Using pregabalin 150 mg as reference, ketamine was associated with lower 0-24-hour opioid use (MD -56.99 mg MME; 95% CI -99.56 to -14.43). Control (MD +21.31; 95% CI -1.05 to +43.66) and pregabalin 300 mg (MD -13.22; 95% CI -40.41 to +13.96) did not significantly differ from pregabalin 150 mg. Seven trials contributed 24-hour VAS data, with control being associated with higher pain versus pregabalin 150 mg (MD +0.84; 95% CI +0.01 to +1.66), while ketamine and pregabalin 300 mg were not k significantly different. Adverse events were generally infrequent and similar to control. CONCLUSIONS: Both ketamine and pregabalin provide early opioid sparing with comparable 24-hour analgesia. Ketamine showed a larger opioid-sparing point estimate, but indirect comparisons are imprecise. Adequately powered head-to-head trials with standardized protocols and adverse event reporting are needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Providing Feedback on Previous Pain Scores Did Not Affect Weekly Pain Variability: A Cohort-Nested Randomised Study.

BACKGROUND: Spinal pain is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide and repeated symptom monitoring is increasingly used to capture its fluctuating nature. However, repeated pain assessments may be influenced by prior responses, potentially affecting longitudinal patterns of pain reporting. This study examined whether providing feedback on prior pain scores influenced within-person variability in weekly pain intensity ratings and retention over 60 weeks. METHODS: This randomised study evaluating a methodological feature of repeated pain assessment was embedded within a cohort of adults with spinal pain referred to an outpatient hospital clinic. Participants (n = 2448) were randomised 1:1 to weekly pain intensity ratings (0-10 numerical rating scale) either with feedback ('You answered [X] last week') or without feedback. Analyses included participants with ≥ 40% valid responses (n = 1883), of whom 948 received feedback and 935 did not. The primary outcome was within-person variability in pain intensity, quantified using the root mean square of successive differences. Secondary outcomes included additional fluctuation metrics and the number of weeks with missing responses. RESULTS: No meaningful between-group differences were observed for the primary outcome (mean difference -0.04 points [95% confidence interval -0.08 to 0.01]) or secondary outcomes, including retention rates. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistent findings. CONCLUSIONS: Providing participants with feedback on their previous pain score did not meaningfully influence within-person pain variability or retention during 60 weeks of weekly monitoring. These findings aid the interpretation of repeated longitudinal pain assessments by showing that the observed variability was robust to this specific study design. SIGNIFICANCE: This randomised study showed that providing participants with feedback on prior pain scores did not meaningfully alter weekly pain variability or retention during 60 weeks of longitudinal monitoring. These findings contribute to the interpretation of repeated longitudinal pain assessments in spinal pain research and suggest that weekly pain reporting patterns are robust to prior-pain feedback during long-term symptom monitoring.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for surgical site infiltration in lumbar fusion: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Effective postoperative pain control after lumbar spine surgery remains challenging, and excessive opioid use is associated with adverse outcomes. Evidence comparing liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with conventional long-acting local anesthetics in spine surgery is limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, randomized, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded trial, adult undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion were assigned (1:1) to surgical site infiltration with either LB (266 mg) plus 25 mg plain bupivacaine (LB group) or ropivacaine (R group). The primary outcome was 72 h cumulative opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents, MME). Secondary outcomes included time-profile opioid consumption, pain scores, rescue analgesia, safety, and functional recovery. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Cumulative MME within 72 h was significantly lower in the LB group compared with the R group [43.0 (37.0, 58.0) mg vs. 58.0 (46.0, 73.0) mg], corresponding to a 22% relative reduction (GMR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.85; p < 0.001). The reduction was most pronounced during 8-24 h and 24-48 h postoperatively. Overall pain scores at rest and with movement, as well as 72-h pain AUC, were lower in the LB group. No significant between-group differences were observed in rescue analgesia, adverse events and functional recovery. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion, surgical site infiltration with an LB-based combined regimen, compared with ropivacaine monotherapy, reduced 72-h opioid consumption and cumulative postoperative pain burden without an observed increase in adverse events or impairment of early functional recovery.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery for spine multiple myeloma-a systematic review.

