Endospine Surgery Complications in Lumbar Herniated Disc

Nubukpo-Guménu, Alëna Améyo; Ségbédji, Felix K.K.; Rué, M.; Destandau, J.

doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.07.013

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[1,4,8,15] In 2007, Jhawar et al and in 2008 Ammerman and Ammerman documented that wrong level cervical diskectomy occurred in from 6.8 to 7.6/10,000 cases/ year, while wrong level lumbar diskectomies occurred in from 4.5 to 12.8/10,000 cases/year. [1,8,15] Using the 1995-2005 Joint Commission Sentinel Event Statistics Database, Devine et al (2010) observed that wrong site spine surgery (WSSS) was the second most frequently encountered adverse event, and determined its frequency was 12.8% (i.e. occurring in 455/3548 spinal procedures); in the literature, the incidence of WSSS varied from 0.9 to 4.5 cases/10,000 spinal operations per year.…”

Section: Incidence Of Wrong Level Surgery (Wls)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A perspective on wrong level, wrong side, and wrong site spine surgery

Epstein¹

2021

Surgical Neurology International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Four of the most common “errors” in spine surgery include: operating on the wrong patient, doing the wrong procedure, performing wrong-level surgery (WLS), and/or performing wrong-sided surgery (WSS). Although preoperative verification protocols (i.e. Universal Protocol, routine Time-Outs, and using the 3 R’s (i.e. right patient, right procedure, right level/side)) have largely limited the first two “errors,” WLS and WSS still occur with an unacceptably high frequency. Methods: In 20 studies, we identified the predominant factors contributing to WLS/WSS; unusual/anatomical anomalies/variants (i.e. sacralized lumbar vertebrae. lumbarized sacral vertebra, Klippel-Feil vertebrae, block vertebrae, butterfly vertebrae, obesity/morbid obesity), inadequate/poor interpretation of X-rays/fluoroscopic intraoperative images, and failure to follow different verification protocols. Results: “Human error” was another major risk factor contributing to the failure to operate at the correct level/side (WLS/WSS). Factors comprising “human error” included; surgeon/staff fatigue, rushing, emergency circumstances, lack of communication, hierarchical behavior in the operating room, and failure to “speak up”. Conclusion: Utilizing the Universal Protocol, routine Time Outs, and the 3 R’s largelly avoid operating on the wrong spine patient, and performing the wrong procedure. However, these guidelines have not yet sufficiently reduced the frequently of WLS and WSS. Greater recognition of the potential pitfalls contributing to WLS/WSS as reviewed in this perspective should better equip spine surgeons to avert/limit such “errors” in the future.

show abstract

Section: Incidence Of Wrong Level Surgery (Wls)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A perspective on wrong level, wrong side, and wrong site spine surgery

Epstein¹

2021

Surgical Neurology International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Due to the rapid development of medical technologies, especially in terms of diagnostic visualization methods, surgical access systems, spinal implants, and anesthesia methods, these procedures are becoming less invasive [2]. As a result, they are associated with smaller wounds [3], less blood loss [4], less traumatization of paraspinal muscles [5], and, according to numerous reports, with lower risk of complications [6]. Modern techniques of general anesthesia, like total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), combined with regional methods such as epidural anesthesia or dorsal extensor muscle blockade, and local anesthesia, have significantly reduced the requirement for several days of hospitalization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outpatient Spine Procedures in Poland: Clinical Outcomes, Safety, Complications, and Technical Insights into an Ambulatory Spine Surgery Center

Latka,

Kolodziej,

Domisiewicz

et al. 2023

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of spine procedures performed in an ambulatory spine surgery unit in Poland. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 318 patients who underwent ambulatory spine surgery between 2018 and 2021, with procedures including microdiscectomy (MLD), anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), endoscopic interbody fusion (endoLIF), posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD), interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy IELD, and transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD). Patient data were analyzed for pre-operative and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Results: The findings indicated that outpatient techniques were safe and effective, with a 2.83% complication rate. All procedures significantly improved VAS scores under short-term observation, and core outcome measurement index (COMI) scores under long-term observation. Conclusions: Ambulatory spine surgery represents a relatively new approach in Poland, with only a select few centers currently offering this type of service. Outpatient spine surgery is a safe, effective, and cost-effective option for patients requiring basic spine surgeries.

show abstract

“…2 This condition may lead to several complications, such as painful foot drop, bladder dysfunction, or cauda equina. 3 The prevalence of lumbar disc herniation is reported to be about 5 to 20 per 1000 people annually (0.5%-2.0%). Based on the studies, most people experience this disease in the third to fifth decade of their lives, and its prevalence in men is almost twice as high as in women.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laser Therapy in Lumbar Disc Surgery – A Narrative Review

Hosseini

Allameh

2020

J Lasers Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Low back pain is one of the most chronic debilitating conditions involving considerable loss of cash, work, and quality time. Lasers are utilized in different fields of drugs, providing unique advantages. They are useful and advantageous in treating lumbar disc disease. In this research, an attempt is made to examine the role and importance of different lasers in lumbar disc surgeries. Methods: We conducted studies about laser therapy in lumbar disc surgery. Our primary search began with reviewing English-language citations from PubMed and Scopus between 1990 and 2019 using the keywords: (laser therapy) OR (lumbar disc AND disc surgery). The initial search yielded 97 articles. However, about 49 articles were selected and used in the present study. Results: Based on the present study, it can be found that there are several methods of using lasers to treat lumbar disc surgery. These methods all have their strengths and weaknesses. Conclusion:The development of laser lumbar disc surgery can be very helpful due to the reduction of surgical risks and the length of the patients' hospital stay. However, the choice of method used for this type of surgery should be made according to the patient's condition and based on the opinion of the treating physician.

show abstract

Endospine Surgery Complications in Lumbar Herniated Disc

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

A perspective on wrong level, wrong side, and wrong site spine surgery

A perspective on wrong level, wrong side, and wrong site spine surgery

Outpatient Spine Procedures in Poland: Clinical Outcomes, Safety, Complications, and Technical Insights into an Ambulatory Spine Surgery Center

Laser Therapy in Lumbar Disc Surgery – A Narrative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About