scholarly journals Unilateral Minimally Invasive Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (Unilateral Micro-PLIF) for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Surgical Technique

10.5772/31401 ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shigeru Kobayashi
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Technique ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using an En-Bloc Resected Lamina as an Interbody Spacer in Combination with Spinal Instruments

1998 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 325-332
Author(s):  
Shigeru Hirabayashi ◽  
Kiyoshi Kumano ◽  
Takeshi Uchida
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinous Process ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bony Union ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Time Of Operation

We developed a new method of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using an en-bloc resected lamina with or without a hydroxyapatite block as an interbody spacer instead of auto-iliac bone, in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of our method. There were 23 patients (13 males, 10 females, age at the time of operation: 21–71 years, mean 50.5 years; follow-up: 1–4 years, mean 2 years and 3 months). In 10 patients with spondylolitic spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with spondylolysis, the floating lamina was resected enbloc by mid-line splitting. In 7 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with unstable spine, a cleavage was made at the isthmus and then the complex of lamina and inferior spinous process was resected en-bloc. Seventeen patients with olisthesis underwent reduction. PLIF was performed at the L4/L5 level in 10 patients and the L5/S1 level in 13 patients. Sixteen patients with preoperative low back pain recovered, except for one patient with instability at the adjacent vertebra. All of the seven patients with preoperative gait disturbance recovered. The ratio of olisthesis changed from preoperative 30% to postoperative 18% on average. Good bony union was obtained in both the patients with and those without a hydroxyapatite spacer. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using an en-bloc resected lamina as an interbody spacer in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation was useful.

Surgical Outcomes and adverse effects for Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Abdelsalam Wafa ◽  
Tameem Shafik Elkhateeb ◽  
Reda Shaaban Abdelhameed
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Minimal Invasive ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Safe Alternative ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Abstract Background Minimal invasive techniques for lumbar interbody fusion is a novel surgical procedure developed to reduce approach-related morbidity associated with traditional open techniques. Objective To determine the clinical comparative effectiveness and adverse event rates of posterior minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to open transforaminal or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF/PLIF) for early and late outcomes by using the visual analogue scale for back pain (VAS–back) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Data Sources Medline databases (PubMed, Medscape, ScienceDirect. EMF-Portal) and all materials available in the Internet till 2018. Data Extraction If the studies did not fulfill the inclusion criteria, they were excluded. Study quality assessment included whether ethical approval was gained, eligibility criteria specified, appropriate controls, and adequate information and defined assessment measures. Conclusion MIS techniques for lumbar interbody fusion is a safe alternative for classic open procedures but due to the limited number of the included RCTs, more well-designed multicenter RCTs with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up are still needed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of both techniques.

Repeated adjacent-segment degeneration after posterior lumbar interbody fusion

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 538-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinya Okuda ◽  
Takenori Oda ◽  
Ryoji Yamasaki ◽  
Takafumi Maeno ◽  
Motoki Iwasaki
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Sacral Slope ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Primary Operation ◽  
The Third

One of the most important sequelae affecting long-term results is adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD) after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Although several reports have described the incidence rate, there have been no reports of repeated ASD. The purpose of this report was to describe 1 case of repeated ASD after PLIF. A 62-year-old woman with L-4 degenerative spondylolisthesis underwent PLIF at L4–5. At the second operation, L3–4 PLIF was performed for L-3 degenerative spondylolisthesis 6 years after the primary operation. At the third operation, L2–3 PLIF was performed for L-2 degenerative spondylolisthesis 1.5 years after the primary operation. Vertebral collapse of L-1 was detected 1 year after the third operation, and the collapse had progressed. At the fourth operation, 3 years after the third operation, vertebral column resection of L-1 and replacement of titanium mesh cages with pedicle screw fixation between T-4 and L-5 was performed. Although the patient's symptoms resolved after each operation, the time between surgeries shortened. The sacral slope decreased gradually although each PLIF achieved local lordosis at the fused segment.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review

2014 ◽  
Vol 472 (6) ◽  
pp. 1792-1799 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gursukhman S. Sidhu ◽  
Erik Henkelman ◽  
Alexander R. Vaccaro ◽  
Todd J. Albert ◽  
Alan Hilibrand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document