scholarly journals Total 3D Airo® Navigation for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaofeng Lian ◽  
Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez ◽  
Connor Berlin ◽  
Ajit Jada ◽  
Yu Moriguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Skin Incision ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Accuracy Rate ◽  
3D Navigation ◽  
K Wires ◽  
New Generation

Introduction.A new generation of iCT scanner, Airo®, has been introduced. The purpose of this study is to describe how Airo facilitates minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).Method. We used the latest generation of portable iCT in all cases without the assistance of K-wires. We recorded the operation time, number of scans, and pedicle screw accuracy.Results. From January 2015 to December 2015, 33 consecutive patients consisting of 17 men and 16 women underwent single-level or two-level MIS-TLIF operations in our institution. The ages ranged from 23 years to 86 years (mean, 66.6 years). We treated all the cases in MIS fashion. In four cases, a tubular laminectomy at L1/2 was performed at the same time. The average operation time was 192.8 minutes and average time of placement per screw was 2.6 minutes. No additional fluoroscopy was used. Our screw accuracy rate was 98.6%. No complications were encountered.Conclusions. Airo iCT MIS-TLIF can be used for initial planning of the skin incision, precise screw, and cage placement, without the need for fluoroscopy. “Total navigation” (complete intraoperative 3D navigation without fluoroscopy) can be achieved by combining Airo navigation with navigated guide tubes for screw placement.

scholarly journals Comparison of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for one-level lumbar spinal stenosis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenbin Hua ◽  
Bingjin Wang ◽  
Wencan Ke ◽  
Xinghuo Wu ◽  
Yukun Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Cauda Equina ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Length Of Hospitalization

Abstract Background: The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical outcomes and postoperative complications of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression (LE-ULBD) and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) to treat one-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 112 consecutive patients of one-level LSS undergoing either LE-ULBD or MIS-TLIF was performed. Patient demographics, operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation, length of hospitalization, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) score for leg and back pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and the Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. The healthcare cost was also recorded.Results: The operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation and length of hospitalization of LE-ULBD group were shorter than MIS-TLIF group. The postoperative mean VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups. According to the modified Macnab criteria, the outcomes rated as excellent/good rate were 90.6% and 93.8% in the two groups. The mean VAS scores, ODI scores and outcomes of the modified Macnab criteria of both groups were of no significant difference. The healthcare cost of LE-ULBD group was lower than MIS-TLIF group. Two cases of intraoperative epineurium injury were observed in the LE-ULBD group. One case of cauda equina injury was observed in the LE-ULBD group. No nerve injury, dural injury or cauda equina syndrome was observed in MIS-TLIF group. However, one case with transient urinary retention, one case with pleural effusion, one case with incision infection and one case with implant dislodgement were observed in MIS-TLIF group. Conclusions: Both LE-ULBD and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective to treat one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. LE-ULBD is a more minimally invasive option and of less economic burden compared with MIS-TLIF. Decompression plus instrumented fusion may be not necessary for one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity.

scholarly journals Comparison of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for one-level lumbar spinal stenosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenbin Hua ◽  
Bingjin Wang ◽  
Wencan Ke ◽  
Xinghuo Wu ◽  
Yukun Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Cauda Equina ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Length Of Hospitalization

Abstract Background The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical outcomes and postoperative complications of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression (LE-ULBD) and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) to treat one-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. Methods A retrospective analysis of 112 consecutive patients of one-level LSS undergoing either LE-ULBD or MIS-TLIF was performed. Patient demographics, operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation, length of hospitalization, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) score for leg and back pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and the Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. The healthcare cost was also recorded. Results The operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation and length of hospitalization of LE-ULBD group were shorter than MIS-TLIF group. The postoperative mean VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups. According to the modified Macnab criteria, the outcomes rated as excellent/good rate were 90.6 and 93.8% in the two groups. The mean VAS scores, ODI scores and outcomes of the modified Macnab criteria of both groups were of no significant difference. The healthcare cost of LE-ULBD group was lower than MIS-TLIF group. Two cases of intraoperative epineurium injury were observed in the LE-ULBD group. One case of cauda equina injury was observed in the LE-ULBD group. No nerve injury, dural injury or cauda equina syndrome was observed in MIS-TLIF group. However, one case with transient urinary retention, one case with pleural effusion, one case with incision infection and one case with implant dislodgement were observed in MIS-TLIF group. Conclusions Both LE-ULBD and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective to treat one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. LE-ULBD is a more minimally invasive option and of less economic burden compared with MIS-TLIF. Decompression plus instrumented fusion may be not necessary for one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity.