Spinal involvement in multiple myeloma (MM) commonly results in pain, vertebral instability, epidural spinal cord compression, and neurological deficits. Although conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) remains the standard radiation modality because of the radiosensitive nature of MM, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has emerged as a highly conformal treatment option capable of delivering focal high-dose radiation while sparing adjacent spinal cord structures and uninvolved bone marrow. This systematic review evaluated the clinical outcomes and safety profile of SRS for spinal MM. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies evaluating SRS for spinal MM. Extracted variables included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment parameters, radiographic outcomes, pain response, neurological outcomes, local control, overall survival, and adverse events. Three retrospective studies comprising 133 patients and 181 treated spinal lesions met the inclusion criteria. Median patient age ranged from 59 to 65 years, with a slight male predominance across studies. Thoracic spine lesions represented the most treated region (55.5-67.7%). Median prescribed SRS dose was 14-16 Gy, predominantly delivered in a single fraction. Median follow-up ranged from 11.2 to 27.8 months. Local control rates ranged from 89.4 to 100%, with 6- and 12-month local control rates of 94% and 91%, respectively, in one study. Pain improvement was reported in 41-88% of treated patients/sites, with a median time to pain relief of 1.6 months in one cohort. Neurological improvement occurred in 56-71.4% of patients with preexisting deficits. Reported adverse events included vertebral compression fractures, fracture progression, pain flare, and tracheoesophageal fistula. De novo vertebral fractures ranged from 3.6 to 7%, while fracture progression ranged from 14 to 18%. SRS appears to provide excellent local control and meaningful pain and neurological improvement in patients with spinal MM, with acceptable toxicity profiles. The highly conformal nature of SRS may preserve uninvolved bone marrow and facilitate continuation of systemic therapy. However, the current evidence is limited to small retrospective studies with heterogeneous reporting, and further prospective comparative studies are needed to better define the role of SRS relative to conventional EBRT in spinal MM.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of analgesic efficacy of pericapsular group of nerve block versus anterior quadratus lumborum block in adult patients undergoing unilateral hip arthroplasty: A comparative randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty is a painful surgical procedure; therefore, it is a challenge to manage effective pain control during the perioperative period. STUDY OBJECTIVES: We compared the analgesic efficacy of the pericapsular nerve group block and the anterior quadratus lumborum block in patients undergoing unilateral hip arthroplasty. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: Operating room of a tertiary care center. PATIENTS: 92 adult patients of >18 years who underwent elective, unilateral total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia were randomized to either Group P (USG guided PENG block with 30 ml 0.25% ropivacaine +4 mg dexamethasone) or Group Q (USG guided QL block with 30 ml 0.25% ropivacaine +4 mg dexamethasone) 20 min before surgery. MEASUREMENTS: We compared the total perioperative fentanyl consumption between the two groups in the first 24 h as the primary outcome. Other outcomes included time to first rescue analgesia in the postoperative period, NRS scores at rest and on movement at 0, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h, incidence of intraoperative hemodynamic changes, and incidence of postoperative PONV. MAIN RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the total fentanyl consumption between the two groups: 237.5 (150-450) μg in the P group and 250 (125-400) μg in the Q group; p = 0.617. The time to first rescue analgesia was similar in both groups: the P group (198 [123-268] minutes) and the Q group (241 [180-318] minutes); p = 0.120. There was also no difference in pain scores, intraoperative hemodynamic changes, or PONV. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the perioperative opioid consumption, pain scores, and adverse event rates between the pericapsular nerve group block and anterior quadratus lumborum block in adult patients undergoing unilateral hip arthroplasty. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI number: CTRI/2023/08/057157).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty combined with minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation versus percutaneous vertebroplasty alone in the treatment of elderly osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.

