scholarly journals Analysis of risk factors for adjacent superior vertebral pedicle-induced facet joint violation during the minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi-Li Zeng ◽  
Long Jia ◽  
Wei Xu ◽  
Yan Yu ◽  
Xiao Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Facet Joint Violation

scholarly journals The feasibility for a novel minimally invasive surgery–percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a cadaveric experiment

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Yin ◽  
Yaoshen Zhang ◽  
Aixing Pan ◽  
Yi Ding ◽  
Liming Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Nerve Root ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Diseases ◽  
Articular Process ◽  
Lumbar Degenerative Diseases

Abstract Background The objective of the study was to evaluate our innovative percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods Two fresh-frozen human cadavers with soft tissues were donated for the experiment. Both cadavers had no history of previous spine surgery. The PE-TLIF surgery was performed on 3 levels (L4-5 of the first one, and L3-4, L4-5 of the second one) in October 2015. The PE-TLIF technique mainly included the following aspects: primary guide pins and a specially designed superior articular process (SAP) guide insertion, working channel setup, endoscopic decompression and fusion, and pedicle screw implantation and fixation. Under the surveillance of C-arm fluoroscope, four primary guide pins were inserted. The inferior primary guide in the hypothetically symptomatic side was confirmed as the first guide pin. At the end of the first guide pin, the specially designed SAP guide was installed. The secondary guide pin was inserted in the SAP via self-designed SAP guide. Under the protection cannula, part of the superior articular process was removed by oriented SAP resection device, so the working channel was smoothly put through the Kambin’s triangle. The endoscope was inserted close to the exiting nerve root. Rotation of the working channel kept the nerve root out of it. Results Three levels of PE-TLIF were successfully performed in two cadavers. Self-designed SAP guide made the secondary guide pin inserting the SAP accurately. Decompression was adequate and the traversing nerve root was relieved. Three aimed intervertebral levels are implanted with two 7-mm-high PEEK cages and one expandable cage. The expandable cage could be adjusted from 8 mm to 13 mm. Surgical incisions included four 15 mm incisions for percutaneous screw fixation and one 12 mm incision for working channel. There was no nerve injury during the operations. Conclusions Our present results showed that the novel minimally invasive surgery PE-TLIF was feasible for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.

Incidence of and risk factors for superior facet violation in minimally invasive versus open pedicle screw placement during transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comparative analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 356-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darryl Lau ◽  
Samuel W. Terman ◽  
Rakesh Patel ◽  
Frank La Marca ◽  
Paul Park
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Screw Placement ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screw Placement ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw

Object A reported risk factor for adjacent-segment disease is injury to the superior facet joint from pedicle screw placement. Given that the facet joint is not typically visualized during percutaneous pedicle screw insertion, there is a concern for increased facet violation (FV) in minimally invasive fusion procedures. The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare the incidence of FV among patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MITLIF) and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). The impact of O-arm navigation compared with traditional fluoroscopy on FV in MITLIF is also assessed, as are risk factors for FV. Methods The authors identified a consecutive population of patients who underwent MITLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw placement, as well as a matched cohort of patients who underwent open TLIF. Postoperative CT imaging was assessed to determine intraarticular FV due to pedicle screw placement. Patients were stratified into minimally invasive and open TLIF groups. Within the MITLIF group, the authors performed a subanalysis of image guidance methods used in cases of FV. Two-tailed Student t-test, ANOVA, chi-square testing, and logistic regression were used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 282 patients were identified, with a total of 564 superior pedicle screw placements. The MITLIF group consisted of 142 patients with 284 screw insertions. The open TLIF group consisted of 140 patients with 280 screw insertions. Overall, 21 (7.4%) of 282 patients experienced FV. A total of 21 screws violated a facet joint for a screw-based FV rate of 3.7% (21 of 564 screws). There were no significant differences between the MITLIF and open TLIF groups in the percentage of patients with FV (6.3% vs 8.6%) and or the percentage of screws with FV (3.2% vs 4.3%) (p = 0.475 and p = 0.484, respectively). Further stratifying the MI group into O-arm navigation and fluoroscopic guidance subgroups, the patient-based rates of FV were 10.8% (4 of 37 patients) and 4.8% (5 of 105 patients), respectively, and the screw-based rates of FV were 5.4% (4 of 74 screws) and 2.4% (5 of 210 screws), respectively. There was no significant difference between the subgroups with respect to patient-based or screw-based FV rates (p = 0.375 and p = 0.442, respectively). The O-arm group had a significantly higher body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.021). BMI greater than 29.9 was independently associated with higher FV (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.65–8.53, p = 0.039). Conclusions The findings suggest that minimally invasive pedicle screw placement is not associated with higher rates of FV. Overall violation rates were similar in MITLIF and open TLIF. Higher BMI, however, was a risk factor for increased FV. The use of O-arm fluoroscopy with computer-assisted guidance did not significantly decrease the rate of FV.

Minimally invasive surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis: transforaminal or oblique lumbar interbody fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sun-Ren Sheng ◽  
Yi-Bo Geng ◽  
Kai-Liang Zhou ◽  
Ai-Min Wu ◽  
Xiang-Yang Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Clinical Trial Registration ◽  
Postoperative Changes ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Aim: To compare the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for degenerative spondylolisthesis transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). Materials & methods: The clinical and surgical characteristics and outcomes of 38 patients with MIS–OLIF and 55 with MIS–TLIF were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Procedures and hospital stay were shorter and blood loss was less, with MIS–OLIF than with MIS–OLIF. The clinical and radiographic outcomes were similar. Postoperative changes in disk height and foraminal dimension were greater and patient satisfaction was better with MIS–OLIF than with MIS–TLIF. Conclusion: The clinical findings associated with the two procedures were similar; but patients preferred MIS–OLIF, which is less invasive, to MIS–TLIF. Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR1800019443.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document