Prior abdominal surgery is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications after anterior lumbar interbody fusion

Prospective Analysis of Incisional Morbidity Associated With Anterior Surgical Approaches to the Lumbar Spine

OBJECTIVE

Anterior approaches to the lumbar spine have been used extensively for various indications but they are also associated with unique complications and have been linked with higher incisional morbidity.This study aimsto evaluate incisional morbidity related to anterior lumbar surgeries and to assess how incisional outcomes correlate with patient and surgery-related factors.

METHODS

Patients ≥18 years old and with planned anterior lumbar fusions from L1 to S1 were prospectively enrolled. Follow-up ended at two years, and patients who did not complete the follow-up were excluded. Incision was assessed for general appearance, width, color, cross-hatching, hypertrophy, and pain by using a validated scoring system and a visual analog scale (VAS). Patient and surgery-related factors were analyzed for possible correlations with complications or wound-related parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients with a mean age of 54.4 ± 11.5 were included. Significant improvements were seen in color, hypertrophy, pain, and appearance of the incision. At two years, the mean patient-based VAS for appearance was 8.6 while surgeon-based VAS was 8.8. The total rate of complications was 9%, with no incisional hernia or bulging. No significant relation was found between incision-related parameters and the demographic and surgical variables.

CONCLUSION

This study reports acceptable cosmetic results and no chronic pain after anterior lumbar surgery, which is contrary to previous reports. Together with a low total rate of complications, anterior approaches are safe when carefully executed, and have low morbidity.

The Impact of Posterior Intervertebral Osteophytes on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To develop a reliable grading system to assess the severity of posterior intervertebral osteophytes and (2) to investigate the impact of posterior intervertebral osteophytes on clinical outcomes after L5-S1 decompression and fusion through anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and minimally-invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence regarding the clinical implications of posterior lumbar vertebral body osteophytes for ALIF and MIS-TLIF surgeries and there are no established grading systems that define the severity of these posterior lumbar intervertebral osteophytes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF or MIS-TLIF was performed. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and leg Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 2-week, 6-week, 12-week, and 6-month follow-up time points were assessed. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for ODI of 14.9 and VAS leg of 2.8 were utilized. Osteophyte grade was based on the ratio of osteophyte length to foraminal width. "High-grade" osteophytes were defined as a maximal osteophyte length >50% of the total foraminal width.

RESULTS

A total of 70 consecutive patients (32 ALIF and 38 MIS-TLIF) were included in the study. There were no significant differences between the two cohorts in patient-reported outcome measures or achievement of MCID for Leg VAS or ODI preoperatively or at any follow-ups. On multivariate analysis, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with leg VAS or ODI scores at any follow-up time point. In addition, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with the achievement of MCID for leg VAS or ODI at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

ALIF and MIS-TLIF are both valid options for treating degenerative spine conditions and lumbar radiculopathy, even in the presence of high-grade osteophytes that significantly occupy the intervertebral foramen.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Analysis of the Frequency of Intraoperative Complications in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the frequency of intraoperative complication rates related to access surgery, operating time, and intraoperative bleeding rates described in the literature for patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) to evaluate the adverse effects and, thus, help in therapeutic decision making and contribute to future clinical trials.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of MEDLINE and Embase databases in March 2023. The main inclusion criteria were adult patients aged >18 years, with no maximum age limit; the use of ALIF; the presence of quantitative data on intraoperative complications; and randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. Vascular and peritoneal injuries were considered primary endpoints. The operative time and intraoperative bleeding rate were secondary endpoints. Reports and case series, case-control series, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included with a total of 2395 patients. We found important quantitative data for future randomized clinical studies involving ALIF surgery, including the rate of vascular lesions (2.79%) and peritoneal lesions (0.37%). In addition to these factors, only 4 of the 8 studies addressed the average surgery time, with a total average of 145.61 minutes. Furthermore, 6 of the 8 articles reported the mean rate of intraoperative bleeding, with a total mean blood loss of 272.75 mL.

CONCLUSIONS

ALIF is a lumbar spine access technique with low intraoperative complications. Patients with contraindications have a higher risk of complications. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of the procedure.

