scholarly journals Comparison of minimally invasive transspinous and open approaches for thoracolumbar intradural-extramedullary spinal tumors

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. E12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kunal P. Raygor ◽  
Khoi D. Than ◽  
Dean Chou ◽  
Praveen V. Mummaneni
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Spinal Tumors ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Extramedullary Tumor ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Asia Score ◽  
Intradural Extramedullary ◽  
The Mean

OBJECT Spinal tumor resection has historically been performed via open approaches, although minimally invasive approaches have recently been found to be effective in small cohort series. The authors compare surgical characteristics and clinical outcomes of surgery in patients undergoing mini-open and open approaches for intradural-extramedullary tumor resection. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed 65 consecutive intradural-extramedullary tumor resections performed at their institution from 2007 to 2014. Patients with cervical tumors or pathology demonstrating neurofibroma were excluded (n = 14). The nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test and Pearson chi-square test were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS, with significance set at p < 0.05. RESULTS Fifty-one thoracolumbar intradural-extramedullary tumor resections were included; 25 were performed via the minimally invasive transspinous approach. There were no statistically significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, preoperative American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) score, preoperative symptom duration, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status class, tumor size, or tumor location. There was no statistically significant difference between groups with respect to the duration of the operation or extent of resection, but the mean estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) cohort (142 vs 320 ml, p < 0.05). In each group, the 2 most common tumor pathologies were schwannoma and meningioma. There were no statistically significant differences in length of hospitalization, ASIA score improvement, complication rate, or recurrence rate. The mean duration of follow-up was 2 years for the MIS group and 1.6 years for the open surgery group. CONCLUSIONS This is one of the largest comparisons of minimally invasive and open approaches to the resection of thoracolumbar intradural-extramedullary tumors. With well-matched cohorts, the minimally invasive transspinous approach appears to be as safe and effective as the open technique, with the advantage of significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss.

A comparison of mini-open and open approaches for resection of thoracolumbar intradural spinal tumors

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 758-764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel C. Lu ◽  
Dean Chou ◽  
Praveen V. Mummaneni
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Scale Score ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Open Group ◽  
Spinal Tumors ◽  
Open Approach ◽  
Score Improvement ◽  
Intradural Tumor ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mini Open

Object Standard approaches to thoracic intradural tumors often involve a large incision and significant tissue destruction. Minimally invasive techniques have been applied successfully for a variety of surgical decompression procedures but have been rarely used for the removal of intradural thoracolumbar tumors. In this paper, the authors compare the clinical outcome of mini-open resection of intradural thoracolumbar tumors with a standard open technique. Methods The authors retrospectively reviewed their series of 18 consecutive mini-open thoracolumbar, intradural, tumor resection cases and compared the outcomes with a profile-matched cohort of 9 cases of open intradural tumor resection. Operative statistics, functional outcome, and complications were compared. Results Tumors were removed successfully using both approaches, except for 1 case in the mini-open cohort in which only biopsy was performed for a diffusely infiltrating tumor (glioblastoma). There was no statistically significant difference in operative duration, American Spinal Injury Association scale score improvement, or back pain visual analog scale score improvement between groups. However, the mini-open group demonstrated a significantly lower estimated blood loss (153 vs 372 ml, respectively) and a significantly shorter length of hospitalization (4.9 vs 8.2 days, respectively). There was 1 complication of pseudomeningocele formation in the mini-open cohort and 1 complication of cerebral infarction in the open cohort. Mean follow-up length was 16 months in the mini-open group compared with 20 months in the open group. Conclusions The mini-open approach allows for adequate treatment of intradural thoracolumbar tumors with comparable outcomes to standard, open approaches. The mini-open approach is associated with less blood loss and a shorter length of stay compared with standard open surgery.

Minimally invasive lumbar intradural extramedullary tumor resection

2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (Suppl1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Lee ◽  
Patrick C. Hsieh
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Csf Leak ◽  
Minimally Invasive Approach ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Extramedullary Tumor ◽  
Intradural Extramedullary ◽  
Dural Opening ◽  
Invasive Techniques

Intradural, extramedullary schwannomas have long been treated with open midline incision, laminectomy, and dural opening to expose and resect the lesion. While this technique is well established, today new surgical techniques can be utilized to perform the same procedure while minimizing pain, size of incision, and trauma to adjacent tissues. In cases of intradural surgery, minimally invasive surgery limits the degree of soft tissue disruption. As a result, there is significant decreased dead space within the surgical cavity that may decrease the rate of CSF leak complications. Minimally invasive techniques have continuously improved over the years and have reached a point where they can be used for intradural surgeries. In this case presentation, we demonstrate a minimally invasive approach to the lumbar spine with resection of an intradural schwannoma. Surgical techniques and the nuances of the minimally invasive approach to intradural tumors compared to the standard open procedure will be discussed. The video can be found here: http://youtu.be/XXrvAIq_H48.

Minimally Invasive Resection of a Cervical Anterolateral Meningioma: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 520-520
Author(s):  
Federico Landriel ◽  
Santiago Hem ◽  
Eduardo Vecchi ◽  
Claudio Yampolsky
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Spinal Tumors ◽  
Minimally Invasive Approach ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Intradural Extramedullary

Abstract Intradural extramedullary spinal tumors were historically managed through traditional midline approaches. Although conventional laminectomy or laminoplasty provides a wide tumor and spinal cord exposure, they may cause prolonged postoperative neck pain and late kyphosis deformity. Minimally invasive ipsilateral hemilaminectomy preserves midline structures, reduces the paraspinal muscle disruption, and could avoid postoperative kyphosis deformity. A safe tumor resection through this approach could be complicated in large sized or anteromedullary located lesions. We present a surgical video of C3 antero located meningioma removed en bloc through a minimally invasive approach. The patient signed a written consent to publish video, recording, photograph, image, illustration, and/or information about him.

scholarly journals Microsurgical unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis: a comparative study

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed I. Refaat ◽  
Amr K. Elsamman ◽  
Adham Rabea ◽  
Mohamed I. A. Hewaidy
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Decompression Surgery ◽  
Microsurgical Decompression ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

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.

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

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.

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

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-156 ◽  
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.

Management of intended durotomy in minimally invasive intradural spine surgery

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-285 ◽  
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.

A Comparative Study of Endoscopic Coblation Adenoidectomy and Regular Curettage Adenoidectomy in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Kerala

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (41) ◽  
pp. 3559-3566
Author(s):  
Abdul Salam R. T. ◽  
Shahul Hameed A. ◽  
Meera Rajan
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Adenoid Tissue ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Tube Function ◽  
Prospective Comparative Study ◽  
The Mean

BACKGROUND An ideal surgery to remove hypertrophied adenoid mass should be safe, with less bleeding and operation time along with post-operative improvement in the eustachian tubal ventilation and normal respiration. It should also have low morbidity and mortality. Among the various methods described for its removal, the two commonly used methods are conventional cold curettage method and coblation technique. The purpose of this study was to collate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy with the conventional curettage adenoidectomy. METHODS A prospective comparative study with fifty patients was studied who underwent adenoidectomy. Twenty five patients underwent endoscopy assisted coblation adenoidectomy and twenty five patients underwent regular adenoidectomy by curettage. RESULTS Patients who underwent coblation adenoidectomy showed better results during follow up in terms of completeness of removal. 80 % of children undergoing regular adenoidectomy by curettage method showed remnant adenoid tissue in the nasopharynx at the end of the procedure. But it was 6 % among the children undergoing endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy. The mean duration of operation was higher for endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy which was significant statistically. The mean blood loss was 30.36 ml in regular curettage adenoidectomy; 10.6 ml with endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy. The grading of pain was significantly lower in endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy. There was no significant difference between two groups in terms of eustachian tube function after surgery. CONCLUSIONS Coblation adenoidectomy has significant advantages over conventional adenoidectomy in terms of completeness of removal, reduced blood loss, and lower post-operative pain grade. KEYWORDS Coblation, Adenoidectomy, Curettage, Haemorrhage and Complications

scholarly journals Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass versus off-pump coronary surgery through sternotomy

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (7) ◽  
pp. 481-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Birla ◽  
P Patel ◽  
G Aresu ◽  
G Asimakopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Coronary Artery Bypass ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Off Pump ◽  
Opcab Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

Introduction Although it is not a new technique, minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) is employed only by a few surgeons in the UK. We compared our experience with MIDCAB with that of single vessel off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) graft surgery through a standard median sternotomy. Methods Patients who underwent either MIDCAB or OPCAB between April 2008 and July 2011 were reviewed. Exclusion criteria included patients with an ejection fraction of <0.5 or previous cardiac surgery. Data were obtained retrospectively from our prospective database, medical records and through general practitioners. Results Overall, 74 patients were analysed in the MIDCAB group and 78 in the OPCAB group. Their demographics and EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) values were comparable (p>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the two groups in terms of mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, postoperative stroke, wound infection, atrial fibrillation or need for reintervention. The MIDCAB group had six conversions to a sternotomy. Eight patients in each group required blood transfusion, with the average transfusion being 1.8 units in the MIDCAB group and 3.2 units in the OPCAB group. The mean duration of ventilation and intensive care unit stay was 5.0 hours and 38.4 hours in the MIDCAB group and 5.4 and 47.8 hours in the OPCAB group. The mean hospital stay was significantly reduced in the MIDCAB population (6.1 vs 8.5 days, p<0.05). Conclusions MIDCAB can be performed safely in appropriately selected patients with outcomes comparable with OPCAB. The potential benefits include shorter hospital stay, reduced need for blood transfusion and faster recovery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document