首页 > 最新文献

International Journal of Spine Surgery最新文献

英文 中文
Nuances of the Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Review. 微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术的细微差别:技术综述。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2025-01-07 DOI: 10.14444/8713
Daivik B Vyas, Brian J Park, Michael Y Wang

Background: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) achieves anterior and posterior spinal arthrodesis through a single approach. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) methods reduce surgical morbidity while achieving positive outcomes.

Methods: The major MIS-TLIF techniques, from tubular to endoscopic approaches, are reviewed with a discussion on the incorporation of new technologies and a comparative review of their outcomes.

Results: MIS-TLIF approaches span a spectrum of visualization methods, with technical nuances related to patient and surgeon-specific factors determining optimal fit. To date, the superiority of 1 technique has yet to be definitively determined. Existing techniques may be integrated in a personalized manner to optimize surgical utility.

Conclusions: Selection of an MIS-TLIF modality relies on a calculus between patient characteristics and surgeon faculty; proper selection can offer significant benefits to patients with spine disease.

Clinical relevance: Emerging technologies for MIS-TLIF comprise a major source of development and clinical translation, while the safe and effective use of these techniques promises greater patient benefit in the right populations.

背景:经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)通过单一入路实现前、后路脊柱融合术。微创手术(MIS)方法减少手术的发病率,同时取得积极的结果。方法:主要的MIS-TLIF技术,从管状到内窥镜入路,与新技术的合并讨论和比较回顾他们的结果。结果:MIS-TLIF方法跨越了一系列可视化方法,与患者和外科医生特定因素相关的技术细微差别决定了最佳拟合。到目前为止,1种技术的优越性还没有得到明确的确定。现有技术可以以个性化的方式整合,以优化手术效用。结论:miss - tlif手术方式的选择取决于患者特征和外科医生能力之间的权衡;正确的选择可以为脊柱疾病患者提供显著的益处。临床相关性:MIS-TLIF的新兴技术是开发和临床转化的主要来源,而这些技术的安全有效使用有望在合适的人群中为患者带来更大的益处。
{"title":"Nuances of the Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Review.","authors":"Daivik B Vyas, Brian J Park, Michael Y Wang","doi":"10.14444/8713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8713","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) achieves anterior and posterior spinal arthrodesis through a single approach. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) methods reduce surgical morbidity while achieving positive outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The major MIS-TLIF techniques, from tubular to endoscopic approaches, are reviewed with a discussion on the incorporation of new technologies and a comparative review of their outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MIS-TLIF approaches span a spectrum of visualization methods, with technical nuances related to patient and surgeon-specific factors determining optimal fit. To date, the superiority of 1 technique has yet to be definitively determined. Existing techniques may be integrated in a personalized manner to optimize surgical utility.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Selection of an MIS-TLIF modality relies on a calculus between patient characteristics and surgeon faculty; proper selection can offer significant benefits to patients with spine disease.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Emerging technologies for MIS-TLIF comprise a major source of development and clinical translation, while the safe and effective use of these techniques promises greater patient benefit in the right populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142956412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Fully Navigated Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Detailed Technical Report and Description of 15 Cases. 全导航单位俯卧侧位腰椎椎体间融合术:15例详细技术报告及描述。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-27 DOI: 10.14444/8697
David E Bauer, Nicolas Lauper, Dennis E Dominguez

Background: Navigation increases the precision and safety of pedicle screw placement and has been used to place interbody cages for lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Single-position surgery shortens its duration and that of anesthesia. The aim of this study was the feasibility of simultaneous cage and screw placement in a single prone position using intraoperative navigation without the need for additional fluoroscopy and a detailed technical description of this procedure.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 15 patients who underwent simultaneous navigated lateral lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation in a single prone position. A detailed technical description of the procedure is provided. Surgery duration, blood loss, complications, and radiographic parameters were recorded.

Results: A total of 24 cages were placed in 15 patients. The mean time taken for cage placement was 21 ± 6.70 minutes, and there were no major complications. Mean surgery duration and blood loss per case, including posterior instrumentation, were 263 ± 94 minutes and 315 ± 143 mL, respectively. There were significant improvements in pre- to postoperative Oswestry Disability Index scores (51.38 ± 15.93 vs 32.81 ± 17.18, P < 0.001) and segmental lordosis (3.26° ± 8.97° vs 13.09° ± 15.25°, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: The present study's results showed the feasibility of lateral lumbar interbody fusion using simultaneous posterior pedicle screw instrumentation and intraoperative navigation in a single prone position.

Clinical relevance: Navigated lateral lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation in a single prone position possibly reduces operating time and blood loss and reduces exposure of operation room personnel to radiation.

Level of evidence: 4:

