Turning a patient prone converts a set of ordinary decisions into permanent ones. Everything you would want in an emergency has to be in place while the patient is still supine, and the triggers for each of them are known before the case starts.
The prone position removes options rather than adding risk in the abstract. A dislodged tube, a lost line, an unrecorded baseline and an unanticipated transfusion are all ordinary problems while the patient is supine and all become difficult once they are face-down on a frame. The useful discipline is not vigilance during the case; it is finishing a short list before the turn, each item triggered by something you already know — the number of levels, the expected blood loss, the expected duration.
There is nothing intrinsically dangerous about the prone position. What it does is remove degrees of freedom. Every problem that is routine in a supine patient — a tube that needs repositioning, a line that has stopped running, a baseline nobody wrote down — becomes a considerably harder problem once the patient is face-down on a frame with the field open.
So the useful framing for a spine case is not vigilance. It is a short list finished before the turn, where each item is triggered by something you already know from the booking.
An arterial line is advisable for prolonged complex procedures — over four hours — in which moderate to heavy blood loss is anticipated; for patients with significant cardiovascular or renal disease; and for those with serious pulmonary dysfunction or planned lung isolation.
Serious venous access is essential for multilevel fusion, surgery expected to run beyond four hours, anticipated blood loss exceeding 1,000 mL, or multiple comorbidities.
Blood availability follows the recognized predictors of perioperative transfusion: preoperative haemoglobin, length of surgery, more than three posterior levels instrumented, deformity correction, trauma surgery, tumour resection, sacral involvement, and the surgical complexity of the procedure.
Cell salvage is recommended for multiple-level procedures — more than three — with expected blood loss above 500 mL, below which it is not cost-effective. One warning travels with it that is worth knowing before you meet it: the washed blood is returned into a plastic bag containing a significant amount of air, pressurizing that bag has caused massive air embolism, and there is a black box warning against pressurizing it.
Positioning comes first, and it is a haemodynamic intervention. Trendelenburg for lower thoracic and lumbar surgery reduces inferior vena caval pressure; reverse Trendelenburg is the equivalent for cervical procedures. Suboptimal prone positioning raises intraabdominal and intrathoracic pressure and increases surgical bleeding — and two randomized comparisons put numbers on it, with less blood loss in the jackknife position than on a conventional table, and less with wide than with narrow chest support on a Wilson frame.
Antifibrinolytics reduce blood loss and transfusion requirement in spine surgery, and systematic review has not shown an increase in thromboembolic risk against placebo. The dosing literature varies considerably; a commonly used regimen is a 10 mg/kg bolus followed by 1 to 2 mg/kg/h. Higher doses carry a seizure signal, particularly with renal impairment, and the safety data in patients at high preoperative thromboembolic risk is genuinely insufficient rather than reassuring.
Deliberate hypotension is the one to be sceptical about. It has a long history as a bleeding-reduction technique, and the important determinants of blood loss in spine surgery are epidural venous plexus pressure and intraosseous pressure — neither of which is arterial. One report found a 33% reduction in blood loss at a MAP of 65 mm Hg or less in deformity surgery, at the cost of placing neural tissue at risk of infarction. If it is used at all, it belongs to the initial dissection and instrumentation in an otherwise low-risk patient, with normotension restored for manipulation of neural structures, and with neuromonitoring running to catch cord hypoperfusion.
The goal is to maintain intravascular volume for perfusion while avoiding the venous congestion and interstitial oedema that come with overload. Goal-directed therapy — managing to dynamic, flow-based endpoints rather than to a running total — reduces total fluid administered, blood loss and postoperative complications across perioperative medicine, and the more limited spine-specific evidence points the same way.
Balanced isotonic crystalloid, alone or with colloid, is appropriate. Two exclusions matter. Lactated Ringer’s is not recommended in spinal cord injury: at a sodium of 130 mEq/L and an osmolality of about 273 mOsm/L against plasma near 295, it is relatively hypotonic and may worsen cord oedema. Glucose containing solutions should be avoided. Among colloids, albumin-containing solutions are appropriate; hydroxyethyl starch is the one colloid linked with increased mortality and should be avoided.
