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.     

Minimally invasive approaches to vertebral column and spinal cord tumors

Minimally invasive approaches to spinal tumors have evolved rapidly over the past 15 to 20 years as clinicians seek to avoid the morbidity and long-term dysfunction associated with traditional open surgical procedures. We review the noninvasive, percutaneous, and minimally invasive surgical techniques currently available for the treatment of spinal column and intradural spinal tumors, including minimal access thoracic corpectomy and minimal access intradural tumor surgery. The various advantages and limitations of these approaches as well as their appropriate indications and uses are also presented here. A measured understanding of surgical objectives and iatrogenic effects on patients' quality of life allows the surgeon to implement such minimally invasive approaches in the design of individualized treatment plans that range from pure palliation to definitive cure.     

Comparison of open,laparoscopic, and hand-assisted approaches to live-donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive donor nephrectomy has become a favored procedure for the procurement of kidneys from live donors. The optimal minimally invasive surgical approach has not been determined. In the current work, we compared the outcome of kidneys procured using the traditional open approach with two minimally invasive techniques: the standard laparoscopic procedure and a hand-assist procedure. METHODS: The function of live-donor kidneys procured by open versus minimally invasive procedures was compared (procedures compared were the traditional open donor nephrectomy [ODN], the standard laparoscopic [LAP] approach, and the hand-assisted [HA] laparoscopic technique). The length of donor operation, donor length of stay in the hospital, surgical complications, and cost of hospitalization for three groups of patients were assessed in a series of 150 live-donor nephrectomies. RESULTS: We found that both minimally invasive procedures yielded kidney allografts with excellent early function and a minimum of complications in the donor. The open procedure was associated with a reduced operative time but increased donor length of stay in the hospital. Resource utilization analysis revealed that both minimally invasive techniques were associated with a slight increase in costs compared with the open procedure, despite a shorter hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive donor nephrectomy is safe and effective for procuring normally functioning organs for live-donor transplantation. Of the two minimally invasive approaches examined, the hand-assisted technique was found to afford a number of important advantages, including facilitating teaching of residents and students, that it is more readily mastered by transplant surgeons, and that it may provide an additional margin of safety for the donor.     

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.     

Minimally invasive lumbar decompression—indications,surgical techniques,and outcomes

The treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, which afflicts millions of patients annually, has greatly evolved to include alternative surgical procedures other than a total laminectomy. Open decompressive procedures have led to satisfactory outcomes in randomized controlled trials; however, recent subgroup analyses have demonstrated complications from this approach. In the properly selected patient, a minimally invasive decompression, which preserves midline structures and limits soft tissue destruction, can improve upon these complications and lead to excellent clinical outcomes. The proper indications, techniques, and published outcomes of a minimally invasive lumbar decompression for spinal stenosis will be reviewed.     

Serum creatine phosphokinase as an indicator of muscle injury after various spinal and nonspinal surgical procedures

OBJECT: Muscle injury is inevitable during surgical exposure of the spine and is quantified by the release of creatine phosphokinase (CPK). No studies have been conducted on different spinal approaches and nonspinal surgery with regard to muscle injury. The present prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the results of postoperative serum CPK as an indicator of muscle injury in relation to various spinal and nonspinal procedures. METHODS: The authors analyzed data in 322 consecutive patients who had undergone 257 spinal and 65 nonspinal procedures. Primary procedures were performed in 264 patients and revision surgeries in 58. Spinal procedures were subdivided according to the degree of surgical invasiveness as follows: minimally invasive (microendoscopic lumbar discectomy, unilateral transflaval discectomy, and minithoracotomy), average invasiveness (bilateral lumbar discectomy, laminectomy, and anterior cervical discectomy), and extensive surgery (instrumented single or multilevel spondylodesis of the entire spinal column). Spinal localization, number of spinal levels involved, surgical approach, duration of surgery, and body mass index (BMI) were recorded. Creatine phosphokinase was measured before surgery and 1 day after surgery, and the CPK ratio (that is, the difference within one patient) was used as the outcome measure. RESULTS: There was a significant dose-response relationship between the CPK ratio and the degree of surgical invasiveness; extensively invasive surgery had the highest CPK ratio and minimally invasive surgery had the lowest. Thoracolumbar surgery had a significantly higher CPK ratio compared with those for cervical and nonspinal surgery. There was a slightly negative relationship between the number of spinal segments involved and the CPK ratio. The CPK ratio in revision surgery was significantly higher than in primary surgery. Posterior surgical approaches had a higher CPK ratio, and the ratios for unilateral compared with bilateral approaches were not significantly different. The duration of surgery and preoperative serum level of CPK significantly influenced postoperative CPK. There was also a significant association between CPK ratio and nonspinal surgery. Age, sex, and BMI were not significant factors. CONCLUSIONS: Data in this study have shown a dose-response relationship between CPK and the extent of surgical invasiveness. Thoracolumbar surgery, posterior approaches, duration of surgery, revision surgery, and preoperative value of CPK were significant influencing factors for the CPK ratio. The clinical significance of the results in the present study is not known.     

