Dataset Information

Outcomes of Two Different Techniques Using the Lateral Approach for Lumbar Interbody Arthrodesis.

ABSTRACT: Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective To determine the short-term outcomes of two different lateral approaches to the lumbar spine. Methods This was a retrospective review performed with four fellowship-trained spine surgeons from a single institution. Two different approach techniques were identified. (1) Traditional transpsoas (TP) approach: dissection was performed through the psoas performed using neuromonitored sequential dilation. (2) Direct visualization (DV) approach: retractors are placed superficial to the psoas followed by directly visualized dissection through psoas. Outcome measures included radiographic fusion and adverse event (AE) rate. Results In all, 120 patients were identified, 79 women and 41 men. Average age was 64.2 years (22 to 86). When looking at all medical and surgical AEs, 31 patients (25.8%) had one or more AEs; 22 patients (18.3%) had a total of 24 neurologically related AEs; 15 patients (12.5%) had anterior/lateral thigh dysesthesias; 6 patients (5.0%) had radiculopathic pain; and 3 patients (2.5%) had postoperative weakness. Specifically, for neurologic AEs, the DV group had a rate of 28.0% and the TP group had a rate of 14.2% (p < 0.18). When looking at the rate of neurologic AEs in patients undergoing single-level fusions only, the DV group rate was 28.6% versus 10.2% for the TP group (p < 0.03). Conclusion Overall, 18.3% of patients sustained a postoperative neurologic AE following lateral interbody fusions. The TP approach had a statistically lower rate of neurologic-specific AE for single-level fusions.

SUBMITTER: Cheng I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4516734 | biostudies-other | 2015 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to verify the biomechanical properties of a newly designed angulated lateral plate (mini-LP) suited for two-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). The mini-LP is placed through the lateral ante-psoas surgical corridor, which reduces the operative time and complications associated with prolonged anesthesia and placement in the prone position.MethodsA three-dimensional nonlinear finite element (FE) model of an intact L1-L5 lumbar spine was constructed and validated. The intact model was modified to generate a two-level OLIF surgery model augmented with three types of lateral fixation (stand-alone, SA; lateral rod screw, LRS; miniature lateral plate, mini-LP); the operative segments were L2-L3 and L3-L4. By applying a 500 N follower load and 7.5 Nm directional moment (flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation), all models were used to simulate human spine movement. Then, we extracted the range of motion (ROM), peak contact force of the bony endplate (PCFBE), peak equivalent stress of the cage (PESC), peak equivalent stress of fixation (PESF), and stress contour plots.ResultsWhen compared with the intact model, the SA model achieved the least reduction in ROM to surgical segments in all motions. The ROM of the mini-LP model was slightly smaller than that of the LRS model. There were no significant differences in surgical segments (L1-L2, L4-L5) between all surgical models and the intact model. The PCFBE and PESC of the LRS and the mini-LP fixation models were lower than those of the SA model. However, the differences in PCFBE or PESC between the LRS- and mini-LP-based models were not significant. The fixation stress of the LRS- and mini-LP-based models was significantly lower than the yield strength under all loading conditions. In addition, the variances in the PESF in the LRS- and mini-LP-based models were not obvious.ConclusionOur biomechanical FE analysis indicated that LRS or mini-LP fixation can both provide adequate biomechanical stability for two-level OLIF through a single incision. The newly designed mini-LP model seemed to be superior in installation convenience, and equally good outcomes were achieved with both LRS and mini-LP for two-level OLIF.

Project description:BackgroundMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) are widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. In the present study, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of these two procedures.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed, and the quality of retrieved studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Clinical outcomes, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, improvement in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) effectiveness rate and complications, in addition to radiographic outcomes, including restoration of disc height, disc angle, overall lumbar lordosis, fusion rate and subsidence, were extracted and input into a fixed or random effect model to compare the efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF.ResultsSeven qualified studies were included. Clinically, OLIF resulted in less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time than MIS-TLIF. Improvement of VAS for leg pain was more obvious in the OLIF group (P < 0.0001), whereas improvement of VAS for back pain (P = 0.08) and ODI (P = 0.98) as well as JOABPEQ effectiveness rate (P = 0.18) were similar in the two groups. Radiographically, OLIF was more effective in restoring disc height (P = 0.01) and equivalent in improving the disc angle (P = 0.18) and lumbar lordosis (P = 0.48) compared with MIS-TLIF. The fusion rate (P = 0.11) was similar in both groups, while the subsidence was more severe in the MIS-TLIF group (P < 0.00001).ConclusionsThe above evidence suggests that OLIF is associated with a shorter operation time (with supplementary fixation in the prone position) and less intraoperative blood loss than MIS-TLIF and can lead to better leg pain alleviation, disc height restoration and subsidence resistance. No differences regarding back pain relief, functional recovery, complications, disc angle restoration, lumbar lordosis restoration and fusion rate were found. However, due to the limited number of studies, our results should be confirmed with high-level studies to fully compare the therapeutic efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF.Trial registrationPROSPERO ID: CRD42020201903 .

Dataset Information

Outcomes of Two Different Techniques Using the Lateral Approach for Lumbar Interbody Arthrodesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets