Lateral lumbar interbody fusion via a unilateral true percutaneous approach associated with minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation for degenerative disc disease and lumbar instability. A technical note

In recent years, minimally invasive surgical techniques for lumbar fusion and fixation procedures gained worldwide popularity. Herein we describe a personal technique for percutaneous lumbar interbody fusion associated with minimally invasive posterior fixation for patients affected by degenerative disc disease and lumbar instability. The procedure is described in a step-by-step way and early results are presented. Although the present data reflect only an early experience, we believe that this is a straightforward procedure which may be more advantageous in terms of surgical invasiveness, potentially saving operative and recovery time and reducing risks compared to posterior or anterior approaches for lumbar interbody fusion.     

Perioperative complications in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior reconstruction for lumbar disc degeneration and instability

OBJECTIVES: Multiple different approaches are used to treat lumbar degenerative disc disease and spinal instability. Both anterior-posterior (AP) reconstructive surgery and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) provide a circumferential fusion and are considered reasonable surgical options. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively assess clinical parameters such as surgical blood loss, duration of the procedure, length of hospitalization, and complications for TLIF and AP reconstructive surgery for lumbar fusion. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was completed on 167 consecutive cases performed between January 2002 and March 2004. TLIF surgical procedure was performed on 124 patients, including 73 minimally invasive and 51 open cases. AP surgery was performed on 43 patients. Patients were treated for painful degenerative disc disease, facet arthropathy, degenerative instability, and spinal stenosis. RESULTS: The mean operative time for AP reconstruction was 455 minutes, for minimally invasive TLIF 255 minutes, and open TLIF 222 minutes. The mean blood loss for AP fusion surgery was 550 mL, for minimally invasive TLIF 231 mL, and open TLIF 424 mL. The mean hospitalization time for AP reconstruction was 7.2 days, for minimally invasive TLIF 3.1 days, and open TLIF 4.1 days. The total rate of complications was 76.7% for AP reconstruction, including 62.8% major and 13.9% minor complications. The minimally invasive TLIF patients group had the total 30.1% rate of complications, 21.9% of which were minor and 8.2% major complications. There were no major complications in the open TLIF patients group, with 35.3% minor complications. CONCLUSIONS: AP lumbar interbody fusion surgery is associated with a more than two times higher complication rate, significantly increased blood loss, and longer operative and hospitalization times than both percutaneous and open TLIF for lumbar disc degeneration and instability.     

Surgical complications of microendoscopic procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Microendoscopic discectomy (MED) is one of the minimally invasive endoscopic procedures for treating lumbar disc herniation. We have applied MED techniques to posterior decompression procedures for treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). In the present study, we examined the surgical complications in 114 consecutive patients surgically treated with MED procedures for LSS. Intraoperative complications occurred in 9 patients. Six patients (5.3%) experienced a dural tear, and three (2.6%) had a fracture of an inferior facet. Early postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients. Twelve patients (10.5%) experienced transient neurological complications. The clinical outcomes at the mean 28-month follow-up were not affected by these surgical complications. Other major complications such as nerve injury and surgical site infection were not observed. Most of the complications occurred in the initial series of patients, and the incidence of complications decreased with an increase in the surgeon's experience and the application of several preventive measures against the complications. The surgeon should undergo training when MED techniques are applied in surgical treatment in order to recognize the specific complications associated with such procedures and apply preventive measures against these complications.     

Minimally invasive lumbar laminectomy via a dual-tube technique: evaluation in a cadaver model

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery is a promising new tool in treatment of spinal disorders. Minimally invasive laminectomy provides an efficacious means of achieving lumbar decompression. Present single-tube approaches may entail significant facet injury. We explore the feasibility of a dual-tube minimally invasive laminectomy approach in a cadaver model. METHODS: We performed minimally invasive lumbar laminectomies in 8 adult cadavers. Twenty-three levels were treated. We used a dual-tube technique, undercutting the facet joints bilaterally while attempting to minimize facet injury. Crossed-tube rongeuring of individual facet joints and neural foramina mirrored open techniques. Pre- and postoperative CT scans of the cadavers were obtained; we measured the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal and neural foramina in each specimen using a CT workstation. Facet damage was assessed. We used the Medtronic Sofamor-Danek (Memphis, Tenn) X-Tube and Quadrant systems to complete individual procedures. RESULTS: Increases in canal cross-sectional area were achieved in each specimen: L3-4 increased from 238.3 to 354.4 mm(2) (125.1%); L4-5, 274 to 390.9 mm(2) (142.7%); and L5-S1, 349.9 mm(2) to 458.8 mm(2) (131%). Neural foraminal diameter also increased in each specimen (L3-4 right increased 123%; left, 136.8%; L4-5, 143.5% and 145.6%; L5-S1, 124% and 116% respectively). Incidental facet injury was noted in 5 (10.9%) of a potential 46 joints. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that a dual-tube MIS technique can effectively complete lumbar decompressive laminectomy and foraminotomy procedures in a cadaver model, without significant facet injury. Minimally invasive surgery laminectomy techniques hold significant clinical promise.     

Biomechanics of lumbar arthroplasty

There are many issues to consider in evaluating the biomechanics of lumbar arthroplasty, which may consist of a nucleus replacement, a total disc replacement, or a mobile posterior device. The goal of spinal arthroplasty is to replicate or augment the function of the normal spinal elements, by taking into consideration both in the quantity and quality of motion that occurs across the replaced joint. This article describes the relevant parameters for studying the biomechanics of lumbar arthroplasty and briefly summarizes the current knowledge with regard to those parameters in some well-known lumbar nucleoplasty, facet replacement, and total disc arthroplasty devices.     

Minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion

Minimally invasive techniques for lumbar spine fusion have been developed in an attempt to decrease the complications related to traditional open exposures (eg, infection, wound healing problems). Anterior minimally invasive procedures include laparoscopic and mini-open anterior lumbar interbody fusion as well as the lateral transpsoas and percutaneous presacral approaches. Posterior techniques typically use a tubular retractor system that avoids the muscle stripping associated with open procedures. These techniques can be applied to both posterior and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures. Many initial reports have shown similar clinical results in terms of spinal fusion rates for both traditional open and minimally invasive posterior approaches. However, the anterior minimally invasive procedures are often associated with significantly greater incidence of complications and technical difficulty than their associated open approaches. There is a steep learning curve associated with minimally invasive techniques, and surgeons should not expect to master them in the first several cases.     

Lumbar disc arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Painful lumbar disc degeneration is one of the most common ailments treated by spine surgeons. Currently, early disc disease and herniation are often treated with microdiscectomy. Late disc degeneration is usually treated with arthrodesis. With the advent of new technology and techniques in lumbar disc arthroplasty, interest in preserving spinal motion at degenerated motion segments has increased. The goals of lumbar disc arthroplasty are to provide long-term pain relief at the degenerated disc level, to restore disc height to protect neural elements and to preserve motion to prevent posterior facet arthropathy and adjacent segment disease. PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to examine the anatomy and biomechanics of the lumbar motion segment to determine the features that successful disc arthroplasty prosthesis must possess. In addition, the early clinical results of three prostheses currently being used in humans are reviewed. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline for articles related to lumbar disc arthroplasty was conducted up to and including journal articles published in August 2003. In addition, the abstracts from the annual meetings of the North American Spine Society and Scoliosis Research Society from 1998 to 2003 were searched. The literature was then reviewed and summarized. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Short-term results of lumbar disc arthroplasty as measured by pain relief and disability are good in some studies. Implants are relatively safe in the short term, and with newer designs complications are usually related to the surgical approach rather than early implant failure. Recovery times appear to be shorter than arthrodesis. Despite the relatively good early clinical results of these devices, questions remain about the long-term efficacy in pain relief and maintenance of motion, the results of randomized comparative trials with fusion and the life span of the devices. In addition, late sequelae and revision options are unknown. Current indications for lumbar disc arthroplasty are in the setting of a Food and Drug Administration trial in young, nonosteoporotic patients with one or two level symptomatic disc degeneration without severe facet arthropathy, segmental instability or neural element compression requiring a posterior decompression.     

Lateral access techniques for degenerative conditions of the spine

Operative approaches for degenerative conditions of the spine include traditional posterior approaches and a newer generation of lateral approaches. These operative corridors have their roots in anterior lumbar fusion and modifications have evolved to include lateral and oblique lumbar interbody fusion. The principal advantages of lateral approaches are that they are minimally invasive, less disruptive, and provide greater access to the disc space, thus allowing for larger cage placement and theoretically greater indirect foraminal decompression with lower rates of subsidence. We describe the anterior, lateral, and oblique lumbar interbody fusion approaches, with particular emphasis on surgical techniques and complications.     

The ALIF concept

The terms ‘minimally invasive’ or ‘less invasive surgery’ have been used recently to describe surgical approaches or operations that are performed with less trauma to anatomical structures on the way to or surrounding the surgical ‘target area’. These types of surgical procedures are usually performed with the help of ‘high-tech’ instruments such as surgical endoscopes or surgical microscopes, modern video techniques and automated instruments. Within the last 10 years, such techniques have been developed in the field of spinal surgery. The application of minimally or less invasive procedures has concentrated predominantly on anterior approaches to the thoracic and lumbar spine. This article describes two anterior approach techniques for performing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) through a minimally invasive retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach. The technical principles are microsurgical modifications of traditional anterior approaches to the lumbar spine. Through small (4-cm) skin incisions, the target area can be exposed. Preliminary results suggest decreased peri - and postoperative morbidity, less blood loss, earlier rehabilitation and acceptable complication rates. The technique is currently used by the author for all patients requiring anterior lumbar interbody fusion.     

Computed tomography-guided percutaneous facet screw fixation in the lumbar spine. Technical note

The authors describe a new minimally invasive technique for posterior supplementation using percutaneous translaminar facet screw (TFS) fixation with computed tomography (CT) guidance. Oblique axial images were used to determine facet screw fixation sites. After the induction of local anesthesia and conscious sedation, a guide pin was inserted and guided with a laser mounted on the CT gantry. Cannulated TFSs were placed via a percutaneous approach. From December 2002 to August 2003, 18 patients underwent CT-guided TFS. In 17 of these patients this procedure was supplementary to anterior lumbar interbody fusion, which had been performed several days earlier; in the remaining patient, CT-guided TFS fixation was undertaken as the primary therapy. Twelve patients had painful degenerative disc disease or unstable degenerative spondylolisthesis, three had infections, and three had deformities. All screws were inserted accurately and there were no complications. This new minimally invasive surgical technique may offer an alternative to pedicle screw fixation as a method of posterior supplementation.     

Minimally invasive surgery for the lumbar spine

Minimally invasive spine surgery is a rapidly developing field that has the potential to decrease surgical morbidity and improve recovery compared to traditional spinal approaches. Minimally invasive approaches have been developed for all regions of the spine, but have been best documented for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Lumbar decompression and lumbar interbody fusion are two of the most well-studied minimally invasive surgical approaches. This article will review both the rationale and technique for minimally invasive lumbar decompression and for a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).     

The ALIF concept

The terms 'minimally invasive' or 'less invasive surgery' have been used recently to describe surgical approaches or operations that are performed with less trauma to anatomical structures on the way to or surrounding the surgical 'target area'. These types of surgical procedures are usually performed with the help of 'high-tech' instruments such as surgical endoscopes or surgical microscopes, modern video techniques and automated instruments. Within the last 10 years, such techniques have been developed in the field of spinal surgery. The application of minimally or less invasive procedures has concentrated predominantly on anterior approaches to the thoracic and lumbar spine. This article describes two anterior approach techniques for performing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) through a minimally invasive retroperitoneal or transperitoneal approach. The technical principles are microsurgical modifications of traditional anterior approaches to the lumbar spine. Through small (4-cm) skin incisions, the target area can be exposed. Preliminary results suggest decreased peri - and postoperative morbidity, less blood loss, earlier rehabilitation and acceptable complication rates. The technique is currently used by the author for all patients requiring anterior lumbar interbody fusion.     

后路显微内窥镜微创治疗腰椎间盘突出症58例报告

目的 探讨后路显微内窥镜微创治疗腰椎间盘突出症的特点、适应征及手术技巧，方法 采用后路显微内窥镜微创治疗腰椎间盘突出症58例，根据患者的临床特点及腰椎间盘突出的具体情况．分别采取单间隙或多间隙一次手术，行髓核摘除及神经根管扩大。结果 本组58例，随访6～16月．平均10．2月．按Nakai分级．优46例，良8例，可4例。结论 该术式较常规手术具有损伤小、出血少、恢复快等特点，随着该技术的不断成熟．适应征的合理掌握．在腰椎间盘突出症的治疗中具有广阔的发展前景。     

微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术的研究进展

腰椎融合是目前治疗腰椎退变性疾病、腰椎不稳及椎间盘源性等疾病的主要手段.经椎间孔腰椎间融合术(transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF)是近年发展起来的新型的腰椎融合术,而随着微创脊柱外科(minimally invasive spinal surgery,MISS)的进步,微创TLIF技术也得到了快速的发展,相对传统开放TLIF又有了更进一步的优势.作者就微创TLIF的适应证与禁忌证,手术方式,发展与优势及微创手术辅助器械等方面的研究现状作一综述.     

Minimally invasive endoscopic removal of a herniated nucleus pulposus that had migrated to the S1 nerve root foramen.

In this report, we described an adult case with a lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus that had migrated to the S1 nerve root foramen from L5-S1 disc space. Endoscopically, the migrated mass was successfully removed after laminectomy at the S1 with a small skin incision of 20 mm in length. Unlike the other levels, the intraforaminally migrated mass along the S1 root can be excised without any removal of the facet joints; therefore, additional spinal fusion is not necessary. Thus, an S1 foraminal migrated mass can be a good surgical candidate for minimally invasive endoscopic surgery.     

微创经椎间孔椎间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病

目的 探讨微创经椎间孔椎间融合术(TLIF)治疗腰椎退行性疾病的方法及疗效.方法 2005年1月至2006年12月,采用微创TLIF治疗腰椎退行性疾病31例(微创TLIF组),年龄4l～63岁,平均53.6岁.其中腰椎间盘突出症合并腰椎管狭窄7例,腰椎间盘突出症合并腰椎不稳16例,腰椎滑脱症8例.手术采用后路旁正中切口,在METRx X-Tube下置入双侧或单侧椎弓根钉,单枚矩形cage斜向45°椎间融合.统计手术时间、术中出血量、输血量、术后引流量、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)值及术前、术后JOA评分,影像评估椎弓根钉位置及椎间融合情况,并与同期采用常规TLIF治疗的33例患者(常规TLIF组)进行比较.结果 微创TLIF组4例采用单侧椎弓根钉固定,平均手术时间199 min,平均术中出血量359 ml,平均输血量32 ml,术后平均引流量81 ml,术后72 h VAS值平均2.37.常规TLIF组3例采用单侧椎弓根钉固定,平均手术时间156 min,平均术中出血量589ml,19例输血,平均输血量122 ml,术后平均引流量120 ml,VAS值4.65,两组比较差异具有统计学意义.微创TLIF组4枚常规TLIF组2枚螺钉偏出.平均随访18.4个月,微创TLIF组1例发生cage移位,两组无椎弓根钉断裂、松动.JOA评分及改善率两组差异无统计学意义.结论 微创TLIF组织损伤小,术后康复快,长期疗效与常规方法相当.     

Minimally invasive far lateral microendoscopic discectomy for extraforaminal disc herniation at the lumbosacral junction: cadaveric dissection and technical case report.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations (ELDHs) at the lumbosacral junction are an uncommon cause of L5 radiculopathy. The surgical anatomy of the extraforaminal space at L5-S1 is uniquely challenging for the various open surgical approaches that have been described for ELDHs in general. Reports specifically describing minimally invasive surgical approaches to lumbosacral ELDHs are lacking. PURPOSE: To report the novel use of a far lateral microendoscopic (FLMED) approach to lumbosacral ELDH. To better define the unique anatomical features of extraforaminal approaches to the lumbosacral junction as they apply to minimal access techniques. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A cadaveric investigation and clinical case were performed at a single institution. A thorough review of the literature was conducted. PATIENT SAMPLE: A single patient with an extraforaminal disc herniation at the lumbosacral junction underwent evaluation and surgery. OUTCOME MEASURES: The patient's self-reported pain levels were documented. Physiologic outcome was judged on pre- and postoperative motor and sensory examinations. Functional capacity was assessed by work status and ability to perform activities of daily living. METHODS: FLMED was performed in two fresh human cadavers at the lumbosacral junction. Qualitative assessments of the surgical anatomy were made, and intraoperative fluoroscopy and endoscopic photographs were obtained to document the findings. A patient with refractory pain and sensorimotor deficits from compression of the L5 nerve root by an ELDH underwent FLMED. The literature was carefully reviewed for the epidemiology of ELDHs at the lumbosacral junction and the surgical techniques used to treat them. RESULTS: The posterolateral surgical corridor to the lumbosacral disc was consistently constrained by the sacral ala and to a lesser extent the lateral facet and L5 transverse process. Resection of the superior ala exposed the exiting nerve root and provided ample access to the disc. In the clinical case, the patient enjoyed immediate pain relief, was discharged in 3 hours, and returned to full work and social activities. Follow-up neurological examination revealed no sensory or motor deficit. CONCLUSIONS: FLMED offers a safe and efficacious approach to ELDHs at the lumbosacral junction by combining satisfactory visualization for adequate resection of the sacral ala with the benefits of reduced tissue injury and faster recovery times that accompany minimally invasive techniques.     

Laparoscopic lumbar interbody spinal fusion

Laparoscopic ALIF is an evolving technique requiring the participation of a laparoscopic surgeon experienced in advanced laparoscopic techniques and knowledgeable in anterior lumbar spinal exposures. Initial enthusiasm for this technique was fostered by the development of interbody fusion devices and a method of exposing the anterior lumbar spine, which takes advantage of the ability of minimally invasive surgeries to improve exposure and visualization while minimizing collateral tissue damage and injury to healthy tissue. Preliminary studies have demonstrated laparoscopic ALIF feasibility. These same studies have been able to prove only minor advantages with the laparoscopic versus open technique using the current implants and bone grafting techniques for single-level disc disease. General acceptance of laparoscopic ALIF awaits further investigation. Reasons for a lack of general acceptance include the expense of the interbody fusion devices and laparoscopic equipment, the unfamiliarity of this advanced laparoscopic technique to spine and general surgeons, and the steep learning curve of the procedure. Intraoperative complications that arise are often severe, such as vascular injuries. Many skeptics appropriately believe that initial enthusiasm and zealousness must be tempered with scientific effort that provides data from long-term follow-up. For laparoscopic ALIF to gain general acceptance, randomized comparisons of laparoscopic ALIF to open ALIF and posterior lumbar spinal fusion and controlled studies with long-term follow-up documenting symptomatic outcome variables and spinal fusion rates must be completed. As new modalities are developed, minimally invasive techniques may facilitate their utility. The indications, procedures, and surgical principles of ALIF are unchanged, and physicians must not invent indications to justify the technique; however, eventually we may be able to redefine the indications to take full advantage of the endoscopic techniques and biological advances.