Venous air embolism is thought of as a sitting-craniotomy problem, and it has been reported during prone spine surgery. The risk rises whenever the incision sits 5 cm or more above the level of the heart, which posterior approaches frequently do, and extensive bony dissection adds to it.
Precordial Doppler and transoesophageal echocardiography are rarely used here. What has been reported as the first clinical sign is visible bubbling of air at the surgical site, before cardiovascular collapse — which means the person most likely to detect it first is the surgeon, and that only helps if they know to say so.
No randomized trial addresses this.
Most of this day is a consensus checklist. The physiology underneath it is not controversial — a valveless epidural venous plexus that engorges when intraabdominal pressure rises, an airway that swells over hours of dependency, a spinal cord whose perfusion depends on a pressure you are controlling — but the specific triggers are accumulated practice, not trial results.
Two parts of it do have better evidence behind them, and they point in different directions.
Blood conservation is well supported. Antifibrinolytics reduce blood loss and transfusion requirement across many operations including spine surgery, with no increase in thromboembolic risk demonstrated in systematic review. Cell salvage reduces allogeneic transfusion in deformity surgery. Goal-directed fluid therapy reduces total fluid, blood loss and postoperative complications across perioperative medicine, with limited but consistent evidence in spine.
The transfusion threshold is not. A restrictive strategy of 7 to 8 g/dL is recommended for stable hospitalized patients, but the meta-analytic picture separates by setting: restrictive transfusion reduced 30-day mortality among critical care patients and trended the other way among surgical patients. Current evidence comparing restrictive with liberal targets in surgical patients does not point either way. In neurologic injury specifically, transfusing patients without haemorrhagic shock has been associated with worse outcomes, particularly above a haemoglobin of 10 g/dL. The pragmatic position for spine stabilization is a restrictive strategy targeting 8 to 10 g/dL with frequent measurement, held as a range rather than a trigger.
The characteristic ending to a badly set-up long spine case is not a catastrophe in the middle of it. It is a patient at the end who has received several litres of crystalloid and several units of blood, whose face and airway are visibly swollen, and for whom nobody has decided in advance what would make extubation safe.
The source text puts it plainly: where large volumes of intraoperative fluid have been given, significant tissue oedema is to be expected, and the safety of postoperative extubation should be carefully considered before the tube is removed. That is a decision, not a reflex, and it is easier to make when the fluid strategy was deliberate — which is what goal-directed therapy buys you, and why total volume given is worth watching as an outcome in its own right.
The related error is quieter. Fluid management in spine surgery is a balance between maintaining perfusion and avoiding the venous congestion and interstitial oedema of overload — and venous congestion is not merely a postoperative airway problem. It is also surgical bleeding, through the valveless epidural plexus, which means that giving too much fluid and positioning the abdomen badly produce the same result by the same route.
Full text · Preston goes through LibKey to whatever Preston holds — the PDF where there is one — and works on a phone. The doi link always reaches the publisher's record, whether or not we hold a subscription. If you are reading on a computer, LibKey Nomad adds the same one-click PDF button to PubMed and publisher pages everywhere else; it is a desktop browser extension, so it does nothing on a phone or tablet.
A 64-year-old is booked for a four-level posterior instrumented lumbar fusion for degenerative deformity. Preoperative haemoglobin is 11.4 g/dL. The surgeon estimates five hours. Which set-up is best supported?
Why is lactated Ringer's solution not recommended for patients with spinal cord injury?
Which statement best describes the evidence for transfusion thresholds in a patient undergoing spine stabilization surgery?
Bilateral proximal, arm-worse-than-leg weakness is the classic border-zone presentation, sitting on the seam between the anterior and middle cerebral territories where flow is pressure-passive once vasodilation is exhausted. Reviewing the actual pressure trace is the first useful step. Note what this does not do: it does not exclude embolism, because a bed with no reserve is also a bed that cannot wash an embolus through.
Under normal conditions pial flow does not cross into the adjacent territory because the pressures on either side of the boundary are equal. Change one side — a stenosis, a fall in pressure, an embolization — and the boundary moves. That is why the anatomic location varies considerably between people and can change during the course of treatment.