Advances in Lateral Interbody Fusion and Single Position Surgery.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurosurgery Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-14 DOI:10.1227/neu.0000000000003353
Alfredo Guiroy, Alfred-John Bayaton, Michael R McDermott, Charlie Spieser, J Alex Thomas, Cristiano M Menezes, Rodrigo Amaral, Ashish Patel, Jahangir Asghar
{"title":"Advances in Lateral Interbody Fusion and Single Position Surgery.","authors":"Alfredo Guiroy, Alfred-John Bayaton, Michael R McDermott, Charlie Spieser, J Alex Thomas, Cristiano M Menezes, Rodrigo Amaral, Ashish Patel, Jahangir Asghar","doi":"10.1227/neu.0000000000003353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is traditionally performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus position for interbody implant insertion and indirect decompression. In cases requiring 360-degree fusion or direct decompression, the patient is repositioned to the prone position during surgery, a technique referred to as dual-position LLIF (DP-L). To improve efficiency and eliminate the need for repositioning, surgeons have adopted single-position approaches, completing the entire procedure either in the lateral decubitus or prone position. This explores the advancements in LLIF and single-position LLIF. Comparing both single position lateral decubitus LLIF and single position prone (P-SPS) to the traditional DP-L. A narrative review of the literature on single-position surgery (SPS) LLIF was conducted to provide an overview of its key aspects and clinical applications. The review included studies comparing SPS lateral and SPS prone to DP-L, encompassing systematic reviews, meta-analyses, retrospective studies, and case series. Additional studies deemed relevant for a thorough review were also included. No randomized controlled trials were identified or included in this review. Lateral single-position surgery and P-SPS have shown reductions in operative times and hospital length of stay compared with DP LLIF. In addition, both techniques improved estimated blood loss, complication rates, and radiographic outcomes. However, the statistical significance of these findings varied inconsistently across the published studies. The development of LLIF represents a notable advancement in spine surgery. SPS builds on this foundation, offering potential improvements over the original technique. While SPS has demonstrated certain advantages, there remains room for further refinement and optimization in its application.</p>","PeriodicalId":19276,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgery","volume":"96 3S","pages":"S9-S16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003353","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is traditionally performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus position for interbody implant insertion and indirect decompression. In cases requiring 360-degree fusion or direct decompression, the patient is repositioned to the prone position during surgery, a technique referred to as dual-position LLIF (DP-L). To improve efficiency and eliminate the need for repositioning, surgeons have adopted single-position approaches, completing the entire procedure either in the lateral decubitus or prone position. This explores the advancements in LLIF and single-position LLIF. Comparing both single position lateral decubitus LLIF and single position prone (P-SPS) to the traditional DP-L. A narrative review of the literature on single-position surgery (SPS) LLIF was conducted to provide an overview of its key aspects and clinical applications. The review included studies comparing SPS lateral and SPS prone to DP-L, encompassing systematic reviews, meta-analyses, retrospective studies, and case series. Additional studies deemed relevant for a thorough review were also included. No randomized controlled trials were identified or included in this review. Lateral single-position surgery and P-SPS have shown reductions in operative times and hospital length of stay compared with DP LLIF. In addition, both techniques improved estimated blood loss, complication rates, and radiographic outcomes. However, the statistical significance of these findings varied inconsistently across the published studies. The development of LLIF represents a notable advancement in spine surgery. SPS builds on this foundation, offering potential improvements over the original technique. While SPS has demonstrated certain advantages, there remains room for further refinement and optimization in its application.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurosurgery
Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
898
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurosurgery, the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, publishes research on clinical and experimental neurosurgery covering the very latest developments in science, technology, and medicine. For professionals aware of the rapid pace of developments in the field, this journal is nothing short of indispensable as the most complete window on the contemporary field of neurosurgery. Neurosurgery is the fastest-growing journal in the field, with a worldwide reputation for reliable coverage delivered with a fresh and dynamic outlook.
期刊最新文献
Commentary: Neurosurgical Endovascular Credentialing in Europe and the United Kingdom for the "Complete" Neurovascular Surgeon: The Time has Come. Dynamic Tumor in Situ Fluid Circulating Tumor DNA Postsurgery Effectively Predicts Recurrence and Clinical Benefits for Glioblastomas. In Reply: So the Bone Flap Hit the Floor, Now What? An In Vitro Comparison of Cadaveric Bone Flap Decontamination Procedures. Letter: So the Bone Flap Hit the Floor, Now What? An In Vitro Comparison of Cadaveric Bone Flap Decontamination Procedures. Long-Term Outcomes After Gamma Knife Radiosurgery Treatment of Craniopharyngiomas: A Swedish Nationwide Cohort With a Mean Follow-Up of 21 Years.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1