Minimally invasive lumbar fusion

Magnetofection of miR-21 promoted by electromagnetic field and iron oxide nanoparticles via the p38 MAPK pathway contributes to osteogenesis and angiogenesis for intervertebral fusion

BACKGROUND

Magnetofection-mediated gene delivery shows great therapeutic potential through the regulation of the direction and degree of differentiation. Lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a serious global orthopaedic problem. However, even though intervertebral fusion is the gold standard for the treatment of DDD, its therapeutic effect is unsatisfactory. Here, we described a novel magnetofection system for delivering therapeutic miRNAs to promote osteogenesis and angiogenesis in patients with lumbar DDD.

RESULTS

Co-stimulation with electromagnetic field (EMF) and iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs) enhanced magnetofection efficiency significantly. Moreover, in vitro, magnetofection of miR-21 into bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) and human umbilical endothelial cells (HUVECs) influenced their cellular behaviour and promoted osteogenesis and angiogenesis. Then, gene-edited seed cells were planted onto polycaprolactone (PCL) and hydroxyapatite (HA) scaffolds (PCL/HA scaffolds) and evolved into the ideal tissue-engineered bone to promote intervertebral fusion. Finally, our results showed that EMF and polyethyleneimine (PEI)@IONPs were enhancing transfection efficiency by activating the p38 MAPK pathway.

CONCLUSION

Our findings illustrate that a magnetofection system for delivering miR-21 into BMSCs and HUVECs promoted osteogenesis and angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo and that magnetofection transfection efficiency improved significantly under the co-stimulation of EMF and IONPs. Moreover, it relied on the activation of p38 MAPK pathway. This magnetofection system could be a promising therapeutic approach for various orthopaedic diseases.

Minimally Invasive Instrumentation of the Cervical Spine: Past, Present, and Future

Posterior cervical instrumentation and fusion procedures are becoming more and more common with the aging population and rising numbers of multisegmental and revision procedures. The instrumentation of the cervical spine has so far been performed almost exclusively via open approaches. Over the past two decades, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have gained increasing popularity. To date, only a few attempts to instrument the cervical spine in a minimally invasive fashion have been reported. The following article, after a detailed review of the currently available literature, overviews MIS in dorsal cervical instrumentation and past, present and future techniques, and it discusses the current limitations. Nevertheless, and because of the multiple advantages of MIS instrumentation, a lot of work remains to be carried out to fully establish MIS procedures for posterior cervical instrumentation.

Expanding access to microneurosurgery in low-resource settings: Feasibility of a low-cost exoscope in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Objectives

Less than a quarter of the world population has access to microneurosurgical care within a range of 2 h. We introduce a simplified exoscopic visualization system for low-resource settings.

Materials and Methods

We purchased a 48 megapixels microscope camera with a c-mount lens and a ring light at a total cost of US$ 125. Sixteen patients with lumbar degenerative disk disease were divided into an exoscope group and a microscope group. In each group, we performed four open and four minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF). We conducted a questionnaire-based assessment of the user experience.

Results

The exoscope achieved similar outcomes with comparable blood loss and operating time as the microscope. It provided similar image quality and magnification. Yet, it lacked stereoscopic perception and the adjustability of the camera position was cumbersome. Most users strongly agreed the exoscope would significantly improve surgical teaching. Over 75% reported that they would recommend the exoscope to colleagues and all users saw its great potential for low-resource environments.

Conclusion

Our low-budget exoscope is safe and feasible for TLIF and purchasable at a fraction of the cost of conventional microscopes. It may thus help expand access to neurosurgical care and training worldwide.

Influence of the Preoperative Duration of Symptoms on Patients' Clinical Outcomes after Minimally Invasive Surgery-Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Diseases

Background and Objectives: The impact of the duration of symptoms (DOS) on postoperative clinical outcomes of patients with degenerative lumbar spinal diseases is important for determining the optimal timing of surgical intervention; however, the timing remains controversial. This prospective case−control study aimed to investigate the influence of the preoperative DOS on surgical outcomes in minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent single-level TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases between 2017 and 2018 were reviewed. Only patients with full clinical data during the 1-year follow-up period were included. The patients were divided into two groups (DOS < 12 months, group S; DOS ≥ 12 months, group L). The clinical outcomes, including the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for lower back pain, leg pain, and numbness, were investigated preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months, as well as 1 year, after surgery. Furthermore, postoperative patient satisfaction 1 year after surgery was also surveyed. Results: A total of 163 patients were assessed: 60 in group S and 103 in group L. No differences in baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were found. The ODI and VAS significantly improved from the baseline to each follow-up period (all p < 0.01). Group S had significantly lower ODI scores at 3 months (p = 0.019) and 6 months (p = 0.022). In addition, group S had significantly lower VAS scores for leg pain at 3 months (p = 0.027). In a comparison between both groups, only the patients with cauda equina symptoms showed that ODI and leg pain VAS scores at 3 months after surgery were significantly lower in group S (19.9 ± 9.1 vs. 14.1 ± 12.5; p = 0.037, 7.4 ± 13.9 vs. 14.7 ± 23.1; p = 0.032, respectively). However, the clinical outcomes were not significantly different between both groups 1 year after surgery. Patient satisfaction was also not significantly different between both groups. Conclusions: Patients with a shorter DOS tended to have a significantly slower recovery; however, clinical outcomes 1 year after surgery were good, regardless of the DOS.

Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Osteobiologics for Lumbar Fusion

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is an excellent treatment option for a number of lumbar diseases. LIF can be performed through posterior, transforaminal, anterior, and lateral or oblique approaches. Each technique has its own pearls and pitfalls. Through LIF, segmental stabilization, neural decompression, and deformity correction can be achieved. Minimally invasive surgery has recently gained popularity and each LIF procedure can be performed using minimally invasive techniques to reduce surgery-related complications and improve early postoperative recovery. Despite advances in surgical technology, surgery-related complications after LIF, such as pseudoarthrosis, have not yet been overcome. Although autogenous iliac crest bone graft is the gold standard for spinal fusion, other bone substitutes are available to enhance fusion rate and reduce complications associated with bone harvest. This article reviews the surgical procedures and characteristics of each LIF and the osteobiologics utilized in LIF based on the available evidence.

Patient outcomes following implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for patients with metastatic spine tumors

BACKGROUND

Metastatic spine tumor surgery consists of palliative operations performed on frail patients with multiple medical comorbidities. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs involve an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach to improve perioperative outcomes. This study presents clinical outcomes of a metastatic spine tumor ERAS pathway implemented at a tertiary cancer center.

METHODS

The metastatic spine tumor ERAS program launched in April 2019, and data from January 2018 to May 2020 were reviewed. Measured outcomes included the following: hospital length of stay (LOS), time to ambulation, urinary catheter duration, time to resumption of diet, intraoperative fluid intake, estimated blood loss (EBL), and intraoperative and postoperative day 0-5 cumulative opioid use (morphine milligram equivalent [MME]).

RESULTS

A total of 390 patients were included in the final analysis: 177 consecutive patients undergoing metastatic spine tumor surgery enrolled in the ERAS program and 213 consecutive pre-ERAS patients. Although the mean case durations were similar in the ERAS and pre-ERAS cohorts (265 vs. 274 min; p = .22), the ERAS cohort had decreased EBL (157 vs. 215 ml; p = .003), decreased postoperative day 0-5 cumulative mean opioid use (178 vs. 396 MME; p < .0001), earlier ambulation (mean, 34 vs. 57 h; p = .0001), earlier discontinuation of urinary catheters (mean, 36 vs. 56 h; p < .001), and shorter LOS (5.4 vs. 7.5 days; p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a multidisciplinary ERAS program designed for metastatic spine tumor surgery led to improved clinical quality metrics, including shorter hospitalizations and significant reductions in opioid consumption.

Surgeon Learning Curve and Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Percutaneous Instrumentation

OBJECTIVES

This study reports the learning phase of the minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion (mini-ALIF) approach with a vascular and orthopaedic spine surgeon team.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent primary mini-ALIF at the lowest two segments of the lumbar spine (i.e., L4/5, L5/S1) between January 2010 and December 2018 were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-seven patients were included. There was no notable change in total surgical time over the study period. Estimated blood loss markedly decreased until stabilizing at case 30 and slowly declined thereafter. The mean estimated blood loss was 184 mL for L5/S1, 232 mL for L4/L5, and 458 mL for two-level mini-ALIF. There were 20 vascular issues requiring primary repair or packing. Vascular issues declined over time, with a rate of 32% in the first 25 cases and 0% in the last 25. The postoperative complication rate was highest in the first 25 cases (7 of 21 total complications). The odds ratio of vascular injury with body mass index (BMI) > 35 was 4.09 (1.4 to 11.7 confidence interval, P ≤ 0.008). Total surgical time and postoperative complications increased with increasing BMI.

