Lumbar interbody expanding cage

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (04) ◽  
pp. 382-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Careddu ◽  
G. Masala ◽  
N. Columbano ◽  
C. Doria ◽  
L. Crissantu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Helical Ct ◽  
Ct Scanning ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Transperitoneal Approach ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Operation ◽  
Bone Autograft

SummaryInterbody fusion devices are used in human medicine for treating degenerative diseases of the spine. Currently, there is not a universally accepted assessment tool for determining fusion, and the definitive criteria for diagnosing a successful interbody fusion remain controversial. The aim of this study was to describe microscopic and helical computed tomography (CT) imaging in the assessment of lumbar interbody fusion using cylindrical threaded titanium expanding cage in sheep. One cylindrical threaded expanding titanium cage (Proconcept – SA, Orange, France) was inserted through a transperitoneal approach after radical discectomy and packed with cancellous bone autograft in five adult sheep. The subjects were euthanatized after three, six, 12, 18 and 24 months. CT images revealed lumbar fusion at 12 months post operation, whereas microscopic evaluations indicated the presence of lumbar fusion at 18 months. CT and histological grades were the same in 65% of the cases observed. There were not a significant difference between CT, histological and micro radiographic grades. Helical CT scanning can be considered to be a suitable method for the monitoring of lumbar fusion as it enables observation of the deposition of bony bridging within the cage.

Stress Radiography and Stress Examination of the Talocrural and Subtalar Joint on Helical Computed Tomography

1997 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 482-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
F.J. van Hellemondt ◽  
J.W.K. Louwerens ◽  
E.S. Sijbrandij ◽  
A.P.G. van Gils
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Subtalar Joint ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Helical Ct ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Chronic Instability ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Subtalar Instability ◽  
Stress Examination

The main objective of this study was to compare subtalar inversion stress views using the Brodén view with inversion stress views on helical computed tomography (CT). One of the drawbacks of routine radiography is the imaging of three-dimensional structures in a two-dimensional plane. We investigated whether the use of helical CT would lead to a more objective and clearer measurable method to determine the amount of tilt in the subtalar joint. A group of 15 patients with unilateral chronic instability complaints and clinically suspected subtalar instability was examined. The contralateral asymptomatic foot was used as control. A variable amount of subtalar tilt (range, 4° to 18°) was demonstrated in all cases on stress radiographs, without finding significant difference between the symptomatic and asymptomatic feet. However, contrary to the findings at the talocrural level, subtalar tilt was found in none of the patients using helical CT. Thus, we now doubt that the tilt seen during stress examination using the Brodén view is the true amount of tilt. It may be that the lateral opening, seen on these radiographs, largely results from imaging two planes that have made a translatory and rotatory movement relative to each other in an oblique direction. It is concluded that the Brodén stress examination might not be useful for screening patients with subtalar instability. Associated anomalies not visible on the radiographs were detected by helical CT. In four cases, narrowing of the articular cartilage and irregular and hypertrophic bone formation at the middle facet joint of the subtalar joints were found. It is likely that these changes cause disturbance of function of this joint and it is suggested that the subjective complaint of instability with “giving way” is not only caused by hypermobility, but can be caused by other disturbances of normal motion.

scholarly journals DIAGNOSTIC VALUE OF NON-CONTRAST HELICAL CT-SCAN AND INTRAVENOUS UROGRAPHY IN UROLITHIASIS EVALUATION

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fadhli Hasan ◽  
Doddy M Soebadi ◽  
Sunaryo Hardjowijoto ◽  
Mohamad Ayodhia Soebadi ◽  
Triyono Karmawan Sukmana Pria ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Helical Ct ◽  
Intravenous Urography ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Diagnostic Modality ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic value of Non Contrast Helical Computed Tomography (NCHCT) scanning as the first choice diagnostic modality for detecting urolithiasis cases in Soetomo General Hospital Surabaya and evaluate the feasibility as alternative to Intravenous Urography (IVU). Material & Methods: Seventeen patients with clinical manifestation of suspected urolithiasis underwent NCHCT and IVU to evaluate suspected urolithiasis. Reformatted three-dimensional CT was performed in all patients. The images were correlated with findings from surgical procedure (ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and open surgery). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy were determined for NCHCT and IVU. Results: The diagnosis of urolithiasis was defined as unequivocal evidence of urolithiasis on either NCHCT or IVU. Sixteen of seventeen patients evaluated were diagnosed with urolithiasis. NCHCT established the diagnosis in 16 of 17 patients while IVU was positive in 11 of 17 patients. IVU was negative in 6 of the 17 cases. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of NCHCT was 100%, 100%, and 100% respectively (p = 0.05) and the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of IVU was 68%, 100% and 70% respectively (p = 0.35). There was no statistically significant difference between IVU and NCHCT using Fisher’s exact test. Conclusions: NCHCT accurately diagnosed urolithiasis in patients with suspected urolithiasis. Considering that NCHCT is more effective and efficient than IVU as diagnostic modality in determining the presence of urolithiasis, it may be considered to replace IVU as the first line diagnostic tool for urolithiasis in Soetomo General Hospital Surabaya. Keywords: Non Contrast Helical CT Scan, Intravenous Urography, Urolithiasis.

scholarly journals Minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of rostral adjacent-segment lumbar degenerative stenosis without supplemental pedicle screw fixation

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 861-866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Y. Wang ◽  
Ram Vasudevan ◽  
Stefan A. Mindea
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Ct Scanning ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lateral Interbody Fusion ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lateral Interbody

Object Adjacent-segment degeneration and stenosis are common in patients who have undergone previous lumbar fusion. Treatment typically involves a revision posterior approach, which requires management of postoperative scar tissue and previously implanted instrumentation. A minimally invasive lateral approach allows the surgeon to potentially reduce the risk of these hazards. The technique relies on indirect decompression to treat central and foraminal stenosis and placement of a graft with a large surface area to promote robust fusion and stability in concert with the surrounding tensioned ligaments. The goal in this study was to determine if lateral interbody fusion without supplemental pedicle screws is effective in treating adjacent-segment disease. Methods For a 30-month study period at two institutions, the authors obtained all cases of lumbar fusion with new back and leg pain due to adjacent-segment stenosis and spondylosis failing conservative measures. All patients had undergone minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion from the side of greater leg pain without supplemental pedicle screw fixation. Patients were excluded from the study if they had undergone surgery for a nondegenerative etiology such as infection or trauma. They were also excluded if the intervention involved supplemental posterior instrumented fusion with transpedicular screws. Postoperative metrics included numeric pain scale (NPS) scores for leg and back pain. All patients underwent dynamic radiographs and CT scanning to assess stability and fusion after surgery. Results During the 30-month study period, 21 patients (43% female) were successfully treated using minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion without the need for subsequent posterior transpedicular fixation. The mean patient age was 61 years (range 37–87 years). Four patients had two adjacent levels fused, while the remainder had single-level surgery. All patients underwent surgery without conversion to a traditional open technique, and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein–2 was used in the interbody space in all cases. The mean follow-up was 23.6 months. The mean operative time was 86 minutes, and the mean blood loss was 93 ml. There were no major intraoperative complications, but one patient underwent subsequent direct decompression in a delayed fashion. The leg pain NPS score improved from a mean of 6.3 to 1.9 (p < 0.01), and the back pain NPS score improved from a mean of 7.5 to 2.9 (p < 0.01). Intervertebral settling averaged 1.7 mm. All patients had bridging bone on CT scanning at the last follow-up, indicating solid bony fusion. Conclusions Adjacent-segment stenosis and spondylosis can be treated with a number of different operative techniques. Lateral interbody fusion provides an attractive alternative with reduced blood loss and complications, as there is no need to re-explore a previous laminectomy site. In this limited series a minimally invasive lateral approach provided high fusion rates when performed with osteobiological adjuvants.

scholarly journals Staged surgical strategy of symptomatic lumbar adjacent-segment degeneration: full-endoscopic decompression versus extended posterior interbody fusion

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tong Li ◽  
Bin Zhu ◽  
Xiaoguang Liu
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Adjacent Segments ◽  
Outcome Evaluations

Abstract Background Symptomatic adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD) is a common complication after lumbar fusion surgery. We want to evaluate the clinical and imaging outcome of full-endoscopic lumbar decompression (FELD) in comparison with extended posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for ASD after lumbar fusion surgeries and develop a staged revision strategy. Methods This retrospective study enrolled 65 patients with ASD who treated with FELD (n=31) or extended PLIF (n=34) between January 2014 and January 2018. Clinical outcome evaluations were performed preoperatively, at 3, 12, 24 months postoperatively, including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores for function assessment, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low-back pain and leg pain. Imaging outcome evaluations were performed preoperatively, immediately after surgery and at the last follow up, including disc height (DH) and lumbar lordosis (LL). Results The ratio of patients with adjacent segmental instability in the PLIF group was significantly higher than that in the FELD group (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in other baseline data for FELD and PLIF groups (p>0.05). Mean operative time, blood loss and length of hospital stay were significantly decreased for the FELD group (p<0.001). For patients with stable adjacent segments, there was no significant difference in preoperative and postoperative low-back pain, leg pain and function between 2 groups (p>0.05). The patients in PLIF group had restored DH after surgery, which was significantly higher than FELD group (p<0.05). For patients with unstable adjacent segments, the low-back and leg pain of PLIF group were significantly relieved than that in FELD group within 24 and 3 months after surgery (p<0.05). The function of PLIF group was significantly improved within 12 months after surgery (p<0.05). The DH was only significantly restored within 3 months after surgery (p<0.05). Recurrence was found in 2 (6.5%, p>0.05) patients in FELD group, while no patient in PLIF group had recurrence. Conclusions FELD could achieve satisfactory safety and efficacy for the treatment of stable ASD, which was not worse than PLIF. With less trauma and faster recovery, FELD may be an alternative surgical treatment for stable ASD.

scholarly journals Is magnesium sulfate as a "preemptive analgesia" effective to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption?

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 156
Author(s):  
Abasali Delavari ◽  
Marzieh Lak ◽  
Hassan Arragizade ◽  
Babak Salatini
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Magnesium Sulfate ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Preemptive Analgesia ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Fusion Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Operation ◽  
The Mean ◽  
And Control

Background<br />Reducing postoperative pain can improve patient satisfaction and hospital cost. Intravenous magnesium sulfate is one of the proposed drugs for preemptive analgesia. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of magnesium sulfate on postoperative pain in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery.<br /><br />Methods<br />A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on candidates for vertebral fusion surgery with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I-II. One hundred and two patients were randomized into the magnesium sulfate group and control group. The magnesium sulfate group received magnesium sulfate at a dose of 50mg/kg in 20 mL volume and infused during 15-30 minutes pre-operation, while the control group received 20 mL normal saline. The severity of the pain was assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours after patients entering the post-anesthetic care unit. After the operation, the patients’ relaxation rate was assessed based on Ramsay sedation score (RSS).<br /><br />Results<br />There was no significant difference at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours post-operation between the two groups in the mean severity of pain (p&gt;0.05). There was no significant difference at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours post-operation between the two groups in the mean of pethidine consumption. There was no significant difference in the relaxation of the patients according to the RSS criteria in the magnesium sulfate and control groups (p=0.162). <br /><br />Conclusion<br />Pre-operative administration of magnesium sulfate does not affect reduction in postoperative pain and opioid consumption of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery.

scholarly journals Staged surgical strategy of symptomatic lumbar adjacent-segment degeneration: full-endoscopic decompression versus extended posterior interbody fusion

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tong Li ◽  
Bin Zhu ◽  
Xiaoguang Liu
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Adjacent Segments ◽  
Outcome Evaluations

Abstract Background Symptomatic adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD) is a common complication after lumbar fusion surgery. We want to evaluate the clinical and imaging outcome of full-endoscopic lumbar decompression (FELD) in comparison with extended posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for ASD after lumbar fusion surgeries and develop a staged revision strategy. Methods This retrospective study enrolled 65 patients with ASD who treated with FELD (n=31) or extended PLIF (n=34) between January 2014 and January 2018. Clinical outcome evaluations were performed preoperatively, at 3, 12, 24 months postoperatively, including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores for function assessment, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low-back pain and leg pain. Imaging outcome evaluations were performed preoperatively, immediately after surgery and at the last follow up, including disc height (DH) and lumbar lordosis (LL). Results The ratio of patients with adjacent segmental instability in the PLIF group was significantly higher than that in the FELD group (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in other baseline data for FELD and PLIF groups (p>0.05). Mean operative time, blood loss and length of hospital stay were significantly decreased for the FELD group (p<0.001). For patients with stable adjacent segments, there was no significant difference in preoperative and postoperative low-back pain, leg pain and function between 2 groups (p>0.05). The patients in PLIF group had restored DH after surgery, which was significantly higher than FELD group (p<0.05). For patients with unstable adjacent segments, the low-back and leg pain of PLIF group were significantly relieved than that in FELD group within 24 and 3 months after surgery (p<0.05). The function of PLIF group was significantly improved within 12 months after surgery (p<0.05). The DH was only significantly restored within 3 months after surgery (p<0.05). Recurrence was found in 2 (6.5%, p>0.05) patients in FELD group, while no patient in PLIF group had recurrence. Conclusions FELD could achieve satisfactory safety and efficacy for the treatment of stable ASD, which was not worse than PLIF. With less trauma and faster recovery, FELD may be an alternative surgical treatment for stable ASD.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion in revision surgery for restenosis after posterior decompression

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. E11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshifumi Kudo ◽  
Ichiro Okano ◽  
Tomoaki Toyone ◽  
Akira Matsuoka ◽  
Hiroshi Maruyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Spinal Canal ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Decompression Surgery ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Decompression ◽  
Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Dural Tears

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results of revision interbody fusion surgery between lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with propensity score (PS) adjustments and to investigate the efficacy of indirect decompression with LLIF in previously decompressed segments on the basis of radiological assessment.METHODSA retrospective study of patients who underwent revision surgery for recurrence of neurological symptoms after posterior decompression surgery was performed. Postoperative complications and operative factors were evaluated and compared between LLIF and PLIF/TLIF. Moreover, postoperative improvement in cross-sectional areas (CSAs) in the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen was evaluated in LLIF cases.RESULTSA total of 56 patients (21 and 35 cases of LLIF and PLIF/TLIF, respectively) were included. In the univariate analysis, the LLIF group had significantly more endplate injuries (p = 0.03) and neurological deficits (p = 0.042), whereas the PLIF/TLIF group demonstrated significantly more dural tears (p < 0.001), surgical site infections (SSIs) (p = 0.02), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (p < 0.001). After PS adjustments, the LLIF group still showed significantly more endplate injuries (p = 0.03), and the PLIF/TLIF group demonstrated significantly more dural tears (p < 0.001), EBL (p < 0.001), and operating time (p = 0.04). The PLIF/TLIF group showed a trend toward a higher incidence of SSI (p = 0.10). There was no statistically significant difference regarding improvement in the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores between the 2 surgical procedures (p = 0.77). The CSAs in the spinal canal and foramen were both significantly improved (p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSLLIF is a safe, effective, and less invasive procedure with acceptable complication rates for revision surgery for previously decompressed segments. Therefore, LLIF can be an alternative to PLIF/TLIF for restenosis after posterior decompression surgery.

scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of Microendoscopy-Assisted Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 135
Author(s):  
Tomohide Segawa ◽  
Hisashi Koga ◽  
Masahito Oshina ◽  
Katsuhiko Ishibashi ◽  
Yuichi Takano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Lateral Interbody Fusion ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lateral Interbody

Background and objectives: Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF) is a widely performed, minimally invasive technique to achieve lumbar lateral interbody fusion. However, some complications can arise due to constraints posed by the limited surgical space and visual field. The purpose of this study was to assess the short-term postoperative clinical outcomes of microendoscopy-assisted OLIF (ME-OLIF) compared to conventional OLIF. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively investigated 75 consecutive patients who underwent OLIF or ME-OLIF. The age, sex, diagnosis, and number of fused levels were obtained from medical records. Operation time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and intraoperative complications were also collected. Operation time and EBL were only measured per level required for the lateral procedure, excluding the posterior fixation surgery. The primary outcome measure was assessed using the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ). The secondary outcome measure was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), measured preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Results: This case series consisted of 14 patients in the OLIF group and 61 patients in the ME-OLIF group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the mean operative time and EBL (p = 0.90 and p = 0.50, respectively). The perioperative complication rate was 21.4% in the OLIF group and 21.3% in the ME-OLIF group (p = 0.99). In both groups, the postoperative JOABPEQ, EQ-5D, and ODI scores improved significantly (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Although there was no significant difference in clinical results between the two surgical methods, the results suggest that both are safe surgical methods and that microendoscopy-assisted OLIF could serve as a potential alternative to the conventional OLIF procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document