Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.2
2.9
Journals
JCM
Special Issues
Clinical Research on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery
jcm-logo
Submit to Special Issue Submit Abstract to Special Issue Review for JCM Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Clinical Research on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

A special issue of Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383). This special issue belongs to the section "Orthopedics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 20 June 2026 | Viewed by 1402

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Daniel Fahim

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. Department of Neurosurgery, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester Hills, MI, USA
2. Spine Tumor Program, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI, USA
3. Spine & Brain Surgery, Royal Oak, MI, USA
Interests: spine tumors; minimally invasive spine surgery; kyphoplasty and radiofrequency ablation
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

We invite you to participate in this Special Issue of JCM on “Clinical Research on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery.” As you are aware, there are many potential advantages to minimally invasive spine surgery when compared to traditional open spine surgery.

Although minimally invasive spine surgery is frequently utilized for degenerative disease of the spine, and we welcome submissions regarding this topic, we are also eager to learn more about the role of minimally invasive spine surgery in spinal trauma, spinal oncology, pathological fractures, and even infectious processes. If you have clinical data or research regarding the use of minimally invasive spine surgery regarding any of these topics please consider sharing your findings and insight with your colleagues.

We look forward to receiving your submissions to this Special Issue.

Cordially,

Dr. Daniel Fahim
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Clinical Medicine is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • minimally invasive spine surgery
  • spine tumors
  • spine trauma
  • spine fractures
  • lumbar stenosis
  • lumbar spondylolisthesis
  • lumbar disc herniation
  • lumbar radiculopathy
  • thoracic disc herniations
  • cervical radiculopathy

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

9 pages, 682 KB  
Article
Ocular Safety of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery: An Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography-Based Analysis
by Ali Gulec, Ebubekir Eravsar, Sadettin Ciftci, Abdullah Beyoglu and Bahattin Kerem Aydin
J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15(5), 1774; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15051774 - 26 Feb 2026
Viewed by 380
Abstract
Background: UBE has gained popularity as a minimally invasive alternative to open spinal procedures. However, it raises concerns about potential ocular complications. Despite these concerns, there is a lack of studies evaluating UBE’s impact on retinal microvasculature using objective imaging tools such [...] Read more.
Background: UBE has gained popularity as a minimally invasive alternative to open spinal procedures. However, it raises concerns about potential ocular complications. Despite these concerns, there is a lack of studies evaluating UBE’s impact on retinal microvasculature using objective imaging tools such as OCTA. This study aims to evaluate the effects of UBE on the microvascular structures of the retina and optic nerve using OCTA, and to determine whether UBE poses a risk for perioperative vision loss. Methods: This study included 32 patients who underwent UBE for lumbar stenosis and received ophthalmologic examinations preoperatively, and at postoperative weeks 1 and 4. Patients with systemic or ocular vascular comorbidities were excluded. OCTA parameters including vascular density (VD), foveal avascular zone (FAZ), retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), central macular thickness (CMT), and subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) were evaluated using swept-source OCT. Results: No patients experienced clinical vision loss. A statistically significant change was observed over time in FAZ (p = 0.043), VDd superior (p = 0.018), VDd temporal (p = 0.032), and RNFLts (p = 0.032). However, only VDd superior showed a statistically significant decrease at postoperative week 4 compared to baseline (p = 0.050). All other parameters either returned to baseline or showed no significant change. No clinically relevant visual changes were detected. Conclusions: In this study, UBE spinal surgery was not associated with clinically evident visual loss or sustained OCTA-detected microvascular alterations during short-term follow-up. These findings should be interpreted as reflecting the absence of detectable short-term changes rather than definitive evidence of ocular safety. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Research on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1223 KB  
Article
Imaging-Based Quantitative Assessment of Cage Migration After Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion
by Ue-Cheung Ho and Lu-Ting Kuo
J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15(3), 1069; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15031069 - 29 Jan 2026
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 384
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Posterior cage migration is a clinically relevant complication after lumbar interbody fusion. Most reported risk factors are derived from open techniques, whereas evidence specific to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is limited. We evaluated factors associated with cage migration [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Posterior cage migration is a clinically relevant complication after lumbar interbody fusion. Most reported risk factors are derived from open techniques, whereas evidence specific to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is limited. We evaluated factors associated with cage migration and symptomatic retropulsion in a large MIS-TLIF cohort. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 650 consecutive patients undergoing MIS-TLIF, comprising 1126 fused motion segments. Cage migration was defined as posterior displacement > 3 mm compared with early postoperative radiographs. Demographic, clinical, surgical, and radiographic variables were compared between segments with and without migration. Cases with migration were further stratified by revision requirement. Results: Cage migration occurred in 27 of 1126 levels (2.4%). Seven cases required revision surgery for symptomatic cage retropulsion, corresponding to a level-based incidence of 0.6%. More posterior initial cage placement was significantly associated with subsequent migration. Age, body habitus, smoking, diabetes, endplate violation, and multilevel fusion were not associated with migration. Among migration cases, male sex was associated with higher odds of revision, and no radiographic or mechanical parameter predicted progression from radiographic migration to symptomatic retropulsion. In revision cases, the migrated cage was removed via the original approach, followed by contralateral placement of a new interbody cage using a minimally invasive technique. Conclusions: In this MIS-TLIF cohort, posterior initial cage placement was the primary factor associated with cage migration, consistent with prior open-series findings. Progression from migration to symptomatic retropulsion was not explained by mechanical parameters alone, suggesting a multifactorial process. These findings underscore the importance of meticulous cage positioning during MIS-TLIF and provide practical insights for postoperative surveillance and revision decision-making. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Research on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

11 pages, 3531 KB  
Case Report
Functional Ureteral Obstruction Due to Retroperitoneal Tissue Interposition During Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Report of Two Cases
by Jun-Seok Lee, Young-Hoon Kim, Sang-Il Kim, Kihyun Kwon, Sangjun Park, Joonghyun Ahn, Chungwon Bang and Hyung-Youl Park
J. Clin. Med. 2026, 15(9), 3235; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15093235 - 23 Apr 2026
Viewed by 329
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Ureteral complications following oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) are uncommon and are typically attributed to direct mechanical injury. Functional ureteral obstruction without overt ureteral damage remains poorly characterized. We report two cases that provide clinical and intraoperative evidence of a previously [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Ureteral complications following oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) are uncommon and are typically attributed to direct mechanical injury. Functional ureteral obstruction without overt ureteral damage remains poorly characterized. We report two cases that provide clinical and intraoperative evidence of a previously underrecognized mechanism of ureteral obstruction associated with anterior cage positioning during OLIF. Case Presentation: Among 180 OLIF procedures performed by a single surgeon, two cases (1.1%) of postoperative or intraoperative ureteral compromise without direct structural injury were identified. In the first case, postoperative imaging revealed hydronephrosis and focal angulation of the left proximal ureter at the level of the interbody cage, without contrast extravasation. The obstruction was managed with double-J ureteral stenting, and serial renal function monitoring confirmed preserved renal function throughout the clinical course. In the second case, retroperitoneal tissue including the ureter was directly observed intraoperatively to be interposed between the anterior longitudinal ligament and the interbody cage during anterior cage placement. Release of the interposed tissue resulted in immediate ureteral decompression without structural damage. Correlation of the postoperative findings in the first case with the intraoperative observations of the second case supports a unified mechanistic explanation: anterior cage advancement may draw retroperitoneal tissue into the cage–anterior longitudinal ligament interface, subjecting the ureter to focal compression or angulation. Conclusions: Functional ureteral obstruction during OLIF may occur secondary to retroperitoneal tissue interposition rather than direct ureteral trauma. Awareness of this mechanism and meticulous protection of the anterior retroperitoneal layer during cage advancement may help prevent avoidable ureteral complications. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Research on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Back to TopTop