The study aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) combined with minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation versus PVP alone in elderly patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). Ninety-four elderly patients with OVCF were randomly classified into the control (47 patients) and combined (47 patients) groups. The control group received PVP, while the combined group received PVP combined with minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation. Perioperative indicators such as intraoperative blood lose, operative time, and hospitalization time were recorded. Pain was assessed using the VAS before and at baseline and 1, 3, and 7 days postoperatively. At 1 and 3 days postoperatively, Serum CRP levels, WBC, and neutrophil counts were measured postoperatively. Radiographic outcomes (vertebral height ratio and Cobb angle), ADL scores, JOA scores, and ODI were evaluated preoperatively and at 3 months post-operation. Postoperative complications were documented. Baseline characteristics were comparable. The combined group showed superior pain relief, vertebral height restoration, Cobb angle correction, functional recovery, and reduced inflammatory markers (CRP, WBC, neutrophils) postoperatively (all P < 0.05). Blood loss and hospital stay were shorter in the combined group, though operative time was longer (P < 0.05). Complication rates did not differ significantly (P > 0.05). PVP combined with minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation yields better outcomes in elderly OVCF patients by enhancing pain control, vertebral height, and functional recovery without increasing perioperative risk.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of posterior cellular bonegraft options for single-level lumbar spinal fusion: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Iliac bone autograft (IBG) is osteoinductive/osteogenic/osteoconductive but requires an additional harvesting procedure with known morbidities. Bone morphogenic protein (BMP) is osteoinductive and effective in obtaining fusion but is used off label for posterior fusion, has multiple side effects, and is expensive. Stem cell bone products, both auto- and allograft are attractive osteoinductive alternatives that avoid morbidity related to the graft donor site and may have a better safety profile than BMP. Morcelized allograft bone is osteoconductive but not osteoinductive or osteogenic. PURPOSE: Evaluate and compare the effectiveness of 6 types of viable or osteoinductive bone graft material in obtaining a solid posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for single level anterior/posterior lumbar spinal fusion. The bone grafts were IBG, BMP, autogenous stem cells (MSC) from concentrated bone marrow aspirate (BMA), allograft MSC from bone marrow, adipose tissue, or amniotic fluid, combined with inert cancellous allograft (Allo). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective, single-blinded randomized study of 6 cohorts and inert historical control. PATIENT SAMPLE: Elective anterior-posterior lumbar spinal fusion of 175 patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessments included pre and postoperative back and leg pain (VAS) scores, pain drawing, disability (ODI) scores, pain medication usage, and 1-year postoperative thin-cut CT scans (read by blinded radiologists). METHODS: Patients who were surgical candidates for a 1-level anterior/posterior lumbar fusion were randomized to 1 of 6 types of posterior bone graft alternatives: IBG, BMP, BMA, allograft MSC derived from bone marrow combined with morcelized Allo (cAlloBone), adipose derived MSC combined with morcelized Allo (cAlloFat), or amnion derived MSC combined with morcelized Allo (cAlloAm). Historical Allo patients served as a negative control group. Each group (n 27) had prospective outcomes and were followed for a minimum of 2 years. Fusion rate and outcomes were compared and referenced to Allo group. RESULTS: All but 5 patients had a solid ASF. The posterior fusion rates were 98% for IBG, 94% for BMP, 85% for BMA, 67% for cAlloBone, 64% for cAlloFat, 62% for cAlloAm, and 50% for Allo. Outcomes were significantly improved for all measures for all groups and there was no difference between groups except cAlloFat had slightly greater improvement in back pain in the 7-12 month follow-up period. BMP was the most expensive graft material; cellular allografts had a high-cost relative to fusion rate. CONCLUSIONS: For single level ASF/PSF, the PSF fusion rate was significantly greater for IBG and BMP followed by BMA. Various allograft MSC bone graft options resulted in lower fusion rates but may be greater than Allo. Outcomes were uniformly improved regardless of the type of graft used or the fusion status of the posterior fusion as long as the interbody fusion was solid. If bone graft cost savings is a consideration for PSF, then IBG has the greatest radiographic value, and Allo the greatest clinical value as long as the anterior interbody fusion is solid.