Comparison of electromagnetic and optical navigation assisted Endo-TLIF in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis

Image-Guided Spine Surgery

The realm of spine surgery is undergoing a transformative shift, thanks to the integration of image-guided navigation technology. This innovative system seamlessly blends real-time imaging data with precise location tracking. While the indispensable expertise of experienced spine surgeons remains irreplaceable, navigation systems bring a host of valuable advantages to the operating room. By offering a comprehensive view of the surgical anatomy, these systems empower surgeons to conduct procedures with accuracy, while minimizing radiation exposure for both patients and medical professionals. Moreover, image-guided navigation paves the way for integration of other state-of-the-art technologies, such as augmented reality and robotics. These innovations promise to further revolutionize the field, providing greater precision and expanding the horizons of what is possible in the world of spinal procedures. This article explores the evolution, classification, and impact of image-guided spine surgery, underscoring its pivotal role in enhancing efficacy and safety while setting the stage for the incorporation of future technological advancements.

Applications of navigation in full-endoscopic spine surgery

PURPOSE

Advancement in all surgery continues to progress towards more minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches. One of the platform technologies which has helped drive this trend within spine surgery is the development of endoscopy; however, the limited anatomic view experienced when performing endoscopic spine surgery requires a significant learning curve. The use of intraoperative navigation has been adapted for endoscopic spine surgery, as this provides computer-reconstructed visual data presented in three dimensions, which can increase feasibility of this technique to more surgeons.

METHODS

This paper will describe the principles, technical considerations, and applications of stereotactic navigation-guided endoscopic spine surgery.

RESULTS

Full-endoscopic spine surgery has advanced in recent years such that it can be utilized in both decompressive and fusion surgeries. One of the major pitfalls to any minimally invasive surgery (including endoscopic) is that the limited surgical view can often complicate the surgery or confuse the surgeon, leading to longer operative times, higher risks, among others. This is the real utility to using navigation in conjunction with the endoscope-when registered correctly and utilized appropriately, navigated endoscopic spine surgery can take some of the guesswork out of the minimally invasive approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Using navigation with endoscopy in spine surgery can potentially expand this technique to surgeons who have yet to master endoscopy as the assistance provided by the navigation can alleviate some of the complexities with anatomic understanding and surgical planning.

The Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Narrative Review, and Future Perspective

Lumbar interbody fusion stands as a preferred surgical solution for degenerative lumbar spine diseases. The procedure primarily aims to establish lumbar segment stability, directly addressing patient symptoms associated with spinal complications. Traditional open surgery, though effective, is linked with notable morbidities and extended recovery time. To mitigate these concerns, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has garnered significant popularity, presenting an appealing alternative with numerous benefits such as reduced soft tissue trauma, decreased blood loss, and expedited recovery. Among MIS procedures, full endoscopic spinal surgery, characterized by its minimal invasiveness, holds the potential to further minimize morbidities while enhancing surgical outcomes. Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion, a novel procedure within this paradigm, has gained attention for offering advantages comparable to those of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. However, the safety, efficacy, and associated surgical techniques and instrument design of this method continue to be subjects of ongoing debate. This paper critically reviews current evidence on the safety, efficacy, and advantages of endoscopic lumbar spinal interbody fusion, examining whether it could indeed supersede existing mainstream techniques.

Interlaminar Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy Versus Microscopic Lumbar Discectomy: A Preliminary Analysis of L5-S1 Lumbar Disc Herniation Outcomes in Prospective Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

A preliminary report from a single institution, noninferiority, prospective randomized controlled trial is conducted to determine the effectiveness of interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy (IELD) versus microscopic lumbar discectomy (MLD) for the treatment of L5-S1 lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

METHODS

This prospective, noncrossover, randomized controlled trials was conducted at a single neurosurgical center. Patients with symptomatic radiculopathy or intermittent neurogenic claudication caused by LDH were enrolled from July 2016 to July 2021. The study compared the effectiveness of microscopic and full-endoscopic discectomy procedures. Outcome measures included visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index scores, radiologic measurements, endurance time of walking, and satisfaction rate.

RESULTS

Of 37 assessed patients, both IELD and MLD groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS scores for pain over time, with no significant difference between them. For secondary outcomes, the IELD group had a shorter hospital stay and reduced blood loss but a longer operation time than the MLD group. Radiographic evaluations showed no change compared to preoperative data. Patient satisfaction and recovery rates were slightly higher for the MLD group, but both groups were comparable in most evaluations, with complications being minimal.

CONCLUSION

The IELD was noninferior in improving the intensity of back and leg pain and functional disability, compared to the MLD. Additionally, the IELD showed no difference in clinical outcomes for patients in terms of radiographic results and patient satisfaction rates. The results of this research preliminarily demonstrate that the IELD could be considered an effective alternative to MLD for L5-S1 central or paracentral LDH.

Full Endoscopic Spine Surgery with Image-Guided Navigation System as "Hybrid Endoscopic Spine Surgery": A Narrative Review

Endoscopic surgery is adopted as a minimally invasive technique in several surgical fields. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) was performed initially for lumbar discectomy but is currently widely utilized for various pathologies. Similar to other endoscopic techniques, ESS has a steep learning curve that has recently been a topic of discussion. Image-guided navigation systems have been developed for spine surgery. Intraoperative computed tomography enables the use of an image-guided navigation system in ESS, which is a suitable approach for managing complex lesions. Full-ESS is currently being adopted for certain cervical pathologies, and the incorporation of an image-guided navigation system will soon enable surgery for other cervical pathologies.

Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion assisted by intraoperative O-arm total navigation for lumbar degenerative disease: A retrospective study

Background

Recently, unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (BE-LIF) has been successfully applied for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine, with good clinical results reported. However, the drawbacks include radiation exposure, limited field of view, and steep learning curves.

Objective

This retrospective study aimed to compare the results between navigation and non-navigation groups and explore the benefits of BE-LIF assisted by intraoperative O-arm total navigation.

Methods

A total of 44 patients were retrospectively analyzed from August 2020 to June 2021. Perioperative data were collected, including operative time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospital stay, radiation dose, and duration of radiation exposure. In addition, clinical outcomes were evaluated using postoperative data, such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS), modified MacNab criteria, Postoperative complications and fusion rate.

Results

The non-navigation and navigation groups included 23 and 21 patients, respectively. All the patients were followed up for at least 12 months. No significant differences were noted in the estimated intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospital stay, fusion rate, or perioperative complications between the two groups. The radiation dose was significantly lower in the navigation group than in the non-navigation group. The average total operation time in the navigation group was lower than that in the non-navigation group (P < 0.01). All clinical outcomes showed improvement at different time points postoperatively, with no significant difference noted between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Compared with the non-navigation approach, O-arm total navigation assistive BE-LIF technology not only has similar clinical results, but also can provide accurate intraoperative guidance and help spinal surgeons achieve accurate decompression. Furthermore, it can reduce radiation exposure to surgeons and operation time, which improve the efficiency and safety of surgery.