No abstract

Background During the last 20 years several less-invasive anterior approaches to the lumbar spine have become standard, including the extreme lateral transpsoas approach. Although it is associated with a lower risk of vascular injury compared with anterior midline approaches, neuromonitoring is considered mandatory to avoid neurologic complications. Interestingly, despite neuromonitoring, the reported risk of neurologic deficits with the extreme lateral transpsoas approach is greater than observed with other anterior approaches. An alternative lateral, oblique, psoassparing approach, recently named the oblique lumbar interbody fusion, uses the anatomic pathway between the abdominal vessels anteriorly and the lumbar plexus laterally to decrease the risk of neurologic and vascular injury; however, as yet, little on this new approach has been reported. Questions/purposesWe asked: what proportion of patients experienced (1) perioperative complications (overall complications), (2) vascular complications, and (3) neurologic complications after less-invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion through the oblique lumbar interbody approach at one high-volume center? Methods We performed a chart review of intra-and perioperative complications of all patients who had undergone minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion through a lateral psoas-sparing approach from L1 to L5 during a 12-year period (1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010). During the study period, the oblique, psoas-sparing approach was the preferred approach of the participating surgeons in this study, and it was performed in 812 patients, all of whom are studied here, and all of whom have complete data for assessment of the short-term (inpatient-only) complications that we studied. In general, we performed this approach whenever possible, although it generally was avoided when a patient previously had undergone an open retro-or transperitoneal abdominal procedure, or previous implantation of hernia mesh in the abdomen. During the study period, posterior fusion techniques were used in an additional 573 patients instead of the oblique lumbar interbody fusion when we needed to decompress the spinal canal beyond what is possible through the anterior approach. In case of spinal stenosis calling for fusion in combination with a high disc space, severe endplate irregularity, or severe biomechanical instability, we combined posterior decompression with oblique lumbar interbody fusion in 367 patients. Complications were evaluated by an independent observer who was not involved in the decisionmaking process, the operative procedure, nor the Each author certifies that he or a member of his immediate family, has no funding or commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1 ed...

No abstract

Although a variety of biomechanical laboratory investigations and radiological studies have highlighted the potential problems associated with total lumbar disc replacement (TDR), no previous study has performed a systematic clinical failure analysis. The aim of this study was to identify the post-operative pain sources, establish the incidence of post-operative pain patterns and investigate the effect on post-operative outcome with the help of fluoroscopically guided spine infiltrations in patients from an ongoing prospective study with ProDisc II. Patients who reported unsatisfactory results at any of the FU-examinations received fluoroscopically guided spine infiltrations as part of a semi-invasive diagnostic and conservative treatment program. Pain sources were identified in patients with reproducible (C29) significant (50-75%) or highly significant (75-100%) pain relief. Results were correlated with outcome parameters visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and the subjective patient satisfaction rate. From a total of 175 operated patients with a mean follow-up (FU) of 29.3 months (range 12.2-74.9 months), n = 342 infiltrations were performed in n = 58 patients (33.1%) overall. Facet joint pain, predominantly at the index level (86.4%), was identified in n = 22 patients (12.6%). The sacroiliac joint was a similarly frequent cause of post-operative pain (n = 21, 12.0%). Pain from both structures influenced all outcome parameters negatively (P \ 0.05). Patients with an early onset of pain (B6 months) were 2-59 higher at risk of developing persisting complaints and unsatisfactory outcome at later FU-stages in comparison to the entire study cohort (P \ 0.05). The level of TDR significantly influenced postoperative outcome. Best results were achieved for the TDRs above the lumbosacral junction at L4/5 (incidence of posterior joint pain 14.8%). Inferior outcome and a significantly higher incidence of posterior joint pain were observed for TDR at L5/S1 (21.6%) and bisegmental TDR at L4/5/S1 (33.3%), respectively. Lumbar facet and/or ISJpain are a frequent and currently underestimated source of post-operative pain and the most common reasons for unsatisfactory results following TDR. Further failureanalysis studies are required and adequate salvage treatment options need to be established with respect to the underlying pathology of post-operative pain. The question as to whether or not TDR will reduce the incidence of posterior joint pain, which has been previously attributed to lumbar fusion procedures, remains unanswered. Additional studies will have to investigate whether TDR compromises the index-segment in an attempt to avoid adjacent segment degeneration.

No abstract

No abstract

Zusammenfassung Operationsziel Minimalinvasiver anterolateraler Zugang zur Lendenwirbelsäule („oblique lateral interbody fusion“ [OLIF]) zur Korrektur von lumbalen Deformitäten. Indikationen Ventrales Release bei degenerativer Lumbalskoliose oder segmentalen Kyphosen und interkorporelle Korrekturspondylodese. Kontraindikationen Absolute Kontraindikationen bestehen nicht. Relative Kontraindikationen sind vorangegangene (linksseitige) retroperitoneale Eingriffe bzw. Zustand nach Peritonitis mit ausgeprägten retroperitonealen Vernarbungen. Gefäßanomalien mit extrem lateral verlaufender V. iliaca communis (v. a. bei Segmentationsstörungen im vorletzten Bewegungssegment). Operationstechnik Über einen kleinen Hautschnitt im Bereich der linken Flanke und Wechselschnitttechnik durch die Bauchwandmuskulatur retroperitoneales Eingehen auf die laterale anteriore Lendenwirbelsäule monosegmental bzw. von L1–L5. Retraktion des M. psoas und Ausräumen des Bandscheibenfaches ggf. mit Durchtrennung des vorderen Längsbandes. Interkorporelles Release und Interposition eines Implantates zur ventralen Korrekturspondylodese. Weiterbehandlung Frühmobilisation nach dorsaler Instrumentation nach Abklingen der Narkose unter Thromboseprophylaxe. Leichte Kost bis zum ersten Stuhlgang. Tragen einer rumpfstabilisierenden Orthese je nach Art und Ausdehnung des Eingriffes bis zu 12 Wochen. Keine Einschränkungen bezüglich Gehstrecke, Stehen und Sitzen unmittelbar postoperativ nach Schmerzvorgabe. Ergebnisse Es wurden 15 konsekutive Patienten mit degenerativer lumbaler Skoliose im Sinne einer ventrodorsalen Fusionsoperation versorgt. Die operative ventrale Versorgung beinhaltete 1 bis 4 Segmente. Erfasst wurden die zugangsspezifischen Komplikationen sowie die prä- und postoperativen radiologischen Parameter. Bei keinem der 15 linksseitig retroperitoneal durchgeführten ventralen Zugänge wurden intraoperative oder postoperative zugangsspezifische Komplikationen festgestellt. Im gesamten Patientenkollektiv konnte eine signifikante Reduktion des a.p.-Cobb-Winkels von präoperativ 16° ± 6° auf 3° ± 2° postoperativ (p < 0,001) erreicht werden.

4.