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The analgesic efficacy of intrathecal morphine compared to peripheral regional analgesia in total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following elective total hip arthroplasty, pain continues to be a significant problem. Intrathecal morphine or peripheral regional analgesia, that is local infiltration analgesia or peripheral nerve block, are common analgesic modalities, but it is still not known which is superior. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: The following electronic databases were searched from inception to 24 March 2026: CENTRAL; Ovid Embase; Ovid MEDLINE; Scopus; and Web of Science. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared intrathecal morphine to peripheral regional analgesia in patients scheduled for elective total hip arthroplasty under general or spinal anaesthesia. RESULTS: Eight trials and 471 patients were included. The peripheral regional analgesia was peripheral nerve block in six trials and local infiltration analgesia in two trials. No difference was demonstrated between intrathecal morphine and peripheral regional analgesia in regard to the first coprimary outcome, the pain score at rest at 24 h. The quality of evidence was moderate. Intrathecal morphine was found to be superior to peripheral regional analgesia with respect to the second coprimary outcome, the cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h. Mean difference (95% CI) was 11.38 mg (4.31-18.45; P  = 0.002, I2  = 81%). The quality of evidence was low. Intrathecal morphine was revealed to be superior to peripheral regional analgesia at 8-12 h for the pain score at rest, 1.24 (0.60-1.88); P  = 0.0001, I2  = 68%; pain score on movement, 1.15 (0.12-2.17), P  = 0.03, I2  = 65%; but the rate of in hospital pruritus was reduced with peripheral regional analgesia, 0.31 (0.17-0.58), P  = 0.0002, I2  = 0%. No differences in functional status were shown. CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference between intrathecal morphine and peripheral regional analgesia in regard to pain score at rest at 24 h. Intrathecal morphine may lead to a favourable effect on some but not all analgesic indices compared to peripheral regional analgesia in elective total hip arthroplasty. The quality of evidence for these positive effects was low. Intrathecal morphine reduced the systemic opioid consumption, but is not in itself an opioid free strategy. This notion is supported by the increased incidence of in hospital pruritus with intrathecal morphine. The quality of evidence for this was high. In view of the quality of evidence, high quality randomised controlled trials are required to substantiate these results.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative Evaluation of Virtual Reality versus Standard Nursing Care in Managing Pain and Fear during Lumbar Puncture Procedures: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Meningitis is a serious infectious disease that can cause significant morbidity and long-term neurological problems. Although a lumbar puncture is a necessary diagnostic procedure, it is often accompanied by discomfort, anxiety, and fear, which can severely impact the patient's experience. Although there is few data on its application prior to lumbar puncture in adult patients with meningitis, immersive virtual reality (VR) has become a promising non-pharmacological technique for lowering procedural distress. Thus, among individuals undergoing lumbar punctures, this randomized controlled research assessed how well pre-procedural VR reduced pain, anxiety, and fear while enhancing patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) in reducing pain and fear among adults undergoing lumbar puncture (LP) compared with standard care protocol. METHODS: A randomised clinical trial was conducted from May to October 2025, using a single-blind, true experimental design. A total of 85 patients were randomly assigned to either the VR intervention group ( n = 41) or the control group receiving standard care ( n = 44). Pain levels were assessed using a visual analogue scale. Fear was assessed using the Multidimensional Fear-of-Injection Scale. Data were analysed using SPSS version 26. RESULTS: According to the study, the findings revealed a significant reduction in pain levels among the study group following the VR intervention, with mean pain scores dropping from 7.54 ± 1.925 to 2.49 ± 0.675. In contrast, the control group showed increased pain intensity, with mean scores rising from 6.84 ± 1.842 to 8.36 ± 1.348. The VR group showed a significant reduction in fear scores across all domains, whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group. Direct fear decreased from 20.12 ± 1.71 to 9.44 ± 2.00, indirect fear from 17.24 ± 1.46 to 8.66 ± 2.24, physiological response improved from 0.34 ± 0.66 to 3.00 ± 1.00 and avoidance behaviour decreased from 16.71 ± 1.49 to 7.80 ± 1.85. CONCLUSIONS: The research shows that the use of VR prior to LP significantly reduces level of pain and fear compared to standard care. These results support VR as a non-pharmacological intervention for fear and pain to improve patient experience during invasive procedures. In contrast, the control group experienced no improvement.Trial Registration: The IRCT code for the trial was IRCT ID 20250803066743N1.