scholarly journals Minimally invasive spine surgeries for treatment of thoracolumbar fractures of spine: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. S147-S155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaitanya Dev Pannu ◽  
Kamran Farooque ◽  
Vijay Sharma ◽  
Deepika Singal
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Thoracolumbar Fractures ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of the Current Role of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilo A. Molina ◽  
Ziya L. Gokaslan ◽  
Daniel M. Sciubba
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Perioperative Morbidity ◽  
Neurological Improvement ◽  
Improved Outcomes ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine ◽  
Spine Disease

Although increasingly aggressive decompression and resection methods have resulted in improved outcomes for patients with metastatic spine disease, these aggressive surgeries are not feasible for patients with numerous comorbid conditions. Such patients stand to benefit from management via minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS), given its association with decreased perioperative morbidity. We performed a systematic review of literature with the goal of evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of MIS in the setting of metastatic spine disease. Results suggest that MIS is an efficacious means of achieving neurological improvement and alleviating pain. In addition, data suggests that MIS offers decreased blood loss, operative time, and complication rates in comparison to standard open spine surgery. However, due to the paucity of studies and low class of available evidence, the ability to draw comprehensive conclusions is limited. Future investigations should be conducted comparing standard surgery versus MIS in a prospective fashion.

scholarly journals Spinal Biologics in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Surgery

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Y. Chang ◽  
Wellington K. Hsu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Bone Graft ◽  
Lumbar Surgery ◽  
Spinal Arthrodesis ◽  
Optimal Fusion ◽  
Bone Graft Substitutes ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine

As the use of minimally invasive spine (MIS) fusion approaches continues to grow, increased scrutiny is being placed on its outcomes and efficacies against traditional open fusion surgeries. While there are many factors that contribute to the success of achieving spinal arthrodesis, selecting the optimal fusion biologic remains a top priority. With an ever-expanding market of bone graft substitutes, it is important to evaluate each of their use as it pertains to MIS techniques. This review will summarize the important characteristics and properties of various spinal biologics used in minimally invasive lumbar surgeries and compare their fusion rates via a systematic review of published literature.

Minimally invasive spine surgery: systematic review

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Péter Banczerowski ◽  
Gábor Czigléczki ◽  
Zoltán Papp ◽  
Róbert Veres ◽  
Harry Zvi Rappaport ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine

scholarly journals Outcome of minimal invasive surgery approach for spine infection: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 4422
Author(s):  
Ketut Gede Mulyadi Ridia
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimal Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimal Invasive ◽  
Spine Infection ◽  
Minimally Invasive Spine

The concept of minimally invasive surgery has gained increasing popularity in the last several decades, are being introduced as an alternative to limit the surgical complications while achieving best possible outcome. While minimally invasive spine surgery holds promise for lower blood loss, faster patient recovery, shorter hospital stays, and the potential to transition procedures to the ambulatory setting, safety in spinal surgery remains paramount and has (appropriately) tempered some of the enthusiasm for the results of aggressive early adapters. Until now, there has been no literature summarizing the evidence of MIS outcome in treating spondylitis TB of the bone. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the outcome of minimal invasive surgery approach for spine infection. authors comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library to search for studies about minimally invasive surgery as management of tuberculous spondylitis up to June 7th, 2019. The selection of appropriate studies was performed by independent investigators based on PRISMA guideline. Given the limited number of studies, there was no restriction in terms of patient’s demographics, the specific minimal invasive surgical method, and publication status. Authors identified the method for minimally invasive approach and open approach, the functional outcome, intraoperative outcome, radiological outcome, length of stay, follow up period, and complication. Authors found 81 articles from database. After evaluating full text, 8 articles (346 patients) were found to be eligible. More than 110 patients were treated with open spine surgery, while more than 270 patients were treated using minimally invasive spine surgery the minimal invasive methods were posterior pedicle screws fixation, plate fixation, lateral nail bar fixation, and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. The visualization methods include C-arm fluoroscopy, X-ray fluoroscopy. The follow-up period ranges from 1 to 40 months. The functional outcome were found to be satisfying with minimal complications. MIS yielded satisfactory result in comparison to conventional open surgery for spine infection. More long term future studies should be conducted to in order to search for more solid evidence regarding this claim.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document