Prone Transpsoas Technique for Simultaneous Single-Position Access to the Anterior and Posterior Lumbar Spine

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. E5-E12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luiz Pimenta ◽  
William R Taylor ◽  
Lauren E Stone ◽  
Arvin Raj Wali ◽  
David R Santiago-Dieppa

Abstract BACKGROUND Effective decompression, arthrodesis, and correction of spinal conditions frequently utilize operative approaches that expose both the anterior and posterior spinal column. Until now, circumferential spinal column access often requires the surgeon to reposition and drape the patient multiple times or utilize a posterior only approach that has limited anterior correction capability or to utilize a lateral-only approach that complicates otherwise traditional posterior surgical maneuvers. OBJECTIVE To describe a technique utilizing a single surgical position that enables minimally disruptive anterior column correction with simultaneous access to the posterior spinal column. METHODS The operative technique for accessing the lateral lumbar interbody space from a prone transpsoas (PTP) approach is described. The rationale for this approach and a representative case example are reviewed. RESULTS The PTP approach was used to perform an L3-4 and L4-5 interbody fusion in a 71-yr-old female with spondylolisthesis, severe stenosis, and locked facets. The PTP approach enabled efficient completion of an anterior column correction, direct posterior decompression, multi-segment pedicle fixation, and maintenance of alignment, all while in a single prone position. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. CONCLUSION The authors’ early experience with the described PTP technique suggests it is not only feasible but offers some advantages, as it allows for single-position surgery maximizing both anterior and posterior column access and corrective techniques. Further follow-up studies of this technique are ongoing.

Author(s):  
Austin Q. Nguyen ◽  
Jackson P. Harvey ◽  
Krishn Khanna ◽  
Bryce A. Basques ◽  
Garrett K. Harada ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are alternative and less invasive techniques to stabilize the spine and indirectly decompress the neural elements compared with open posterior approaches. While reoperation rates have been described for open posterior lumbar surgery, there are sparse data on reoperation rates following these less invasive procedures without direct posterior decompression. This study aimed to evaluate the overall rate, cause, and timing of reoperation procedures following anterior or lateral lumbar interbody fusions without direct posterior decompression. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients indicated for an ALIF or LLIF for lumbar spine at a single academic institution. Patients who underwent concomitant posterior fusion or direct decompression surgeries were excluded. Rates, causes, and timing of reoperations were analyzed. Patients who underwent a revision decompression were matched with patients who did not require a reoperation, and preoperative imaging characteristics were analyzed to assess for risk factors for the reoperation. RESULTS The study cohort consisted of 529 patients with an average follow-up of 2.37 years; 40.3% (213/529) and 67.3% (356/529) of patients had a minimum of 2 years and 1 year of follow-up, respectively. The total revision rate was 5.7% (30/529), with same-level revision in 3.8% (20/529) and adjacent-level revision in 1.9% (10/529) of patients. Same-level revision patients had significantly shorter time to revision (7.14 months) than adjacent-level revision patients (31.91 months) (p < 0.0001). Fifty percent of same-level revisions were for a posterior decompression. After further analysis of decompression revisions, an increased preoperative canal area was significantly associated with a lower risk of further decompression revision compared to the control group (p = 0.015; OR 0.977, 95% CI 0.959–0.995). CONCLUSIONS There was a low reoperation rate after anterior or lateral lumbar interbody fusions without direct posterior decompression. The majority of same-level reoperations were due to a need for further decompression. Smaller preoperative canal diameters were associated with the need for revision decompression.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-25
Author(s):  
Natalia Sergeyevna Morozova ◽  
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Kolbovsky ◽  
Arkadiy Ivanovich Kazmin ◽  
Sergey Vasilievich Kolesov

ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare the outcomes of surgical treatment with lumbar fixation using nitinol rods without fusion and with standard lumbar fixation with titanium rods and interbody fusion. Methods: Treatment results of 70 patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis aged 40 to 82 were analyzed. In all cases pedicle screws and nitinol rods with a diameter of 5.5 mm were used. Thirty patients underwent fixation at L1-S1 and 40 patients underwent fixation at L1-L5. Spinal fusion was not performed. All patients had radiography, CT and MRI performed. The results were assessed according to the Oswestry scale, SRS 22, SF 36 and VAS. The minimum follow-up period for all patients was 2.5 years. For the control group, consisting of 72 patients, pedicle fixation with titanium rods and interbody fusion in the lumbosacral region were performed. Results: The average level of deformity correction equaled 25° (10° - 38°). The analysis of X-ray and CT-scans revealed a single patient with implant instability, two patients with bone resorption around the screws and one patient with rod fractures. Functional radiography 2.5 years after surgery showed an average mobility of the lumbar spine of 21° (15° - 30°). There were no problems at the adjacent levels. Conclusions: The use of nitinol rods in spinal deformity surgery is promising. This technology is an alternative to rigid fixation. Continued gathering of clinical data and its further evaluation is necessary.


2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 198-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Taneichi ◽  
Kota Suda ◽  
Tomomichi Kajino ◽  
Akira Matsumura ◽  
Hiroshi Moridaira ◽  
...  

Object There are no published reports of unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in which two Brantigan I/F cages were placed per level through a single portal to achieve bilateral anterior-column support. The authors describe such a surgical technique and evaluate the clinical outcomes of this procedure. Methods Data obtained in 86 (93.5%) of the first 92 consecutive patients who underwent the procedure were retrospectively reviewed; the minimum follow-up duration was 2 years. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system. Disc height, disc angle, cage positioning in the axial plane, and fusion status were radiographically evaluated. The mean follow-up period was 33.8 months. The mean improvement in the JOA score was 77.2%. Fusion was successful in 93% of the cases. According to the Farfan method, the mean anterior and posterior disc heights increased from 20.2 and 16.9% preoperatively to 35.9 and 22.7% at follow up, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean disc angle increased from 4.8° preoperatively to 7.5° at last follow-up examination (p < 0.01). Two cages were correctly placed to achieve bilateral anterior-column support in greater than 85% of the cases. The following complications occurred: hardware migration in two patients and deep infection cured by intravenous antibiotic therapy in one patient. Conclusions Unilateral TLIF involving the placement of two Brantigan cages per level led to good clinical results. Two Brantigan cages were adequately placed via a single portal, and reliable bilateral anterior-column support was achieved. Although the less invasive unilateral approach was used, the outcomes were as good as those in many reported series of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in which the Brantigan cages were placed via the bilateral approach.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 147
Author(s):  
Md. Rezaul Amin ◽  
Md. Atikur Rahman ◽  
Akhlaque Hossain Khan ◽  
Haradhan Devnath ◽  
A. B. M. Manwar Hossain ◽  
...  

<p class="Abstract">Spondylolisthesis is forward slipping of upper vertebra in relations to its lower one, commonest is L4-L5. The ideal surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis is still controversial. Posterior lumber interbody fusion with pedicle fixation is one of treatment choices for the lumber spondylolisthesis. Forty patient who operated through posterior lumber interbody fusion and pedicle screw fixation by single surgeon was included from January 2012 to March 2015. Periodical follow-up was done both clinically and radiologically up to 6 months. Patient outcome was completed based on pain relief graphic rating scale and Oswestry disability index. In our series, the excellent outcome were 25 patients (62.5%), good were 12 patients (30%), and fair were 3 patients (7.5%). There were no poor outcome and no new neurological deficit. This study concludes that posterior lumber inter-body fusion with pedicle is an effective treatment for the lumber spondylolisthesis. It helps to maintain the biomechanics, associated with less complication and improve the quality of life of patient.</p>


2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Couture ◽  
Charles L. Branch

Object The goal of this prospective study was to review a series of 27 patients who underwent bilateral posterior lumbar interbody fusion with instrumented pedicle fixation and two HYDROSORB (known generically as 70:30 poly[L-lactide-co-D,L-lactide]) rectangular cages packed with locally harvested autograft at a total of 48 levels, and to assess the safety and efficacy of this novel technique. This analysis, conducted at a mean of 26 months of follow up, is the first report of a long-term evaluation of this technique. Fusion rates and clinical outcomes are presented. Methods A prospective clinical and radiographic review of findings in 27 consecutive patients was performed. Fusion rates and clinical outcome were assessed at 6-month intervals up to the 32-month follow-up end point. Two patients with four corresponding fusion levels were lost to follow up. Radiographic evidence of satisfactory fusion was achieved in 42 (95.5%) of 44 levels fused. Satisfactory fusion at all levels was achieved in 23 (92%) of 25 patients. Two patients required repeated operations for treatment of symptomatic pseudarthrosis during the study period. The likelihood of all levels attaining fusion in a given patient decreased as the number of levels treated increased, which is consistent with previously published studies. Nonetheless, fusion rates per treated level were similar for patients in whom one to three levels were treated. No significant surgical complication occurred. Conclusions Posterior lumbar interbody fusion in which the HYDROSORB bioabsorbable implant packed with locally harvested autograft and segmental internal fixation are used appears to be an interbody fusion alternative whose efficacy is comparable with previously reported procedures.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zongqiang Yang ◽  
Changhao Liu ◽  
Ningkui Niu ◽  
Jing Tang ◽  
Jiandang Shi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background To compare the diseased verses the non-diseased intervertebral surgery used in the treatment of thoracolumbar and lumbar spinal tuberculosis and to explore the best choice of fusion of fixation range. Methods Two hundred twenty-one patients with thoracolumbar and lumbar tuberculosis were categorized into two groups. One hundred eighteen patients underwent the diseased intervertebral surgery (lesion vertebral pedicle fixation, Group A) and 103 patients underwent the non-diseased intervertebral surgery (1 or 2 vertebral fixation above and below the affected vertebra, group B). Spinal tuberculosis diagnosis was confirmed in both groups of patients before lesion removal, bone graft fusion, and internal fixation. Clinical data and efficacy of the two surgical methods were then evaluated. Results The mean follow-up duration for both procedures was 65 months (50–68 months range). There were no significant differences in laboratory examinations, VAS scores, and the Cobb angle correction rate and the angle loss. However, significant differences existed in the operation time, blood loss, serosanguineous drainage volume, and blood transfusion requirement between the two groups. The diseased intervertebral surgery group performed significantly better than the non-diseased intervertebral surgery group in all of these areas. In both cases, the bone graft fused completely with the normal bone by the last follow-up, occuring at 50–86 months post surgery. Conclusion The diseased intervertebral surgery is a safe and feasible option for the treatment of thoracolumbar and lumbar tuberculosis. It effectively restores the physiological curvature of the spine and reduces the degeneration of adjacent vertebral bodies in the spinal column.


1999 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. E4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis A. Dickman

Correction of rigid scoliotic deformities involving the thoracic spine has required that a thoracotomy be performed to obtain anterior release to mobilize the deformity, as well as placement of corrective spinal instrumentation either via a separate posterior or anterior thoracic approach. To the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first published report of a case in which anterior correction of a deformity was achieved endoscopically. A 27-year-old man presented with a rigid 85° thoracic kyphoscoliotic deformity that had developed over several years. He had previously undergone a C7-T12 laminectomy to decompress the spinal cord from a lipoma. Using thoracoscopic techniques, the author performed an anterior release and interbody fusion. Endoscopically, an anterior screw/rod system applied from T-5 to T-9 corrected the deformity to 55°. There were no surgery-related complications. At follow-up examiniation 1.5 years after surgery, the patient had developed a solid fusion and the correction was maintained at an angle of 58°. It is feasible to use thoracoscopic techniques to perform an anterior release and to apply anterior corrective spinal instrumentation to treat thoracic scoliotic deformities, thereby avoiding the need for an open posterior approach in which instrumentation is placed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34
Author(s):  
Takayoshi Shimizu ◽  
Shunsuke Fujibayashi ◽  
Bungo Otsuki ◽  
Koichi Murata ◽  
Shuichi Matsuda