The Role of Anterior Spine Surgery in Deformity Correction

There are a range of anterior-based approaches to address flexible adult spinal deformity from the thoracic spine to the sacrum, with each approach offering access to a range of vertebral levels. It includes the transperitoneal (L5-S1), paramedian anterior retroperitoneal (L3-S1), oblique retroperitoneal (L1-2 to L5-S1), the thoracolumbar transdiaphragmatic approach (T9-10 to L4-5), and thoracotomy approach (T4-T12). The lumbar and lumbosacral spine is especially favorable for anterior-based approaches given the relative mobility of the peritoneal organs and position of the vasculature.

Anterior spine surgery for the treatment of complex spine pathology: a state-of-the-art review

The use of anterior spinal surgery for the treatment of spinal pathology has experienced a dramatic increase over the past decade. Long relegated to treat complicated anterior pathologies it has returned to mainstream spine surgery techniques for all types of conditions, providing a significant boost to the spine surgeons' armamentarium to address a wide variety of types of spinal diseases more effectively. Anterior surgery is useful whenever there is significant spinal pathology that requires direct visualization of the anterior vertebral column to best restore spinal alignment, structural integrity and neurologic function. These pathologies include spinal deformities, tumors, burst fractures, infections, vertebral avascular necrosis, pseudoarthrosis and other miscellaneous indications. Currently available approaches to the spine include transabdominal, paramedian retroperitoneal, lateral oblique retroperitoneal, thoracotomy, and thoracolumbar extensile. Most of the lumbar approaches are now done through a muscle splitting, minimalistic approach that has decreased their morbidity or more recently via tubular approaches, such as lateral lumbar interbody fusions or other ante-psoas approaches. New retractors, instrumentation, hyperlordotic implants, approved biologics and even image guidance for disc preparation and precise implant placement are all recent advances that will hopefully improve surgical outcomes in patients following anterior spinal surgery. Most importantly, these approaches require added expertise and training with a dedicated team consisting of an anteriorly trained spine surgeon working simultaneously with a dedicated vascular surgeon to ensure maximum safety and superior patient outcomes. This state of the review is dedicated to familiarizing practicing spine surgeons with the most commonly used anterior spinal approaches along with cutting-edge instrumentation and fusion techniques to improve their options for the treatment of difficult spinal pathologies.

Single position lateral decubitus anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior fusion reduces complications and improves perioperative outcomes compared with traditional anterior-posterior lumbar fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Lateral decubitus single position anterior-posterior (AP) fusion utilizing anterior lumbar interbody fusion and percutaneous posterior fixation is a novel, minimally invasive surgical technique. Single position lumbar surgery (SPLS) with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) or lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) has been shown to be a safe, effective technique. This study directly compares perioperative outcomes of SPLS with lateral ALIF vs. traditional supine ALIF with repositioning (FLIP) for degenerative pathologies.

PURPOSE

To determine if SPLS with lateral ALIF improves perioperative outcomes compared to FLIP with supine ALIF.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Multicenter retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing primary AP fusions with ALIF at 5 institutions from 2015 to 2020.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Levels fused, inclusion of L4-L5, L5-S1, radiation dosage, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), perioperative complications. Radiographic analysis included lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), and PI-LL mismatch.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of primary ALIFs with bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation between L4-S1 over 5 years at 5 institutions. Patients were grouped as FLIP or SPLS. Demographic, procedural, perioperative, and radiographic outcome measures were compared using independent samples t-tests and chi-squared analyses with significance set at p <.05. Cohorts were propensity-matched for demographic or procedural differences.

RESULTS

A total of 321 patients were included; 124 SPS and 197 Flip patients. Propensity-matching yielded 248 patients: 124 SPLS and 124 FLIP. The SPLS cohort demonstrated significantly reduced operative time (132.95±77.45 vs. 261.79±91.65 min; p <0.001), EBL (120.44±217.08 vs. 224.29±243.99 mL; p <.001), LOS (2.07±1.26 vs. 3.47±1.40 days; p <.001), and rate of perioperative ileus (0.00% vs. 6.45%; p =.005). Radiation dose (39.79±31.66 vs. 37.54±35.85 mGy; p =.719) and perioperative complications including vascular injury (1.61% vs. 1.61%; p =.000), retrograde ejaculation (0.00% vs. 0.81%, p =.328), abdominal wall (0.81% vs. 2.42%; p =.338), neuropraxia (1.61% vs. 0.81%; p =.532), persistent motor deficit (0.00% vs. 1.61%; p =.166), wound complications (1.61% vs. 1.61%; p =.000), or VTE (0.81% vs. 0.81%; p =.972) were similar. No difference was seen in 90-day return to OR. Similar results were noted in sub-analyses of single-level L4-L5 or L5-S1 fusions. On radiographic analysis, the SPLS cohort had greater changes in LL (4.23±11.14 vs. 0.43±8.07 deg; p =.005) and PI-LL mismatch (-4.78±8.77 vs. -0.39±7.51 deg; p =.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Single position lateral ALIF with percutaneous posterior fixation improves operative time, EBL, LOS, rate of ileus, and maintains safety compared to supine ALIF with prone percutaneous pedicle screws between L4-S1.

Exploring perioperative complications of anterior lumber interbody fusion in patients with a history of prior abdominal surgery: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) exposes the anterior aspect of the spine through a retroperitoneal approach. Access to the anterior spine requires mobilization of intra-abdominal viscera/vasculature, which can become complicated as scarring and/or adhesions develop from prior abdominal surgical interventions, increasing risk of intraoperative complications. The literature suggests that "significant prior abdominal surgery" is a relative contraindication of ALIF surgery; however, there is no consensus within the literature as to what defines "major/significant" abdominal surgeries. Additionally, the association between the number of prior abdominal surgeries and perioperative complications in ALIF surgery has not been explored within the literature.

PURPOSE

This study seeks to explore the association between perioperative complications of ALIF surgery and the type (major and/or minor) and number of prior abdominal surgeries.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study was performed to examine perioperative complications in ALIF patients with or without prior history of abdominal surgery.

PATIENT SAMPLE

All consecutive patients undergoing ALIF with or without a history of prior abdominal surgery from 2008 to 2018 at a single tertiary center were evaluated. Patients under the age of 18, patients with spinal malignancy, or patients who had ALIF above L3 were excluded.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Perioperative complications included intraoperative complications during ALIF surgery and postoperative complications within 90 days of ALIF surgery. Intraoperative complications include vascular injury, ureter injury, retroperitoneal hematoma, etc. Postoperative complications include urinary tract infection, revision of abdominal scar, ileus, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, etc. Other outcome measures include readmission within 90 days, length of ALIF surgery, and length of hospital stay.

METHODS

Electronic medical records of 660 patients who underwent ALIF between 2008 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI), level of fusion, past abdominal surgical history, use of access surgeon during exposure, intraoperative, and postoperative complications were collected. Predictors of intraoperative and postoperative complications were analyzed using simple and multivariable logistic regression. Statistical analysis was performed using JMP 14.0 (SAS, Cary, NC, USA) software.

RESULTS

After controlling for age, length of ALIF, gender, multilevel ALIF, and the use of an access surgeon, there was no significant association between the type of prior abdominal surgery (major and/or minor) and intraoperative complications on multivariable logistic regression analysis (Minor: odds ratio [OR]=1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-4.86 & Major: OR=1.99; 95% CI: 0.80-4.91). On multivariable logistic regression, the odds of developing an intraoperative complication increases by 52% for each additional prior abdominal surgery after adjusting for age, length of ALIF, gender, multilevel ALIF, and the use of an access surgeon (OR=1.52, 95% CI: 1.10-2.11). Iliac vein laceration was the most common intraoperative complication (n=27, 4%). Neither the type (major and/or minor) nor the number of prior abdominal surgeries were significant predictors of postoperative complications (Minor: OR=1.29; 95% CI: .72-2.31, Major: OR=1.24; 95% CI: 0.77-2.00, & Number: OR=1.03; 95% CI: .84-1.26).

CONCLUSION

With each additional prior abdominal surgery, accumulation of scarring and adhesions can likely obscure anatomical landmarks and increase the risk of developing an intraoperative complication. Therefore, the number of prior abdominal surgeries should be taken into consideration during planning and operative exposure of the anterior spine via a retroperitoneal approach.

Abdominal compartment syndrome following posterior lumbar fusion in a patient with previous abdominal surgery

Introduction

Perioperative complications associated with spinal fusion have been investigated steadily to reduce morbidity and mortality. Although there are several reports reviewing abdominal complications occurring with anterior spinal fusion, complications related to posterior spinal fusion (PSF) are rare. However, abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) after PSF could be the most fatal and unpredictable complication in spinal surgery.

