Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and interbody fusion with B-Twin expandable spinal spacer

Transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion microscopic safe operating area: a three-dimensional model study based on computed tomography imaging

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic spine lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-LIF) is well-regarded within the academic community. However, it presents challenges such as intraoperative disorientation, high rates of nerve damage, a steep learning curve, and prolonged surgical times, often occurring during the creation of the operative channel. Furthermore, the undefined safe operational zones under endoscopy continue to pose risks to surgical safety. We aimed to analyse the anatomical data of Kambin's triangle via CT imaging to define the parameters of the safe operating area for transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TPLIF), providing crucial insights for clinical practice.

METHODS

We selected the L4-L5 intervertebral space. Using three-dimensional (3D), we identified Kambin's triangle and the endocircle within it, and recorded the position of point 'J' on the adjacent facet joint as the centre 'O' of the circle shifts by angle 'β.' The diameter of the inscribed circle 'd,' the abduction angle 'β,' and the distances 'L1' and 'L2' were measured from the trephine's edge to the exiting and traversing nerve roots, respectively.

RESULTS

Using a trephine with a diameter of 8 mm in TPLIF has a significant safety distance. The safe operating area under the TPLIF microscope was also clarified.

CONCLUSIONS

Through CT imaging research, combined with 3D simulation, we identified the anatomical data of the L4-L5 segment Kambin's triangle, to clarify the safe operation area under TPLIF. We propose a simple and easy positioning method and provide a novel surgical technique to establish working channels faster and reduce nerve damage rates. At the same time, according to this method, the Kambin's triangle anatomical data of the patient's lumbar spine diseased segments can be measured through CT 3D reconstruction of the lumbar spine, and individualised preoperative design can be conducted to select the appropriate specifications of visible trephine and supporting tools. This may effectively reduce the learning curve, shorten the time operation time, and improve surgical safety.

Comparative efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopy and micro-endoscopic discectomy in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Given the inconclusive literature on operative time, pain relief, functional outcomes, and complications, this meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) and Micro-Endoscopic Discectomy (MED) in treating Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (DLSS).

METHODS

A thorough literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and based on the PICO framework. The study interrogated four primary databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library-on August 16, 2023, without time restrictions. The search employed a strategic selection of keywords and was devoid of language barriers. Studies were included based on strict criteria, such as the diagnosis, surgical intervention types, and specific outcome measures. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and statistical analysis was executed through Stata version 17.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis incorporated 9 articles out of an initial yield of 1,136 potential studies. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in surgical duration, but no statistically significant difference was identified (MD = - 2.11, P = 0.56). For VAS scores assessing lumbar and leg pain, UBE was statistically superior to MED (MD = - 0.18, P = 0.013; MD = - 0.15, P = 0.006, respectively). ODI scores demonstrated no significant difference between the two surgical methods (MD = - 0.57, P = 0.26). UBE had a lower incidence of complications compared to those receiving MED (OR = 0.54, P = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

UBE and MED exhibited comparable surgical durations and disability outcomes as measured by ODI. However, UBE demonstrated superior efficacy in alleviating lumbar and leg pain based on VAS scores. The findings present an intricate evaluation of the two surgical interventions for DLSS, lending valuable insights for clinical decision-making.

A single-arm retrospective study of the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis

Objective

The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Methods

Patients who underwent UBE-TLIF due to single-segment LSS between August 2019 and July 2021 were retrospectively included in the study. Clinical outcomes evaluated include operative time, estimated blood loss (including postoperative drainage), time to ambulation, postoperative hospital stay, complications, visual analog scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and modified Macnab criteria. Interbody bony fusion at the index level was assessed using Bridwell grading criteria.

Results

A total of 73 patients (29 males and 44 females) were enrolled in this study. All surgeries were successfully performed without intraoperative conversion to open surgery. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed optimal direct neural decompression after UBE-TLIF. The mean operative time was 150.89 ± 15.58 min. The mean estimated blood loss was 126.03 ± 17.85 ml (postoperative drainage was 34.84 ± 8.31 ml). Time to ambulation was 2.0 ± 0.75 days after the procedure. Postoperatively, the mean hospital stay was 5.96 ± 1.38 days. VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain, JOA, and ODI were significantly improved postoperatively compared with those before the operation, and differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Excellent and good outcomes were reported by 87.67% of patients according to the modified Macnab criteria at the final follow-up. A total of nine perioperative complications occurred, with an incidence of 12.33%. X-ray or computerized tomography (CT) 6 months after the procedure showed that 37 cases (50.68%) presented with segmental fusion, 30 cases (41.10%) showed incomplete fusion, and 6 cases (8.22%) showed no signs of fusion. However, bony fusion was achieved in all cases at the final follow-up.

Conclusions

UBE-TLIF for LSS has the advantages of less surgical invasiveness and fast postoperative recovery.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Interbody Debridement and Fusion for Pyogenic Lumbar Spondylodiskitis: Surgical Technique and the Comparison With Percutaneous Endoscopic Drainage and Debridement

Objective

Surgical treatment of severe infectious spondylodiskitis remains challenging. Although minimally invasive percutaneous endoscopic drainage and debridement (PEDD) may yield good results in complicated cases, outcomes of patients with extensive structural damage and mechanical instability may be unsatisfactory. To address severe infectious spondylodiskitis, we have developed a surgical technique called percutaneous endoscopic interbody debridement and fusion (PEIDF), which comprises endoscopic debridement, bonegraft interbody fusion, and percutaneous posterior instrumentation.

Methods

Outcomes of PEIDF in 12 patients and PEDD in 15 patients with infectious spondylodiskitis from April 2014 to July 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Outcome were compared between 2 kinds of surgical procedures.

Results

Patients in PEIDF group had significantly lower rate of revision surgery (8.3% vs. 58.3%), better kyphosis angle (-5.73°±8.74 vs. 1.07°±2.70 in postoperative; 7.09°±7.23 vs. 0.79°±4.08 in kyphosis correction at 1 year), and higher fusion rate (83.3% vs. 46.7%) than those who received PEDD.

Conclusion

PEIDF is an effective approach for treating infectious spondylodiskitis, especially in patients with spinal instability and multiple medical comorbidities.

Full Endoscopic Lumbar Transforaminal Interbody Fusion in DDD Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease: A Latest Technique

BACKGROUND

Lumbar interbody fusion has long been used in the treatment of degenerative disc disease. Lumbar spinal interbody fusion surgery traditionally is an open surgical technique. Although lumbar spinal interbody fusions using endoscopy have been reported, the endoscope was used partially for the interbody fusion. We are reporting a case where lumbar interbody fusion with discectomy was entirely done through direct visualization with the endoscope.

METHODS

We report a case of a 55-year-old woman who underwent the transforaminal percutaneous full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion technique (FELTIF) under continuous and direct visualization at the L5-S1 level. To facilitate the interbody fusion, a foraminoplasty with complete resection of the superior articular process (SAP) and a partial pediculectomy of the S1 pedicle was performed. End plate sparing decortication techniques were used under direct video endoscopic visualization. The cage and bone graft insertion occurred through the endoscopic working cannula, thereby protecting the retracted traversing and exiting nerve roots at the surgical level. Posterior supplemental fixation with percutaneous pedicle screws was performed to complete the circumferential fusion.

RESULT

The VAS leg score was reduced to 2 from preoperative score of 7 and the VAS back score reduced 3 from preoperative score of 9. Her neurogenic symptom score improved from 8 before surgery to 1 at the last follow-up. The fusion is assessed by plain radiographs in follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that the insertion of an interbody fusion cage device directly through an endoscopic working cannula was technically feasible. Future research should focus on examining the clinical outcomes of this technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Expandable Interbody Fusion Cages: An Editorial on the Surgeon's Perspective on Recent Technological Advances and Their Biomechanical Implications

BACKGROUND

Expandable cages have gone through several iterations since they first appeared on the market in the early 2000s. Their development was prompted by some common problems associated with static interbody cages, including migration, expulsion, dural or neural traction injury, and pseudarthrosis.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize current technological advances from earlier expandable lumbar interbody fusion devices to implants with vertical and medial-to-lateral expansion mechanisms.

METHODS

The authors review the currently available expandable cage designs, the incremental technological advances, and how these devices impact minimally invasive surgery interbody procedures and clinical outcomes. The strategic concepts intended to improve the minimally invasive application of expandable interbody fusion implants are reviewed from a surgeon's perspective in a clinical context to discuss how their use may improve patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The geometrical configuration, effective stiffness of composite multi-material cage designs may impact the bone-implant contact area with the endplates. Hybridization strategies of expandable cage technology with modern minimally invasive and endoscopic spinal surgery techniques are presented by outlining their advantages and disadvantages.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Systematic review.

Clinical Results and Complications of Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) may combine the advantages of minimally invasive fusion and endoscopic spine surgery, little evidence exists on endoscopic TLIF. This meta-analysis investigated the clinical results of endoscopic TLIF.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of Web-based electronic databases to identify articles on endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion. Only studies of water-based endoscopic TLIF with pedicle screw fixation were included. We analyzed preoperative and postoperative scores for the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scales (VASs) for back and leg pain to evaluate clinical efficacy. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of VAS and ODI was analyzed. We calculated differences in means and 95% confidence intervals and investigated indications for endoscopic TLIF, surgical approaches for endoscopic TLIF, the endoscopic systems that were used, and procedure-related complications.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles were included in this meta-analysis. Uniportal and biportal endoscopic systems were used. Six articles used the posterolateral approach and 7 used the trans-Kambin approach. Preoperative ODI and VAS scores for leg and back pain significantly improved after endoscopic TLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (P = 0.00). The ODI significantly improved by twice as much as the MCID. The mean change in the VAS for back and leg pain showed significant improvements over the MCID. The perioperative complications were usually minor.

CONCLUSIONS

The early clinical results of endoscopic TLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation are favorable. However, long-term outcomes should be investigated and randomized controlled trials should be conducted.

Outcomes of Expandable Interbody Devices in Lumbar Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to review radiographic, clinical, and surgical outcomes of expandable interbody device implantation following lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Few studies have evaluated postsurgical outcomes of expandable implants following lumbar interbody fusion.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify studies investigating expandable intervertebral body devices in lumbar fusion. Radiographic parameters, fusion assessments, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), complications, and revision data were recorded. A comparison of expandable and static devices was performed using a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included. Postoperative improvements for each radiographic parameters for expandable versus static device implantation ranged from: lumbar lordosis, +2.0 to +5.0 degrees (expandable) versus +1.0 to +4.4 degrees (static); segmental lordosis, +1.0 to +5.2 degrees (expandable) versus+1.1 to +2.3 degrees (static); disk height, +0.82 to +4.8 mm (expandable) versus +0.26 to +6.9 mm (static); foraminal height, +0.13 to +2.8 mm (expandable) versus and +0.05 to +3.0 mm (static). Fusion rates ranged from 72.1% at 6 months to 100% at terminal follow-up. Preoperative to final follow-up improvement for the various PROs assessed were: Oswestry Disability Index, -15.4 to -56.3 (expandable) versus -13.6 to -26.3 (static); Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Back, -3.2 to -6.0 (expandable) versus -3.1 to -4.1 (static); and VAS Leg, -2.9 to -7.1 (expandable) -3.0 versus -4.8 (static). Static cages had a reported complication rate ranging from 6.0% to 16.1% and a subsidence rate of 6.0%. Expandable cages had a reported complication rate that ranged from 0.0.% to 10.0% and a subsidence rate of 5.5%-10.0%. A meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the PRO Oswestry Disability Index, but not VAS Back, VAS Leg, or radiographic outcomes (disk height or foraminal height).

CONCLUSION

There is no clear evidence for the use of expandable interbody devices over static devices.

CT-based Morphometric Analysis of Approach of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVES

A radiographic study was designed to measure the relationship of the exiting nerve root and its surroundings to the corresponding intervertebral disc for percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion to better understand the regional anatomy and to improve clinical applications.

