Radiographic evaluation of indirect decompression of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerated lumbar spondylolisthesis

Sato, Jun; Ohtori, Seiji; Orita, Sumihisa; Yamauchi, Kazuyo; Eguchi, Yawara; Ochiai, Nobuyasu; Kuniyoshi, Kazuki; Aoki, Yasuchika; Nakamura, Junichi; Miyagi, Masayuki; Suzuki, Miyako; Kubota, Go; Inage, Kazuhide; Sainoh, Takeshi; Fujimoto, Kazuki; Shiga, Yasuhiro; Abe, Koki; Kanamoto, Hiroto; Inoue, Gen; Takahashi, Kazuhisa

doi:10.1007/s00586-015-4170-0

Cited by 192 publications

(161 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

156

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lower back pain and leg pain were significantly improved. The fact that the overall parameters improved after the surgery support that efficient intervertebral fusion and correction can be achieved with OLIF surgery by using a lateral intervertebral cage followed by ligamentotaxis, which has favorable mid-term results 12,13,15,18) . It has been reported that LLIF can correct a deformity with larger lateral interbody cages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of the location of intervertebral cages during oblique lateral interbody fusion surgery to achieve sagittal correction

Orita

Inage

Sato

et al. 2017

Spine Surg Relat Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Introduction: Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) can achieve recovery of lumbar lordosis (LL) in minimally invasive manner. The current study aimed to evaluate the location of lateral intervertebral cages during OLIF in terms of LL correction.Methods: The subjects were patients who underwent OLIF for lumbar degenerative diseases, including lumbar spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and discogenic low back pain. Their clinical outcome was evaluated using visual analogue scale on lower back pain (LBP), leg pain and numbness. The following parameters were retrospectively evaluated on plain radiographic images and computed tomography scans before and at 1 year after OLIF: the intervertebral height, vertebral translation, and sagittal angle. The cage position was defined by equally dividing the caudal endplate into five zones (I to V), and its association with segmental lordosis restoration was analyzed. Subjects were also evaluated for a postoperative endplate injury.Results: Eighty patients (121 fused levels) with lumbar degeneration who underwent OLIF were included. There were no significant specific distribution in preoperative disc pathology such as disc angle, height, and translation. After OLIF, sagittal alignment was improved with an average correction angle of 3.8 at the instrumented segments in a level-independent fashion. All cases showed significant improvement in clinical outcomes, and had improvement in the radiological parameters (P<0.05). A detailed analysis of the cage position showed that the most significant sagittal correction and the most postoperative endplate injuries occurred in the farthest anterior zone (I). Cages with a 12-mm height were associated with more endplate injuries compared with shorter cages (8 or 10 mm).Conclusions: OLIF improves sagittal alignment with an average correction angle of 3.8 at the instrumented segments. We suggest that the optimal cage position for better lordosis correction and the fewest endplate injuries is zone II with a cage height of up to 10 mm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…OLIF surgery was performed according to the standard procedure described previously 18) . Briefly, patients were placed in the lateral decubitus position on their right side, and the target intervertebral disc space was identified under fluoroscopic guidance.…”

Section: Surgical Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the location of intervertebral cages during oblique lateral interbody fusion surgery to achieve sagittal correction

Orita

Inage

Sato

et al. 2017

Spine Surg Relat Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They concluded that use of this oblique corridor, anterior to the psoas muscle, may avoid many of the anatomic structure-associated complications with the anterior or transpsoas approaches. However, studies on intra-and perioperative complications of the oblique psoassparing approach have been based on small cohorts of patients undergoing surgery for different indications [36,37,42]. Silvestre et al [44] reported the results of 179 patients who underwent oblique lumbar interbody fusion, but a single-center series focusing on inpatient complications has not been reported to our knowledge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Oblique Anterolateral Approach to the Lumbar Spine Provides Access to the Lumbar Spine With Few Early Complications

Mehren

Mayer

Zandanell

et al. 2016

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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...

show abstract

“…With interest I read the article by Jun Sato et al [1] describing a study in which they examined the radiographic and clinical efficacy of OLIF for lumbar degenerated spondylolisthesis.…”

Section: Dear Editormentioning

confidence: 99%

Letter to the Editor concerning ‘‘Radiographic evaluation of indirect decompression of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerated lumbar spondylolisthesis’’ by Jun Sato et al. Eur Spine J (2017) 26: 671–678

Wang

Jian

2017

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiographic evaluation of indirect decompression of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerated lumbar spondylolisthesis

Cited by 192 publications

References 20 publications

Evaluation of the location of intervertebral cages during oblique lateral interbody fusion surgery to achieve sagittal correction

Evaluation of the location of intervertebral cages during oblique lateral interbody fusion surgery to achieve sagittal correction

The Oblique Anterolateral Approach to the Lumbar Spine Provides Access to the Lumbar Spine With Few Early Complications

Letter to the Editor concerning ‘‘Radiographic evaluation of indirect decompression of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerated lumbar spondylolisthesis’’ by Jun Sato et al. Eur Spine J (2017) 26: 671–678

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About