scholarly journals Learning Curve and Clinical Outcome of Biportal Endoscopic-Assisted Lumbar Interbody Fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Ju-Eun Kim ◽  
Hyun-Seung Yoo ◽  
Dae-Jung Choi ◽  
Jin-Ho Hwang ◽  
Eugene J. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Stable Point ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Interbody fusion is a common surgical technique for diseases of the lumbar spine. Biportal endoscopic-assisted lumbar interbody fusion (BE-LIF) is a novel minimally invasive technique that has a long learning curve, which can be a barrier for surgeons. Therefore, we analyzed the learning curve in terms of operative time and evaluated the outcomes of BE-LIF. A retrospective study of fifty-seven consecutive patients who underwent BE-LIF for degenerative lumbar disease by a single surgeon from January 2017 to December 2018 was performed. Fifty patients underwent a single-level procedure, and 7 underwent surgery at two levels. The mean follow-up period was 24 months (range, 14–38). Total operative time, postoperative drainage volume, time to ambulation, and complications were analyzed. Clinical outcome was measured using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, and modified Macnab criteria. The learning curve was evaluated by a nonparametric regression locally weighted scatterplot smoothing curve. Cases before the stable point on the curve were designated as group A, and those after the stable point were designated group B. Operative time decreased as the number of cases increased. A stable point was noticed on the 400th day and the 34th case after the first BE-LIF was performed. All cases showed improved ODI and VAS scores at the final follow-up. Overall mean operative time was 171.74 ± 35.1   min . Mean operative time was significantly lower in group B ( 139.7 ± 11.6   min ) compared to group A ( 193.4 ± 28.3   min ). Time to ambulation was significantly lower in group B compared to group A. VAS and ODI scores did not differ between the two groups. BE-LIF is an effective minimally invasive technique for lumbar degenerative disease. In our case series, this technique required approximately 34 cases to reach an adequate performance level.

scholarly journals Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 030006052091002
Author(s):  
Teoman Atici ◽  
Selcan Yerebakan ◽  
Cenk Ermutlu ◽  
Ali Özyalçın
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Decompression ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Objective This study was performed to compare fusion rates and clinical outcomes of posterior decompression by posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods This retrospective cohort study involved 157 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with instrumented PLF alone or instrumented PLF combined with TLIF from 2010 to 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: the PLF group (Group A), in which posterior decompression with instrumented PLF was performed, and the cage-augmented group (Group B), in which TLIF was added to the procedures described for the PLF group. Patient outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale score, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores) and fusion rates were compared. Results The fusion rate was similar between the two groups. Among patients with two- and three-level fusion, improvements in the clinical outcome scores were significantly greater in Group B than Group A. Conclusion Combining TLIF with PLF provides better clinical outcomes than PLF alone when multilevel fusion is indicated. TLIF augmentation does not improve the fusion rates in either single- or multi-level surgery.

scholarly journals Modified Percutaneous Achilles Tendon Lengthening by Triple Hemisection for Achilles Tendon Contracture

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yangjing Lin ◽  
Jin Cao ◽  
Changgui Zhang ◽  
Liu Yang ◽  
Xiaojun Duan
Keyword(s):  
Achilles Tendon ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Achilles Tendon Rupture ◽  
Tendon Lengthening ◽  
Group A ◽  
Achilles Tendon Lengthening ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group B

Background. Both percutaneous Achilles tendon lengthening by triple hemisection and the traditional open Z-lengthening are effective methods for Achilles tendon contracture. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this new therapeutic method, which is based on the percutaneous sliding technique with three hemi-cuts in the tendon, as compared with the traditional open Z-lengthening. Methods. Retrospective analysis of the Achilles tendon contracture cases in our hospital between January 2010 and September 2016 was conducted. Twenty-five cases received percutaneous Achilles tendon lengthening (group A), and 30 patients who underwent open Z-lengthening during the same period were in the control group (group B). Operative time and hospital stay were statistically analyzed. Incision complication, equinus recurrence rate and Achilles tendon rupture morbidity were recorded. The function was assessed by American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. All cases in group A received Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of ankle preoperatively and in the follow-ups. Results. The mean follow-up period was 42.04 months in group A and 61.7 months in group B. The entire operative time and the mean hospitalization days were lower in group A than in group B. No incision and infection complication occurred in group A. The infection rate in group B was 3.3%. Equinus recurrence rate was 4% in group A and the equinus recurrence rate in group B was 21.4%. In group A, the mean AOFAS score increased from 64 ± 10.16 points preoperatively to 96.08 ± 3.17 at final follow-up, while the score in group B increased from 63.48 ± 6.2 points to 85.4 ± 10.3. MRI showed continuity of the Achilles tendon and homogeneous signal in group A. Conclusion. Modified surgery can significantly reduce the risk of Achilles tendon rupture, provide better balance in soft tissue strength between ankle dorsiflexion and ankle plantarflexion, helping to avoid recurrence of the deformity.

Outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Kenji Ohzono ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Single Level ◽  
The Mean

Object A systematic review concerning surgical management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) showed that a satisfactory clinical outcome was significantly more likely with adjunctive spinal fusion than with decompression alone. However, the role of adjunctive fusion and the optimal type of fusion remain controversial. Therefore, operative management for multilevel DS raises more complicated issues. The purpose of this retrospective study was to elucidate clinical and radiological outcomes after 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS with the least bias in determination of operative procedure. Methods Since 2005, all patients surgically treated for lumbar DS at the authors' hospital have been treated using posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with pedicle screws, irrespective of severity of slippage, patient age, or bone quality. The authors conducted a retrospective review of 20 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS and had been followed up for 2 years or longer (2-level PLIF group). They also analyzed data from 92 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent single-level PLIF for single-level DS during the same time period and had been followed for at least 2 years (1-level PLIF group). This second group served as a control. Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Fusion status and sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine were assessed by comparing serial plain radiographs. Surgery-related complications and the need for additional surgery were evaluated. Results The mean JOA score improved significantly from 12.8 points before surgery to 20.4 points at the latest follow-up in the 2-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 51.8%), and from 14.2 points preoperatively to 22.5 points at the latest follow-up in the single-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 55.3%). At the final follow-up, 95.0% of patients in the 2-level PLIF group and 96.7% of those in the 1-level PLIF group had achieved solid spinal fusion, and the mean sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine was more lordotic than before surgery in both groups. Early surgery-related complications, including transient neurological complications, occurred in 6 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (30.0%) and 11 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (12.0%). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease was found in 4 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (20.0%) and 10 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (10.9%). Conclusions The clinical outcome of 2-level PLIF for 2-level lumbar DS was satisfactory, although surgery-related complications including symptomatic adjacent-segment disease were not negligible.

scholarly journals A comparative study of functional outcome between posterior lumbar fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in spondylolisthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 544
Author(s):  
Harpreet Singh ◽  
Dhruv Patel ◽  
Sangam Tyagi ◽  
Krushna Saoji ◽  
Tilak Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Tertiary Care Centre ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Fusion

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Spondylolisthesis is condition in which one vertebra slips over other vertebra. This study has been done to compare the functional outcome and complications of two techniques: posterior lumbar fusion (intertransverse fusion) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Total 20 patients with spondylolisthesis admitted in a tertiary care centre in Rajasthan were allotted alternatively in posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) group and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) group. In PLF, fusion was done by placing bone graft between transverse processes and around facets. In PLIF, fusion was bone by placing cage in between vertebral bodies.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> 20 patients were included in our study with female predominance (65%). Mean age was 54.2 years (PLF=58.4 and PLIF=50.2). 70% patients have L4-L5 level spondylolisthesis. Average operative time was less in PLF group, which is statistically significant. Functional outcome was measured by using visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Japanese orthopedics association score (JOAS) at 3 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. There is a significant decrease between preoperative VAS and at 6 months, in both PLF and PLIF group. JOAS was significantly increased at 6 months in both PLF and PLIF group as compared to preoperative score. But difference in JOAS at 6 months is not significant between PLF and PLIF.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Both PLF and PLIF are equally effective for spondylolisthesis. Both techniques have same satisfactory results. As PLIF is more invasive technique, more operative time and more complications are seen.</p>

scholarly journals Learning curve and complications of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2013 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. E7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro S. Silva ◽  
Paulo Pereira ◽  
Pedro Monteiro ◽  
Pedro A. Silva ◽  
Rui Vaz
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Level ◽  
Negative Exponential

Object Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) has the potential advantage of minimizing soft-tissue damage and reducing recovery time compared to open procedures. A steep learning curve has been described for the technique. The aim of the present study was to define the learning curve that describes the progress of a single surgeon performing the MI-TLIF. Methods One hundred fifty consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar disease who underwent 1- or 2-level MI-TLIF were included in the study. Operative time, corrected operative time per level, and complications were analyzed. The learning curve was assessed using a negative exponential curve-fit regression analysis. Results One hundred ten patients underwent 1-level and 18 patients underwent 2-level MI-TLIF; the remaining 22 underwent a single-level procedure plus an ancillary procedure (decompression at adjacent level, vertebral augmentation through fenestrated pedicle screws, interspinous device at adjacent level). Negative exponential curves appropriately described the relationship between operative time and experience for 1-level surgery and after correction of operative time per level (R2 = 0.65 and 0.57). The median operative time was 140 minutes (interquartile range 120–173 minutes), and a 50% learning milestone was achieved at Case 12; a 90% learning milestone was achieved at Case 39. No patient required transfusion in the perioperative period. The overall complication rate was 12.67% and the most frequent complication was a dural tear (5.32%). Before the 50% and 90% learning milestones, the complication rates were 33% and 20.51%, respectively. Conclusions The MI-TLIF is a reliable and effective option for lumbar arthrodesis. According to the present study, 90% of the learning curve can be achieved at around the 40th case.

scholarly journals Hip hemiarthroplasty with modular neck: is it useful in residents’ learning curve? A prospective clinical trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 30-36
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Solarino ◽  
Lorenzo Moretti ◽  
Giovanni Vicenti ◽  
Davide Bizzoca ◽  
Andrea Piazzolla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Learning Curve ◽  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Modular Neck ◽  
Hip Hemiarthroplasty ◽  
Orthopaedic Surgeons ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Hardinge Approach

Background: The number of femoral neck fractures (FNFs) worldwide will drastically increase in the next few decades, reaching 6.3 million by 2050. In the future, therefore, newly-qualified orthopaedic surgeons will treat this kind of injury more frequently than in past decades. This prospective observational study aims to assess whether hip hemiarthroplasty with modular neck, performed via the Hardinge approach, can be safely carried out by orthopaedic residents. Methods: Patients referred to our Level I trauma centre, between January 2016 and June 2017, with displaced intra-articular femoral fractures, were prospectively recruited. All patients underwent cemented modular bipolar hip hemiarthroplasty (Profemur Z, MicroPort Orthopedics Inc., Arlington, TN, USA) via the Hardinge approach, with the patient positioned in lateral decubitus. The surgical procedures were performed by the same surgical and anesthesiology team, under spinal anaesthesia. All patients underwent clinical and radiographic follow-up up to 24 months. Complications and re-operations were recorded. Clinical evaluation was performed using the Harris Hip Score (HHS), Osteoporosis Quality of Life Questionnaire QUALEFFO-41 and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Anteroposterior pelvis x-rays were performed preoperatively, postoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months follow-up. Results: 118 patients met the inclusion criteria (male: 50; female: 68; mean age: 74.3 years; range 65–88 years) and were included in the current study. 67 patients out of 118 (56.8%) were managed by senior orthopaedic surgeons (Group A), whereas the remaining 51 patients out of 118 (43.2%) were treated by orthopaedic residents (Group B). Hip hemiarthroplasties performed by senior surgeons showed the prevalent use of straight (short or long) necks, whereas, in surgical procedures performed by residents, there was a significantly higher use of varus/valgus, anteverted or retroverted necks. The overall complication rate was significantly higher in Group-B patients, compared with Group-A patients ( p = 0.002). The length of hospital stay and the mean clinical scores at 24 months follow-up showed no significant differences. Conclusions: Hip hemiarthroplasty with modular neck can be safely employed during the learning curve of orthopaedic residents. Great efforts, however, should be made in future to improve residents’ training in the management of FNFs.

Caiman Versus LigaSure Hemorrhoidectomy: Postoperative Pain, Early Complications, Long-Term Follow-up, and Costs

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-278
Author(s):  
Chiara Eberspacher ◽  
Pietro Mascagni ◽  
Domenico Di Nardo ◽  
Daniele Pironi ◽  
Stefano Pontone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Healing Time ◽  
Visual Analog Score ◽  
Historical Cohort ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Purpose. Recently, the use of radiofrequency for hemorrhoidectomy has minimized incidence of postoperative complications. Effectiveness of LigaSure is demonstrated, but it is quite expensive. This study aims to compare LigaSure with Caiman, a cheaper instrument that uses radiofrequency for hemorrhoidectomy. Methods. A total of 35 patients were enrolled in this study between January 2015 and December 2017: 35 (Group A: Caiman) patients were matched with 35 control patients (Group B) from our historical cohort, treated with LigaSure. They were checked at 1 week after operation, at 4 weeks, and then after 2, 6, and 12 months. We considered different factors: intraoperative (operative time, number of piles removed, necessity of stiches or ligation), immediate postoperative (pain, bleeding within 4 weeks, incontinence, soiling within 4 weeks, healing time of anal wounds, return to working activities), and with a long-term follow-up. Results. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in analyzed intraoperative data: operative time (Group A 35 minutes vs Group B 33 minutes; P = .198) and stitches used. Postoperative data were comparable too, in particular pain (Group A 1 day Visual Analog Score = 6.25 vs Group B = 5.4, P = .178; Group A 1 week Visual Analog Score = 2.7 vs Group B = 1.14, P = .22) and bleeding (Group A = 2 vs Group B = 4; P = .2). Conclusions. According our initial experience, Caiman can be a safe and cheaper alternative to LigaSure for hemorrhoidectomy.

scholarly journals Superficial and Deep Infections Rate in Primary Total Ankle Replacement through Anterior Approach versus Lateral Transfibular Approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011417S0003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Giuseppe Usuelli ◽  
Cristian Indino ◽  
Luigi Manzi ◽  
Camilla Maccario ◽  
Ettore Vulcano
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Approach ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Deep Infection ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Trabecular Metal ◽  
Ankle Replacement ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Approach Group

Category: Ankle, Ankle Arthritis, Periprosthetic Infections Introduction/Purpose: Periprosthetic joint infections represent a relatively infrequent complication following total ankle replacement (TAR), with reported incidence ranging from 2% to 8,6%. Early treatment of any wound infection is the key to prevent disastrous outcomes. One of the most recent TARs (Zimmer Trabecular Metal Total Ankle, Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN) requires implantation through a lateral transfibular approach. Potential advantages of this approach include the supposed decreased risk of wound complications, thanks to a preservation of the distal leg angiosomes. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively compare the rate of superficial and deep infections between TARs performed through an anterior approach and TARs performed through a lateral transfibular approach at 12-months follow-up. Methods: This study included 150 consecutive primary TARs performed between May 2011 and July 2015 with at least 1-year follow up. The 3-component uncemented Hintegra implant (Newdeal SA, Lyon, France) was used in 81 TARs (54.0%) through an anterior approach (group A). The 2-component uncemented Zimmer Trabecular Metal Total Ankle prosthesis, was implanted in 69 TARs (46.0%) through a lateral transfibular approach (Group B). Operative time, tourniquet time and superficial and deep infections were recorded up to 1-year follow-up. All patients were clinically and radiologically evaluated postoperatively at two, six and twelve months. Superficial wound infections were classified as dehiscence, eschar, or wound drainage according to criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for surgical wound infection. Deep infections were classified according to Fitzgerald’s classification: acute postoperative, deep late infections, late hematogenous infections. We compared the incidence of superficial and deep infections as well as the operative time. Results: In group A there were 4 (4.9%) superficial infections. Two of these patients developed a deep infection. Overall, there were 3 (3.7%) deep infections in group A that required: intravenous antibiotics and vacuum assisted closure; replacement of the tibial component and polyethylene liner; polyethylene exchange and VAC treatment. In group B, there were 2 (2.9%) superficial infections. One of these patients developed the only deep infection (1.4%) that was treated with antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. There was no statistically significant difference in terms of superficial (P= 0.687) and deep infections (P= 0.625). The mean operative time in group A was 115.2 minutes (65-150) and 179.5 minutes (105-333) in group B. Operative time was statistically different between group A and group B (P <0.001). Conclusion: This study demonstrates a lower superficial and deep infection rate in the lateral transfibular approach group compared to the anterior approach group. Nonetheless, this difference was not statistically significant. The significantly longer operative time in the lateral approach group did not seem to affect the infection rates. In conclusion, TARs performed through a lateral approach appear to be as safe as TARs done through an anterior approach in terms of the infection rate within the first postoperative year. Further studies on larger cohorts and longer follow-up are essential to validate the findings from this study.

scholarly journals A Modified Method to Treat Severe Asymptomatic Pre-existing Degeneration of Adjacent Segment: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinliang Zhang ◽  
Jinwen Zhu ◽  
Yibing Li ◽  
Dingjun Hao ◽  
Wenjie Gao
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Modified Method ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract Background: Pre-existing degeneration of adjacent segment is an important risk factor for adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), but limited and controversial studies have addressed its management.Methods: Patients with symptomatic degeneration of the L5/S1 segment warranting surgical interference and severe asymptomatic degeneration of the L4/5 segment were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, those who underwent interbody fusion in the causative (L5/S1) segment and distraction of the intervertebral space and facet fusion in the adjacent L4/5 segment were included as Group A (n=103). Patients who underwent interbody fusion in both L5/S1 and L4/5 segments were included as Group B (n=81). Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated.Results: Mean follow-up was 58.5 months (range, 48-75 m). No significant difference in clinical outcomes or the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration in L3/4 segment was found between Groups A and B. Compared with Group B, less bleeding (315±84 vs. 532±105 ml), shorter operation time (107±34 vs. 158±55 min) and lower costs (13,830±2640 vs. 16,020±3380 US$) were found in Group A (P<0.05). In Group A, disc height ratio (DHR) of L4/5 segment was significantly increased from preoperative value of 0.40±0.13 to last follow-up value of 0.53±0.18 (P<0.05), while the degree of canal stenosis (DCS) was decreased from preoperative value of 34.3±11.2% to last follow-up value of 15.9±9.3% (P<0.05). Conclusions: This modified method could be effective in treating severe asymptomatic pre-existing degeneration of adjacent segment in lumbar spine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document