European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
Can triggered electromyography monitoring throughout retraction predict postoperative symptomatic neuropraxia after XLIF? Results from a prospective multicenter trial.
This multicenter study aims to evaluate the utility of triggered electromyography (t-EMG) recorded throughout psoas retraction during lateral transpsoas interbody fusion to predict postoperative changes in motor function. ⋯ Prolonged retraction time and coincident increases in t-EMG thresholds are predictors of declining nerve integrity. Increasing t-EMG thresholds, while predictive of injury, were also observed in a large number of patients without iatrogenic injury, with a greater predictive value in cases with extended duration. In addition to a careful approach with minimal muscle retraction and consistent lumbar plexus directional retraction, the incidence of postoperative motor neuropraxia may be reduced by limiting retraction time and utilizing t-EMG throughout retraction, while understanding that the specificity of this monitoring technique is low during initial retraction and increases with longer retraction duration.
-
Cervical spondylotic myelopathy is frequently encountered in neurosurgical practice. The posterior surgical approach includes laminectomy and laminoplasty. ⋯ Based on these results, a claim of superiority for laminoplasty or laminectomy was not justified. The higher number of procedure-related complications should be considered when laminoplasty is offered to a patient as a treatment option. A study of robust methodological design is warranted to provide objective data on the clinical effectiveness of both procedures.
-
Cervical laminectomy is a reliable tool for posterior decompression in various cervical spine pathologies. Although there is increasing evidence of superior clinical, neurological and radiological outcomes when using anterior cervical decompression, laminectomy can be a valuable tool when combined with instrumented lateral mass fusion for carefully selected indications. ⋯ This review article will provide decision-making guidance, technical advice and pitfalls. The technical advice for laminectomy and instrumented lateral mass fusion is illustrated. The authors review the literature on outcomes and complications and suggest indications for the safe and successful application of cervical laminectomy and lateral mass fusion.
-
Clinical Trial
Anterior stand-alone fusion revisited: a prospective clinical, X-ray and CT investigation.
The purpose of this study was to assess the mid-term clinical and radiological results as well as patient safety in terms of complication and reoperation rates in patients treated with a novel anterior stand-alone fusion (ASAF) device (Synfix-LR, DePuy Synthes, West Chester, PA, USA) in a cohort of patients with predominant and intractable low back pain originating from monosegmental degenerative disc disease at the lumbosacral junction. ⋯ The current study delineates satisfactory clinical results following ASAF at the lumbosacral junction. Patient safety was demonstrated with acceptable complication and low reoperation rates. Radiological data demonstrated a significant reconstruction of lordosis at the lumbosacral junction. Solid interbody fusion was achieved in 97.3 % of all cases in a highly selected cohort with optimal predisposition for fusion. ASAF may serve to avoid a variety of negative side effects for a considerable number of patients which, otherwise, would have been candidates for posterior instrumented fusion techniques.
-
Review
MIS lateral spine surgery: a systematic literature review of complications, outcomes, and economics.
Over the past decade, the minimally disruptive lateral transpsoas approach for lumbar interbody fusion (MI-LIF) is increasingly being used as an alternative to conventional surgical approaches. The purpose of this review was to evaluate four primary questions as they relate to MI-LIF: (1) Is there an anatomical justification for MI-LIF at L4-5? (2) What are the complication and outcome profiles of MI-LIF and are they acceptable with respect to conventional approaches? (3) Given technical and neuromonitoring differences between various MI-LIF procedures, are there any published clinical differences? And, (4) are modern minimally disruptive procedures (e.g., MI-LIF) economically viable? ⋯ There is considerable published evidence to support MI-LIF in spinal fusion and advanced applications, though the results of some reports, especially concerning complications, vary greatly depending on technique and instrumentation used. Additional cost-effectiveness analyses would assist in fully understanding the long-term implications of MI-LIF.