Comparative economic analyses of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to assess the degree to which published cost comparisons of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass through a thoracotomy versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting, off-pump bypass surgery through a sternotomy, or angioplasty with or without stenting adhered to existing guidelines for performing economic analyses. METHODS: We used minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), off-pump bypass surgery, cost-effectiveness, economic analysis, and related keywords to search MEDLINE, other literature databases and article reference lists for English-language economic analyses of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass procedures versus other procedures that were published from 1990 to February 2002. We critically appraised article adherence to a 10-item methodologic checklist modified to address issues particularly relevant to minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass evaluations. Assessment discordance was reconciled by consensus. RESULTS: Ten articles published from June 1997 to March 2001 compared costs and (generally) outcomes of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass with those of other procedures. All were nonrandomized comparisons, generally of concurrent intrainstitutional clinical series. Stated results generally favored minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass, angioplasty, or off-pump bypass surgery through a sternotomy relative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting. Studies adequately addressed an average of only 24% of applicable checklist items (range 0%-67%). Few studies adequately ensured the comparability of treatment groups, clearly performed intent-to-treat analyses, comprehensively and credibly measured costs that were considered, or clearly addressed costs and results of preprocedural angiography or postprocedural imaging. Only 1 study compared success of revascularization between minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass and competing alternatives. No studies specified the cost-analysis perspective or included costs of physician or physician assistant care. CONCLUSIONS: Most published comparative economic analyses of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass have failed to adequately address issues crucial to such evaluations. Future studies should more closely follow well-described principles of clinical epidemiology and cost-effectiveness analysis.     

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).     

Economic impact of minimally invasive lumbar surgery

Cost effectiveness has been demonstrated for traditional lumbar discectomy, lumbar laminectomy as well as for instrumented and noninstrumented arthrodesis. While emerging evidence suggests that minimally invasive spine surgery reduces morbidity, duration of hospitalization, and accelerates return to activites of daily living, data regarding cost effectiveness of these novel techniques is limited. The current study analyzes all available data on minimally invasive techniques for lumbar discectomy, decompression, short-segment fusion and deformity surgery. In general, minimally invasive spine procedures appear to hold promise in quicker patient recovery times and earlier return to work. Thus, minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery appears to have the potential to be a cost-effective intervention. Moreover, novel less invasive procedures are less destabilizing and may therefore be utilized in certain indications that traditionally required arthrodesis procedures. However, there is a lack of studies analyzing the economic impact of minimally invasive spine surgery. Future studies are necessary to confirm the durability and further define indications for minimally invasive lumbar spine procedures.     

An update on minimally invasive surgery

Minimally invasive surgery is a highly technological specialty of surgical practice, and requires training and retraining for traditional surgeons. The development of new instruments and new technologies during the last few years has allowed complex procedures that were previously considered unsuitable for minimally invasive surgery, but it has to be recognized that training, accreditation, and case load are fundamental for programs in advanced procedures. This article reviews some of these items including innovative surgical technologies related to minimally invasive surgery.     

Surgical management of minimally invasive aortic valve operations

Although there is still a role for conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement, minimally invasive techniques are increasing in popularity and may benefit the patient with shorter postoperative course, less morbidity, and decreased overall cost. Additionally, transcatheter procedures have recently shown promising results in high-risk patients. This article provides an overview of the development of minimally invasive aortic valve operations, including a brief history of minimally invasive approaches, surgical considerations during minimally invasive aortic valve replacement, and the technical approach to performing a hemisternotomy with aortic valve replacement. In addition, the authors review transcatheter techniques, including aortic valve replacement via a sheath placed in the apex of the left ventricle or through a sheath placed in the femoral vessels. Finally, the exciting results of the PARTNER trial and the effect of these results on the future of aortic valve surgery are discussed.     

Koronare Bypasschirurgie am wachen Patienten

Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting increasingly show severe co-morbidities, which can negatively affect the outcome. Recent developments in cardiac surgery have therefore focused on minimizing the invasiveness of the procedure by revascularization on the beating heart without cardiopulmonary bypass, and by reducing surgical trauma using smaller surgical incisions. Progress in minimally invasive cardiac surgery has led to minimally invasive anesthesia, i.e. using high thoracic epidural anesthesia as the sole technique in the conscious patient (awake coronary artery bypass grafting, ACAB). Published data on ACAB procedures in smaller cohorts have demonstrated that the procedure is safe. Significant complications occurred in 7.1% of patients. A particular cause of concern during ACAB surgery is the development of spinal epidural hematoma the risk of which has been estimated to be as high as 1:1,000. A thorough risk-benefit analysis has therefore to be made. Currently, ACAB surgery remains limited to few specialized centers and highly selected patients.     