METHODS

A retrospective study from January 2017 to October 2017 was conducted at Tianjin Hospital. CT images were obtained from patients presenting low back pain (110 patients), and analysis was performed bilaterally from L2-3 to L5 S1 . In the rotating coronal plane we analyzed: the nerve root-dural sac distance at the superior and inferior margins of the disc (Js, Ji); the nerve root-pedicle distance at the medial, middle, and lateral borders of the pedicle (Pa, Pb, Pc); the pedicle width (W); and the safe working zone, defined as a trapezoid bounded by the inferior pedicle and the exiting nerve root (S). In the transverse plane, the nerve root-articular process and the shortest distance for the nerve root-articular process joint surface were analyzed at the superior and inferior margins of the disc (Gs, Gi), respectively. The groups were analyzed using ANOVA, and paired t-tests were used to compare the left and right sides.

RESULTS

From L2-3 to L5 S1 , the distance of the nerve root to the dural sac was larger at the inferior margin of the disc. From L2-3 to L5 S1 , each segment of the vertebral nerve root-pedicle distance gradually decreased from medial to lateral. From L2-3 to L5 S1 , the distance from the exiting nerve root to the middle and lateral margins of the pedicle gradually decreased, with L5 S1 being the minimum. Some significant differences were observed between the left and right sides for L4-5 and L5 S1 . The pedicle width of the vertebral body and the mean area for the safe working zone gradually increased from L2-3 to L5 S1 . In the axial plane, the shortest distance between the nerve root and articular process joint surface at the inferior margin of the disc was greater than the distance for the nerve root to the articular process at the superior margin of the disc from L2-3 to L5 S1 . There were no significant differences between the two sides.

CONCLUSIONS

It is more difficult to implant a cage with a width of 10 mm above the L3-4 level. By removing part of the superior articular process, the safe working area can be expanded, and damage to the nerve or other structures can be avoided when implanting a cage.

The anatomic rationale for transforaminal endoscopic interbody fusion: a cadaveric analysis

OBJECTIVE

The authors describe a cadaveric analysis to determine the ideal dimensions and trajectory for considering endoscopic transforaminal interbody implantation.

METHODS

The soft tissues of 8 human cadavers were removed from L-1 to the sacrum, exposing the posterior bony elements. Facetectomies were performed bilaterally at each lumbar level with resection of the pars interarticularis, revealing the pedicles, nerve roots, and interbody disc space. Each level was digitally photographed with a marker for scale and evaluated with digital analysis software. The traversing and exiting nerve roots and pedicle margins were identified, and the distances between these structures and their relationships to the surrounding structures were documented.

RESULTS

The dimensions of 2 areas were measured: the working triangle and safe zone. The working triangle is the triangle between the exiting and traversing nerve roots above the superior margin of the inferior pedicle. The safe zone is the trapezoid bounded by the widths of the superior and inferior pedicles between the exiting and traversing nerve roots. The mean surface area for the working triangle was 1.83 cm2, with L5–S1 having the largest area at 2.19 cm2. The mean surface area of the safe zone was 1.19 cm2, with L5–S1 having the largest area at 1.26 cm2. At the medial border of the pedicle extending superiorly, there were no nerve structures within 1.19 cm at any level. On the lateral border of the pedicle, the exiting nerve root was closer superiorly, with the closest being 0.3 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

The working triangle is a relatively large area. The safe zone, just superior to the pedicle, is free of nerve structures. By utilizing the superior border of the pedicle, the disc space can be accessed within this safe zone without risk of injury to the nerves. A thorough understanding of foraminal anatomy is fundamental for considering how to safely access the disc space, thereby utilizing less invasive endoscopic techniques, and is an important first step in considering what shapes and sizes of interbody implants and retractors are feasible for use in the foramen.

Clinical and Radiological Results of Microsurgical Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Decompression without Posterior Instrumentation for Lateral Recess Stenosis

Study Design

A single-center, retrospective patient review of clinical and radiological outcomes of microsurgical posterior lumbar interbody fusion and decompression, without posterior instrumentation, for the treatment of lateral recess stenosis.

Purpose

This study documented the clinical and radiological results of microsurgical posterior lumbar interbody fusion and decompression of the lateral recess using interbody cages without posterior instrumentation for the treatment of lateral recess stenosis.

