Sykes, David AWTabarestani, Troy QChaudhry, Nauman SSalven, David SShaffrey, Christopher IBullock, W MichaelGuinn, Nicole RGadsden, JeffreyBerger, MilesAbd-El-Barr, Muhammad M2023-06-122023-06-122023-051878-87501878-8769https://hdl.handle.net/10161/27922<h4>Objective</h4>There is increasing interest in awake spinal fusion under spinal anesthesia (SA). Evidence supporting SA has been positive, albeit limited. The authors set out to investigate the effects of SA vs general anesthesia (GA) for spinal fusion procedures on length of stay (LOS), opioid use, time to ambulation (TTA), and procedure duration.<h4>Methods</h4>The authors performed a retrospective review of a single surgeon's patients who underwent lumbar fusions under SA vs GA from June of 2020 to June of 2022. SA patients were compared to demographically matched GA counterparts undergoing comparable procedures. Analyzed outcomes include operative time, opioid usage in morphine milligram equivalents (MME), TTA, and LOS.<h4>Results</h4>10 SA patients were matched to 10 GA counterparts. The cohort had a mean age of 66.77, a mean body mass index of 27.73 kg/m², and a median American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Score of 3.00. LOS was lower in SA vs GA patients (12.87 vs 50.79 hours, p=0.001). Opioid utilization was reduced in SA vs GA patients (10.76 vs 31.43 MME, p=0.006). TTA was reduced in SA vs GA patients (7.22 vs 29.87 hours, p=0.022). Procedure duration was not significantly reduced in SA patients compared to GA patients (139.3 vs 188.2 minutes, p=0.089).<h4>Conclusion</h4>These preliminary retrospective results suggest the use of SA rather than GA for lumbar fusions is associated with reduced hospital LOS, reduced opioid utilization, and reduced TTA. Future randomized prospective studies are warranted to determine if SA usage truly leads to these beneficial outcomes.Length of StayLumbar FusionOpioidsSpinal AnesthesiaSpine SurgeryJournal article2023-06-12