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Multilevel Revision Percutaneous Vertebroplasty in Elderly Patients With Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are common complications of osteoporosis in elderly patients. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) provides pain relief and functional improvement, but some patients require revision due to refracture, cement failure, or new symptomatic levels. While outcomes of primary and multilevel augmentation have been described, systematic data on multilevel revision PVP remain rare. The aim of this study was to evaluate pain relief, functional improvement, and perioperative safety after three- and four-level revision PVP in elderly patients with osteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center cohort included patients aged 75-85 years who underwent revision PVP between August 2019 and November 2023. Eligible cases had a history of prior PVP and required repeat augmentation of three or four vertebral levels in a single session. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for functional disability were recorded preoperatively and at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Nine patients were analyzed. Revision involved three levels in five patients and four levels in four patients, with a mean interval of 14.1 months after the index procedure. Mean VAS improved from 8.3 ± 0.7 preoperatively to 3.2 ± 0.6 at 12 months (61% reduction, p < 0.01). ODI improved from 75.2% ± 3.4% to 26.9% ± 2.7% (64% reduction, p < 0.01). All patients exceeded the minimal clinically important difference thresholds. No perioperative complications such as cement leakage, neurological deficits, or pulmonary events were observed. CONCLUSION: Three- and four-level revision PVP provided significant pain relief and functional improvement in elderly patients with osteoporotic fractures, without increased complication rates. To our knowledge, this represents one of the first reports addressing this topic, suggesting it is an effective option in carefully selected patients.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion With Lateral Vertebral Screw Fixation Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Severe Lumbar Stenosis: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The benefits of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) vs transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in severe lumbar stenosis (Schizas C/D) remain uncertain. This randomized trial compared clinical, radiographic, and safety outcomes of OLIF and TLIF. METHODS: From November 2018 to December 2021, a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolled 260 adults with single-level severe stenosis and instability. In total, 224 patients were randomized to OLIF or TLIF. Prespecified outcomes followed consolidated standards of reporting trials. Primary outcomes were visual analog scale back/leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), with minimal clinically important difference thresholds of ODI ≥12-13 points or ≥30% improvement, and visual analog scale ≥1.5-2.0 points. Radiographic measures included disc height, lumbar and segmental lordosis, and canal cross-sectional area (CSA). Complications were recorded. Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review board, the trial was registered with ISRCTN.com , and all patients provided written informed consent. RESULTS: In total, 224 patients were randomized, 5 were lost to follow-up (TLIF n = 2, OLIF n = 3). Baseline features were comparable. OLIF was associated with shorter operative time, less blood loss, earlier ambulation, and shorter hospital stay (all P < .05). Both groups achieved significant, clinically meaningful improvements. OLIF showed greater back pain reduction at 3-6 months and 2 years ( P < .05) and superior ODI improvement at 3 and 6 months ( P < .001), although long-term ODI scores were similar. Radiographically, OLIF provided greater restoration of disc height and segmental lordosis (all P < .001) and demonstrated progressive CSA increase (dynamic decompression), whereas TLIF achieved immediate, sustained CSA enlargement. Fusion rates were comparable at 1-2 years. Complication rates were low and similar (7.3% TLIF vs 5.5% OLIF), with most OLIF-specific events transient. CONCLUSION: Both OLIF and TLIF yield improvements in severe lumbar stenosis. OLIF offers perioperative advantages, earlier functional recovery, radiographic restoration, and dynamic canal remodeling, supporting its role as an equivalent alternative for lumbar spinal stenosis with some secondary advantages.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

MIS-TLIF Versus Open TLIF in Combined Lumbar Stenosis and Low-Grade Spondylolisthesis : Of Discharge Timing and Treatment Pricing.

