LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Spine/Rush Spine Docs Honored With Best Paper Award
Spine

Rush Spine Docs Honored With Best Paper Award

May 5, 2017 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Rush Spine Docs Honored With Best Paper Award
Courtesy of Midwest Orthopaedics at Rush
Secondary

Another top award for the researchers at Midwest Orthopedics at Rush in Chicago. They are the 2017 winner of the “Best Paper” award at the recently concluded meeting of the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery (ISASS).

Their paper tackled the tough question of: does a higher ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) Score mean more pain and narcotics use after spinal fusion?

Their answer: not necessarily.

Ankur Narain, research coordinator for Kern Singh, M.D., was first author on the unpublished paper, “Inpatient Pain Scores and Narcotic Utilization Based on American Society of Anesthesiologists Score after Cervical and Lumbar Spinal Fusion.”

Ankur Narain told OTW, “The ASA classification is a widely utilized operative risk stratification tool in many surgical fields. However, research regarding the ASA classification in spine surgery populations is lacking. Our research group is also very interested in patient pain and postoperative narcotics consumption, as issues regarding narcotics dependence are increasingly prevalent. We thought it would be interesting to perform a study examining if a relationship existed between the ASA classification and postoperative pain and narcotics use during a patient’s inpatient stay after spinal fusion procedures.”

The researchers used a prospective surgical database of patients who underwent either a single-level, primary anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) for degenerative pathology between 2005-2016.

The authors wrote, “After exclusion of patients with incomplete preoperative pain scores, a total of 604 patients were included in this analysis; 211 (34.93%) underwent ACDF and 393 (65.07%) underwent MIS TLIF. Of the patients who underwent ACDF, 184 (87.20%) had an ASA score ≤ 2 and 27 (12.80%) had an ASA score > 2. ACDF patients with an ASA score > 2 were older (58.22 vs 46.31 years, p< 0.001), had lower rates of obesity (40.74% vs 63.04%, p=0.027), and had longer duration of hospital stay (38.50 vs. 28.15 hours, p=0.004). There were no differences in inpatient Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores or inpatient narcotic consumption between cohorts on any postoperative day (p>0.05 for each).”

“Of the patients who underwent MIS TLIF, 314 (79.90%) had an ASA ≤ 2 and 79 (20.10%) had an ASA score > 2. MIS TLIF patients with an ASA Score > 2 were older (59.75 vs 51.21 years, p< 0.001), had higher rates of obesity (64.56% vs 41.53%, p< 0.001), and had longer duration of hospital stay (69.18 vs. 56.42 hours, p=0.011). There were no significant differences in inpatient VAS pain scores or inpatient narcotic consumption between cohorts on any postoperative day (p>0.05 for each).”

Advertisement

Ankur Narain told OTW, “We were surprised to find that ASA score was not associated with differences in postoperative pain and narcotics consumption after spinal fusion procedures. This was surprising in that previous studies in other fields had demonstrated that ASA score is a predictor for postoperative complication incidence.”

“ASA score is not a predictor of postoperative pain and narcotics use after spinal fusion procedures, and postoperative analgesic protocols should not be altered based on ASA score. More work is necessary to analyze long-term narcotics use and narcotics dependence in patients undergoing spinal fusion procedures.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy