Full-Endoscopic Trans-Kambin Triangle Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Surgical Technique and Nomenclature

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshihiro Ishihama ◽  
Masatoshi Morimoto ◽  
Fumitake Tezuka ◽  
Kazuta Yamashita ◽  
Hiroaki Manabe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Articular Process ◽  
Disk Material ◽  
Surgical Field ◽  
Psoas Major ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background Full-endoscopic lumbar surgery is used for decompression of lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Now, a cage can be inserted through Kambin's triangle for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). We have been performing full-endoscopic trans-Kambin triangle LIF (KLIF) at our institution since 2018. In this article, we describe this technique and present our results. Methods We performed full-endoscopic one-level KLIF in 10 patients. The procedure is as follows. First, percutaneous pedicle screws are inserted. Listhesis is reduced if necessary. The endoscope is inserted in Kambin's triangle. Next, the superior articular process is partially removed, enlarging Kambin's triangle to allow safe insertion of the cage. A cannula is inserted into the disk to avoid damaging the exiting nerve. The disk material is shaved and curetted. Finally, the harvested bone is packed in a cage and inserted into the disk space. We analyze the complications, visual analog scores (VAS), and MacNab's criteria. Results One patient had an irritation in the exiting nerve at L4–L5. The VAS for back pain and leg pain decreased from 69 to 9 and from 60 to 9, respectively. The clinical outcome was considered excellent in eight and good in two patients. Conclusions Kambin's triangle lies immediately behind the psoas major. Therefore, we consider KLIF as a lateral LIF procedure comparable with oblique or extreme LIF. However, unlike oblique or extreme LIF, there are no major vessels and organs in the surgical field; therefore, KLIF is the safest type of lateral LIF. Furthermore, using the endoscope, we can perform decompression directly using the facetectomy technique.

scholarly journals The Memory Metal Minimal Access Cage: A New Concept in Lumbar Interbody Fusion—A Prospective, Noncomparative Study to Evaluate the Safety and Performance

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kok ◽  
R. D. Donk ◽  
F. H. Wapstra ◽  
A. G. Veldhuizen
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Contact Area ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Minimal Access ◽  
Solid Fusion

Study Design/Objective. A single-centre, prospective, non-comparative study of 25 patients to evaluate the performance and safety of the Memory Metal Minimal Access Cage (MAC) in Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Summary of Background Data. Interbody fusion cages in general are designed to withstand high axial loads and in the meantime to allow ingrowth of new bone for bony fusion. In many cages the contact area with the endplate is rather large leaving a relatively small contact area for the bone graft with the adjacent host bone. MAC is constructed from the memory metal Nitinol and builds on the concept of sufficient axial support in combination with a large contact area of the graft facilitating bony ingrowth and ease in minimal access implantation due to its high deformability.Methods. Twenty five subjects with a primary diagnosis of disabling back and radicular leg pain from a single level degenerative lumbar disc underwent an interbody fusion using MAC and pedicle screws. Clinical performance was evaluated prospectively over 2 years using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form 36 questionnaire (SF-36) and pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The interbody fusion status was assessed using conventional radiographs and CT scan. Safety of the device was studied by registration of intra- and post-operative adverse effects.Results. Clinical performance improved significantly (P<.0018), CT scan confirmed solid fusion in all 25 patients at two year follow-up. In two patients migration of the cage occurred, which was resolved uneventfully by placing a larger size at the subsequent revision.Conclusions. We conclude that the Memory Metal Minimal Access Cage (MAC) resulted in 100% solid fusions in 2 years and proved to be safe, although two patients required revision surgery in order to achieve solid fusion.

scholarly journals Enhanced Recovery after an Innovative Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Prospective Observational Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Peng Yin ◽  
Haifeng Gao ◽  
Lijin Zhou ◽  
Daming Pang ◽  
Yong Hai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Enhanced Recovery ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Multifidus Muscle ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Background. The objective of this study was to investigate the enhanced recovery clinical effects of an innovative percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) for the treatment of patients with LSS and degenerative instability. Methods. From January 2019 to March 2020, 51 patients with single-segment LSS and degenerative instability were prospectively included in our study (ChiCTR1900020679). The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the visual analogue scale (VAS) on lumbar and leg pain (VAS-LBP and VAS-LP), serum creatine kinase (CK), the peak intensity of sulphur hexafluoride microbubble contrast agent (PI), and the maximal cross-sectional area of multifidus muscle (Max-CSA) around the surgical incision were assessed preoperatively, postoperatively, and at regular follow-up. Results. All patients were followed up. The mean postoperative bedridden time was 20.45 ± 2.66 hours. The ODI, VAS-LBP, and VAS-LP were improved significantly after operation compared to these data before operation in all the patients ( P < 0.05 ). The CK at 1 day after operation was higher compared to the data before the operation ( P < 0.05 ), and there was no significant difference on CK at 1 week after operation ( P > 0.05 ). The PI at 1 week after operation was higher compared to this item before operation ( P < 0.05 ), and there was no significant difference on PI at 1 month or 3 months after operation ( P > 0.05 ). The Max-CSA at 1 week after operation was higher compared to this item before the operation ( P < 0.05 ), and there was no significant difference in Max-CSA at 1 month or 3 months after operation compared with before the operation ( P > 0.05 ). Conclusions. Our results and systematic review presented the innovative PE-TLIF technique could obtain satisfactory and effective outcomes for the treatment of patients with LSS and degenerative instability. Our PE-TLIF technique also had the ability to decrease the MF injury and obtain an enhanced recovery.

scholarly journals Dynamic stabilization using the Dynesys system versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal disease: a clinical and radiological outcomes-based meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. E7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Hyun Lee ◽  
Tae-Ahn Jahng ◽  
Seung-Jae Hyun ◽  
Chi Heon Kim ◽  
Sung-Bae Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
The United States ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinal Disease ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

OBJECTIVE The Dynesys, a pedicle-based dynamic stabilization (PDS) system, was introduced to overcome the drawbacks of fusion procedures. Nevertheless, the theoretical advantages of PDS over fusion have not been clearly confirmed. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who underwent PDS using the Dynesys system with those who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). METHODS The authors searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database. Studies that reported outcomes of patients who underwent PDS or PLIF for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal disease were included. The primary efficacy end points were perioperative outcomes. The secondary efficacy end points were changes in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and back and leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores and in range of motion (ROM) at the treated and adjacent segments. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate weighted mean differences (WMDs), 95% confidence intervals, Q statistics, and I2 values. Forest plots were constructed for each analysis group. RESULTS Of the 274 retrieved articles, 7 (which involved 506 participants [Dynesys, 250; PLIF, 256]) met the inclusion criteria. The Dynesys group showed a competitive advantage in mean surgery duration (20.73 minutes, 95% CI 8.76–32.70 minutes), blood loss (81.87 ml, 95% CI 45.11–118.63 ml), and length of hospital stay (1.32 days, 95% CI 0.23–2.41 days). Both the Dynesys and PLIF groups experienced improved ODI and VAS scores after 2 years of follow-up. Regarding the ODI and VAS scores, no statistically significant difference was noted according to surgical procedure (ODI: WMD 0.12, 95% CI −3.48 to 3.72; back pain VAS score: WMD −0.15; 95% CI −0.56 to 0.26; leg pain VAS score: WMD −0.07; 95% CI −0.47 to 0.32). The mean ROM at the adjacent segment increased in both groups, and there was no substantial difference between them (WMD 1.13; 95% CI −0.33 to 2.59). Although the United States is the biggest market for Dynesys, no eligible study from the United States was found, and 4 of 8 enrolled studies were performed in China. The results must be interpreted with caution because of publication bias. During Dynesys implantation, surgeons have to decide the length of the spacer and cord pretension. These values are debatable and can vary according to the surgeon's experience and the patient's condition. Differences between the surgical procedures were not considered in this study. CONCLUSIONS Fusion still remains the method of choice for advanced degeneration and gross instability. However, spinal degenerative disease with or without Grade I spondylolisthesis, particularly in patients who require a quicker recovery, will likely constitute the main indication for PDS using the Dynesys system.

Prompt Return to Work after Bilateral Transforaminal Full-endoscopic Lateral Recess Decompression under Local Anesthesia: A Case Report

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosuke Sugiura ◽  
Kazuta Yamashita ◽  
Hiroaki Manabe ◽  
Yoshihiro Ishihama ◽  
Fumitake Tezuka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Return To Work ◽  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Skin Incision ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lateral Recess ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Transforaminal Approach ◽  
Lateral Recess Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Herniated Nucleus Pulposus

AbstractTransforaminal full-endoscopic lumbar diskectomy became established early in the 21st century. It can be performed under local anesthesia and requires only an 8-mm skin incision, making it the least invasive disk surgery method available. The full-endoscopic technique has recently been used to treat lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Here, we describe the outcome of simultaneous bilateral decompression of lumbar lateral recess stenosis via a transforaminal approach under local anesthesia in a 60-year-old man. The patient presented with a complaint of bilateral leg pain that was preventing him from standing and walking, and he had been able to continue his work as a dentist by treating patients while seated. Imaging studies revealed bilateral lumbar lateral recess stenosis with central herniated nucleus pulposus at L4/5. We performed simultaneous bilateral transforaminal full-endoscopic lumbar lateral recess decompression (TE-LRD) under local anesthesia. Both decompression and diskectomy were successfully completed without complications. Five days after TE-LRD, he was able to return to work, and 3 months after the surgery, he resumed playing golf. Full-endoscopic surgery under local anesthesia can be very effective in patients who need to return to work as soon as possible after surgery.

Correlation of axial loaded magnetic resonance imaging with clinical symptoms in lumbar spinal canal stenosis patients

MedPharmRes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
Son Nguyen ◽  
Son Vi ◽  
Hoat Luu ◽  
Toan Do
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Canal ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Axial Loading ◽  
Spinal Canal Stenosis ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Conventional Mri ◽  
Frame System ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

There are cases when symptoms are available but no abnormal stenosis is found in MRI and vice versa. Axial-loaded MRI has been shown that it can demonstrate more accurately the real status of spinal canal stenosis than conventional MRI. This is the first time we applied a new system that we have recreated from the original loading frame system in order to fit with the demands of Vietnamese people. Sixty-two patients were selected from Phu Tho Hospital in Phu Tho Province, Vietnam, who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The Anterior-posterior diameter (APD), Dura Cross-sectional Area (DSCA) in conventional MRI and axial loaded MRI, and changes in APD and DCSA were determined at the single most constricted intervertebral level. The APD and DCSA in axial loaded MRI had very good significant correlations with VAS for back pain (rs=0.83, 0.79), leg pain (rs=0.69, 0.57) and JOA score (rs=0.70, 0.65). APD and DCSA in axial loaded MRI significantly correlated with the severity of symptoms. Our axial loading MRI provides more valuable information than the conventional MRI for assessing patients with LSCS.

scholarly journals Stand-Alone Posterior Expandable Cage Technique for Adjacent Segment Degeneration with Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis: A Retrospective Case Series

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 237
Author(s):  
Woo-Jin Choi ◽  
Seung-Kook Kim ◽  
Manhal Alaraj ◽  
Hyeun-Sung Kim ◽  
Su-Chan Lee
Keyword(s):  
Sagittal Balance ◽  
Spinal Canal ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Spinal Canal Stenosis ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Expandable Cages

Background and Objectives: Symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) with lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) is a common complication after spinal intervention, particularly interbody fusion. Stand-alone posterior expandable cages enable interbody fusion with preservation of the previous operation site, and screw-related complications are avoided. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the clinicoradiologic outcomes of stand-alone posterior expandable cages for ASD with LSCS. Materials and Methods: Patients with persistent neurologic symptoms and radiologically confirmed ASD with LSCS were evaluated between January 2011 and December 2016. The five-year follow-up data were used to evaluate the long-term outcomes. The radiologic parameters for sagittal balance, pain control (visual analogue scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and early (peri-operative) and late (implant) complications were evaluated. Results: The data of 19 patients with stand-alone posterior expandable cages were evaluated. Local factors, such as intervertebral and foraminal heights, were significantly corrected (p < 0.01 and p < 0.01, respectively), and revision was not reported. The pain level (p < 0.01) and disability rate (p < 0.01) significantly improved, and the early complication rate was low (n = 2, 10.52%). However, lumbar lordosis (p = 0.62) and sagittal balance (p = 0.80) did not significantly improve. Furthermore, the rates of subsidence (n = 4, 21.05%) and retropulsion (n = 3, 15.79%) were high. Conclusions: A stand-alone expandable cage technique should only be considered for older adults and patients with previous extensive fusion. Although this technique is less invasive, improves the local radiologic factors, and yields favorable clinical outcomes with low revision rates, it does not improve the sagittal balance. For more widespread application, the strength of the cage material and high subsidence rates should be improved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document