STUDY DESIGN: An open-label, randomized, noninferiority clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of the MIS-TLIF over the O-TLIF in patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis combined with low-grade spondylolisthesis by comparing the clinical efficacy and safety. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In patients with combined lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis, it remains uncertain whether minimally invasive fusion surgery is noninferior to the open approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an open-label, noninferiority trial involving patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis combined with low-grade spondylolisthesis. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either MIS-TLIF or open TLIF surgery. The primary endpoint was the reduction in the Oswestry disability index (ODI) score from baseline to three months postsurgery, with a noninferiority margin of 12 points. Secondary outcomes included three-month changes from baseline in back and leg pain, neuropathic pain, satisfaction with treatment, intraoperative data, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: In the modified intention-to-treat population, the mean difference was 0.4, with the corresponding 90% CI of -5.7 to 6.5, having a lower bound below the noninferiority margin of 12. Similar results were obtained by analysis of the per-protocol population. 82.8% of patients achieved the MCID for the ODI. Results for secondary outcomes (clinical scales, complications) showed no significant differences between the treatment groups (all P >0.05). Although the open TLIF group had a hospital stay that was 1.5 days longer ( P =0.005) and required additional analgesia more frequently ( P =0.026), direct costs were 10.5% higher in the MIS-TLIF group ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first high-quality study comparing open TLIF and MIS-TLIF with a validated primary endpoint. Among patients with combined lumbar degenerative stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis, MIS-TLIF resulted in clinical outcomes at three months that were noninferior to those with open TLIF.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring Using Propofol-Fentanyl Versus Desflurane-Dexmedetomidine Anesthesia During Spinal Cord Tumor Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing resection of spinal cord tumours require intraoperative neuromonitoring. Transcranial electrical stimulation is used to record myogenic responses during surgery. This study aimed to compare the effect of 2 anaesthetic regimens, propofol/fentanyl versus desflurane/dexmedetomidine, on the ability to record MEPs with an amplitude of 50 µV or greater. Our secondary outcome compared intraoperative haemodynamics, recovery profile, and postoperative analgesia between the groups. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, open-label, single-centre, randomized controlled trial of 50 adult patients undergoing spinal cord tumour resection with TcmMEP monitoring. Patients were randomized to 2 groups: Group P (n=25) received intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and fentanyl; group D (n=25) received desflurane and dexmedetomidine. RESULTS: We recorded TcmMEP's in 80% of group P and 76% group D (95% CI: -23% to 31%, P =1.00). The time in minutes for spontaneous breathing (21.04±11.31 vs. 8.00±3.42 [8.29-,17.79, P =0.01]), extubation (31.56±17.56 vs. 10.84±3.99 [13.48-27.96; P =0.01]), emergence (33.68±18.11 vs. 10.92±4.01 [15.30-30.22, P =0.001]), discharge readiness (45.00±25.24 vs. 15.56±6.08 [19.00-39.88; P =0.001]) and requirement of first analgesia (136.6±108.04 vs. 230.8±81.33) (-148.58 to -39.82; P =0.01) was lower in group D compared with group P. Postoperative analgesia assessed using the Visual Analogue Score was lower in group D compared with group P at 12 and 24 hours. (1.68±1.18 vs. 0.64±1.31 [0.33-1.74 P =0.001]) :1.4±0.95 vs. 0.36± 0.70 (0.56-1.51; P =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found similar rates of successful TcMEP monitoring using desflurane-dexmedetomidine and propofol-fentanyl. Patients who received desflurane-dexmedetomidine had reduced emergence time, discharge readiness, and lower pain scores in the postoperative period.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Feasibility and barriers to same-day physical therapy following lumbar fusion surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of same-day (postoperative day 0; POD0) physical therapy (PT) following lumbar fusion and to identify factors associated with failure to participate. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed prospectively collected data from patients undergoing single-level posterior spinal fusion (PSF), with or without anterior (ALIF) or lateral (LLIF) interbody fusion, between January and December 2024 at a single institution. A standardized POD0 PT protocol was implemented for eligible patients. Patients were categorized into two groups: successful POD0 PT (ambulatory on POD0) and unable to participate. Demographic and surgical variables were compared between groups. Reasons for inability to participate were recorded and categorized. RESULTS: Among 129 patients in whom POD0 PT was attempted, 84 (65%) successfully participated, while 45 (35%) were unable. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, ASA class, operative time, estimated blood loss, or surgical approach between groups. Patients who successfully completed POD0 PT had a significantly shorter hospital length of stay compared to those who did not (3.4 ± 1.6 vs 5.8 ± 2.9 days, P < 0.001), with no differences in complication rates, discharge disposition, emergency department visits, or reoperation rates. The most common barriers to POD0 PT were postoperative pain, medical issues (e.g., orthostatic hypotension, nausea, dizziness), and anesthesia-related somnolence. Less common factors included postoperative restrictions and logistical issues such as brace availability. CONCLUSIONS: POD0 PT following lumbar fusion is feasible in the majority of patients and is associated with a shorter hospital stay without increased complications. Failure to participate was not associated with the baseline patient or surgical characteristics evaluated in this study. Instead, the most common barriers were postoperative pain, transient medical issues, and anesthesia-related somnolence, suggesting that optimization of modifiable perioperative factors may improve the implementation of POD0 PT.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Postoperative Curvature Loss in Three-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Zero-Profile Device.