Case presentation

This 73-year-old man with body mass index (BMI) of 23.02, and surgical history of appendectomy 10 years prior complained of severe nausea and vomiting on the second postoperative day of L4-5 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). By postoperative day 4, he presented with dyspnea and fever, and the first diagnostic impression suggested aspiration pneumonia due to vomiting. Physical examination revealed severe abdominal distention and tenderness to palpation at most of the abdomen. Computed tomography (CT) scan of abdomen and chest revealed left inguinal hernia of the small bowel with incarceration suggesting intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH), and multifocal peri-bronchial consolidation in both lungs, respectively. His respiratory symptoms progressed to respiratory failure, and he was finally mechanically ventilated in conjunction with antibiotics. After 2 weeks of intensive care, the patient's symptom had improved, and finally he was transferred to a nursing facility.

Discussion

IAH and ACS rarely occur as abdominal complications of PSF. We suggest several risk factors including body mass index, abdominal surgical history, and long segment fusion for development of abdominal complications.

Stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion: indications, techniques, surgical outcomes and complications

INTRODUCTION

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a well-established technique to achieve lumbar spine fusion with various indications including degenerative disk disease, spondylolisthesis, recurrent disk herniation, adjacent level disease, pseudoarthrosis, as well as being used as part of the overall strategy to restore sagittal balance. ALIF can be an extremely useful tool in any spine surgeon's armamentarium. However, like any surgical procedure, proper patient selection is key to success. A solid understanding of the biomechanics, careful surgical planning, along with clear knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of stand-alone ALIF will ensure optimal clinical outcome. Stand-alone ALIF may be a suitable surgical option in carefully selected patients that can provide good clinical results and adequate fusion rates without the need for posterior instrumentation. Areas covered: A brief overview of the indications, techniques, biomechanics, surgical outcome and complications of stand-alone ALIF is provided in this article with a review of the pertinent literature. Expert commentary: In this review we discuss the clinical evidence of using a stand-alone ALIF compared to other fusion techniques of the lumbar spine. The development of interbody cages with integrated screws has increased the arthrodesis rate and improved clinical outcomes while decreasing morbidity and operative time.

Lumbar spine surgery positioning complications: a systematic review

OBJECT There are a variety of surgical positions that provide optimal exposure of the dorsal lumbar spine. These include the prone, kneeling, knee-chest, knee-elbow, and lateral decubitus positions. All are positions that facilitate exposure of the spine. Each position, however, is associated with an array of unique complications that result from excessive pressure applied to the torso or extremities. The authors reviewed clinical studies reporting complications that arose from positioning of the patient during dorsal exposures of the lumbar spine. METHODS MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science database searches were performed to find clinical studies reporting complications associated with positioning during lumbar spine surgery. For articles meeting inclusion criteria, the following information was obtained: publication year, study design, sample size, age, operative time, type of surgery, surgical position, frame or table type, complications associated with positioning, time to first observed complication, long-term outcomes, and evidence-based recommendations for complication avoidance. RESULTS Of 3898 articles retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, 34 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies reported complications associated with use of the prone position, and 7 studies investigated complications after knee-chest positioning. Complications associated with the knee-elbow, lateral decubitus, and supine positions were each reported by a single study. Vision loss was the most commonly reported complication for both prone and knee-chest positioning. Several other complications were reported, including conjunctival swelling, Ischemic orbital compartment syndrome, nerve palsies, thromboembolic complications, pressure sores, lower extremity compartment syndrome, and shoulder dislocation, highlighting the assortment of possible complications following different surgical positions. For prone-position studies, there was a relationship between increased operation time and position complications. Only 3 prone-position studies reported complications following procedures of less than 120 minutes, 7 studies reported complications following mean operative times of 121-240 minutes, and 9 additional studies reported complications following mean operative times greater than 240 minutes. This relationship was not observed for knee-chest and other surgical positions. CONCLUSIONS This work presents a systematic review of positioning-related complications following prone, knee-chest, and other positions used for lumbar spine surgery. Numerous evidence-based recommendations for avoidance of these potentially severe complications associated with intraoperative positioning are discussed. This investigation may serve as a framework to educate the surgical team and decrease rates of intraoperative positioning complications.