Antifibrinolytics Are Not Associated With Reduced Blood Loss in Minimally-Invasive Endoscopic-Assisted Craniectomy for Repair of Single-Suture Craniosynostosis

Abstract Background The quest for better patient outcomes is driving to the development of minimally invasive spine surgical techniques. There are several evidences on the use of microsurgical decompression surgery for degenerative lumbar spine stenosis; however, few of these studies compared their outcomes with the traditional laminectomy technique. Objectives The aim of our study was to compare outcomes following microsurgical decompression via unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) of the spinal canal to the standard open laminectomy for cases with lumbar spinal stenosis. Subjects and methods Cases were divided in two groups. Group (A) cases were operated by conventional full laminectomy; Group (B) cases were operated by (ULBD) technique. Results from both groups were compared regarding duration of surgery, blood loss, perioperative complication, and postoperative outcome and patient satisfaction. Results There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding the improvement of visual pain analogue, while improvement of neurogenic claudication outcome score was significant in group (B) than group (A). Seventy-three percent of group (A) cases and 80% of group (B) stated that surgery met their expectations and were satisfied from the outcome. Conclusion Comparing ULBD with traditional laminectomy showed the efficacy of the minimally invasive technique in obtaining good surgical outcome and patient satisfaction. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding the occurrence of complications The ULBD technique was found to respect the posterior spinal integrity and musculature, accompanied with less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and shorter recovery periods than the open laminectomy technique.

Download Full-text

The Emerging Role of Robotic Single-site Approach for Myomectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Surgical Innovation ◽

10.1177/1553350620988227 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 155335062098822

Author(s):

Eirini Giovannopoulou ◽

Anastasia Prodromidou ◽

Nikolaos Blontzos ◽

Christos Iavazzo

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Complication Rate ◽

Operative Time ◽

Intraoperative Complications ◽

Single Site ◽

Minimally Invasive Technique ◽

Invasive Technique ◽

Robotic Myomectomy ◽

The Mean

Objective. To review the existing studies on single-site robotic myomectomy and test the safety and feasibility of this innovative minimally invasive technique. Data Sources. PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar (from their inception to October 2019), as well as Clinicaltrials.gov databases up to April 2020. Methods of Study Selection. Clinical trials (prospective or retrospective) that reported the outcomes of single-site robotic myomectomy, with a sample of at least 20 patients were considered eligible for the review. Results. The present review was performed in accordance with the guidelines for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Four (4) studies met the inclusion criteria, and a total of 267 patients were included with a mean age from 37.1 to 39.1 years and BMI from 21.6 to 29.4 kg/m2. The mean operative time ranged from 131.4 to 154.2 min, the mean docking time from 5.1 to 5.45 min, and the mean blood loss from 57.9 to 182.62 ml. No intraoperative complications were observed, and a conversion rate of 3.8% was reported by a sole study. The overall postoperative complication rate was estimated at 2.2%, and the mean hospital stay ranged from 0.57 to 4.7 days. No significant differences were detected when single-site robotic myomectomy was compared to the multiport technique concerning operative time, blood loss, and total complication rate. Conclusion. Our findings support the safety of single-site robotic myomectomy and its equivalency with the multiport technique on the most studied outcomes. Further studies are needed to conclude on the optimal minimally invasive technique for myomectomy.

Download Full-text

Treatment of thoracolumbar trauma by short-segment percutaneous transpedicular screw instrumentation: prospective comparative study with a minimum 2-year follow-up

Journal of Neurosurgery Spine ◽

10.3171/2013.11.spine13479 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 20 (2) ◽

pp. 150-156 ◽

Cited By ~ 52

Author(s):

Petr Vanek ◽

Ondrej Bradac ◽

Renata Konopkova ◽

Patricia de Lacy ◽

Jiri Lacman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Cobb Angle ◽

Control Group ◽

Working Ability ◽

Short Segment ◽

Transpedicular Screw ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Screw Group

Object The main aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes after stabilization by a percutaneous transpedicular system and stabilization from the standard open approach for thoracolumbar spine injury. Methods Thirty-seven consecutive patients were enrolled in the study over a period of 16 months. Patients were included in the study if they experienced 1 thoracolumbar fracture (A3.1–A3.3, according to the AO/Magerl classification), had an absence of neurological deficits, had no other significant injuries, and were willing to participate. Eighteen patients were treated by short-segment, minimally invasive, percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation. The control group was composed of 19 patients who were stabilized using a short-segment transpedicular construct, which was performed through a standard midline incision. The pain profile was assessed by a visual analog scale (VAS), and overall satisfaction by a simple 4-stage scale relating to performance of daily activities. Working ability and return to original occupation were also monitored. Radiographic follow-up was defined by the vertebral body index (VBI), vertebral body angle (VBA), and bisegmental Cobb angle. The accuracy of screw placement was examined using CT. Results The mean surgical duration in the percutaneous screw group was 53 ± 10 minutes, compared with 60 ± 9 minutes in the control group (p = 0.032). The percutaneous screw group had a significantly lower perioperative blood loss of 56 ± 17 ml, compared with 331 ± 149 ml in the control group (p < 0.001). Scores on the VAS in patients in the percutaneous screw group during the first 7 postoperative days were significantly lower than those in the control group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups in VBI, VBA, and Cobb angle values during follow-up. There was no significant difference in screw placement accuracy between the groups and no patients required surgical revision. There was no significant difference between groups in overall satisfaction at the 2-year follow-up (p = 0.402). Working ability was insignificantly better in the percutaneous screw group; previous working position was achieved in 17 patients in this group and in 12 cases in the control group (p = 0.088). Conclusions This study confirms that the percutaneous transpedicular screw technique represents a viable option in the treatment of preselected thoracolumbar fractures. A significant reduction in blood loss, postoperative pain, and surgical time were the main advantages associated with this minimally invasive technique. Clinical, functional, and radiological results were at least the same as those achieved using the open technique after a 2-year follow-up. The short-term benefits of the percutaneous transpedicular screw technique are apparent, and long-term results have to be studied in other well-designed studies evaluating the theoretical benefit of the percutaneous technique and assessing whether the results of the latter are as durable as the ones achieved by open surgery.

Download Full-text

Management of intended durotomy in minimally invasive intradural spine surgery

Journal of Neurosurgery Spine ◽

10.3171/2014.3.spine13719 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 21 (2) ◽

pp. 279-285 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Lee A. Tan ◽

Ippei Takagi ◽

David Straus ◽

John E. O'Toole

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Length Of Hospital Stay ◽

Bed Rest ◽

Tubular Retractor ◽

Specific Patient ◽

Dural Closure ◽

Estimated Blood Loss ◽

The Mean ◽

Operative Notes

Object Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been increasingly used for the treatment of various intradural spinal pathologies in recent years. Although MIS techniques allow for successful treatment of intradural pathology, primary dural closure in MIS can be technically challenging due to a limited surgical corridor through the tubular retractor system. The authors describe their experience with 23 consecutive patients from a single institution who underwent MIS for intradural pathologies, along with a review of pertinent literature. Methods A retrospective review of a prospectively collected surgical database was performed to identify patients who underwent MIS for intradural spinal pathologies between November 2006 and July 2013. Patient demographics, preoperative records, operative notes, and postoperative records were reviewed. Primary outcomes include operative duration, estimated blood loss, length of bed rest, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications, which were recorded prospectively. Results Twenty-three patients who had undergone MIS for intradural spinal pathologies during the study period were identified. Fifteen patients (65.2%) were female and 8 (34.8%) were male. The mean age at surgery was 54.4 years (range 30–74 years). Surgical pathologies included neoplastic (17 patients), congenital (3 patients), vascular (2 patients), and degenerative (1 patient). The most common spinal region treated was lumbar (11 patients), followed by thoracic (9 patients), cervical (2 patients), and sacral (1 patient). The mean operative time was 161.1 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 107.2 ml. All patients were allowed full activity less than 24 hours after surgery. The median length of stay was 78.2 hours. Primary sutured dural closure was achieved using specialized MIS instruments with adjuvant fibrin sealant in all cases. The rate of postoperative headache, nausea, vomiting, and diplopia was 0%. No case of cutaneous CSF fistula or symptomatic pseudomeningocele was identified at follow-up, and no patient required revision surgery. Conclusions Primary dural closure with early mobilization is an effective strategy with excellent clinical outcomes in the use of MIS techniques for intradural spinal pathology. Prolonged bed rest after successful primary dural closure appears unnecessary, and the need for watertight dural closure should not prevent the use of MIS techniques in this specific patient population.

Download Full-text

Retrospective comparison of three minimally invasive approaches for adrenal tumors: perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal laparoscopic, retroperitoneal laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy

BMC Urology ◽

10.1186/s12894-020-00637-y ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Changwei Ji ◽

Qun Lu ◽

Wei Chen ◽

Feifei Zhang ◽

Hao Ji ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Length Of Stay ◽

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy ◽

Perioperative Outcomes ◽

Adrenal Tumors ◽

Transfusion Rate ◽

Robot Assisted ◽

Estimated Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive Adrenalectomy

Abstract Background To compare the perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal laparoscopic (TLA), retroperitoneal laparoscopic (RLA), and robot-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopic (RATLA) adrenalectomy for adrenal tumors in our center. Methods Between April 2012 and February 2018, 241 minimally invasive adrenalectomies were performed. Cases were categorized based on the minimally invasive adrenalectomy technique. Demographic characteristics, perioperative information and pathological data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Results This study included 37 TLA, 117 RLA, and 87 RATLA procedures. Any two groups had comparable age, ASA score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative hemoglobin. The tumor size for RLA patients was 2.7 ± 1.1 cm, which was significantly smaller compared to patients who underwent TLA/RATLA (p = 0.000/0.000). Operative time was similar in any two groups, while estimated blood loss was lower for RATLA group (75.6 ± 95.6 ml) compared with the TLA group (131.1 ± 204.5 ml) (p = 0.041). Conversion to an open procedure occurred in only one (2.7%) patient in the TLA group for significant adhesion and hemorrhage. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of transfusion rate and complication rate. Length of stay was shorter for the RATLA group versus the TLA/RLA group (p = 0.000/0.029). In all groups, adrenocortical adenoma and pheochromocytoma were the most frequent histotypes. Conclusions Minimally invasive adrenalectomy is associated with expected excellent outcomes. In our study, the RATLA approach appears to provide the benefits of decreased estimated blood loss and length of stay. Robotic adrenalectomy appears to be a safe and effective alternative to conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy.

Download Full-text

Rotational Vertebral Artery Occlusion—Series of 9 Cases

Neurosurgery ◽

10.1227/neu.0b013e3181ee36db ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 67 (4) ◽

pp. 1066-1072 ◽

Cited By ~ 33

Author(s):

Daniel C Lu ◽

Zsolt Zador ◽

Praveen V Mummaneni ◽

Michael T Lawton

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Vertebral Artery ◽

Anterior Approach ◽

Lateral Approach ◽

Preoperative Imaging ◽

Cervical Instability ◽

Far Lateral Approach ◽

Far Lateral

Abstract BACKGROUND: Rotational vertebral artery syndrome (RVAS) is a rare entity about which previously published studies are mostly limited to individual case reports. OBJECTIVE: To report our decade-long experience with this syndrome in 9 patients with compression ranging from the occiput to C6. METHODS: We utilized a posterior approach for lesions rostral to C4 and an anterior approach for lesions at or caudal to C4. Furthermore, we demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of a minimally invasive posterior cervical approach. Patient profile, operative indications, surgical approach, operative findings, complications, and long-term follow-up were reviewed and discussed. RESULTS: Average follow-up was 47 months. All procedures provided excellent outcomes by Glasgow Outcome Scale scores. The anterior approach had significantly less blood loss (187.5 mL vs 450 mL, P = .00016) and shorter hospitalization length (2 days vs 4.5 days; P = .0001) compared with the far-lateral approach. There was one complication of cervical instability in the far-lateral approach cohort. As an alternative to the far-lateral surgery, a minimally invasive approach resulted in shorter hospitalization (2 days) and less blood loss (10 mL) while avoiding the complication of cervical instability. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the safety, efficacy, and durability of 3 surgical approaches for RVAS. Proper examination, preoperative imaging, and surgical planning were necessary for a satisfactory outcome.

Download Full-text

A systematic review of endoscopic versus open treatment of craniosynostosis. Part 2: the nonsagittal single sutures

Journal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics ◽

10.3171/2018.4.peds17730 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 22 (4) ◽

pp. 361-368 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Han Yan ◽

Taylor J. Abel ◽

Naif M. Alotaibi ◽

Melanie Anderson ◽

Toba N. Niazi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Blood Loss ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Operating Time ◽

Length Of Hospital Stay ◽

Transfusion Rate ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Qualitative Synthesis ◽

Endoscopic Techniques ◽

Single Suture

OBJECTIVEDespite increasing adoption of endoscopic techniques for repair of nonsagittal single-suture craniosynostosis, the efficacy and safety of the procedure relative to established open approaches are unknown. In this systematic review the authors aimed to directly compare open surgical and endoscope-assisted techniques for the treatment of metopic, unilateral coronal, and lambdoid craniosynostosis, with an emphasis on quantitative reported outcomes.METHODSA literature search was performed in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant articles were identified from 3 electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL [Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials]) from their inception to August 2017. The quality of methodology and bias risk were assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies.RESULTSOf 316 screened records, 7 studies were included in a qualitative synthesis of the evidence, of which none were eligible for meta-analysis. These reported on 111 unique patients with metopic, 65 with unilateral coronal, and 12 with lambdoid craniosynostosis. For all suture types, 100 (53%) children underwent endoscope-assisted craniosynostosis surgery and 32 (47%) patients underwent open repair. These studies all suggest that blood loss, transfusion rate, operating time, and length of hospital stay were superior for endoscopically treated children. Although potentially comparable or better cosmetic outcomes are reported, the paucity of evidence and considerable variability in outcomes preclude meaningful conclusions.CONCLUSIONSLimited data comparing open and endoscopic treatments for metopic, unilateral coronal, and lambdoid synostosis suggest a benefit for endoscopic techniques with respect to blood loss, transfusion, length of stay, and operating time. This report highlights shortcomings in evidence and gaps in knowledge regarding endoscopic repair of nonsagittal single-suture craniosynostosis, emphasizing the need for further matched-control studies.

Download Full-text

Endoscopic decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal of Neurosurgery Spine ◽

10.3171/2021.8.spine21890 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-9

Author(s):

Roberto J. Perez-Roman ◽

Wendy Gaztanaga ◽

Victor M. Lu ◽

Michael Y. Wang

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Back Pain ◽

Length Of Stay ◽

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Spinal Stenosis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Lumbar Stenosis ◽

Lumbar Spinal ◽

Endoscopic Methods

OBJECTIVE Lumbar stenosis treatment has evolved with the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Endoscopic methods take the concepts applied to MIS a step further, with multiple studies showing that endoscopic techniques have outcomes that are similar to those of more traditional approaches. The aim of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of studies comparing the outcomes between endoscopic (uni- and biportal) and microscopic techniques for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Ovid Embase, and PubMed databases from their dates of inception to December 14, 2020. All identified articles were then systematically screened against the following inclusion criteria: 1) studies comparing endoscopic (either uniportal or biportal) with minimally invasive approaches, 2) patient age ≥ 18 years, and 3) diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Bias was assessed using quality assessment criteria and funnel plots. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to synthesize the metadata. RESULTS From a total of 470 studies, 14 underwent full-text assessment. Of these 14 studies, 13 comparative studies were included for quantitative analysis, totaling 1406 procedures satisfying all criteria for selection. Regarding postoperative back pain, 9 studies showed that endoscopic methods resulted in significantly lower pain scores compared with MIS (mean difference [MD] −1.0, 95% CI −1.6 to −0.4, p < 0.01). The length of stay data were reported by 7 studies, with endoscopic methods associated with a significantly shorter length of stay versus the MIS technique (MD −2.1 days, 95% CI −2.7 to −1.4, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference with respect to leg visual analog scale scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores, blood loss, surgical time, and complications, and there were not any significant quality or bias concerns. CONCLUSIONS Both endoscopic and MIS techniques are safe and effective methods for treating patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis. Patients who undergo endoscopic surgery seem to report less postoperative low-back pain and significantly reduced hospital stay with a trend toward less perioperative blood loss. Future large prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm the findings in this study.

Download Full-text

A Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Grade 1 Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: An Analysis of the Prospective Quality Outcomes Database

Neurosurgery ◽

10.1093/neuros/nyaa097 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 87 (3) ◽

pp. 555-562 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Andrew K Chan ◽

Erica F Bisson ◽

Mohamad Bydon ◽

Kevin T Foley ◽

Steven D Glassman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Sample Size ◽

Interbody Fusion ◽

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽

Small Sample ◽

Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽

Quality Outcomes ◽

Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽

Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND It remains unclear if minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) is comparable to traditional, open TLIF because of the limitations of the prior small-sample-size, single-center studies reporting comparative effectiveness. OBJECTIVE To compare MI-TLIF to traditional, open TLIF for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in the largest study to date by sample size. METHODS We utilized the prospective Quality Outcomes Database registry and queried patients with grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent single-segment surgery with MI- or open TLIF methods. Outcomes were compared 24 mo postoperatively. RESULTS A total of 297 patients were included: 72 (24.2%) MI-TLIF and 225 (75.8%) open TLIF. MI-TLIF surgeries had lower mean body mass indexes (29.5 ± 5.1 vs 31.3 ± 7.0, P = .0497) and more worker's compensation cases (11.1% vs 1.3%, P < .001) but were otherwise similar. MI-TLIF had less blood loss (108.8 ± 85.6 vs 299.6 ± 242.2 mL, P < .001), longer operations (228.2 ± 111.5 vs 189.6 ± 66.5 min, P < .001), and a higher return-to-work (RTW) rate (100% vs 80%, P = .02). Both cohorts improved significantly from baseline for 24-mo Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scale back pain (NRS-BP), NRS leg pain (NRS-LP), and Euro-Qol-5 dimension (EQ-5D) (P > .001). In multivariable adjusted analyses, MI-TLIF was associated with lower ODI (β = −4.7; 95% CI = −9.3 to −0.04; P = .048), higher EQ-5D (β = 0.06; 95% CI = 0.01-0.11; P = .02), and higher satisfaction (odds ratio for North American Spine Society [NASS] 1/2 = 3.9; 95% CI = 1.4-14.3; P = .02). Though trends favoring MI-TLIF were evident for NRS-BP (P = .06), NRS-LP (P = .07), and reoperation rate (P = .13), these results did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION For single-level grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, MI-TLIF was associated with less disability, higher quality of life, and higher patient satisfaction compared with traditional, open TLIF. MI-TLIF was associated with higher rates of RTW, less blood loss, but longer operative times. Though we utilized multivariable adjusted analyses, these findings may be susceptible to selection bias.

Download Full-text

Instrumentation Removal following Minimally Invasive Posterior Percutaneous Pedicle Screw-Rod Stabilization (PercStab) of Thoracolumbar Fractures Is Not Always Required

Advances in Orthopedics ◽

10.1155/2020/7949216 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-7

Author(s):

Neil Manson ◽

Dana El-Mughayyar ◽

Erin Bigney ◽

Eden Richardson ◽

Edward Abraham

Keyword(s):

Patient Satisfaction ◽

Blood Loss ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Pedicle Screw ◽

Rating Scales ◽

Case Series ◽

Leg Pain ◽

Mild Pain ◽

Open Stabilization ◽

Percutaneous Pedicle Screw

Study Design. Clinical case series. Background. Percutaneous stabilization for spinal trauma confers less blood loss, reduces postoperative pain, and is less invasive than open stabilization and fusion. The current standard of care includes instrumentation removal. Objective. 1. Reporting patient outcomes following minimally invasive posterior percutaneous pedicle screw-rod stabilization (PercStab). 2. Evaluating the results of instrumentation retention. Methods. A prospective observational study of 32 consecutive patients receiving PercStab without direct decompression or fusion. Baseline data demographics were collected. Operative outcomes of interest were operative room (OR) time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. Follow-up variables of interest included patient satisfaction, Numeric Rating Scales for Back and Leg (NRS-B/L) pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and return to work. Clinical outcome data (ODI and NRS-B/L) were collected at 3, 12, 24 months and continued at a 24-month interval up to a maximum of 8 years postoperatively. Results. 81.25% of patients (n = 26) retained their instrumentation and reported minimal disability, mild pain, and satisfaction with their surgery and returned to work (mean = 6 months). Six patients required instrumentation removal due to prominence of the instrumentation or screw loosening, causing discomfort/pain. Instrumentation removal patients reported moderate back and leg pain until removal occurred; after removal, they reported minimal disability and mild pain. Neither instrumentation removal nor retention resulted in complications or further surgical intervention. Conclusions. PercStab without instrumentation removal provided high patient satisfaction, mild pain, and minimal disability and relieved the patient from the burden of finances and resources allocation of a second surgery.

Download Full-text