CONCLUSION

Performance of the mini-ALIF approach is associated with a learning curve of 25 to 30 cases before complications begin to decline. BMI > 35 is associated with increased surgical time and complications.

Which Is Better in Clinical and Radiological Outcomes for Lumbar Degenerative Disease of Two Segments: MIS-TLIF or OPEN-TLIF?

Objective: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (OPEN-TLIF) in the treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods: The clinical data of 112 patients were retrospectively analyzed, and were divided into an MIS-TLIF group and OPEN-TLIF group. The operative time, intraoperative fluoroscopy, blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, bed rest time, the content of creatine kinase(CK) and complications, were recorded. VAS score and ODI index were used to evaluate clinical efficacy. Bridwell grading was used to evaluate postoperative interbody fusion. Screw position was evaluated by Rao grading. Results: Compared with the OPEN-TLIF group, the MIS-TLIF group had longer operation times, more intraoperative fluoroscopy times, but shorter postoperative bed times (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in blood loss, postoperative drainage and postoperative CK content between the two groups (p > 0.05). There was no difference in VAS score and ODI index during the follow-up (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the interbody fusion rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the distribution of type A screws, but the type B screw in the MIS-TLIF group was higher (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The postoperative quality of life score and radiological outcomes of the two types of surgery in two-level lumbar degenerative diseases was similar, and there was no significant difference in muscle injury and complications, but the operation time and intraoperative radiation exposurewere higher than in the OPEN-TLIF group, and the pedicle screws were more likely to deviate laterally out of the vertebral body. Therefore, OPEN-TLIF is recommended for patients with lumbar degenerative diseases of two segments.

Comparison of Three Common Intervertebral Disc Discectomies in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Multiple Data

OBJECTIVE

Due to recent developments and the wide application of percutaneous transforaminal discectomy (PTED), we herein compare it with microendoscopic discectomy (MED) and traditional open surgery (OD) through surgical indicators and postoperative outcomes to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of minimally invasive surgery PTED.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO2018: CRD42018094890). We searched four English and two Chinese databases from the date of their establishment to May 2022. Randomized controlled trials and case-control studies of PTED versus MED or PTED versus OD in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation were retrieved.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies with 6467 cases were included. When comparing MED with PTED, the latter had less intraoperative blood loss, smaller incision, shorter postoperative bed times, shorter hospitalization times, better postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back pain, and postoperative dysfunction index (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) and higher recurrence rates and revision rates. However, operation times, postoperative VAS leg scores and complications, and successful operation rates were similar in both groups. Comparison of PTED with OD revealed in the former less intraoperative blood loss and smaller incision, shorter postoperative bed times, shorter hospitalization times, shorter operation times, and higher recurrence rates and revision rates. Nonetheless, comprehensive postoperative VAS scores, VAS leg pain scores, VAS low back pain, ODI and incidence of complications, and successful operation rates were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The therapeutic effect and safety of PTED, MED and OD in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation were comparable. PTED had obvious advantages in that it is minimally invasive, with rapid recovery after surgery, but its recurrence rates and revision rates were higher than MED and OD. Therefore, it is not possible to blindly consider replacing MED and OD with PTED.

Biomechanical studies of different numbers and positions of cage implantation on minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion: A finite element analysis

BACKGROUND

The position and number of cages in minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) are mainly determined by surgeons based on their individual experience. Therefore, it is important to investigate the optimal number and position of cages in MIS-TLIF.

METHODS

The lumbar model was created based on a 24-year-old volunteer's computed tomography data and then tested using three different cage implantation methods: single transverse cage implantation (model A), single oblique 45° cage implantation (model B), and double vertical cage implantation (model C). A preload of 500 N and a moment of 10 Nm were applied to the models to simulate lumbar motion, and the models' range of motion (ROM), ROM ratio, peak stress of the internal fixation system, and cage were assessed.

RESULTS

The ROM ratios of models A, B, and C were significantly reduced by >71% compared with the intact model under all motions. Although there were subtle differences in the ROM ratio for models A, B, and C, the trends were similar. The peak stress of the internal fixation system appeared in model B of 136.05 MPa (right lateral bending), which was 2.07 times that of model A and 1.62 times that of model C under the same condition. Model C had the lowest cage stress, which was superior to that of the single-cage model.

CONCLUSION

In MIS-TLIF, single long-cage transversal implantation is a promising standard implantation method, and double short-cage implantation is recommended for patients with severe osteoporosis.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) do not increase blood loss or the incidence of postoperative epidural hematomas when using minimally invasive fusion techniques in the degenerative lumbar spine

Objective

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are essential in surgeons' armamentarium for pain relief and antiphlogistic effects. However, spine surgeons are concerned about the drugs' impact on coagulation, fearing hemodynamic instability due to blood loss and neurological complications due to postoperative hematoma. Furthermore, there are no clear guidelines for the use of these drugs.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective subgroup analysis of a prospective observational study, we investigated 181 patients who underwent minimally invasive spinal fusions in degenerative lumbar spine pathologies. 83 patients were given NSAID perioperatively, 54 of which were female and 29 male. Of these patients who took NSAID, 39 were on NSAID until at least one day before surgery or perioperatively, whilst the others discontinued their NSAID medication at least three days before surgery. Differences in perioperative blood loss, as well as complication rates between patients with and without NSAID treatment, were investigated.

Results

A significantly higher amount of blood loss during surgery and the monitoring period was encountered in patients whose spine was fused in more than one level, regardless of whether NSAID medication was taken or not and up until what point. Furthermore, it was found that taking NSAID medication had no effect on the incidence of postoperative epidural hematomas.

Conclusion

Perioperatively taking NSAID medication does not increase blood loss or the incidence of postoperative hematoma in patients undergoing minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Contralateral bridge fixation of freehand minimally invasive pedicle screws combined with unilateral MIS-TLIF vs. open TLIF in the treatment of multi-segmental lumbar degenerative diseases: A five years retrospective study and finite element analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, feasibility and biomechanical stability of contralateral bridge fixation of freehand minimally invasive pedicle screws (Freehand MIPS) combined with unilateral minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) (smile-face surgery) and open TLIF for the treatment of multi-segmental lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs).

METHODS

From January 2013 to January 2016, clinical data of multi-segmental (2- or 3-level) LDDs receiving smile-face surgery or open TLIF were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The back and leg pain VAS and ODI were used to assess clinical outcomes preoperatively and postoperatively. The MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the satisfaction of patient. The disc height (DH), lumbar lordosis (LL) and segmental lordosis angle (SLA) were measured before and after surgery. We used patient's CT data to establish the finite element model of smile-face surgery and open TLIF, and analyze biomechanical stability of two methods.

RESULTS

Smile-face surgery group showed shorter operation time, shorter incision, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay than open TLIF (P < 0.05). The back VAS in smile-face surgery group was significantly lower than that in open TLIF immediately and 3 months after surgery, and no significant difference was observed 1 year, 2 years and 5 years after surgery. There was no significant difference in the leg pain VAS and ODI between both groups after surgery. No significant difference was observed between two groups in the DH, LL and SLA. At 5-year follow-up, grade I or II fusion was achieved in 99.00% (100/101) segments of smile-face surgery group and 97.67% (84/86) segments of open TLIF group according to Bridwell system. The complication rate of open TLIF was higher than that of smile-face surgery (24.32% vs. 0%, P < 0.01). After verification, the established finite element model can accurately simulate the biological structure of lumbar spine and there was no significant difference in biomechanical stability between two methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Smile-face surgery has some advantages over open TLIF including smaller aggression, less blood loss, and lower cost, indicating that it is a good choice of treatment for multi-segmental LDDs. Both methods can achieve good biomechanical stability.

Comparison of the Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Retrospective Matched Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

We compared the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who underwent single-segment Mis-TLIF or Endo-TLIF between June 2016 and June 2019 at our hospital. The patients in each treatment group were matched 1:1 for sex, age, and type of lumbar degenerative disease, and their clinical outcomes were compared at discharge and at 1 and 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

Our study included 64 patients, with 32 patients in each treatment group. Operative time and fluoroscopy time were significantly higher in the Endo-TLIF versus Mis-TLIF groups, whereas estimated blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, and the low back pain visual analog scale score at discharge were significantly lower. Both treatments achieved exact interbody fusion at the final-follow up. There was no significant difference in the visual analog scale score or Oswestry Disability Index between the groups at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Complication rates were higher in the Endo-TLIF group (21.9%) than in the Mis-TLIF group (6.2%), although the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no difference in the long-term outcomes between the treatments, Endo-TLIF had less blood loss and a lower postoperative drainage volume and low back pain visual analog scale score at discharge than Mis-TLIF. However, the longer operative time and potentially higher complication rate of Endo-TLIF suggest that surgeons may need to overcome the steeper learning curve than the procedure of Mis-TLIF.

Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with a Tubular Retractor System: A Retrospective Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the safety and clinical efficacy of full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (FE-LIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

METHODS

A total of 70 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative diseases underwent FE-LIF or MIS-TLIF with a tubular retractor system from August 2018 to August 2020. Postoperatively, the efficacy and safety were compared using several clinical and radiological indices.

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients underwent FE-LIF and 38 received MIS-TLIF with a tubular retractor system, and all patients had no apparent complications. The FE-LIF group had higher radiation exposure, longer operation time, and less bleeding than the MIS-TLIF group (P < 0.05). Postoperative lumbar magnetic resonance imaging showed that the nerve decompression was sufficient. The pain in the lower back and legs was significantly relieved, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score was greatly improved after surgery (P < 0.01) in both the groups. The sensory and motor functions of nerve roots were remarkably recovered in both the groups at the 1-year follow-up (P < 0.05), and there was no significant difference in MacNab scores between the 2 groups. As per Mannion's fusion classification, the interbody fusion rate was significantly better in the FE-LIF group than in the MIS-TLIF group.

CONCLUSIONS

FE-LIF, which is safe, effective, and minimally invasive, exhibits the same clinical efficacy as MIS-TLIF but with longer operation time and increased radiation exposure.

Comparison of minimally invasive and open TLIF outcomes with more than seven years of follow-up

Background

Few studies directly comparing minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and open TLIF offering long-term follow-up data have been performed to date. Therefore, we sought to compare mid- to long-term outcomes between these two surgical approaches.

Methods

This was a retrospective data analysis of two surgical groups. We analyzed the details of 97 patients with degenerative lumbar disease who were treated with MI TLIF (n = 55) or open TLIF (n = 42) between 2011–2014 and had at least seven years of follow-up data available. Peri- and postoperative outcomes were compared. To evaluate rates of adjacent segment disease (ASD) and revisions, frequencies of radiologic, symptomatic, and operative ASD were analyzed accordingly.

Results

In terms of clinical outcome, the Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores were significantly reduced, with no difference between the groups. However, data for several peri- and postoperative outcomes, including perioperative blood loss, ambulation day, hospital stay, and operation time, varied in a manner favoring the MI TLIF group (P < 0.05). Rates of radiologic ASD and symptomatic ASD were significantly higher in the open TLIF group beginning at five years of follow-up (P < 0.05), while the rate of operative ASD and the revision rate were similar between the groups. Other long-term outcomes, including fusion rate and complications, remained similar between the two groups at 7 years.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing MI TLIF showed favorable immediate postoperative outcomes and less radiographic ASD. However, the rates of fusion and operative ASD remained similar between the two groups after 7 years of follow-up.

Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment (MIST)—A New Concept in the Treatment of Spinal Diseases: A Narrative Review

In the past two decades, minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) techniques have been developed for spinal surgery. Historically, minimizing invasiveness in decompression surgery was initially reported as a MISS technique. In recent years, MISS techniques have also been applied for spinal stabilization techniques, which were defined as minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt), including percutaneous pedicle screws (PPS) fixation, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, balloon kyphoplasty, percutaneous vertebroplasty, cortical bone trajectory, and cervical total disc replacement. These MISS techniques typically provide many advantages such as preservation of paraspinal musculature, less blood loss, a shorter operative time, less postoperative pain, and a lower infection rate as well as being more cost-effective compared to traditional open techniques. However, even MISS techniques are associated with several limitations including technical difficulty, training opportunities, surgical cost, equipment cost, and radiation exposure. These downsides of surgical treatments make conservative treatments more feasible option. In the future, medicine must become “minimally invasive” in the broadest sense—for all patients, conventional surgeries, medical personnel, hospital management, nursing care, and the medical economy. As a new framework for the treatment of spinal diseases, the concept of minimally invasive spinal treatment (MIST) has been proposed.

Expanding Access to Microneurosurgery in Low-Resource Settings: Feasibility of a Low-Cost Exoscope in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Objectives Less than a quarter of the world population has access to microneurosurgical care within a range of 2 hours. We introduce a simplified exoscopic visualization system to achieve optical magnification, illumination, and video recording in low-resource settings.

Materials and Methods We purchased a 48 megapixels industrial microscope camera with a heavy-duty support arm, a wide field c-mount lens, and an LED ring light at a total cost of US$ 125. Sixteen patients with lumbar degenerative disk disease were divided into an exoscope group and a conventional microscope group. In each group we performed four open and four minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures. We further conducted a questionnaire-based assessment of the user experience.

Results The overall user experience was positive. The exoscope achieved similar postoperative improvement with comparable blood loss and operating time as the conventional microscope. It provided a similar image quality, magnification and illumination. Yet, the lack of stereoscopic perception and the cumbersome adjustability of the camera position and angle resulted in a shallow learning curve. Most users strongly agreed that the exoscope would significantly improve surgical teaching. Over 75% reported they would recommend the exoscope to colleagues and all users saw its great potential for low-resource environments.

Conclusion Our low-budget exoscope is technically non-inferior to the conventional binocular microscope and purchasable at a significantly lower price. It may thus help expand access to neurosurgical care and training worldwide.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Interbody Debridement and Fusion (PEIDF) Decreases Risk of Sepsis and Mortality in Treating Infectious Spondylodiscitis for Patients with Poor Physical Status, a Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Postoperative immunosuppression is associated with blood loss and surgical trauma during surgery and subsequently predisposes patients to increased morbidity. Spine endoscopic surgery has been accepted as an effective surgical technique with less surgical trauma and less blood loss for the complication of infectious spondylodiscitis. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether PEIDF could reduce the morbidity rates for patients with infectious spondylodiscitis. Methods: We launched a retrospective cohort study on the comparison of the perioperative prognosis between PEIDF and conventional open surgery for single-level lumbar infectious spondylodiscitis in patients with poor physical health (ASA ≥ 4) from 2014 to 2019. Results: Forty-four patients were included in this study. Fifteen of them underwent PEIDF, and the rest of the 29 patients were treated with open surgery. Less surgical blood loss (p < 0.001) and intraoperative transfusions (p < 0.001) with a better decline of CRP (p = 0.017) were statistically significant in patients receiving PEIDF. Patients undergoing conventional open surgery encountered more postoperative sepsis (p = 0.030), a higher qSOFA score (p = 0.044), and prolonged-time for CRP normalization (p = 0.001). Conclusions: PEIDF minimizes a poor postoperative outcome due to less surgical trauma, intraoperative blood loss, and the need for a blood transfusion.

Robotic Spine Surgery: Past, Present, and Future

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to present an overview of robotic spine surgery (RSS) including its history, applications, limitations, and future directions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The first RSS platform received United States Food and Drug Administration approval in 2004. Since then, robotic-assisted placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws has been extensively studied. More recently, expanded applications of RSS have been introduced and evaluated.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Cochrane, OVID-MEDLINE, and PubMed databases was performed for articles relevant to robotic spine surgery. Institutional review board approval was not needed.

RESULTS

The placement of thoracolumbar pedicle screws using RSS is safe and accurate and results in reduced radiation exposure for the surgeon and surgical team. Barriers to utilization exist including learning curve and large capital costs. Additional applications involving minimally invasive techniques, cervical pedicle screws, and deformity correction have emerged.

CONCLUSION

Interest in RSS continues to grow as the applications advance in parallel with image guidance systems and minimally invasive techniques.

IRB APPROVAL

N/A.

Lateral versus prone robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw placement: a CT-based comparative assessment of accuracy

OBJECTIVE

Single-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SP-LLIF) has recently gained significant popularity due to increased operative efficiency, but it remains technically challenging. Robot-assisted percutaneous pedicle screw (RA-PPS) placement can facilitate screw placement in the lateral position. The authors have reported their initial experience with SP-LLIF with RA-PPS placement in the lateral position, and they have compared this accuracy with that of RA-PPS placement in the prone position.

METHODS

The authors reviewed prospectively collected data from their first 100 lateral-position RA-PPSs. The authors graded screw accuracy on CT and compared it to the accuracy of all prone-position RA-PPS procedures during the same time period. The authors analyzed the effect of several demographic and perioperative metrics, as a whole and specifically for lateral-position RA-PPS placement.

RESULTS

The authors placed 99 lateral-position RA-PPSs by using the ExcelsiusGPS robotic platform in the first 18 consecutive patients who underwent SP-LLIF with postoperative CT imaging; these patients were compared with 346 prone-position RA-PPSs that were placed in the first consecutive 64 patients during the same time period. All screws were placed at L1 to S1. Overall, the lateral group had 14 breaches (14.1%) and the prone group had 25 breaches (7.2%) (p = 0.032). The lateral group had 5 breaches (5.1%) greater than 2 mm (grade C or worse), and the prone group had 4 (1.2%) (p = 0.015). The operative level had an effect on the breach rate, with breach rates (grade C or worse) of 7.1% at L3 and 2.8% at L4. Most breaches were grade B (< 2 mm) and lateral, and no breach had clinical sequelae or required revision. Within the lateral group, multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that BMI and number of levels affected accuracy, but the side that was positioned up or down did not.

CONCLUSIONS

RA-PPSs can improve the feasibility of SP-LLIF. Spine surgeons should be cautious and selective with this technique owing to decreased accuracy in the lateral position, particularly in obese patients. Further studies should compare SP-LLIF techniques performed while the patient is in the prone and lateral positions.

Minimally Invasive Robotic Lumbar Facet Decortication

Minimally invasive percutaneous pedicle screws (PPS) are placed through muscle sparing paramedian incisions and provide rigid 3 column fixation to promote stability and fusion. Percutaneous pedicle instrumentation is generally performed as adjunctive posterior stabilization after anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures. In these instances, arthrodesis is often achieved through the interbody fusion rather than posterior column fusion. In some cases, the surgeon may choose to perform posterior facet fusion in addition to PPS and anterior interbody. The addition of a minimally invasive facet fusion to PPS and anterior column interbody fusion creates more fusion surface and enables a truly circumferential fusion. While robotic-guided facet decortication has been suggested, there are currently no published techniques. Here, we describe a novel minimally invasive technique to perform percutaneous robotic facet decortication in conjunction with PPS following anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

Obesity and Spine Surgery: A Qualitative Review About Outcomes and Complications. Is It Time for New Perspectives on Future Researches?

STUDY DESIGN

Literature review.

OBJECTIVES

An increasing number of obese patients requires operative care for degenerative spinal disorders. The aim of this review is to analyze the available evidence regarding the role of obesity on outcomes after spine surgery. Peri-operative complications and clinical results are evaluated for both cervical and lumbar surgery. Furthermore, the contribution of MIS techniques for lumbar surgery to play a role in reducing risks has been analyzed.

METHODS

Only articles published in English in the last 10 years were reviewed. Inclusion criteria of the references were based on the scope of this review, according to PRISMA guidelines. Moreover, only paper analyzing obesity-related complications in spine surgery have been selected and thoroughly reviewed. Each article was classified according to its rating of evidence using the Sacket Grading System.

RESULTS

A total number of 1636 articles were found, but only 130 of them were considered to be relevant after thorough evaluation and according to PRISMA checklist. The majority of the included papers were classified according to the Sacket Grading System as Level 2 (Retrospective Studies).

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggest that obese patients could benefit from spine surgery and outcomes be satisfactory. A higher rate of peri-operative complications is reported among obese patients, especially in posterior approaches. The use of MIS techniques plays a key role in order to reduce surgical risks. Further studies should evaluate the role of multidisciplinary counseling between spine surgeons, nutritionists and bariatric surgeons, in order to plan proper weight loss before elective spine surgery.

Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single segmental lumbar disc herniation: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies on the comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and open-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (O-TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) have been published, but there is no clear conclusion.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of MIS-TLIF compared with O-TLIF in the treatment of LDH in the Chinese population by meta-analysis.

METHODS

Studies on the treatment of LDH by MIS-TLIF versus O-TLIF were searched in Pubmed, Web of Science, Medline, Embase, CNKI, VIP and China Wanfang databases from the establishment of the databases to January 2020. The meta-analysis was used to analyze the pooled operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative ground movement time, Waist and leg Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score and Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) score. Mean difference (MD) and standard mean difference (SMD) were used as the effect size.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with 1132 patients were included. The results showed that MIS-TLIF compared with O-TLIF, MD =-133.82 (95% CI: -167.10 ∼-100.53, P< 0.05) in intraoperative blood loss, MD =-114.43 (95% CI: -141.12 ∼-87.84, P< 0.05) in postoperative drainage, MD =-3.30 (95% CI: -4.31 ∼-2.28, P< 0.05) in postoperative ground movement time, SMD =-1.44 (95% CI: -2.63 ∼-0.34, P< 0.05) in postoperative low back pain VAS score, SMD = 0.41 (95% CI: 0.15 ∼ 0.66, P< 0.05) in postoperative JOA score, MD = 4.12 (95% CI: -11.64 ∼ 19.87, P> 0.05) in the average operation time, SMD =-0.00 (95% CI: -0.36 ∼ 0.36, P> 0.05) in leg pain VAS score, and SMD =-0.59 (95% CI: -1.22 ∼ 0.03, P> 0.05) in ODI score.

CONCLUSION

MIS-TLIF was superior to O-TLIF in the treatment of LDH, especially in the intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative ground movement time and low back pain in the Chinese population.

Successful salvage strategy using anterior retroperitoneal approach in failed posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A retrospective analisys on lumbar lordosis and clinical outcome

OBJECTIVE

Posterior and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF, TLIF) are among the most popular surgical options for lumbar interbody fusion. If non-union occurs with consequent pain and reduced quality of life, revision surgery should correct any previous technical errors, avoiding further complications. The aim of this study was to analyze technical advantages, radiological and clinical outcomes of anterior approaches (ALIF) in case of failed PLIF or TLIF.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with persistent low back pain after failed PLIF/TLIF where salvage ALIF through an anterior retroperitoneal miniopen video-assisted technique was performed. Surgical, clinical and radiological data were analysed. Uni and multivariate statistical analysis were applied.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (average age: 47.1 years) were included. Mean follow-up was 34.4 months. In 30 patients (83.3%) a posterior surgical step was necessary. Non-union (86.1%), cage migration (5.5%), infection (8.3%) were the causes of revision surgery. In 22 patients (61.1%) the involved level was L5-S1, in 12 patients (33.4%) L4-L5, in 1 patient (2.7%) L3-L4. One patient (2.7%) had two levels (L4-L5 and L5-S1) involved. No major intraoperative complications were recorded. Significant correlation between clinical and radiological outcomes (L4-S1 and L5-S1 lordosis improvement) were observed (postoperative VAS and L5-S1, p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage ALIF is a safe option that can significantly ameliorate residual pain achieving primary interbody stability with an ideal segmental lordosis according to pelvic parameters. The advantages of a naive anterior approach fulfils the main objectives of a revision surgery in order to significantly increase the chances of definitive fusion.

Accuracy and safety of percutaneous pedicle screw placement using the K-wireless minimally invasive spine percutaneous pedicle screw system in Japan: A randomized active controlled study

•

We compared the VIPER PRIME™ (VP) with existing percutaneous pedicle screw systems.

•

Screw-placement accuracy was not inferior using VP compared with previous systems.

•

Use of VP reduced the screw-insertion time and use of fluoroscopy.

•

VP was not associated with any device- or treatment-related adverse events.

•

VP could reduce radiation exposure and provide accurate pedicle screw placement.

Background

Minimally invasive lumbar fusion has recently become a widely used technique worldwide. This randomized active controlled study was conducted to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the K-wireless Minimally Invasive Spine (MIS) Percutaneous Pedicle Screw (PPS) system compared with use of the six pedicle screw systems currently used in our practices with respect to the accuracy of pedicle screw placement.Also to compare the screw-insertion time and number of fluoroscopic observations during screw insertion between the groups.

Methods

A total of 80 patients with degenerative spinal diseases or vertebral fractures were assigned, including 41 patients in the K-wireless MIS PPS system group (K-wireless group) and 39 in the control group (K-wire group).

The accuracy of the screw insertion, screw-insertion time, number of fluoroscopic observations during screw insertion, and the incidence of adverse events were compared between the K-wireless group and the K-wire group. The accuracy rate was calculated as the number of screws with no breach divided by the total number of screws.

Results

The accuracy rates of screw insertion were 85.7% and 75.0% in the K-wireless and K-wire groups, respectively, with an intergroup difference of 10.7% (95% confidence interval: 2.3–19.1%). The K-wireless group demonstrated non-inferiority compared with the K-wire group. The mean screw-insertion time was significantly shorter in the K-wireless group (2.62 and 2.97 min in the K-wireless and K-wire groups, respectively; P=0.005). There were also significantly fewer fluoroscopies in the K-wireless group (10.7 and 17.4 in the K-wireless and K-wire groups, respectively; P<0.001). There were no device-related or study treatment-related adverse events in either group.

Conclusions

The accuracy of pedicle screw insertion using the K-wireless MIS PPS system was not inferior to that of existing products. In terms of safety, no product-related or treatment-related adverse events were identified in this study and no new safety concerns were noted.