背景:导航增加了椎弓根螺钉置入的准确性和安全性,并已被用于放置椎间固定架进行侧位腰椎椎间融合。单体位手术缩短了手术时间和麻醉时间。本研究的目的是探讨术中导航在单一俯卧位同时放置固定架和螺钉的可行性,无需额外的透视检查和详细的技术描述。方法:我们回顾性分析了15例同时行导航侧腰椎体间融合术和单一俯卧位后路内固定的患者。提供了该过程的详细技术描述。记录手术时间、出血量、并发症及影像学参数。结果:15例患者共放置24个笼。平均放置笼时间为21±6.70分钟,无重大并发症。平均手术时间和每例出血量(包括后路内固定)分别为263±94分钟和315±143 mL。术后Oswestry残疾指数评分(51.38±15.93 vs 32.81±17.18,P < 0.001)和节段性前凸(3.26°±8.97°vs 13.09°±15.25°,P < 0.001)均有显著改善。结论:本研究结果表明,在单俯卧位下,同时使用后路椎弓根螺钉内固定和术中导航进行侧位腰椎椎体间融合术的可行性。临床意义:导航侧位腰椎椎体间融合术和单一俯卧位后路内固定可能减少手术时间和出血量,减少手术室人员暴露于辐射。证据等级:4;
{"title":"Fully Navigated Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Detailed Technical Report and Description of 15 Cases.","authors":"David E Bauer, Nicolas Lauper, Dennis E Dominguez","doi":"10.14444/8697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8697","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Navigation increases the precision and safety of pedicle screw placement and has been used to place interbody cages for lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Single-position surgery shortens its duration and that of anesthesia. The aim of this study was the feasibility of simultaneous cage and screw placement in a single prone position using intraoperative navigation without the need for additional fluoroscopy and a detailed technical description of this procedure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 15 patients who underwent simultaneous navigated lateral lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation in a single prone position. A detailed technical description of the procedure is provided. Surgery duration, blood loss, complications, and radiographic parameters were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 24 cages were placed in 15 patients. The mean time taken for cage placement was 21 ± 6.70 minutes, and there were no major complications. Mean surgery duration and blood loss per case, including posterior instrumentation, were 263 ± 94 minutes and 315 ± 143 mL, respectively. There were significant improvements in pre- to postoperative Oswestry Disability Index scores (51.38 ± 15.93 vs 32.81 ± 17.18, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and segmental lordosis (3.26° ± 8.97° vs 13.09° ± 15.25°, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study's results showed the feasibility of lateral lumbar interbody fusion using simultaneous posterior pedicle screw instrumentation and intraoperative navigation in a single prone position.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Navigated lateral lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation in a single prone position possibly reduces operating time and blood loss and reduces exposure of operation room personnel to radiation.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 4: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142898838","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Comparison of Pain and Functional Outcomes Among Geriatric and Nongeriatric Adults Following Full Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Pathology. 老年和非老年成人腰椎退行性病理全内窥镜手术后疼痛和功能结果的比较。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-17 DOI: 10.14444/8693
Alexander A Chernysh, Jannik Leyendecker, Owen P Leary, Rahul A Sastry, Ziya L Gokaslan, Jared S Fridley, Peter Derman, Osama Kashlan, Sanjay Konakondla, John Ogunlade, Christoph P Hofstetter, Albert E Telfeian

Background: Full endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) champions a rapid recovery and a low rate of overall complications. However, its efficacy in geriatric patients that might yield additional benefits from minimized invasiveness remains underexplored.

Methods: A multi-institutional prospective cohort study was conducted involving patients undergoing elective lumbar FESS. Participants were categorized into nongeriatric (18-69 years old) and geriatric (≥70 years old) groups. Studied variables included demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). A mobile application was leveraged to collect real-time data pre- and postoperatively.

Results: One hundred and sixty-four patients were included and divided into nongeriatric (N = 125) and geriatric (N = 39) cohorts. No group differences were observed between sex (P = 0.404), body mass index (P = 0.372), procedure duration (P = 0.350), or blood loss (P = 0.384). Nongeriatric patients received discectomy more frequently (P < 0.001), while older patients underwent more decompressive procedures (P < 0.001). Characterization of pain and functional outcome revealed that nongeriatric and geriatric patients follow a similar recovery trajectory and both appreciate significant improvements from baseline to 3 months postoperatively (P < 0.001 for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI). There were no differences in the rate of improvement between age groups at any time point (P > 0.05 for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI).

Conclusions: FESS significantly improves pain and function in both geriatric and nongeriatric adults with degenerative lumbar conditions, with no difference in the degree of improvement between groups.

Clinical relevance: These findings underscore the efficacy of FESS as a minimally invasive surgical option for elderly patients. Mobile application technology is useful for collecting patient-reported data in spine surgery clinical research.

Level of evidence: 3:

背景:全内窥镜脊柱手术(FESS)恢复迅速,整体并发症发生率低。然而,它对老年患者的疗效,可能会产生额外的好处,从最小的侵入性仍有待探索。方法:对择期腰椎FESS患者进行多机构前瞻性队列研究。参与者被分为非老年组(18-69岁)和老年组(≥70岁)。研究变量包括人口统计学、医疗合并症、手术细节、背部和腿部疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS)和Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)。利用移动应用程序收集术前和术后的实时数据。结果:纳入164例患者,分为非老年组(N = 125)和老年组(N = 39)。性别(P = 0.404)、体重指数(P = 0.372)、手术时间(P = 0.350)或失血量(P = 0.384)之间没有组间差异。非老年患者接受椎间盘切除术的频率更高(P < 0.001),而老年患者接受减压手术的频率更高(P < 0.001)。疼痛和功能结果的特征显示,非老年和老年患者遵循相似的恢复轨迹,并且从基线到术后3个月都有显着改善(VAS背部,VAS腿部和ODI的P < 0.001)。各年龄组在任何时间点的改善率均无差异(VAS背部、VAS腿部和ODI的P < 0.05)。结论:FESS可显著改善老年和非老年腰椎退行性疾病患者的疼痛和功能,两组间改善程度无差异。临床意义:这些发现强调了FESS作为老年患者微创手术选择的有效性。在脊柱外科临床研究中,移动应用技术有助于收集患者报告的数据。证据等级:3;
{"title":"Comparison of Pain and Functional Outcomes Among Geriatric and Nongeriatric Adults Following Full Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Pathology.","authors":"Alexander A Chernysh, Jannik Leyendecker, Owen P Leary, Rahul A Sastry, Ziya L Gokaslan, Jared S Fridley, Peter Derman, Osama Kashlan, Sanjay Konakondla, John Ogunlade, Christoph P Hofstetter, Albert E Telfeian","doi":"10.14444/8693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8693","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Full endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) champions a rapid recovery and a low rate of overall complications. However, its efficacy in geriatric patients that might yield additional benefits from minimized invasiveness remains underexplored.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multi-institutional prospective cohort study was conducted involving patients undergoing elective lumbar FESS. Participants were categorized into nongeriatric (18-69 years old) and geriatric (≥70 years old) groups. Studied variables included demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). A mobile application was leveraged to collect real-time data pre- and postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixty-four patients were included and divided into nongeriatric (<i>N</i> = 125) and geriatric (<i>N</i> = 39) cohorts. No group differences were observed between sex (<i>P</i> = 0.404), body mass index (<i>P</i> = 0.372), procedure duration (<i>P</i> = 0.350), or blood loss (<i>P</i> = 0.384). Nongeriatric patients received discectomy more frequently (<i>P</i> < 0.001), while older patients underwent more decompressive procedures (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Characterization of pain and functional outcome revealed that nongeriatric and geriatric patients follow a similar recovery trajectory and both appreciate significant improvements from baseline to 3 months postoperatively (<i>P</i> < 0.001 for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI). There were no differences in the rate of improvement between age groups at any time point (<i>P</i> > 0.05 for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FESS significantly improves pain and function in both geriatric and nongeriatric adults with degenerative lumbar conditions, with no difference in the degree of improvement between groups.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>These findings underscore the efficacy of FESS as a minimally invasive surgical option for elderly patients. Mobile application technology is useful for collecting patient-reported data in spine surgery clinical research.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 3: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142847905","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Comparison of Clinical Efficacy in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion, Posterior Lumbar Fusion, and Hybrid Surgery. 后路腰椎椎间融合术、后路腰椎融合术和混合手术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的临床疗效比较
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-12 DOI: 10.14444/8659
Zhenbiao Zhu, Anwu Xuan, Cheng Xu, Chaofeng Wang, Qing He, Liang Tang, Dike Ruan
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Numerous studies have confirmed that both posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and posterior lumbar fusion (PLF), have their advantages and disadvantages. However, the inconsistent results of these studies make it difficult to reach a consensus on which fusion method is superior.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the clinical outcomes of PLIF, PLF, and hybrid surgery combining PLIF and PLF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was conducted, collecting clinical records and radiological data of patients with lumbar degenerative disease from 2014 to 2022. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on surgical strategy: PLIF group, PLF group, and hybrid group. Clinical data included patient-reported outcomes such as the Japanese Orthopedic Association score, Oswestry Disability Index score, visual analog scale score, 36-item Short Form Health Survey score, and the occurrence of complications. Radiological data included Cobb angle, fusion rate, adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg), adjacent segment disease (ASDis), and cage subsidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 378 patients were divided into 3 groups: PLIF group (<i>n</i> = 122), PLF group (<i>n</i> = 126), and hybrid group (<i>n</i> = 130). The baseline characteristics were balanced among the 3 groups. As the follow-up time increased, visual analog scale scores showed varying degrees of improvement (all <i>P</i> <sub>measure time</sub> < 0.001), but there were no significant differences observed between the groups (all <i>P</i> <sub>measure time * group</sub> > 0.05). Oswestry Disability Index scores improved over time (<i>F</i> <sub>measure time</sub> = 939, <i>P</i> <sub>measure time</sub> < 0.001), with the hybrid group showing more significant improvement (<i>F</i> <sub>measure time * group</sub> = 2.826, <i>P</i> <sub>measure time * group</sub> = 0.006). The 36-item Short Form Health Survey scores and Cobb angles also improved significantly during the follow-up period, with no significant differences observed among the groups. The overall fusion rates for the hybrid group and PLIF group were 93% and 91%, significantly higher than the fusion rate of the PLF group (84%; <i>P</i> = 0.031). The postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in the PLIF group (24.4%) compared with the PLF group (16.4%) and the hybrid group (12.5%; <i>P</i> = 0.022). There was no significant difference in the overall 5-year ASDeg occurrence rate (38% vs 36%) and ASDis occurrence rate (11.3% vs 8.3%) between the PLIF group and PLF group for single-level fusion (<i>P</i> > 0.05). The occurrence rate of ASDeg for multilevel fusion in the hybrid group was 29%, significantly lower than that in the PLIF group (42%) and PLF group (37%; <i>P</i> = 0.044). The overall 5-year ASDis occurrence rates for multilevel fusion were 12.3%, 9.9%, and 7.6% for the PLIF group, PLF group, and hybrid g
背景:大量研究证实后路腰椎椎体间融合术(PLIF)和后路腰椎融合术(PLF)各有优缺点。然而,这些研究结果的不一致性使得对于哪种融合方法更优很难达成共识。目的:比较PLIF、PLF及PLIF + PLF混合手术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2014 - 2022年腰椎退行性疾病患者的临床记录和影像学资料。根据手术策略将患者分为3组:PLIF组、PLF组和混合组。临床数据包括患者报告的结果,如日本骨科协会评分、Oswestry残疾指数评分、视觉模拟量表评分、36项简短健康调查评分和并发症的发生。放射学数据包括Cobb角、融合率、邻近节段退变(ASDeg)、邻近节段病变(ASDis)和笼沉降。结果:378例患者分为3组:PLIF组(n = 122)、PLF组(n = 126)和混合组(n = 130)。三组患者基线特征平衡。随着随访时间的延长,视觉模拟量表得分均有不同程度的改善(均P测量时间< 0.001),但各组间差异无统计学意义(均P测量时间*组> 0.05)。Oswestry残疾指数评分随时间推移而改善(F测量时间= 939,P测量时间< 0.001),其中混合组改善更显著(F测量时间*组= 2.826,P测量时间*组= 0.006)。36项简短健康调查得分和科布角在随访期间也有显著改善,各组之间没有明显差异。混合组和PLIF组的整体融合率分别为93%和91%,显著高于PLF组(84%;P = 0.031)。PLIF组术后并发症发生率(24.4%)明显高于PLF组(16.4%)和混合组(12.5%;P = 0.022)。PLIF组与PLF组5年ASDeg发生率(38% vs 36%)和ASDis发生率(11.3% vs 8.3%)在单节段融合术中差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。杂交组多节段融合ASDeg发生率为29%,明显低于PLIF组(42%)和PLF组(37%);P = 0.044)。PLIF组、PLF组、hybrid组5年ASDis总体发生率分别为12.3%、9.9%、7.6%,差异无统计学意义(P = 0.338)。结论:3种手术方式均能有效改善退行性腰椎病患者的临床症状。在多节段融合病例中,混合技术在提高融合率、减少并发症和减少ASDeg发生方面与PLIF和PLF具有相当的疗效。临床相关性:该研究具有重要的临床相关性,因为它直接解决了腰椎退行性疾病的常见手术干预的治疗结果,这是一种显著影响患者生活质量和功能的疾病。这项研究对临床医生选择腰椎退行性疾病患者最合适的治疗策略也至关重要。证据等级:3;
{"title":"Comparison of Clinical Efficacy in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion, Posterior Lumbar Fusion, and Hybrid Surgery.","authors":"Zhenbiao Zhu, Anwu Xuan, Cheng Xu, Chaofeng Wang, Qing He, Liang Tang, Dike Ruan","doi":"10.14444/8659","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8659","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Numerous studies have confirmed that both posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and posterior lumbar fusion (PLF), have their advantages and disadvantages. However, the inconsistent results of these studies make it difficult to reach a consensus on which fusion method is superior.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To compare the clinical outcomes of PLIF, PLF, and hybrid surgery combining PLIF and PLF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;A retrospective review was conducted, collecting clinical records and radiological data of patients with lumbar degenerative disease from 2014 to 2022. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on surgical strategy: PLIF group, PLF group, and hybrid group. Clinical data included patient-reported outcomes such as the Japanese Orthopedic Association score, Oswestry Disability Index score, visual analog scale score, 36-item Short Form Health Survey score, and the occurrence of complications. Radiological data included Cobb angle, fusion rate, adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg), adjacent segment disease (ASDis), and cage subsidence.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;A total of 378 patients were divided into 3 groups: PLIF group (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 122), PLF group (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 126), and hybrid group (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 130). The baseline characteristics were balanced among the 3 groups. As the follow-up time increased, visual analog scale scores showed varying degrees of improvement (all &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;measure time&lt;/sub&gt; &lt; 0.001), but there were no significant differences observed between the groups (all &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;measure time * group&lt;/sub&gt; &gt; 0.05). Oswestry Disability Index scores improved over time (&lt;i&gt;F&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;measure time&lt;/sub&gt; = 939, &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;measure time&lt;/sub&gt; &lt; 0.001), with the hybrid group showing more significant improvement (&lt;i&gt;F&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;measure time * group&lt;/sub&gt; = 2.826, &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; &lt;sub&gt;measure time * group&lt;/sub&gt; = 0.006). The 36-item Short Form Health Survey scores and Cobb angles also improved significantly during the follow-up period, with no significant differences observed among the groups. The overall fusion rates for the hybrid group and PLIF group were 93% and 91%, significantly higher than the fusion rate of the PLF group (84%; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; = 0.031). The postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in the PLIF group (24.4%) compared with the PLF group (16.4%) and the hybrid group (12.5%; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; = 0.022). There was no significant difference in the overall 5-year ASDeg occurrence rate (38% vs 36%) and ASDis occurrence rate (11.3% vs 8.3%) between the PLIF group and PLF group for single-level fusion (&lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; &gt; 0.05). The occurrence rate of ASDeg for multilevel fusion in the hybrid group was 29%, significantly lower than that in the PLIF group (42%) and PLF group (37%; &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; = 0.044). The overall 5-year ASDis occurrence rates for multilevel fusion were 12.3%, 9.9%, and 7.6% for the PLIF group, PLF group, and hybrid g","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687063/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142818831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Augmenting Endoscopic Transforaminal Spinal Decompression Surgery (Full Endoscopic Spine Surgery) Using Stimulated Electromyography Neuromonitoring Dilators. 使用刺激肌电神经监测扩张器的内镜下经椎间孔脊柱减压手术(全内镜脊柱手术)。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-06 DOI: 10.14444/8692
Dickson Hong Him Chau, Dhivakaran Gengatharan, Walter-Soon-Yaw Wong

Background: Full endoscopic spine surgery via a transforaminal approach (FESS-TFA) offers a minimally invasive approach for spinal decompression. However, it carries a risk of nerve root irritation or injury. Existing intraoperative neuromonitoring primarily provides retrospective warnings of potential nerve disturbance.

Objective: To introduce the use of stimulated electromyography neuromonitoring dilators in FESS-TFA for proactive nerve protection, enhanced localization, and potential reduction in radiation exposure.

Methods: This technical note describes the first use of neuromonitoring dilators in FESS-TFA. A 6-mm dilator tipped with a stimulation electrode is introduced to provide real-time directional feedback regarding nerve proximity, allowing the surgeon to actively avoid accidental injury to the exiting nerve root. With the creation of a safe tract, subsequent introduction of working instruments would theoretically reduce the risk of neural injury.

Results: The technique was successfully applied in a case of T11/T12 severe spinal stenosis, facilitating safe instrument passage and nerve localization. We describe the surgical technique and provide illustrative intraoperative details.

Conclusion: Neuromonitoring dilators represent a promising innovation in FESS-TFA with the potential to enhance patient safety and possibly streamline the procedure. Larger-scale studies are warranted to quantify the true impact of this technique on complication rates, operative time, and radiation exposure.

Clinical relevance: This technique highlights a significant advancement in reducing neural complications during minimally invasive spinal surgeries. By proactively preventing nerve irritation or injury and reducing radiation exposure, it contributes to optimizing surgical workflows and improving patient outcomes.

Level of evidence: 5:

背景:经椎间孔入路的全内窥镜脊柱手术(FESS-TFA)为脊柱减压提供了一种微创入路。然而,它有刺激或损伤神经根的风险。现有的术中神经监测主要提供潜在神经障碍的回顾性警告。目的:介绍刺激肌电神经监测扩张器在FESS-TFA中的应用,以主动保护神经,增强定位,并潜在地减少辐射暴露。方法:本技术说明描述了FESS-TFA中首次使用神经监测扩张器。一个带有刺激电极的6毫米扩张器可以提供神经接近的实时方向反馈,使外科医生能够主动避免意外损伤现有神经根。随着安全通道的建立,随后工作器械的引入理论上可以降低神经损伤的风险。结果:该技术成功应用于1例T11/T12严重椎管狭窄患者,使器械通过和神经定位更加安全。我们描述手术技术和提供说明性的术中细节。结论:神经监测扩张器在FESS-TFA中是一项有前途的创新,具有提高患者安全性和简化手术流程的潜力。有必要进行更大规模的研究,以量化该技术对并发症发生率、手术时间和辐射暴露的真正影响。临床意义:该技术在微创脊柱手术中减少神经并发症方面取得了重大进展。通过主动预防神经刺激或损伤和减少辐射暴露,它有助于优化手术工作流程和改善患者预后。证据等级:5;
{"title":"Augmenting Endoscopic Transforaminal Spinal Decompression Surgery (Full Endoscopic Spine Surgery) Using Stimulated Electromyography Neuromonitoring Dilators.","authors":"Dickson Hong Him Chau, Dhivakaran Gengatharan, Walter-Soon-Yaw Wong","doi":"10.14444/8692","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8692","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Full endoscopic spine surgery via a transforaminal approach (FESS-TFA) offers a minimally invasive approach for spinal decompression. However, it carries a risk of nerve root irritation or injury. Existing intraoperative neuromonitoring primarily provides retrospective warnings of potential nerve disturbance.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To introduce the use of stimulated electromyography neuromonitoring dilators in FESS-TFA for proactive nerve protection, enhanced localization, and potential reduction in radiation exposure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This technical note describes the first use of neuromonitoring dilators in FESS-TFA. A 6-mm dilator tipped with a stimulation electrode is introduced to provide real-time directional feedback regarding nerve proximity, allowing the surgeon to actively avoid accidental injury to the exiting nerve root. With the creation of a safe tract, subsequent introduction of working instruments would theoretically reduce the risk of neural injury.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The technique was successfully applied in a case of T11/T12 severe spinal stenosis, facilitating safe instrument passage and nerve localization. We describe the surgical technique and provide illustrative intraoperative details.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Neuromonitoring dilators represent a promising innovation in FESS-TFA with the potential to enhance patient safety and possibly streamline the procedure. Larger-scale studies are warranted to quantify the true impact of this technique on complication rates, operative time, and radiation exposure.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>This technique highlights a significant advancement in reducing neural complications during minimally invasive spinal surgeries. By proactively preventing nerve irritation or injury and reducing radiation exposure, it contributes to optimizing surgical workflows and improving patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 5: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142792514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Standalone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Without Supplementary Posterior Fixation Is Effective for Treatment of Symptomatic Grade 1 Isthmic Spondylolisthesis. 独立前路腰椎椎体间融合术无后路辅助固定治疗症状性1级峡部滑脱有效。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-05 DOI: 10.14444/8663
James S Toohey, Charlie R Faulks, Dean T Biddau, Matthew H Claydon, Nigel R Munday, Gregory M Malham

Background: There is a paucity of data examining anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with pedicle-screw fixation (ALIF-PSF) or without (standalone, sa-ALIF) for the treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). Treating pathology with sa-ALIF reduces costs, operative times, and posterior access morbidity. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of sa-ALIF for the management of low-grade IS compared with an ALIF-PSF cohort.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Consecutive patients from 1 senior spine surgeon performing sa-ALIF or ALIF-PSF for management of low-grade IS. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected at baseline, then postoperatively at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and a final follow-up timepoint. Computed tomography was conducted at 6 months, 12 months, or until interbody fusion was confirmed.

Results: Two cohorts comprised 51 patients (sa-ALIF 22 and ALIF-PSF 29). Both cohorts' PROMs improved from baseline to 12 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences (P = 0.05) in PROMs between the 2 cohorts at 6 months postoperatively, 12 months postoperatively, or at a final follow-up timepoint. There were no significant differences in mean fusion rates 12 months postoperatively (sa-ALIF 82% and ALIF-PSF 88%). Compared with preoperative measurements in sa-ALIF and ALIF-PSF cohorts, listhesis and segmental lordosis showed no significant changes, while disc height significantly increased (P = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in disc L5/S1 radiographic measurements between the cohorts at 12 months. There were 12 complications (sa-ALIF 2 and ALIF-PSF 10). Only 1 patient in the ALIF-PSF cohort required revision surgery.

Conclusions: In appropriately selected patients with normal bone density, sacral slope <40°, and a body mass index <35, sa-ALIF is a safe and effective treatment option for grade I IS. The additional morbidity and cost of PSF may not be justified given the satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes of sa-ALIF for grade I IS.

Clinical relevance: Clinically, this research continues to suggest that sa-ALIF is a safe and effective method of treatment for low grade IS.

Level of evidence: 4:

背景:关于前路腰椎椎体间融合术(ALIF)联合椎弓根螺钉固定(ALIF- psf)或不联合(独立,sa-ALIF)治疗低度峡部滑脱(is)的资料缺乏。用sa-ALIF治疗病理可减少费用、手术时间和后路通路发病率。本研究旨在探讨与ALIF-PSF队列相比,sa-ALIF治疗低级别IS的临床和影像学结果。方法:回顾性分析前瞻性收集的资料。1名资深脊柱外科医生连续对患者进行sa-ALIF或ALIF-PSF治疗低级别IS。在基线时收集患者报告的结果测量(PROMs),然后在术后6周、6个月、12个月和最终随访时间点收集。在6个月、12个月或直到确认椎间融合时进行计算机断层扫描。结果:两个队列包括51例患者(sa-ALIF 22和ALIF-PSF 29)。两组患者的PROMs从基线到术后12个月均有所改善。两组患者在术后6个月、12个月和最后随访时间点的PROMs无显著差异(P = 0.05)。术后12个月的平均融合率无显著差异(sa-ALIF 82%, ALIF-PSF 88%)。与术前测量结果相比,sa-ALIF和ALIF-PSF组的滑脱和节段性前凸无明显变化,而椎间盘高度显著增加(P = 0.0001)。12个月时,两组患者椎间盘L5/S1 x线测量无显著差异。共有12例并发症(sa-ALIF 2和ALIF-PSF 10)。ALIF-PSF队列中只有1例患者需要翻修手术。临床意义:临床上,本研究继续提示sa-ALIF是一种安全有效的治疗低级别is的方法。证据等级:4;
{"title":"Standalone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Without Supplementary Posterior Fixation Is Effective for Treatment of Symptomatic Grade 1 Isthmic Spondylolisthesis.","authors":"James S Toohey, Charlie R Faulks, Dean T Biddau, Matthew H Claydon, Nigel R Munday, Gregory M Malham","doi":"10.14444/8663","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8663","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a paucity of data examining anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with pedicle-screw fixation (ALIF-PSF) or without (standalone, sa-ALIF) for the treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). Treating pathology with sa-ALIF reduces costs, operative times, and posterior access morbidity. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of sa-ALIF for the management of low-grade IS compared with an ALIF-PSF cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Consecutive patients from 1 senior spine surgeon performing sa-ALIF or ALIF-PSF for management of low-grade IS. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected at baseline, then postoperatively at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and a final follow-up timepoint. Computed tomography was conducted at 6 months, 12 months, or until interbody fusion was confirmed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two cohorts comprised 51 patients (sa-ALIF 22 and ALIF-PSF 29). Both cohorts' PROMs improved from baseline to 12 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences (<i>P</i> = 0.05) in PROMs between the 2 cohorts at 6 months postoperatively, 12 months postoperatively, or at a final follow-up timepoint. There were no significant differences in mean fusion rates 12 months postoperatively (sa-ALIF 82% and ALIF-PSF 88%). Compared with preoperative measurements in sa-ALIF and ALIF-PSF cohorts, listhesis and segmental lordosis showed no significant changes, while disc height significantly increased (<i>P</i> = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in disc L5/S1 radiographic measurements between the cohorts at 12 months. There were 12 complications (sa-ALIF 2 and ALIF-PSF 10). Only 1 patient in the ALIF-PSF cohort required revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In appropriately selected patients with normal bone density, sacral slope <40°, and a body mass index <35, sa-ALIF is a safe and effective treatment option for grade I IS. The additional morbidity and cost of PSF may not be justified given the satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes of sa-ALIF for grade I IS.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Clinically, this research continues to suggest that sa-ALIF is a safe and effective method of treatment for low grade IS.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 4: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687050/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142787367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Sequential Anterior Longitudinal Ligament Release With Expandable Spacers for Lordosis Correction in Anterior-to-Psoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Radiographic and Biomechanical Study. 连续前纵韧带松解与可扩展垫片用于前腰肌-腰肌椎间融合术中前凸矫正:放射学和生物力学研究。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-12-05 DOI: 10.14444/8664
Joshua P Herzog, Joshua P McGuckin, Jonathan M Mahoney, Jalen Winfield, Brandon S Bucklen

Background: Anterior column realignment is an attractive minimally invasive treatment for sagittal imbalance. Expandable spacers offer controlled tensioning of the anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) during release, which could optimize correction and anterior column stability. This study investigated the biomechanical and radiographic effects of single-level anterior-to-psoas lumbar interbody fusion (ATP-LIF) with expandable spacers and sequential ALL release.

Methods: In vitro range of motion tests were performed on 7 fresh-frozen cadaveric spines (L2-L5) with a ±7.5 Nm load applied in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). After testing intact spines, single-level (L3-L4) ATP-LIFs were performed and supplemented with posterior screws, rods, and integrated lateral screws and tested after (1) no ALL release (ATP-LIF); (2) resection of 1/3 the ALL's width (1/3 ALL release); (3) resection of 2/3 the ALL's width (2/3 ALL release); and (4) complete ALL resection (3/3 ALL release). Following each partial ALL release, rods were removed, and spacers were expanded until the torque limit was reached. Rods were then reapplied, and lateral radiographs were taken to analyze changes in intervertebral angle (IVA), foraminal height, foraminal area, and posterior and anterior disc height (PDH and ADH).

Results: In ATP-LIF constructs, range of motion decreased in FE (18% intact), LB (14% intact), and AR (30% intact), while IVA, PDH, ADH, foraminal height, and foraminal area increased. PDH and ADH increased linearly with sequential ALL release and spacer expansion, while LB and AR remained stable. FE increased slightly (+15%-16% intact, <1°) following 2/3 ALL release but remained stable afterward. IVA increased exponentially with sequential ALL release, gaining 8.8° ± 3.2° with complete release.

Conclusions: The present study found improved biomechanics and radiographic parameters following ATP-LIF with intact ALL, minimal biomechanical differences between partial and complete ALL release, and greater correction and height restoration with complete release. Future clinical testing is necessary to determine the impact of this finding on patient outcomes.

Clinical relevance: Controlled tensioning of the ALL before and after ligament release allows for potential optimization between restoring sagittal balance and maximizing construct stability in a minimally invasive approach.

Level of evidence: 5:

背景:前柱调整是治疗矢状位不平衡的一种有吸引力的微创治疗方法。可膨胀垫片在释放过程中控制前纵韧带(ALL)的张力,这可以优化矫正和前柱稳定性。本研究探讨了单节段前-腰肌腰椎体间融合术(atp - liff)与可扩展垫片和顺序ALL释放的生物力学和影像学效果。方法:对7个新鲜冷冻尸体脊柱(L2-L5)进行了±7.5 Nm的屈伸(FE)、侧向弯曲(LB)和轴向旋转(AR)载荷的体外运动范围试验。在测试完整的脊柱后,进行单节段(L3-L4) atp - liff,并辅以后路螺钉、棒和一体化外侧螺钉,并在(1)ALL未释放(atp - liff)后进行测试;(2)切除1/3 ALL宽度(1/3 ALL释放);(3)切除2/3 ALL宽度(2/3 ALL释放);(4)完全切除ALL (3/3 ALL释放)。在每次部分释放ALL后,抽油杆被移除,并扩展垫片,直到达到扭矩极限。然后重新应用棒,并拍摄侧位片分析椎间角(IVA)、椎间孔高度、椎间孔面积和椎间盘前后高度(PDH和ADH)的变化。结果:在atp - liff结构中,FE(18%完整)、LB(14%完整)和AR(30%完整)的活动范围减小,而IVA、PDH、ADH、椎间孔高度和椎间孔面积增加。PDH和ADH随ALL的顺序释放和间隔剂的扩展呈线性增加,而LB和AR保持稳定。结论:本研究发现,ATP-LIF治疗ALL完整后,生物力学和影像学参数得到改善,ALL部分和完全释放之间的生物力学差异最小,完全释放后矫正和高度恢复效果更好。未来的临床试验是必要的,以确定这一发现对患者预后的影响。临床意义:在韧带释放前后对ALL进行有控制的张紧,可以在微创入路中恢复矢状面平衡和最大化结构稳定性之间实现潜在的优化。证据等级:5;
{"title":"Sequential Anterior Longitudinal Ligament Release With Expandable Spacers for Lordosis Correction in Anterior-to-Psoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Radiographic and Biomechanical Study.","authors":"Joshua P Herzog, Joshua P McGuckin, Jonathan M Mahoney, Jalen Winfield, Brandon S Bucklen","doi":"10.14444/8664","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8664","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anterior column realignment is an attractive minimally invasive treatment for sagittal imbalance. Expandable spacers offer controlled tensioning of the anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) during release, which could optimize correction and anterior column stability. This study investigated the biomechanical and radiographic effects of single-level anterior-to-psoas lumbar interbody fusion (ATP-LIF) with expandable spacers and sequential ALL release.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In vitro range of motion tests were performed on 7 fresh-frozen cadaveric spines (L2-L5) with a ±7.5 Nm load applied in flexion-extension (FE), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). After testing intact spines, single-level (L3-L4) ATP-LIFs were performed and supplemented with posterior screws, rods, and integrated lateral screws and tested after (1) no ALL release (ATP-LIF); (2) resection of 1/3 the ALL's width (1/3 ALL release); (3) resection of 2/3 the ALL's width (2/3 ALL release); and (4) complete ALL resection (3/3 ALL release). Following each partial ALL release, rods were removed, and spacers were expanded until the torque limit was reached. Rods were then reapplied, and lateral radiographs were taken to analyze changes in intervertebral angle (IVA), foraminal height, foraminal area, and posterior and anterior disc height (PDH and ADH).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In ATP-LIF constructs, range of motion decreased in FE (18% intact), LB (14% intact), and AR (30% intact), while IVA, PDH, ADH, foraminal height, and foraminal area increased. PDH and ADH increased linearly with sequential ALL release and spacer expansion, while LB and AR remained stable. FE increased slightly (+15%-16% intact, <1°) following 2/3 ALL release but remained stable afterward. IVA increased exponentially with sequential ALL release, gaining 8.8° ± 3.2° with complete release.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present study found improved biomechanics and radiographic parameters following ATP-LIF with intact ALL, minimal biomechanical differences between partial and complete ALL release, and greater correction and height restoration with complete release. Future clinical testing is necessary to determine the impact of this finding on patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Controlled tensioning of the ALL before and after ligament release allows for potential optimization between restoring sagittal balance and maximizing construct stability in a minimally invasive approach.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 5: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687034/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142787357","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Response to "Nonoperative Management of Isolated Thoracolumbar Flexion Distraction Injuries". 对“孤立性胸腰椎屈曲牵张损伤的非手术治疗”的回应。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI: 10.14444/8694
Reed M Butler, Steven M Theiss
{"title":"Response to \"Nonoperative Management of Isolated Thoracolumbar Flexion Distraction Injuries\".","authors":"Reed M Butler, Steven M Theiss","doi":"10.14444/8694","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8694","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687062/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142773176","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Letter to Editor: Nonoperative Management of Isolated Thoracolumbar Flexion Distraction Injuries: A Single-Center Study. 致编者信:孤立胸腰椎屈曲牵张损伤的非手术治疗:一项单中心研究。
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI: 10.14444/8691
Mohamed M Aly, Andrei Fernandes Joaquim
{"title":"Letter to Editor: Nonoperative Management of Isolated Thoracolumbar Flexion Distraction Injuries: A Single-Center Study.","authors":"Mohamed M Aly, Andrei Fernandes Joaquim","doi":"10.14444/8691","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8691","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687051/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142773164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Using the ExcelsiusGPS Robotic Navigation Platform: An Analysis of 728 Screws. 使用ExcelsiusGPS机器人导航平台进行椎弓根螺钉置放的准确性:对728枚螺钉的分析
IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY Pub Date : 2024-11-26 DOI: 10.14444/8660
Meghana Bhimreddy, Andrew M Hersh, Kelly Jiang, Carly Weber-Levine, A Daniel Davidar, Arjun K Menta, Brendan F Judy, Daniel Lubelski, Ali Bydon, Jon Weingart, Nicholas Theodore

Background: Robotic platforms have increased in sophistication for pedicle screw placement. Here, we review our institutional experience using ExcelsiusGPS to assess the accuracy rate of pedicle screw placement throughout the spine and characterize predictors of placement inaccuracy.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Methods: Patients from 2017 to 2022 undergoing spinal fusion surgery with ExelsiusGPS-assisted screw implantation at a single tertiary center were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics, preoperative symptoms, and operative details were collected. Postoperative computed tomography was used to classify screw placement accuracy according to the Gertzbein and Robbins scale (GRS). A stepwise multivariable ordered logistic regression analysis determined independent risk factors for clinically inaccurate screws (GRS C/D/E).

