Minimally Invasive L5 Corpectomy with Navigated Expandable Vertebral Cage: A Technical Note

A New Minimally Invasive Technique for Thoracolumbar/Lumbar Focal Kyphosis Due to Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: A Case Report

Osteoporotic vertebral fractures are common fractures in the elderly population and are often associated with low back pain and disruption in daily living activities. Reconstruction surgeries, such as corpectomy, are among the treatment options for these conditions. However, a corpectomy requires a longer surgical procedure and involves a significant amount of blood loss. We present the case of an 80-year-old woman with severe low back pain due to an L2 fracture and focal kyphosis treated with a novel minimally invasive technique. The patient underwent anterior and posterior surgery in the right decubitus position using a C-arm-free technique. Hyperlordotic cages were inserted in the upper and lower disc space via a lateral approach, while percutaneous pedicle screws were inserted from a posterior approach. These procedures were performed simultaneously under navigation guidance only.

Our C-Arm-Free Minimally Invasive Technique for Spinal Surgery: The Thoracolumbar and Lumbar Spine-Based on Our Experiences

Background and Objectives: The implementation of intraoperative imaging in the procedures performed under the guidance of the same finds its history dating back to the early 1990s. This practice was abandoned due to many deficits and practicality. Later, fluoroscopy-dependent techniques were developed and have been used even in the present time, albeit with several disadvantages. With the recent advancement of several complex surgical techniques, which demand higher accuracy and are in conjunction with the existence of radiation exposure hazard, C-arm-free techniques were introduced. In this review study, we aim to demonstrate the various types of these techniques performed in our hospital. Materials and Methods: We have retrospectively analyzed and collected imaging data of C-arm-free, minimally invasive techniques performed in our hospital. The basic steps of the procedures are described, following with a discussion, along with the literature of findings, enlisting the merits and demerits. Results: MIS techniques of the thoracolumbar and lumbar spine that do not require the use of the C-arm can offer excellent results with high precision. However, several disadvantages may prevail in certain circumstances such as the navigation accuracy problem where in the possibility of perioperative complications comes a high morbidity rate. Conclusions: The accustomedness of performing these techniques requires a steep learning curve. The increase in accuracy and the decrease in radiation exposure in complex spinal surgery can overcome the burden hazards and can prove to be cost-effective.

Comparison of Navigated Expandable Vertebral Cage with Conventional Expandable Vertebral Cage for Minimally Invasive Lumbar/Thoracolumbar Corpectomy

Background and Objectives: The thoracolumbar burst fracture is one of the most common spinal injuries. If the patient has severe symptoms, corpectomy is indicated. Currently, minimally invasive corpectomy with a navigated expandable vertebral cage is available thanks to spinal surgical technology. The aim of this study is to retrospectively compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of conventional and navigational minimally invasive corpectomy techniques. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 21 patients who underwent thoracolumbar minimally invasive corpectomy between October 2016 and January 2021. Eleven patients had a navigated expandable cage (group N) and 10 patients had a conventional expandable cage (group C). Mean follow-up period was 31.9 months for group N and 34.7 months for group C, ranging from 12 to 42 months in both groups. Clinical and radiographic outcomes are assessed using values including visual analogue scale (VAS) for back pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI). This data was collected preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results: Surgical time and intraoperative blood loss of both groups were not significantly different (234 min vs. 267 min, 656 mL vs. 786 mL). Changes in VAS and ODI were similar in both groups. However, lateral cage mal-position ratio in group N was lower than that of group C (relative risk 1.64, Odds ratio 4.5) and postoperative cage sinking was significantly lower in group N (p = 0.033). Conclusions: Clinical outcomes are not significantly different, but radiographic outcomes of lateral cage mal-position and postoperative cage sinking were significantly lower in the navigation group.