PURPOSE: Cervical curvature loss is a frequent complication following 3-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using a Zero-Profile device. Consequently, the capacity of this device to maintain cervical sagittal alignment in 3-level ACDF remains highly controversial. This study aimed to identify potential predictors for postoperative curvature loss (PCL) and evaluate its impact on clinical outcomes. METHODS: A total of 113 patients who underwent ACDF for 3-level cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD) between January 2021 and December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic data, radiological parameters, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Radiographic measures included cervical curvature, T1 slope, C2-7 sagittal vertical axis, and titanium plate and endplate (TPE) distance. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores. Statistical analyses were performed using paired and independent t-tests, as well as Pearson correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The average curvature loss was 6.82° from 1 week postoperatively to the final follow-up (p < 0.001). However, the final curvature (11.65°) was maintained, representing a 4.33° improvement compared to preoperative values. Significant correlations were observed between PCL and preoperative curvature (r = -0.368, p = 0.013), preoperative T1 slope (r = -0.546, p < 0.001), ∆T1 slope (r = 0.443, p = 0.002), and ∆TPE distance (r = 0.417, p = 0.004). PCL did not correlate with Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores or arm VAS scores at the final follow-up. Nevertheless, patients with a PCL ≥ 6° exhibited significantly higher neck VAS (p = 0.028) and NDI scores (p = 0.041). CONCLUSION: Although contiguous 3-level ACDF with a Zero-Profile device may result in PCL, it preserves an improved cervical lordosis compared to the preoperative baseline. Low preoperative curvature and a low preoperative T1 slope are potentially predictive factors for PCL. Postoperative changes in TPE distance and T1 slope are significantly associated with PCL, suggesting a potential biomechanical link that requires direct validation. Furthermore, PCL may lead to higher neck VAS and NDI scores. Consequently, the Zero-Profile device may require careful consideration in 3-level CDDD patients presenting with low preoperative curvature and a low T1 slope. Importantly, the 6° PCL threshold identified is preliminary and requires prospective validation before clinical application.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The Impact of Baseline Negative Emotions on Postoperative Quality of Life in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Patients: A 2-Year Follow-Up Study.

OBJECTIVE: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a three-dimensional spinal deformity that develops during puberty without a clear etiology. Beyond physical manifestations, AIS severely impacts adolescents' psychological and social well-being, leading to anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem. While advancements in surgical techniques have enhanced objective outcomes, existing studies on AIS have primarily focused on objective indices, with limited attention to the long-term impact of preoperative negative emotions on patient-reported subjective quality of life. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. A total of 112 eligible AIS patients who underwent posterior spinal correction surgery between April and August 2023 were enrolled. Inclusion criteria included confirmed AIS, completion of 2-year follow-up, and informed consent; exclusion criteria included missing imaging/questionnaire data, comorbid psychiatric/neurological diseases, or prior spinal surgery. Patients were grouped using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) administered on admission. Quality of life was assessed preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively using the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22, evaluating self-image, mental health, pain, function, treatment satisfaction) and Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36, assessing 8 physical and mental health dimensions). Statistical analysis was performed via SPSS, using independent t-tests, paired t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test, and chi-square test. p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics (age, gender, BMI, surgical parameters, scoliosis type, preoperative/postoperative Cobb angles) between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Preoperatively, SRS-22 and SF-36 scores showed no inter-group differences (all p > 0.05). Postoperatively, the Negative Emotion Group had significantly lower scores in SRS-22 mental health (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 4.5 ± 0.2) and treatment satisfaction (4.0 ± 0.3 vs. 4.6 ± 0.7), as well as SF-36 general health (68.6 ± 6.4 vs. 79.7 ± 13.3), role-emotional (61.3 ± 9.3 vs. 70.8 ± 9.7), and mental health (61.8 ± 14.3 vs. 68.9 ± 10.7) (all p < 0.05); no inter-group differences were observed in physical function-related dimensions. Both groups showed significant improvements in physical function-related dimensions postoperatively. The Non-Negative Emotion Group also exhibited significant improvements in SRS-22 self-image/pain and SF-36 bodily pain (all p < 0.05), while the Negative Emotion Group showed no significant improvements in these dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative anxiety and depression do not affect the recovery of physical function in AIS patients after spinal correction surgery but significantly impede improvements in subjective quality of life dimensions, including mental health and treatment satisfaction. These findings highlight the need to integrate psychological assessment and targeted interventions into the perioperative management of AIS. Such a patient-centered approach will help optimize both physical and psychological outcomes, ultimately achieving comprehensive rehabilitation for AIS adolescents.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy of a multimodal conservative rehabilitation program for bladder control in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury: A randomized controlled trial.

ObjectiveThe study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a multimodal intervention on urodynamic outcomes, urinary incontinence severity, and pelvic floor muscle strength in individuals with overactive bladder after incomplete spinal cord injury.MethodsA single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted on 74 male participants diagnosed with overactive bladder and incomplete spinal cord injury. Participants were randomly assigned to an experimental group or a control group. Treatment was conducted for 8 weeks, three sessions per week. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and the 8-week follow-up.ResultsThe experimental group showed significantly greater improvements in the measured outcomes compared with the control group (P < 0.001).ConclusionIncorporating a multimodal regimen demonstrated significant efficacy in enhancing bladder capacity, continence, and muscle function in individuals with overactive bladder due to incomplete spinal cord injury.Clinical trial registry (ID: NCT07008157).https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07008157?cond=Spinal%20Cord%20Injuries&intr=Multimodal%20Rehabilitation%20Program&viewType=Card&rank=1.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparing the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral spinal anesthesia has gained increasing attention in recent years. Emerging evidence suggests that it provides comparable analgesia to conventional bilateral spinal anesthesia while reducing adverse effects, and its efficacy and safety compared to bilateral spinal anesthesia remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia. DESIGN: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 10, 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included studies were randomized controlled trials involving adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing surgery under spinal anesthesia, comparing unilateral versus bilateral spinal anesthesia for efficacy and adverse effects. Studies that focused exclusively on either unilateral or bilateral spinal anesthesia were excluded. The comparator group used the same local anesthetic as the experimental group, with no restrictions on adjuncts (e.g. fentanyl, morphine). RESULTS: Nineteen randomized controlled trials including 1191 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with bilateral spinal anesthesia, unilateral spinal anesthesia has a longer onset of sensory blockade (MD = 2.58, 95% CI: 0.93 to 4.22, p = 0.002), a shorter duration of sensory blockade (MD = -27.83, 95% CI: -39.25 to -16.42, p < 0.00001). In addition, unilateral spinal anesthesia significantly reduced the incidence of hypotension (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.52, p < 0.0001), nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.56, p = 0.002), and post-dural puncture headache (RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.81, p = 0.009). No statistically significant differences were observed in bradycardia and urinary retention. Collectively, these findings support unilateral spinal anesthesia as a strategy that may enhance perioperative safety while maintaining adequate anesthetic efficacy in appropriately selected patients. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral spinal anesthesia may offer a favorable balance between anesthetic efficacy and safety compared with bilateral spinal anesthesia, although its clinical utility may depend on surgical duration and patient characteristics.

Humans↗