OBJECTIVEThe use of indirect decompression surgery for severe canal stenosis remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of lateral interbody fusion (LIF) without posterior decompression in degenerative lumbar spinal spondylosis with severe stenosis on preoperative MRI.METHODSThis is a retrospective case series from a single academic institution. The authors included 42 patients (45 surgical levels) who were preoperatively diagnosed with severe degenerative lumbar stenosis on MRI based on the previously published Schizas classification. These patients underwent LIF with supplemental pedicle screw fixation without posterior decompression. Surgical levels were limited to L3–4 and/or L4–5. All patients satisfied the minimum 1-year MRI follow-up. The authors compared the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the thecal sac and the clinical outcome scores (Japanese Orthopaedic Association [JOA] score) preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at the 1-year follow-up. Fusion status and disc height were evaluated based on CT scans obtained at the 1-year follow-up.RESULTSThe CSA improved over time, increasing from 54.5 ± 19.2 mm2 preoperatively to 84.7 ± 31.8 mm2 at 3 weeks postoperatively and to 132.6 ± 37.5 mm2 at the last follow-up (average 28.3 months) (p < 0.001). The JOA score significantly improved over time (preoperatively 16.1 ± 4.1, 3 months postoperatively 24.4 ± 4.0, and 1-year follow-up 25.7 ± 2.9; p < 0.001). The fusion rate at the 1-year follow-up was 88.8%, and disc heights were significantly restored (preoperative, 6.3 mm and postoperative, 9.6 mm; p < 0.001). Patients showing poor CSA expansion (< 200% expansion rate) at the last follow-up had a higher prevalence of pseudarthrosis than patients with significant CSA expansion (> 200% expansion rate) (25.0% vs 3.4%, p < 0.001). No major perioperative complications were observed.CONCLUSIONSLIF with indirect decompression for degenerative lumbar disease with severe canal stenosis provided successful clinical outcomes, including restoration of disc height and indirect expansion of the thecal sac. Severe canal stenosis diagnosed on preoperative MRI itself is not a contraindication for indirect decompression surgery.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 230949902110542
Author(s):  
Se-Jun Park ◽  
Jin-Sung Park ◽  
Chong-Suh Lee ◽  
Keun-Ho Lee

Purpose Pseudoarthrosis and metal failure at L5-S1 following long fusion surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) remain major issues. Few studies report on which anterior column support technique is better in terms of achieving fusion and avoiding metal failures. Our study aimed to evaluate the fusion status and metal failure rate at L5-S1 after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Methods The study population included patients aged >50 years who underwent surgery for ASD. Anterior column supports at L5-S1 using ALIF and TLIF were compared with ≥ 2-year follow-up. Fusion status on 2-year computed tomography (CT) scan, metal failure, visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were evaluated. Results 98 patients were included in this study (53 ALIF group and 45 TLIF group). We achieved solid fusion on 2-year CT scans in 88.9% and 69.8% patients in the TLIF and ALIF group, respectively. Metal failure developed in nine (17.0%) and six (13.3%) patients in the ALIF and TLIF group, respectively. The most common failure type was unilateral L5-S1 rod fracture (7 and five patients in the ALIF and TLIF group, respectively). Only one patient with bilateral rod fractures in the ALIF group required revision surgery. There were no differences in the VAS and ODI scores at the last follow-up. Conclusions TLIF showed a better fusion rate than ALIF at L5-S1 after long instrumented fusion for ASD. However, the capacity to restore sagittal parameters was greater in the ALIF group. There were no differences between the groups regarding metal failure rate, revision surgery, or clinical outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document