scholarly journals Comparison of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for one-level lumbar spinal stenosis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenbin Hua ◽  
Bingjin Wang ◽  
Wencan Ke ◽  
Xinghuo Wu ◽  
Yukun Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Cauda Equina ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Length Of Hospitalization

Abstract Background: The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical outcomes and postoperative complications of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression (LE-ULBD) and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) to treat one-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 112 consecutive patients of one-level LSS undergoing either LE-ULBD or MIS-TLIF was performed. Patient demographics, operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation, length of hospitalization, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) score for leg and back pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and the Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. The healthcare cost was also recorded.Results: The operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation and length of hospitalization of LE-ULBD group were shorter than MIS-TLIF group. The postoperative mean VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups. According to the modified Macnab criteria, the outcomes rated as excellent/good rate were 90.6% and 93.8% in the two groups. The mean VAS scores, ODI scores and outcomes of the modified Macnab criteria of both groups were of no significant difference. The healthcare cost of LE-ULBD group was lower than MIS-TLIF group. Two cases of intraoperative epineurium injury were observed in the LE-ULBD group. One case of cauda equina injury was observed in the LE-ULBD group. No nerve injury, dural injury or cauda equina syndrome was observed in MIS-TLIF group. However, one case with transient urinary retention, one case with pleural effusion, one case with incision infection and one case with implant dislodgement were observed in MIS-TLIF group.Conclusions: Both LE-ULBD and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective to treat one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. LE-ULBD is a more minimally invasive option and of less economic burden compared with MIS-TLIF. Decompression plus instrumented fusion may be not necessary for one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity.

scholarly journals Comparison of Full-Endoscopic Visualized Unilateral Laminotomy Bilateral Decompression and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for One-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenbin Hua ◽  
Bingjin Wang ◽  
Wencan Ke ◽  
Xinghuo Wu ◽  
Yukun Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Cauda Equina ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Length Of Hospitalization

Abstract Background: The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical outcomes and postoperative complications of full-endoscopic visualized unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression (FEV-ULBD) and minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) to treat one-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 112 consecutive patients of one-level LSS undergoing either FEV-ULBD or MIS-TLIF was performed. Patient demographics, operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation, length of hospitalization, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) score for leg and back pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and the Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. The healthcare cost was also recorded.Results: The operation time, estimated blood loss, time to ambulation and length of hospitalization of FEV-ULBD group were shorter than MIS-TLIF group. The postoperative mean VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups. According to the modified Macnab criteria, the outcomes rated as excellent/good rate were 90.6% and 93.8% in the two groups. The mean VAS scores, ODI scores and outcomes of the modified Macnab criteria of both groups were of no significant difference. The healthcare cost of FEV-ULBD group was lower than MIS-TLIF group. Two cases of intraoperative epineurium injury were observed in the FEV-ULBD group. One case of cauda equina injury was observed in the FEV-ULBD group. No nerve injury, dural injury or cauda equina syndrome was observed in MIS-TLIF group. However, one case with transient urinary retention, one case with pleural effusion, one case with incision infection and one case with implant dislodgement were observed in MIS-TLIF group. Conclusions: Both FEV-ULBD and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective to treat one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity. FEV-ULBD is a more minimally invasive option and of less economic burden compared with MIS-TLIF. Decompression plus instrumented fusion may be not necessary for one-level LSS without degenerative spondylolisthesis or deformity.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion using 3-Dimensional Total Navigation: 2-Dimensional Operative Video

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. E9-E10
Author(s):  
Sertac Kirnaz ◽  
Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez ◽  
Christoph Wipplinger ◽  
Franziska Anna Schmidt ◽  
Ibrahim Hussain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Intraoperative Imaging ◽  
Computer Navigation ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
3D Navigation ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
K Wires

Abstract This video demonstrates the workflow of a minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) using a portable intraoperative CT (iCT) scanner, (Airo®, Brainlab AG, Feldkirchen, Germany), combined with state-of-the-art total 3D computer navigation. The navigation is used not only for instrumentation but also for intraoperative planning throughout the procedure, inserting the cage, therefore, completely eliminating the need for fluoroscopy. In this video, we present a case of a 72-yr-old female patient with a history of lower back pain, right lower extremity radicular pain and weakness for 2 yr due to L4-L5 spondylolisthesis with instability and severe lumbar spinal stenosis. The patient is treated by a L4-L5 unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) and MIS-TLIF. MIS-TLIF using total 3D navigation significantly improves the workflow of the conventional TLIF procedure. The tailored access to the spine is translated into smaller but more efficient surgical corridors. This modification in a “total navigation” modality minimizes the staff radiation exposure to 0 by navigating in real time over iCT obtained images that can be acquired while the surgical staff is protected or outside the OR. Furthermore, this technique makes real-time and virtual intraoperative imaging of screws and their planned trajectory feasible. 3D Navigation eliminates the need for K-Wires, thus decreasing the risk of vascular penetration injury due to K-Wire malpositioning. 3D navigation can also predict the positioning of the interbody cage, thereby, decreasing the risk of malpositioning or subsidence. Patient consent was obtained prior to performing the procedure.

Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive midline lumbar interbody fusion versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-35
Author(s):  
Mladen Djurasovic ◽  
Jeffrey L. Gum ◽  
Charles H. Crawford ◽  
Kirk Owens ◽  
Morgan Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Direct Costs ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

OBJECTIVEThe midline transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) using cortical screw fixation is a novel, minimally invasive procedure that may offer enhanced recovery over traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Little information is available regarding the comparative cost-effectiveness of the MIDLIF over conventional TLIF. The purpose of this study was to compare cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive MIDLIF with open TLIF.METHODSFrom a prospective, multisurgeon, surgical database, a consecutive series of patients undergoing 1- or 2-level MIDLIF for degenerative lumbar conditions was identified and propensity matched to patients undergoing TLIF based on age, sex, smoking status, BMI, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System (ASA) class, and levels fused. Direct costs at 1 year were collected, including costs associated with the index surgical visit as well as costs associated with readmission. Improvement in health-related quality of life was measured using EQ-5D and SF-6D.RESULTSOf 214 and 181 patients undergoing MIDLIF and TLIF, respectively, 33 cases in each cohort were successfully propensity matched. Consistent with propensity matching, there was no difference in age, sex, BMI, diagnosis, ASA class, smoking status, or levels fused. Spondylolisthesis was the most common indication for surgery in both cohorts. Variable direct costs at 1 year were $2493 lower in the MIDLIF group than in the open TLIF group (mean $15,867 vs $17,612, p = 0.073). There was no difference in implant (p = 0.193) or biologics (p = 0.145) cost, but blood utilization (p = 0.015), operating room supplies (p < 0.001), hospital room and board (p < 0.001), pharmacy (p = 0.010), laboratory (p = 0.004), and physical therapy (p = 0.009) costs were all significantly lower in the MIDLIF group. Additionally, the mean length of stay was decreased for MIDLIF as well (3.21 vs 4.02 days, p = 0.05). The EQ-5D gain at 1 year was 0.156 for MIDLIF and 0.141 for open TLIF (p = 0.821). The SF-6D gain at 1 year was 0.071 for MIDLIF and 0.057 for open TLIF (p = 0.551).CONCLUSIONSCompared with patients undergoing traditional open TLIF, those undergoing MIDLIF have similar 1-year gains in health-related quality of life, with total direct costs that are $2493 lower. Although the findings were not statistically significant, minimally invasive MIDLIF showed improved cost-effectiveness at 1 year compared with open TLIF.

Incidence of graft extrusion following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 88-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Bakhsheshian ◽  
Ryan Khanna ◽  
Winward Choy ◽  
Cort D. Lawton ◽  
Alex T. Nixon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Graft Extrusion
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document