Minimally invasive surgery in the management of abdominal tumors in children

The application of minimally invasive surgical techniques to pediatric abdominal tumors is a controversial application towards the surgical management of childhood cancer. Although general pediatric surgeons practice minimally invasive surgery techniques in a vast array of abdominal cases, its role in pediatric oncology is still developing, with no consensus in North America about its use for pediatric solid abdominal tumors. The purposes of this article are to review the current literature about the use of minimally invasive surgery in pediatric abdominal oncology and to examine established indications, procedures and technologic advances.     

Socio-economic impact of endovenous thermal ablation techniques

Varicose veins are common and cause extensive morbidity; however, the value of treatment is under-appreciated. Many procedures allow the treatment of varicose veins with minimal cost and extensive literature supporting differing minimally invasive approaches. In this article, we investigate the current literature regarding treatment options, clinical outcome and the cost-benefit economics associated with varicose vein treatment. The practice of defining clinical outcome with quality of life (QOL) assessment is explained to provide valid concepts of treatment success beyond occlusion rates.     

Clinical outcome of microendoscopic posterior decompression for spinal stenosis associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis--minimum 2-year outcome of 37 patients

A clear consensus for the optimal surgical treatment for spinal stenosis associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) has not appeared. In general, decompression and fusion are recommended. However, the symptoms of spinal stenosis are the main complaints in almost all patients with DS, and whether or not routine concomitant fusion is necessary in the surgical treatment for DS is still discussed controversially. The authors have treated almost all the patients with spinal stenosis associated with DS by microendoscopic posterior decompression (MEPD) procedures since 2001. In the present study, we examined the minimum 2-year outcome in 37 patients surgically treated with the MEPD procedures for spinal stenosis associated with DS. At the mean of 38 months after surgery, the overall results were excellent in 54% of the patients, good in 19%, fair in 13.5%, and poor in 13.5%, based on the Japanese Orthopedic Association lumbar score, a visual analogue scale, and the Roland-Morris disability questionnaire. Although the progression of spondylolisthesis and the increase of segmental sagittal motion after surgery were seen in 7 patients (19%), only one patient required secondary fusion during the follow-up period. A sufficient decompression with the preservation of the posterior structures of the spine was observed in almost the patients after surgery. In conclusion, the MEPD is a minimally invasive procedure developing a sufficient decompression with the preservation of the spinal stability. Thus, the MEPD is one of the useful procedures in the surgical treatment of spinal stenosis associated with DS. However, further follow-up studies should be performed to evaluate the long-term outcome for evaluation of the true validity of the MEPD for DS.     

Minimally invasive spinal surgery

Minimally invasive surgery offers quicker recovery and less morbidity for our patients through smaller surgical wounds and less tissue trauma. Although minimally invasive surgery has progressed in other fields of surgery for many years, spine surgeons have not previously embraced this philosophy for the various reasons discussed. However, minimally invasive spinal surgery has gained much interest in recent years. With the advent of new instrumentation, technology, and techniques, the promise of minimally invasive surgery in the spinal arena has become a reality. With the use of the microscope, navigational tools, newly developed canula for retraction, and image-guided percutenous pedicle screw systems, we can accomplish the same surgical procedures as currently used through smaller wounds and with greater precision. Nevertheless, all new technology does offer us an initial challenge of steep learning curves. Minimally invasive should not equate to minimal and inadequate treatment for our patients. Furthermore, careful analysis of this new technique is underway to assess its true advantages as compared with our current and proven techniques.     

Minimal-invasive Kinderchirurgie

In recent years minimally invasive surgical techniques in children have made substantial progress. The feasibility and safety of a wide spectrum of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures have been confirmed in numerous studies. Moreover, it was reported that minimally invasive pediatric surgery is associated with lower morbidity, a shorter hospital stay, lower costs, better cosmetics and clinical results similar to those achieved by open surgery. The present article reviews information on established as well as feasible but not yet established surgical procedures. The discussion of potential hemodynamic, respiratory and organ perfusion effects of the CO₂ pneumoperitoneum and the notation of special logistic aspects should support the reader in the process of decision-making to schedule infants and children for minimally invasive surgery.     

The development of minimally invasive spine surgery

The modern era of minimally invasive spine surgery has its roots in percutaneous techniques developed in the mid-twentieth century. The widespread application of minimally invasive techniques seen today is predicated on technologic developments of only the past 10 years, however. This article reviews the development of minimally invasive spinal surgery as it has evolved for the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine. Each new development has sought to equal or improve on the effectiveness demonstrated by comparable open surgical techniques while reducing iatrogenic tissue trauma and resultant postoperative pain and disability, to produce overall better outcomes for patients.