Effect Comparison Of MIS-TLIF Under MED and Quadrant Modes in The Treatment of Lu mbar Spinal Stenosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 1598-1604
Author(s):  
Chen Qi ◽  
Xia Chen ◽  
Mao Guangfeng ◽  
Chen Chuyong ◽  
Jin Yongming ◽  
...  

Background Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the common causes of low back and leg pain. Lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration leads to the decrease of intervertebral height, the limitation of vertebral activity, and the biomechanical changes of the lumbar spine, which in turn makes the lumbar anterior convex angle and sacral inclination angle smaller, and the pelvic inclination angle larger, affecting the stress distribution of the lumbar spine aggravating the intervertebral disc degeneration. If the spinal canal stenosis is not corrected for a long time, can cause the cauda equina nerve, nerve root compression, resulting in neurogenic intermittent claudication. If the spinal canal stenosis is not corrected for a long time, can cause the cauda equina nerve, nerve root compression, resulting in neurogenic intermittent claudication. Surgery can correct lumbar stenosis and reconstruct lumbar stability. But the traditional lumbar fusion trauma is huge, even can aggravate pain, spinal canal stenosis. Therefore, more and more patients are more inclined to MIS-TLIF treatment with less surgical trauma. For single-segment lumbar spinal stenosis, MIS-TLIF has the same effect as open surgery in restoring lumbar interbody height and improving lumbar-pelvis balance. Objective Discussion on the effect difference of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by Quadrant and MED methods. Methods A total of 96patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who were scheduled to undergo MIS-TLIF surgery in Our Hospital from January 2017 to October 2020 were selected and divided into group A and group B according to the surgical channel selection scheme, with 48 cases in each group. The patients in group A were treater with MED channel, and the patients in group B were treated with Quadrant channel. The degree of surgical trauma, VAS score before and postoperative, JOA score, lumbar-pelvic imaging parameters and surgical complications were compared between the two methods. Results The operation time of the A group was shorter than that of the group B(P < 0.05). The blood loss, exposure time under X line, drainage flow and down-ground time in A group were lower than those in B group, which had statistical significance (P<0.05) ; A and B groups of patients were compared, the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05) ; Preoperative, Comparison of VAS scores between A and B groups, the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05) . On the first day of postoperative, the VAS score of group A was lower than that of groupB, which had statistical significance (P < 0.05). Preoperative, Comparison of JOA scores between A and B groups, the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05) ; Comparison of JOA scores between 1 month ,3 months and 6 months in Postoperative, the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The JOA scores of the two groups at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months postoperative were significantly lower than those Preoperative (P < 0.05). Six months postoperative, the lumbar anterior convex angle, segmental anterior convex angle and intervertebral height of the two groups were significantly higher than those Preoperative (P<0.05), and the pelvic inclination angle of the two groups was lower than that Preoperative (P<0.05).Conclusion MIS-TLIF in the treatment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis using MED channel or Quadrant channel operation has curative effect, and there is little difference in the recovery of lumbar-pelvis imaging parameters, but the former has the advantages of less surgical trauma and lower postoperative pain.

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-261
Author(s):  
Gabriel Iacob ◽  
Abdul Salam ◽  
Abdul Rahman Hawis

Abstract Aim: To compare between classic open surgeries and minimally invasive surgeries in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Methods: A comparative descriptive study, involved 117 patients suffering from lumbar canal stenosis, aged between 40-70 years; admitted to department of Neurosurgery from March 2011 till august 2016 in King Fahad Hospital in Saudi Arabia. Study groups are consisted of group A as patients managed with classical laminectomy, group B as patients managed with Endoscopic spinal procedures and group C as patients managed with Microscopic decompression facilitated by the Metrex Tubular System. SPSS was used in data entry and analysis, and ethical considerations taken into consideration and participants filled the required inform consents. Results: Age of particaoncet ranged from 45 - 63 Year, Mean +/- 50. The degenerative canal stenosis with acute disc single level (cauda equina syndrome) was the most common type of lumbar canal stenosis encountered in group A, the unilateral foraminal and lateral recess stenosis without disc prolapse was the most common type of lumbar canal stenosis encountered in group B, while The unilateral foraminal and lateral recess stenosis without disc prolapse was the most common type of lumbar canal stenosis encountered in group C. Classic laminectomy and disectomy used mostly in group A, endoscopic unilateral decompression lamino-foraminotomy without discectomy used mostly in group B and bilateral microscopic laminectomy without discectomy followed by unilateral microscopic lamino-foraminotomy without discectomy used mostly in group C. Mean of operation duration was the highest in both gender of group A, followed by group B, then group C. Unintended durotomy was the most common intra operative complications occurred in the whole study especially in group A. Mean of blood lost was the highest in both gender of group A, followed by group B, then group C. Postop complications in the patients of study Groups was the highest in group A (33.3 %) ,followed by group B (8.5 %) and then group C (2 %). Conclusion: Microscopic decompression facilitated by the Metrex Tubular System is the most effective techniques of Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and the least intraoperative and post-operative complications.


KYAMC Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-165
Author(s):  
Nazif Sultana ◽  
Fatama Sharmin ◽  
AHM Tanvir Hasan Siddiquee ◽  
SM Mazharul Islam ◽  
Enayet Karim

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis is the most frequent indication for spine surgery. The X-ray and MRI are the choice of investigation. Justified use of radiography can be cost effective in the management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Objective: To evaluate and compare the sensitivity and specificity of the plain X-ray and MRI in the diagnosis of the lumbar spinal stenosis. Materials and Methods: A multicenter cross sectional analytical study was carried out from January 2014 to December 2015 on 70 patients of both sexes aged more than 25 years with chronic low back pain. Plain x-ray and MRI were done in all patients. The interval between plain x-ray and MRI was less than 3 months. A descriptive analysis was performed for all data. Results: The mean age (+ SD) was 45.1 (+ 5.4) years. Forty two (60%) were male and 28 (40%) were female. In plain x-ray of the lumbosacral spine, 30 (42.9%) had diskogenic spinal canal stenosis and 22 (31.4%) had both diskogenic and non diskogenic spinal canal stenosis. In the MRI, 35 (50.0%) cases had diskogenic spinal canal stenosis and 24 (34.3%) had both diskogenic and non diskogenic spinal canal stenosis. The validity of MRI evaluation for only diskogenic spinal canal stenosis was correlated, where the calculated values of plain x-ray were: sensitivity 80.0%, specificity 60.0%, accuracy 77.5%, positive predictive value 93.3% and negative predictive value 30.0%. The validity of MRI evaluation for both diskogenic and non diskogenic spinal canal stenosis was correlated, where the calculated values of plain x-ray were: sensitivity 83.3%, specificity 66.7%, accuracy 80.0%, positive predictive value 90.9% and negative predictive value 50.0%. Conclusion: Plain x-ray is a useful and reliable diagnostic modality for the evaluation, assessment and the subsequent appropriate management of lumbar spinal stenosis. KYAMC Journal. 2021;12(3): 161-165


2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110088
Author(s):  
Kazunori Nomura ◽  
Munehito Yoshida ◽  
Motohiro Okada ◽  
Yosuke Nakamura ◽  
Kenichi Yawatari ◽  
...  

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of a gelatin–thrombin matrix sealant (GTMS) during microendoscopic laminectomy (MEL) for lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS). Methods: This study included 158 LSCS cases on hemostasis-affecting medication who underwent MEL by a single surgeon between September 2016 and August 2020. Patients were divided into 2 groups depending on whether GTMS was used (37 cases, Group A) or not (121 cases, Group B). Perioperative data related to bleeding or postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (PSEH) was investigated. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score for low back pain. Results: The mean intraoperative blood loss per level was greater in Group A (26.0 ± 20.3 g) than in Group B (13.6 ± 9.0 g), whereas the postoperative drainage volume was smaller in Group A (79.1 ± 42.5 g) than in Group B (97.3 ± 55.6 g). No revision surgeries for PSEH were required in Group A, while 2 (1.7%) revisions were required in Group B ( P = .957). The median JOA score improved significantly from the preoperative period to 1-year postoperatively in both Group A and B (total score, 16.0-23.5 and 17.0-25.0 points, respectively). Conclusions: The use of GTMS during MEL for LSCS may be associated with a reduction in postoperative drainage volume. The revision rate for PSEH was not affected significantly by the use of GTMS. Clinical outcomes (represented by the JOA score) were significantly improved after the surgery, regardless of GTMS use during MEL.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 151-156
Author(s):  
Trung Hoang Van ◽  
Cuong Le Van Ngoc

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis often associates with chronic pain described the abnormal narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal, resulting in compression of neural elements within the central spinal canal or the lateral recesses or the root canals or coordinate with each other. The purpose of this study was to describe and compare the plain X-ray and magnetic resonance imaging features of lumbar canal stenosis. Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study of 78 patients with an acquired lumbar spinal canal between October 2017 and May 2018. Results: The X-rays confirmed osteophytes in 92.3%, endplate sclerosis in 88.5% and disc space narrowing 62.8%. On MRI, 213 lumbar levels were lumbar spinal canal stenosis, 181 lumbar levels were evaluated for the grade of central spinal canal stenosis. Conclusions: X-ray examination has limitations in a diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis but also serves as a diagnostic aid. MRI is well diagnosed as spinal pathology as well as lumbar spinal stenosis. Key words: Lumbar spinal, Lumbar spinal stenosis, Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), X-ray, Grading


Neurosurgery ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 546-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. Lin

Abstract In cases of lumbar spinal stenosis, use of the wide decompressive procedure for neural compression without regard for the integrity of facets tends to lead to instability and the chronic pain syndrome. Experience with the posterior lumbar interbody fusion technique indicates that, in cases of multiple levels of spinal canal stenosis, the decompression can be made adequately by inferior and superior marginal laminotomy, mesial facetectomy with an osteotome, and foraminotomy with an angle bone punch and a supersonic curette. Internal thinning of the thickened lamina can be achieved by the shaving action of the supersonic curette done from within the spinal canal. This technique achieves the necessary internal decompression of the multiple levels of spinal stenosis without interruption of the integrity of the motion segment. The spinous processes and the supraspinous ligaments and the lateral half of the facet, with its firm fibrous capsules, are scrupulously preserved. The disc is not removed unless it is overtly extruded.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Michael Mayer ◽  
Franziska Heider

Objective.Selective, bilateral multisegmental microsurgical decompression of lumbar spinal canal stenosis through separate, alternating cross-over approaches.Indications. Two-segmental and multisegmental degenerative central and lateral lumbar spinal stenosis.Contraindications. None.Surgical Technique.Minimally invasive, muscle, and facet joint-sparing bilateral decompression of the lumbar spinal canal through 2 or more alternating microsurgical cross-over approaches from one side.Results.From December 2010 until December 2015 we operated on 202 patients with 2 or multisegmental stenosis (115 f; 87 m; average age 69.3 yrs, range 51–91 yrs). All patients were suffering from symptoms typical of a degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. All patients complained about back pain; however the leg symptoms were dominant in all cases. Per decompressed segment, the average OR time was 36 min and the blood loss 45.7 cc. Patients were mobilized 6 hrs postop and hospitalization averaged 5.9 days. A total of 116/202 patients did not need submuscular drainage. 27/202 patients suffered from a complication (13.4%). Dural tears occurred in 3.5%, an epidural hematoma in 5.5%, a deep wound infection in 1.98%, and a temporary radiculopathy postop in 1.5%. Postop follow-up ranged from 12 to 24 months. There was a significant improvement of EQ 5 D, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), VAS for Back and Leg Pain, and preoperative standing times and walking distances.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Zhang ◽  
Yanna Zhou ◽  
Hua Zou ◽  
Zimo Lu ◽  
Xin Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose To compare the efficacies of minimal invasive decompression by posterior microscopic mini-open technique combined with percutaneous pedicle fixation (hereafter MOT) and traditional open surgeries in patients with severe traumatic spinal canal stenosis resulting from AO Type A3 or A4 thoracolumbar burst fractures and provide references for clinical treatment. Methods The clinical materials of 133 patients with severe traumatic spinal canal stenosis caused by AO Type A3 or A4 thoracolumbar burst fractures who underwent MOT (group A) or traditional open surgery (group B) were retrospectively enrolled. The patient demographic and radiological data were analyzed between the two groups. Results A total of 64 patients were finally recruited in this study. There were no significant differences in gender, age, follow-up time, injury mechanism, injured level, Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) classification, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) score, Visual analogue scale (VAS) score and hospital stay between the two groups (P>0.05). After procedures, the prevertebral height ratio (PHR), the Cobb angle, and the mid-sagittal canal diameter compression ratio (MSDCR) in two groups were significantly improved (P<0.05). Meanwhile, group A with little intraoperative bleeding volume, and the VAS score improved better at post-operation and last follow up, but the operative time was longer (P<0.05). The PHR, the Cobb angle in the two groups at the post-operation and last follow up without significantly different (P>0.05), the MSDCR was improved at last follow up when compared with the value at post-operation (P<0.05). However, the Cobb angle in group A was well maintained than in group B at last follow up (P<0.05) and the MSDCR in group B at last follow up improved better than in group A (P<0.05). Conclusions Both the MOT and traditional open surgery can treat AO type A3 and A4 thoracolumbar burst fractures accompanied with severe traumatic spinal stenosis effectively. The MOT has advantages including minimal invasion, extremely fine spinal canal decompression, lower intraoperative bleeding volume and obvious pain relief. We suggest that MOT should be preferentially selected for AO type A3 or A4 thoracolumbar burst fractures accompanied with severe traumatic spinal stenosis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (05) ◽  
pp. 387-391
Author(s):  
Nikhil Jain ◽  
Shankar Acharya ◽  
Nitin Maruti Adsul ◽  
Mukesh Kumar Haritwal ◽  
Manoj Kumar ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although spinal canal narrowing is thought to be the defining feature for the clinical diagnosis of lumbar canal stenosis, the degree of spinal canal stenosis necessary to elicit neurologic symptoms is not clear. Several studies have been performed to detect an association between a narrow spinal canal and clinical symptoms. Through our prospective study, we compared the radiologic criteria with the clinical criteria using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and assessed how they correlate. Materials and Methods We used the qualitative grading (morphological classification system on magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) system, dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA), and sedimentation sign on MRI images and compared them with the Self-Paced Walking Ability (Self-Paced Walking Test) and ODI of the patients in the study. The systems were applied to 85 patients divided into three groups: group A: 43 patients with neurogenic claudication and able to walk < 30 minutes; group B: 11 patients with neurogenic claudication and able to walk > 30 minutes; and group C: 31 patients with simple back pain and no signs of neurologic claudication. Results The mean ODI was 21.19 in group C, 46.50 in group B, and 61.95 in group A. The difference was statistically significant. The mean DSCA was 164.42 mm2 in group C, 49.94 mm2 in group B, and 35.07 mm2 in group A. The difference was statistically significant. The sedimentation sign was negative in 96.8% patients in group C, 54.5% patients in group B, and 32.6% patients in group A. The difference was statistically significant. Group C had 9.3% patients in morphology grade A3, 51.6% in grade A2, and 38.7% patients in grade A1. Group B had 63.6% patients in grade C, 18.2% patients in grade B, 9.1% in grade A4, and 9.1% in grade A3. Group A had 18.6% patients in grade D, 39.5% in grade C, 27.9% in grade B, 11.6% in grade A4, and 2.3% in grade A3. The mean DSCA of group C was significantly different from group A and group B, but the difference of the mean DSCA between group A and group B was not statistically significant. The relationship of ODI to DSCA, ODI to sedimentation sign, and ODI to morphological grading for group C and group A was not statistically significant. The relationship of morphological grading to DSCA was statistically significant for all three groups. Conclusion DSCA, morphological grading, and sedimentation sign are good to excellent radiologic indicators differentiating patients with simple back pain from those with lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinically, ODI is an excellent indicator of the severity of stenosis. But ODI statistically has no significant correlation to any of these radiologic parameters.


2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 634-642
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Piechota ◽  
Robert Król ◽  
David A. Elias ◽  
Wojciech Wawrzynek ◽  
Andrzej Lekstan

Background The nerve root sedimentation sign is a magnetic resonance (MR) sign, shown to be present in central lumbar spinal stenosis. The lack of sedimentation of the nerve roots to the dorsal part of the dural sac is consistent with the positive nerve root sedimentation sign. Purpose To validate the reliability of the nerve root sedimentation sign in diagnosis of different grades of lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Material and Methods This study was a retrospective review of 101 consecutive MR imaging (MRI) studies obtained on patients with clinically suspected lumbar canal stenosis. Based on the minimum anteroposterior (AP) diameter of the dural sac the study sample was classified into two groups: a group with morphological lumbar spinal stenosis; and the group of patients free from stenosis (AP > 12 mm). Patients with stenosis were further subclassified based on its severity: severe stenosis (AP ≤ 10 mm); and moderate stenosis (AP > 10 mm to ≤ 12 mm). Results Positive sedimentation sign was identified in 81% of patients with severe lumbar spinal stenosis and 14% of patients with moderate stenosis. No patients without lumbar spinal stenosis had a positive nerve root sedimentation sign. Of patients with a positive nerve root sedimentation sign, 89% presented with neurological claudication. Conclusion The nerve root sedimentation is a useful tool for identification of patients with both severe clinical and morphological lumbar spinal stenosis; however, its performance in the diagnosis of patients with moderate morphological spinal stenosis is poor.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document