Overview of Literature

Although microsurgery has some advantages, various complications have been reported following microsurgical decompression, including cage migration, pseudoarthrosis, neurologic deficits, and persistent pain.

Methods

A total of 34 patients (13 men, 21 women), with a mean age of 56.65±9.1 years (range, 40-77 years) confirmed spinal stability, and preoperative radiological findings of lateral recess stenosis, were included in the study. Interbody polyetheretherketone cages and auto grafts were used in all patients. Posterior instrumentation was not used because of limited resection of the posterior lumbar structures. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging were assessed and compared to images taken at the final follow-up. Functional recovery was also evaluated according to the Macnab criteria at the final follow-up.

Results

The average follow-up time was 35.05±8.65 months (range, 24-46 months). The clinical results, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and duration of hospital stay were similar to previously published results; the fusion rate (85.2%) was decreased and the migration rate (5.8%) was increased, compared with prior reports.

Conclusions

Although microsurgery has some advantages, migration and pseudoarthrosis remain challenges to achieving adequate lumbar interbody fusion.

Expandable Polyaryl-Ether-Ether-Ketone Spacers for Interbody Distraction in the Lumbar Spine

Study Design Retrospective case series. Objective StaXx XD (Spine Wave, Inc., Shelton, CT, United States) is an expandable polyaryl-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) wafer implant utilized in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. PEEK implants have been successfully used as interbody devices. Few studies have focused on expandable PEEK devices. The aim of the current study is to determine the radiographic and clinical outcome of expandable PEEK cages utilized for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods Forty-nine patients who underwent lumbar interbody fusion with implantation of expandable PEEK cages and posterior instrumentation were included. The clinical outcome was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiographic parameters including disk height, foraminal height, listhesis, local disk angle of the index level/levels, regional lumbar lordosis, and graft subsidence were measured preoperatively, postoperatively, and at latest follow-up. Results At an average follow-up of 19.3 months, the minimum clinically important difference for the ODI and VAS back, buttock, and leg were achieved in 64, 52, 58, and 52% of the patients, respectively. There was statistically significant improvement in VAS back (6.42 versus 3.11, p < 0.001), VAS buttock (4.66 versus 1.97, p = 0.002), VAS leg (4.55 versus 1.96, p < 0.001), and ODI (21.7 versus 12.1, p < 0.001) scores. There was a significant increase in the average disk height (6.49 versus 8.18 mm, p = 0.037) and foraminal height (15.6 versus 18.53 mm, p = 0.0001), and a significant reduction in the listhesis (5.13 versus 3.15 mm, p = 0.005). The subsidence of 0.66 mm (7.4%) observed at the latest follow-up was not significant (p = 0.35). Conclusions Midterm results indicate that expandable PEEK spacers can effectively and durably restore disk and foraminal height and improve the outcome without significant subsidence.

Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: is it worth it?

PURPOSE

Interbody spine fusion with cages was first described by Bagby and has been performed for a long time now in a variety of different conditions. We developed a percutaneous endoscopic lumbar fusion technique based on the principles of Kambin and an original titanium cage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2004 to 2010, 57 patients were operated on, 17 patients were male with a mean age of 50.29 years (range 34-71 years) and 40 were female with a mean age of 57.42 years (29-90 years). Nineteen patients had a previous operation. Patients were operated on under local anaesthesia in the prone position under image intensifier and a transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic approach.

RESULTS

Fifty cases had a bilateral cage through a bilateral endoscopic approach, and seven cases had a unilateral endoscopic approach only; of those, three cases had only one cage. Eleven patients had a contemporary posterior plate fixation at the same time of the endoscopic cage fusion. Eight patients had a postoperative radicular pain with paresthesias. Asymptomatic migration of the cages occurred in two cases and symptomatic migration requiring a conventional secondary reoperation in 13 cases after a mean delay of eight months (range three to 36 months). The mean ODI after two years or more was 34.3 % (initial ODI 69.4 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The technique was introduced in our practice to take care of difficult or grave co-morbidity patients, and some patients had excellent lasting results following a very short procedure and hospital stay. However, given the 36 % complication rate in this series, we do not recommend it unless decisive technical improvements are made.