Results: One hundred and seventeen patients were included. Mean age was 60.6 ± 13.2 years, with 57% men, 72% white, and mean body mass index of 29.9 ± 6.4 kg/m2. Seven hundred and twenty-eight screws were placed, predominantly in the thoracic (29.5%) and lumbar (52.6%) regions. Accuracy classification indicated 670 GRS A, 31 GRS B, 22 GRS C, 4 GRS D, and 1 GRS E screws. The clinically acceptable screw placement rate (GRS A/B) was 96%. Male gender (odds ratio [OR]: 2.12, P = 0.03), revision surgery (OR: 2.43, P = 0.02), and thoracic level screw insertion (OR: 2.33, P = 0.01) were independently associated with inaccurate screw placement and explained 8.7% of the variability seen. Of the 728 screws placed, 3 required revision after postoperative imaging revealed loosening or pedicle breach.

Conclusion: ExcelsiusGPS-assisted screw insertion has high placement accuracy and low revision rates. Identification of predictors of inaccuracy illustrates that similar variables, such as placement in the thoracic spine and revision surgery status, apply to both freehand and robotic screw placement.

Clinical relevance: Robotic spine surgery is an accurate, reliable tool that can improve patient outcomes. Factors like male gender, thoracic screw placement, and revision surgery status are associated with lower screw placement accuracy, and these factors should inform surgical decision-making when using robotic assistance.

Level of evidence: 4:

背景:用于椎弓根螺钉置入的机器人平台越来越先进。在此,我们回顾了本机构使用ExcelsiusGPS评估整个脊柱椎弓根螺钉置入准确率的经验,并分析了置入不准确的预测因素:回顾性队列研究:回顾性识别2017年至2022年在一家三级中心接受ExelsiusGPS辅助螺钉植入脊柱融合手术的患者。收集了患者的人口统计学资料、术前症状和手术细节。术后计算机断层扫描根据 Gertzbein 和 Robbins 量表(GRS)对螺钉植入的准确性进行了分类。逐步多变量有序逻辑回归分析确定了临床螺钉放置不准确(GRS C/D/E)的独立风险因素:结果:共纳入 177 名患者。平均年龄为 60.6 ± 13.2 岁,男性占 57%,白人占 72%,平均体重指数为 29.9 ± 6.4 kg/m2。共放置了 728 枚螺钉,主要集中在胸椎(29.5%)和腰椎(52.6%)部位。精确度分类显示,670 枚螺钉为 GRS A 型,31 枚为 GRS B 型,22 枚为 GRS C 型,4 枚为 GRS D 型,1 枚为 GRS E 型。临床可接受的螺钉置放率(GRS A/B)为 96%。男性性别(几率比 [OR]:2.12,P = 0.03)、翻修手术(OR:2.43,P = 0.02)和胸椎水平螺钉植入(OR:2.33,P = 0.01)与螺钉置入不准确独立相关,占所见变异的 8.7%。在放置的728枚螺钉中,有3枚在术后成像发现松动或椎弓根破损后需要进行翻修:结论:ExcelsiusGPS辅助螺钉置入术具有较高的置入准确性和较低的翻修率。结论:ExcelsiusGPS辅助螺钉植入准确率高,翻修率低。对不准确性预测因素的识别表明,类似的变量,如在胸椎的植入和翻修手术状态,适用于徒手和机器人螺钉植入:机器人脊柱手术是一种精确、可靠的工具,可以改善患者的预后。男性性别、胸椎螺钉置放位置和翻修手术状态等因素与较低的螺钉置放准确性有关,在使用机器人辅助时,这些因素应作为手术决策的参考:4:
{"title":"Accuracy of Pedicle Screw Placement Using the ExcelsiusGPS Robotic Navigation Platform: An Analysis of 728 Screws.","authors":"Meghana Bhimreddy, Andrew M Hersh, Kelly Jiang, Carly Weber-Levine, A Daniel Davidar, Arjun K Menta, Brendan F Judy, Daniel Lubelski, Ali Bydon, Jon Weingart, Nicholas Theodore","doi":"10.14444/8660","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8660","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic platforms have increased in sophistication for pedicle screw placement. Here, we review our institutional experience using ExcelsiusGPS to assess the accuracy rate of pedicle screw placement throughout the spine and characterize predictors of placement inaccuracy.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients from 2017 to 2022 undergoing spinal fusion surgery with ExelsiusGPS-assisted screw implantation at a single tertiary center were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics, preoperative symptoms, and operative details were collected. Postoperative computed tomography was used to classify screw placement accuracy according to the Gertzbein and Robbins scale (GRS). A stepwise multivariable ordered logistic regression analysis determined independent risk factors for clinically inaccurate screws (GRS C/D/E).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and seventeen patients were included. Mean age was 60.6 ± 13.2 years, with 57% men, 72% white, and mean body mass index of 29.9 ± 6.4 kg/m<sup>2</sup>. Seven hundred and twenty-eight screws were placed, predominantly in the thoracic (29.5%) and lumbar (52.6%) regions. Accuracy classification indicated 670 GRS A, 31 GRS B, 22 GRS C, 4 GRS D, and 1 GRS E screws. The clinically acceptable screw placement rate (GRS A/B) was 96%. Male gender (odds ratio [OR]: 2.12, <i>P</i> = 0.03), revision surgery (OR: 2.43, <i>P</i> = 0.02), and thoracic level screw insertion (OR: 2.33, <i>P</i> = 0.01) were independently associated with inaccurate screw placement and explained 8.7% of the variability seen. Of the 728 screws placed, 3 required revision after postoperative imaging revealed loosening or pedicle breach.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ExcelsiusGPS-assisted screw insertion has high placement accuracy and low revision rates. Identification of predictors of inaccuracy illustrates that similar variables, such as placement in the thoracic spine and revision surgery status, apply to both freehand and robotic screw placement.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Robotic spine surgery is an accurate, reliable tool that can improve patient outcomes. Factors like male gender, thoracic screw placement, and revision surgery status are associated with lower screw placement accuracy, and these factors should inform surgical decision-making when using robotic assistance.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 4: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687040/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142733356","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
International Journal of Spine Surgery
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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