A Comparative Study of a New Retractor‐Assisted WILTSE TLIF, MIS‐TLIF, and Traditional PLIF for Treatment of Single‐Level Lumbar Degenerative Diseases

Objectives

To compare the clinical efficacy of a new retractor‐assisted Wiltse transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), minimally invasive TLIF (MIS‐TLIF), and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in treating single‐level lumbar degenerative diseases.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted by analyzing the clinical and imaging data of consecutive patients with single‐level lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent the new retractor‐assisted Wiltse TLIF, MIS‐TLIF, or traditional PLIF. This study enrolled 87 concurrent patients between June 2016 and December 2019 (Wiltse TLIF 29 cases; MIS‐TLIF 28 cases; PLIF 30 cases). The three groups were compared for perioperative indicators (including intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy time, bedridden time), creatine kinase (CK), visual analog score (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, intervertebral fusion rate, muscle atrophy, and fatty infiltration (including ratio of multifidus atrophy and ratio of lean‐to‐total cross‐sectional area [CSA]).

Results

Intraoperative blood loss (F = 62.628, p < 0.001), postoperative drainage volume (F = 72.048, p < 0.001), and bedridden time (χ² = 62.289, p < 0.001) were significantly lower in the MIS‐TLIF and Wiltse groups than in the PLIF group. The operative and intraoperative radiation times of the MIS‐TLIF group were significantly longer than those of the Wiltse and PLIF groups. The CK concentration in the Wiltse and MIS‐TLIF groups were significantly lower than those in the PLIF group 1 day (F = 9.331, p < 0.001) and 3 days after surgery (F = 15.967, p < 0.001). The PLIF group's back pain VAS score was higher than those of the Wiltse and MIS‐TLIF groups. The PLIF group had a higher ODI 6 months (F = 3.282, p = 0.042) and 12 months (F = 5.316, p = 0.007) after surgery and a lower JOA score than the Wiltse and MIS‐TLIF groups 6 months (F = 3.234, p = 0.044) and 12 months (F = 3.874, p = 0.025) after surgery. The ratio of multifidus atrophy in the PLIF group (41.70 ± 8.84%) was significantly higher than those of the Wiltse group (24.13 ± 6.82%) and the MIS‐TLIF group (22.35 ± 5.03%). The ratio of lean‐to‐total CSA in the PLIF group was lower than those of the Wiltse and MIS‐TLIF groups after surgery (F = 8.852, p < 0.001). MIS‐TLIF group showed longer operation time (169.11 ± 29.38 min) and intraoperative fluoroscopy time (87.61 ± 3.13 s) than the Wiltse group.

Conclusion

Wiltse TLIF assisted by the new retractor is a more convenient and minimally invasive surgical method than the traditional PLIF and MIS‐TLIF methods, which are linked to a long learning curve and long operation and fluoroscopy time.

Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion vs. Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is an effective surgical option for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with spondylolisthesis. However, few studies have discussed oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) with MIS-TLIF.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate postoperative improvements, complications, and reoperation rates between patients with LSS undergoing OLIF or MIS-TLIF.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 113 LLS patients who underwent OLIF (53) or MIS-TLIF (60) with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation between January 2016 and December 2018. We measured estimated blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, reoperation, and complication incidence, visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA), and Short Form-36 (SF-36) scores, discal and foraminal height and lumbar lordotic angle.

RESULTS

The mean age was 58.81 ± 0.9 years. The TLIF group had increased operation time, blood loss, and hospital stays (p = 0.007, 0.001, and 0.016, respectively). Postoperatively, VAS and ODI scores significantly decreased while JOA and SF-36 scores significantly increased. The postoperative differences in main outcomes between the groups were insignificant (all p > 0.05). The OLIF group had the lowest rates of overall (9.8% OLIF vs. 12.9% MIS-TLIF), intraoperative (3.9% OLIF vs. 4.8% MIS-TLIF), and postoperative complications (5.9% OLIF vs. 8.1% MIS-TLIF), but the differences were insignificant (p = 0.607, 0.813, and 0.653, respectively). The reoperation rate did not differ significantly (3.8% OLIF vs. 3.3% MIS-TLIF) (p = 0.842). OLIF restored disc height (74.4 vs. 32.0%), foraminal height (27.4 vs. 18.2%), and lumbar lordotic angle (3.5 vs. 1.1%) with greater success than did MIS-TLIF.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing OLIF with LSS improved similarly to MIS-TLIF patients. OLIF restored disc height, foraminal height and lumbar lordotic angle more successfully than did MIS-TLIF.

Comparison Between PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in the Treatment of Middle-Aged and Elderly Patients with Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation

Objective

To evaluate the early clinical effect of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) surgery in the treatment of middle-aged and elderly patients with single-level lumbar disc herniation accompanied by lumbar instability.

Methods

From January 2019 to June 2020, a total of 82 consecutive patients were categorised into PE-TLIF group and MIS-TLIF group based on different surgical methods. The visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, perioperative objective serological index, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, time to back to work or normal life, and Modified MacNab score were used as the evaluation indexes. The differences between the two groups were analyzed and the clinical effects were compared.

Results

The VAS back pain of PE-TLIF group was decreased compared to that of MIS-TLIF group in the postoperative 1 week and 1 month. The operative time in PE-TLIF group was obviously longer than that in MIS-TLIF group. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in PE-TLIF group than that in MIS-TLIF group. More intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage were recorded in MIS-TLIF group. Compared with MIS-TLIF, PE-TLIF surgery was associated with a shorter time to ambulation after surgery and a shorter time to back to work or normal life. Significant statistical differences were observed in IL-6, CRP, and CK on postoperative 3 days between the two groups.

Conclusion

For middle-aged and elderly patients, PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF surgery both have obvious clinical efficacy and safety. However, with less intraoperative blood loss, shorter recovery time and less injury to the patients, people undergoing PE-TLIF surgery can return to work or normal life faster. It is speculated that PE-TLIF has a higher incidence of complications and recurrence rate than that MIS-TLIF. PE-TLIF may be a better choice for middle-aged and elderly patients with single-level lumbar disc herniation.

Reinforcement of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation with Hydroxyapatite Granules in Patients with Osteoporotic Spine: Biomechanical Performance and Clinical Outcomes

In percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation of the osteoporotic spine, rigid screw fixation obtaining strong stabilization is important for achieving successful treatment outcomes. However, in patients with severe osteoporosis, it is difficult to obtain PPS fixation with sufficient stability. PPS fixation has potential disadvantages with respect to maintaining secure stabilization in comparison to conventional pedicle screw fixation. In PPS fixation, bone grafting to achieve posterior spine fusion is generally not applicable and transverse connectors between the rods cannot be used to reinforce the fixation. Various augmentation methods, including additional hooks, sublaminar bands, and hydroxyapatite (HA) sticks, are available for conventional pedicle screw fixation. On the other hand, there has been no established augmentation method for PPS fixation. Recently, we developed a novel augmentation technique for PPS fixation using HA granules. This technique allows the percutaneous insertion of HA granules into the screw hole along the guidewire prior to insertion of the PPS. We have used this augmentation technique for PPS fixation in various spine surgeries in patients with osteoporosis. In our previous studies, biomechanical analyses demonstrated that PPS fixation was significantly enhanced by augmentation with HA granules in the osteoporotic lumbar spine. Furthermore, augmentation with HA granules was considered to decrease the incidence of screw loosening and implant failure following PPS fixation in patients with osteoporotic spine. In this article, we describe the surgical procedures of the augmentation method using HA granules and summarize our data from the biomechanical analysis of augmentation for PPS fixation. We also review the surgical outcomes of PPS fixation with augmentation using HA granules.

Mechanical Study of Various Pedicle Screw Systems including Percutaneous Pedicle Screw in Trauma Treatment

Background and Objectives: Spine surgery using a percutaneous pedicle screw placement (PPSP) is widely implemented for spinal trauma. However, percutaneous systems have been reported to have weak screw-rod connections. In this study, conventional open and percutaneous systems were biomechanically evaluated and compared. Material and Methods: The experiments were performed in two stages: the first stage was a break test, whereas the second stage was a fatigue test. Four systems were used for the experiments. System 1 was intended for conventional open surgery (titanium rod with a 6.0 mm diameter, using a clamp connecting mechanism). System 2 was a percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) system for trauma (titanium alloy rod with a 6.0 mm diameter, using ball ring connections). System 3 was a PPS system for trauma (cobalt-chromium alloy rod with a 6.0 mm diameter, using sagittal adjusting screw connections). System 4 was a general-purpose PPS system (titanium alloy rod with a 5.5 mm diameter, using a mechanism where the adapter in the head holds down the screw). Results: Stiffness values of 54.8 N/mm, 43.1 N/mm, 90.9 N/mm, and 39.3 N/mm were reported for systems 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The average number of load cycles in the fatigue test was 134,393, 40,980, 1,550,389, and 147,724 for systems 1 to 4, respectively. At the end of the test, the displacements were 0.2 mm, 16.9 mm, 1.2 mm, and 8.6 mm, respectively. System 1, with a locking mechanism, showed the least displacement at the end of the test. Conclusion: A few PPS systems showed better results in terms on stiffness and life than the open system. The experiments showed that mechanical strength varies depending on the spinal implant. The experiments conducted are essential and significant to provide the mechanical strength required for surgical reconstruction.

Usefulness of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined with Indirect Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review

Background and Objective: The aim of this review was to analyze the existing literature and investigate the outcomes or complications of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) combined with indirect decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS). Materials and Methods: A database search algorithm was used to query MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE to identify the literature reporting LLIF with indirect decompression for DS between January 2010 and December 2021. Improvements in outcome measures and complication rates were pooled and tested for significance. Results: A total of 412 publications were assessed, and 12 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria after full review. The pooled data available in the included studies showed that 438 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis (mean age 65.2 years; mean body mass index (BMI) 38.1 kg/m²) underwent LLIF. A total of 546 disc spaces were operated on. The most frequently treated levels were L4–L5 and L3–L4. Clinically, the average improvement was 32.5% in ODI, 46.3 mm in low back pain, and 48.3 mm in leg pain estimated from the studies included. SF-36 PCS improved by 51.5% and MCS improved by 19.5%. For radiological outcomes, a reduction in slippage was seen in 6.3%. Disc height increased by 55%, foraminal height increased by 21.1%, the foraminal area on the approach side increased by 21.9%, and on the opposite side it increased by 26.1%. The cross-sectional spinal canal area increased by 20.6% after surgery. Post-operative complications occurred in 5–40% of patients with thigh symptoms, such as anterior thigh numbness, dysesthesia, discomfort, pain, and sensory deficits. Conclusions: Indirect decompression by LLIF for DS is an effective method for improving pain and dysfunction with less surgical invasion. In addition, it has the effect of significantly improving disc height, foraminal height and area, and segmental lordosis on radiological outcomes compared to the posterior approach.

Posterior Oblique Square Decompression with a Three-Step Wanding Technique in Tubular Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Report and Mid-Long-Term Clinical Outcomes

Although minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is the most common procedure in minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt), details of the technique remain unclear. This technical report shows the mid-long-term clinical outcomes in patients who underwent posterior oblique square decompression (POSDe) with the three-step wanding technique of tubular MIS-TLIF for degenerative lumbar disease. Tubular MIS-TLIF (POSDe) was performed on 50 patients (males, 19; age, 69.2 ± 9.6 years), and traditional open surgery was performed (OS) on 27 (males, 4; age, 67.9 ± 6.6 years). We evaluated the clinical outcomes using the Visual Analog Scale for back pain, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores, and JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. We also assessed the fusion rate using the Bridwell grading system with computed tomography or plain radiography for at least 2 years postoperatively. Although there was no significant difference in the improvement rate of JOA scores between the two groups, the mean operation time and blood loss were significantly lower with MIS-TLIF than with OS. In the tubular MIS-TLIF group, there were no cases of deep wound infection; four cases had a pseudarthrosis, two had dural injury, and three had cage retropulsion. We revealed good clinical outcomes in patients who underwent POSDe.

Clinical outcomes, complications and fusion rates in endoscopic assisted intraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF): systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aims to determine the clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates in endoscopic assisted intra-foraminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The inclusion criteria were: five or more consecutive patients who underwent iLIF or MI-TLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases; description of the surgical technique; clinical outcome measures, complications and imaging assessment; minimum follow-up of 12 months. Surgical time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were extracted. Mean outcome improvements were pooled and compared with minimal clinically important differences (MCID). Pooled and direct meta-analysis were evaluated. We identified 42 eligible studies. The iLIF group had significantly lower mean intra-operative blood loss, unstandardized mean difference (UMD) 110.61 mL (95%CI 70.43; 150.80; p value < 0.0001), and significantly decreased length of hospital stay (UMD 2.36; 95%CI 1.77; 2.94; p value < 0.0001). Visual analogue scale (VAS) back, VAS leg and Oswestry disability index (ODI) baseline to last follow-up mean improvements were statistically significant (p value < 0.0001), and clinically important for both groups (MCID VAS back > 1.16; MCID VAS leg > 1.36; MCID > 12.40). There was no significant difference in complication nor fusion rates between both cohorts. Interbody fusion using either iLIF or MI-TLIF leads to significant and clinically important improvements in clinical outcomes for lumbar degenerative diseases. Both procedures provide high rates of fusion at 12 months or later, without significant difference in complication rates. iLIF is associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay.

Study registration: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews: Registration No. CRD42020180980, accessible at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ April 2020.

Computed Tomography-Based Navigation System in Current Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review

The number of spine surgeries using instrumentation has been increasing with recent advances in surgical techniques and spinal implants. Navigation systems have been attracting attention since the 1990s in order to perform spine surgeries safely and effectively, and they enable us to perform complex spine surgeries that have been difficult to perform in the past. Navigation systems are also contributing to the improvement of minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt) surgery, which is becoming popular due to aging populations. Conventional navigation systems were based on reconstructions obtained by preoperative computed tomography (CT) images and did not always accurately reproduce the intraoperative patient positioning, which could lead to problems involving inaccurate positional information and time loss associated with registration. Since 2006, an intraoperative CT-based navigation system has been introduced as a solution to these problems, and it is now becoming the mainstay of navigated spine surgery. Here, we highlighted the use of intraoperative CT-based navigation systems in current spine surgery, as well as future issues and prospects.

Perioperative Modifications to the Open TLIF Provide Comparable Short-term Outcomes to the MIS-TLIF

STUDY DESIGN

This study is a retrospective review of patients' charts and data from longitudinally collected clinical outcomes and opioid use.

OBJECTIVE

In the current study, we aim to compare short-term outcomes data for 139 Open transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) patients to recently published data for tubular and endoscopic MIS-TLIF.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In response to the downsides associated with Open TLIF, such as large incision, blood loss, delayed ambulation, prolonged hospitalization, and opioid-reliance, spine surgeons developed tubular retractor based "minimally-invasive" TLIF. However, the traditional Open TLIF retains its significance in terms of providing successful fusion and improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

We adapted several techniques with an aim to improve short-term outcomes for our Open TLIF patients that combined extensive perioperative counselling, an emphasis on early mobilization, avoidance of overuse of opioid analgesics, early discharge with home care arrangements, use of a posthospitalization drainage tube with intraoperative surgical modifications using small incisions (4-5 cm), a narrow 20 mm retractor, minimal muscle injury, and use of a cell saver to minimize net blood loss. The demographics and perioperative results were compared with data from recent MIS-TLIF studies using Student t test for continuous and χ2/exact test for categorical variables.

RESULTS

Among the total 139 patients, 115 underwent a single-level procedure, 90% of whom were discharged on the first postoperative day (length of stay=1.13±0.47 d) with an average net estimated blood loss of 176.17±87.88 mL. There were 24 two-level procedures with an average length of stay of 1.57±0.84 days, average net estimated blood loss was 216.96±85.70 mL. The patients had statistically significant improvements in PROs at 3 and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study identify that patients who underwent modified Open TLIF demonstrated favorable short-term outcomes, as compared with the tubular MIS-TLIF, by virtue of avoidance of blood transfusions, shorter hospital stays, and significantly less opioid usage while experiencing satisfactory PROs.

Comparison of Perioperative and Postoperative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Open TLIF in Obese Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‑Analysis

PURPOSE

Previous studies have demonstrated that minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is comparable to the open approach in terms of efficacy and safety. However, few comparative studies of surgical procedures in patients with obesity show that they may react differently to open-TLIF (O-TLIF) and MI-LTIF approaches.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The main indicators were complications, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and secondary indicators were operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

No significant differences in the VAS and ODI scores for back pain at the last follow-up and wound infection rates were observed between the two groups. Dural tear incidence and complication rate were significantly lower in the MI-TLIF group than that in the O-TLIF group (P = 0.002 and 0.001, respectively). No significant difference in operative time was found between the two groups. There was less blood loss and shorter hospital stay (P = 0.001 and 0.002, respectively) in the MI-TLIF group than that in the O-TLIF group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with O-TLIF, MI-TLIF is an effective and safe surgical option for patients with obesity, which resulted in similar improvements in pain and functional disability, as well as a lower complication rate.

PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION: RESULTS OVER 47 MONTHS OF FOLLOW-UP

Introduction

This study aims to investigate the clinical-functional results of a new surgical technique, Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PELIF), in patients with a clinical diagnosis of low back or sciatic pain and segmental instability who were submitted to surgery using this technique assisted by the attending physician.

Materials and methods

Patients completed a consent form and were clinically and radiographically re-assessed by independent evaluators using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the SF-36 Quality of Life Score in the pre- and postoperative periods. Their medical records were also reviewed for surgical time, length of hospital stay, need for blood transfusion, return to work, and radiographic fusion evaluation.

Results

In the group of 19 patients with 33 levels operated, VAS and ODI decreased from 10.0 and 64% to 2.0 and 28%, respectively. The SF-36 showed significantly higher scores in 5 of its 7 domains at the end of the follow-up as compared to the preoperative period scores. Only 1 case of pseudoarthrosis was diagnosed radiographically.

Conclusions

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PELIF) has been shown to be a safe and efficient technique for the treatment of patients with segmental instability associated with low back or sciatic pain. Level of Evidence VI; Therapeutic Study; Case Series.

Single-level awake transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a Mayo Clinic institutional experience and national analysis

OBJECTIVE

Awake transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a novel technique for performing spinal fusions in patients under conscious sedation. Whether awake TLIF can reduce operative times and decrease the hospital length of stay (LOS) remains to be shown. In this study, the authors sought to assess the differences in clinical outcomes between patients who underwent awake TLIF and those who underwent TLIF under general anesthesia by using institutional experience at the Mayo Clinic and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.

METHODS

Chart review was performed for a consecutive series of patients who underwent single-level minimally invasive surgery (MIS)-TLIF performed by a single surgeon (K.A.I.) at a single institution. Additionally, the NSQIP database was queried from 2016 to 2019 for patients who underwent awake TLIF as well as propensity score-matched patients who underwent TLIF under general anesthesia.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients at Mayo Clinic underwent awake single-level MIS-TLIF. The mean operative time was 122 ± 16.68 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 39 ± 30.24 ml. No intraoperative complications were reported. A total of 96 patients who underwent TLIF (24 awake and 72 under general anesthesia) were analyzed from the NSQIP database. The mean LOS was less in the awake cohort (1.4 ± 1.381 days) than the general anesthesia cohort (3 ± 2.274 days) (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from the authors' institutional experience and national analysis has demonstrated that awake MIS-TLIF is efficient and can reduce hospital LOS.

Clinical Comparison of Combined Cortical Bone Trajectory and Transarticular Surface Screw Versus Standard Pedicle Screw Insertion by Wiltse Approach for L5 Isthmic Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and invasiveness of a combined screw insertion technique [using cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw and transarticular surface screw (TASS)] for patients with L5 isthmic spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbosacral posterior fixation using TASS is safe, with high biomechanical strength. However, data regarding its clinical outcomes, effectiveness, and invasiveness, are lacking.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 111 patients who underwent single-level L5-S1 posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for L5 isthmic spondylolisthesis. The cohort was stratified into 2 groups: the Wiltse group included patients who underwent PLIF between 2008 and 2013 with standard pedicle screw fixation via Wiltse approach and the CBT/TASS group included those who underwent PLIF from 2014 onward with CBT/TASS fixation. After propensity score matching of the CBT/TASS and Wiltse groups, the surgical times, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of in-hospital stays, clinical scores, serum creatine kinase concentration, radiographic parameters, and bone union rate were compared using the χ2 test or Mann-Whitney U test. In addition, multivariate linear regression analyses, with surgical time and EBL as objective variables applied after Box-Cox transformation, were performed.

RESULTS

The matched CBT/TASS group showed significantly shorter surgical times (P<0.001), lower EBL (P=0.032), shorter in-hospital stays (P=0.005), and lower 3-day postoperative serum creatine kinase concentrations (P=0.014) than the matched Wiltse group. However, neither the postoperative grade of spondylolisthesis, the L5-S1 lordotic angle, nor the clinical scores were significantly different between matched groups. The bone union rates were 94.7% and 96.2% in the matched CBT/TASS and Wiltse groups, respectively (P=1.000). Regression analysis showed that CBT/TASS was an independent factor significantly related to shorter surgical times and lower EBL (P<0.001 and P=0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Compared with Wiltse approach, CBT/TASS is a less invasive technique, with a shorter surgical time and sufficient clinical outcomes for patients with L5 isthmic spondylolisthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-treatment benefits.

Minimally versus conventional-invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with failed back surgery syndrome

BACKGROUND

Failed back surgery syndrome is an important cause of back and leg pain after spinal surgery. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is commonly used in revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome. In the literature, there is a lack of evidence concerning the minimally and conventional-invasive TLIF and debates are ongoing. The purpose of the present study was to compare efficacy and safety of minimally versus conventional-invasive TLIF for failed back surgery syndrome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted according to the STROBE Statement. Between 2011 and 2014, thirty patients with failed back surgery syndrome underwent TLIF. Group I (15 patients) received minimally invasive TLIF through paramedian approach using microscopy and fluoroscopy. Group II (15 patients) received conventional-invasive TLIF. Minimum follow-up was 12 months.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in both groups postoperatively. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding ODI, VAS, leg and back pain pre- and postoperatively. There was a tendency to better postoperative ODI and VAS scores in group I; however this did not reach the statistical significance. One case showed adjacent segment degeneration in group I. In group II, one case had screw mal-positioning with foot drop. Another case had dural injury with postoperative fistula.

CONCLUSION

TLIF is a valuable option after failed back surgery syndrome providing statistically significant improvement postoperatively. Both minimally and conventional-invasive TLIF represent a safe and reliable treatment of patients with failed back syndrome, achieving satisfactory outcome along with low rate of complications. Although the minimally invasive TLIF scored better, these differences did not reach the threshold of significance.

Lumbar degenerative disease treated by percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion or minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a case-matched comparative study

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and imaging results of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PETLIF) through comparing it with minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MISTLIF).

Materials and methods

We performed a retrospective analysis on patients with lumbar degenerative disease treated by PETLIF or MISTLIF from September 2017 to January 2019, and the patients were divided into two groups: the PETLIF group and the MISTLIF group. The clinical and imaging parameters of the two groups were evaluated.

Results

There was no significant difference between the two groups in complication rate. The operative time in the PETLIF group was significantly less than that in the MISTLIF group. Compared with those before operation, the postoperative VAS-L and VAS-B scores were significantly improved after operation in the both groups. In addition, the postoperative VAS-B score of the PETLIF group was significantly lower than that of the MISTLIF group. At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the VAS-L score, VAS-B score, ODI score, and bony fusion rate.

Conclusions

Both PETLIF and MISTLIF could achieve satisfactory clinical outcomes in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, but our study suggested that PETLIF had less damage, rapid recovery after operation, and short discharge time.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-021-02841-4.

Expandable vs. Static Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cages: 1-year Radiographic Parameters and Patient Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages capable of multidirectional in situ expansion have gained popularity as they increase axial surface area for fusion and may enhance lordotic correction through a traditional MIS surgical corridor.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between a novel expandable vs. static MIS TLIF cage for the treatment of degenerative disc disease.

STUDY DESIGN

A single center retrospective review of 120 consecutive adult patients undergoing 1 or 2-level MIS TLIF with an expandable (n=60) or static cage was performed between 2015-2019. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative radiographic and clinical outcomes were assessed by upright flexion/extension radiographs and serial confidential surveys.

RESULTS

120 patients (mean age 63.5 years, 60.0 % female) undergoing 1 and 2-level MIS TLIF met inclusion criteria. A statistically significant reduction of spondylolisthesis, restoration of foraminal, anterior and posterior disc height was achieved in both cohorts, but greater in the ECC (all p<0.05). Comparable rates of fusion, 93% and 91% were observed in the ECC and SCC. A significant reduction in NRS back and ODI scores were observed in both cohorts but more pronounced in the ECC (5.9±2.4 to 2.2±1.9 and 37.3±16.2 to 17.1±15.2) vs. SCC (6.2±2.8 to 3.2±2.5 and 41.8±16.1 to 24.3±17.5) (p<0.05). One instance of cage migration requiring reoperation occurred in the ECC.

CONCLUSIONS

Taken together, these radiographic and clinical findings suggest an expandable cage placed through an MIS corridor represents a safe, equitable and efficacious alternative to a static TLIF in adults with degenerative lumbar pathology.

Comparison of adjacent segment disease after minimally invasive versus open lumbar fusion: a minimum 10-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

The object of this study was to compare, after a long-term follow-up, the incidence and features of adjacent segment disease (ASDis) following lumbar fusion surgery performed via an open technique using conventional interbody fusion plus transpedicular screw fixation or a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) using a tubular retractor together with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with a follow-up period > 10 years who had undergone instrumented lumbar fusion at the L4-5 level between January 2004 and December 2010. The patients were divided into an open surgery group and MIS group based on the surgical method performed. Baseline characteristics and radiological findings, including factors related to ASDis, were compared between the two groups. Additionally, the incidence of ASDis and related details, including diagnosis, time to diagnosis, and treatment, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 119 patients who had undergone lumbar fusion at the L4-5 level in the study period, 32 were excluded according to the exclusion criteria. The remaining 87 patients were included as the final study cohort and were divided into an open group (n = 44) and MIS group (n = 43). The mean follow-up period was 10.50 (range 10.0-14.0) years in the open group and 10.16 (range 10.0-13.0) years in the MIS group. The overall facet joint violation rate was significantly higher in the open group than in the MIS group (54.5% vs 30.2%, p = 0.022). However, in terms of adjacent segment degeneration, there were no significant differences in corrected disc height, segmental angle, range of motion, or degree of listhesis of the adjacent segments between the two groups during follow-up. The overall incidence of ASDis was 33.3%, with incidences of 31.8% in the open group and 34.9% in the MIS group, showing no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.822). Additionally, detailed diagnosis and treatment factors were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

After a minimum 10-year follow-up, the incidence of ASDis did not differ significantly between patients who had undergone open fusion and those who had undergone MIS fusion at the L4-5 level.

Posterior Percutaneous Screw Fixation to Treat Vertebral Fracture Non-union in Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) alters the biomechanical properties of the spine, rendering it highly prone to fracture, following even minor trauma. Risk of delayed diagnosis of vertebral fractures is particularly high in this cohort of patients since radiographs are notoriously difficult to interpret and presentation is late, due to difficulty distinguishing new from pre-existing back pain. Our case describes a gentleman in his late sixties with a six-month delay in presentation to our services with a T12 fracture, secondary to previously undiagnosed DISH, which had progressed to non-union. He underwent T9-L3 thoracolumbar posterior percutaneous stabilisation and fusion. At eighteen months follow-up, there was evidence of union, significant improvement in his pain, no focal neurology signs, and the patient had returned to his activities of daily living (ADLs).

Comparison of Simultaneous Single-Position Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation with Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using O-arm Navigated Technique for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases

Minimally invasive posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-PLIF/TLIF) are widely accepted procedures for lumbar instability due to degenerative or traumatic diseases. Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is currently receiving considerable attention because of the reductions in damage to the back muscles and neural tissue. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of simultaneous single-position OLIF and percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation with MI-PLIF/TLIF. This retrospective comparative study included 98 patients, comprising 63 patients with single-position OLIF (Group SO) and 35 patients with MI-PLIF/TLIF (Group P/T). Cases with more than 1 year of follow-up were included in this study. Mean follow-up was 32.9 ± 7.0 months for Group SO and 33.7 ± 7.5 months for Group P/T. Clinical and radiological evaluations were performed. Comparing Group SO to Group P/T, surgical time and blood loss were 118 versus 172 min (p < 0.01) and 139 versus 374 mL (p < 0.01), respectively. Cage height, change in disk height, and postoperative foraminal height were significantly higher in Group SO than in Group P/T. The fusion rate was 96.8% in Group SO, similar to the 94.2% in Group P/T (p = 0.985). The complication rate was 6.3% in Group SO and 14.1% in Group P/T (p = 0.191). Simultaneous single position O-arm-navigated OLIF reduces the surgical time, blood loss, and time to ambulation after surgery. Good indirect decompression can be achieved with this method.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: Technical tips, learning curve, short-term clinical outcome, and brief review

Background

Current trends in spine surgeries have shifted to minimally invasive procedures. Minimally invasive approaches are getting more popular for lumbar interbody fusion procedures.

Objectives

The objective of the study was to report technical modifications, learning curve, and short-term clinical results in minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MITLIF).

Materials and Methods

All MITLIF cases performed from 2018 July to March 2020 were included. First three authors were operating surgeons. Visual analog scores (VAS) scoring for pain, Macnab criteria, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were used for outcome assessment. Operating time, radiation exposure, and complications were assessed separately in a group of 20 as per time sequence in series to assess the learning curve.

Results

A total of 61 patients were included. Various indications included spondylolisthesis, failed back surgery, calcified lumbar disc, and spondylodiscitis. Mean age was 47.08 ± 12.06. Intraoperative blood loss was 97.04 ± 25.58. Mean operating time and number of C-arm shots were 190.75 ± 37.11 and 159.3 ± 74.54, respectively, in initial 20 cases which however reduced in later operated cases. Significant improvement in VAS and ODI scores was observed at follow-up of 6.34 ± 4.67 months. Three cases needed surgical revision in the initial 20 cases, and there were no revision surgeries in later operated cases.

Conclusion

MITLIF could be done in failed back surgery cases, spondylodiscitis, and deformity corrections in addition to spondylolisthesis. It has advantages of less injury to soft tissues, maintaining the posterior tension band, decrease in blood loss and hospital stays, and early mobilization. However, it has longer learning curve and takes minimum 20 cases for the surgeon to acquire reasonable experience and confidence.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion - A narrative review on the present status

Minimally invasive lumbar transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) has become the most commonly performed lumbar fusion procedure. There are multiple variables such as bone graft properties, use of rhBMP (recombinant human bone morphogenic protein), interbody cage properties, image guidance techniques, etc., that may impact the outcomes and fusion rates. Radiation exposure to the patient as well as to the operating team is an important concern. The minimally invasive anterior approaches for lumbar fusion with ability to insert larger cages and achieve better sagittal correction have added another option in management of lumbar degenerative deformities. A literature review of recent studies and systematic reviews on different aspects impacting the outcomes of MIS TLIF has been done to define the present status of the procedure in this narrative review. Iliac crest bone graft can help achieve very good fusion rate without significantly increasing the morbidity. RhBMP is most potent enhancer of fusion and the adverse effects can be avoided by surgical technique and using lower dose. The use of navigation techniques has reduced the radiation exposure to patient and the surgeons but the benefit seems to be significant only in long segment fusions.

[Degenerative lumbar spine stenosis: minimally invasive microsurgical methods of treatment]

Degenerative lumbar spine stenosis is one of the main causes of chronic pain and radiculopathy in advanced age people. Along with increase in average life expectancy, degenerative lumbar spine stenosis becomes the most common indication for spinal surgery. There is still no consensus regarding the most optimal surgical approach due to the variety of modern surgical methods. In recent years, minimally invasive spinal surgery has become a more advisable alternative to open surgery due to its advanced technical features combined with less soft tissue damage, lower risk of complications and shorter postoperative recovery.

Efficacy of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine on postoperative pain after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine on postoperative pain after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent TLIF in our department between August 2018 and January 2020. Patients were divided to ropivacaine group and saline group. A ropivacaine group whom received gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine during operation, and a saline group whom were intraoperatively administered by gelatin sponge impregnated with saline. The two groups were compared in reference to postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. The consumption of postoperative diclofenac sodium suppository use was also recorded. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores were used for functional evaluation at 1 year postoperatively.

RESULT

A total of 127 patients were evaluated in this retrospective study. The mean postoperative hospital stay in the ropivacaine group was significantly lower than saline group. The VAS score was significantly lower in patients receiving gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine as compared with patients in saline group on postoperative day 1, 2, 3 and 4. The number of patients who need the administration of diclofenac sodium suppository and the mean consumption of postoperative diclofenac sodium suppository was significantly lower in the ropivacaine group as compared with saline group.

CONCLUSION

The application of gelatin sponge impregnated with ropivacaine around the nerve root in patients undergoing TLIF can effectively control the postoperative pain and reduce postoperative hospital stay.

Accidental Dural Tears in Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disease

Background: One of the most frequent complications of spinal surgery is accidental dural tears (ADTs). Minimal access surgical techniques (MAST) have been described as a promising approach to minimizing such complications. ADTs have been studied extensively in connection with open spinal surgery, but there is less literature on minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS).

Materials and Methods: We reviewed 187 patients who had undergone degenerative lumbar spinal surgery using minimally invasive spinal fusions techniques. We analyzed the influence of age, Body Mass Index (BMI), smoking, diabetes, and previous surgery on the rate of ADTs in MISS.

Results: Twenty-two patients (11.764%) suffered from an ADT. We recommended bed rest for two and a half to 5 days, depending on the type of repair required and the amount of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage. We could not find any statistically significant correlation between ADTs and age (p = 0.34,), BMI (p = 0.92), smoking (p = 0.46), and diabetes (p = 0.71). ADTs were significantly more frequent in cases of previous surgery (p < 0.001). None of the patients developed a transcutaneous CSF leak or post-operative infection.

Conclusions: The frequency of ADTs in MISS appears comparable to that encountered when using open surgical techniques. Additionally, MAST produces less dead space along the corridor to the spine. Such reduced dead space may not be enough for pseudomeningocele to occur, cerebrospinal fluid to accumulate, and fistula to form. MAST, therefore, provides a certain amount of protection.