Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (24)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = MIS-TLIF

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
14 pages, 1506 KB  
Article
Sagittal Alignment Correction in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion with Unilateral vs. Bilateral Facetectomy
by Sergej Telentschak, Eva Fruechtl, Moritz Perrech, Moritz Lenschow, Niklas von Spreckelsen, Dierk-Marko Czybulka, Roland Goldbrunner and Volker Neuschmelting
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(21), 7595; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217595 - 26 Oct 2025
Viewed by 252
Abstract
Objective: Bilateral facetectomy (BF) within minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) remains debated regarding its advantages over unilateral facetectomy (UF) in restoring segmental lordosis, addressing spondylolisthesis and decompressing both neural foramina. The evidence is limited. We sought to determine the benefits of [...] Read more.
Objective: Bilateral facetectomy (BF) within minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) remains debated regarding its advantages over unilateral facetectomy (UF) in restoring segmental lordosis, addressing spondylolisthesis and decompressing both neural foramina. The evidence is limited. We sought to determine the benefits of contralateral facetectomy on radiographic and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis on patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent single-level percutaneous instrumentation and MI-TLIF with either UF or BF. Plain radiographs, CT and MRI were utilized for comparative radiographic analysis. Various intraoperative and clinical parameters were evaluated to assess surgical effort and clinical outcomes. Results: We included 81 UF and 23 BF cases; complete radiological data were available for 27 and 13 patients, respectively. Both techniques demonstrated a comparable increase in segmental lordosis (UF 2.1° ± 5.3° vs. BF 4.3° ± 5.4°, p > 0.1), which is below the study’s minimum detectable effect (MDE ≈ 5.1° at 80% power). Spondylolisthesis reduction was similar, with UF achieving a mean of 2.8 ± 2.2 mm and BF 2.4 ± 1.9 mm (p > 0.1). Mean posterior disc height did not differ significantly between groups (p > 0.1). The mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher with BF (803 ± 347 mL) compared to UF (437 ± 207 mL, p < 0.001). The mean duration of surgery was significantly longer for BF (240 ± 48 min) compared to UF (197 ± 37 min, p = 0.001). Conclusions: This study found no evidence of a large advantage of BF over UF in restoring segmental lordosis, spondylolisthesis and posterior disc height in monosegmental MI-TLIF surgery. Given the higher blood loss and longer operative time observed with BF, its use should be selective for specific indications. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Advances in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 11724 KB  
Article
Improved Clinical and Radiological Outcomes with Double-Cage Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparative CT-Based Study
by Yu-Hao Huang and Jwo-Luen Pao
Diagnostics 2025, 15(20), 2652; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15202652 - 21 Oct 2025
Viewed by 561
Abstract
Background/Objectives: When transitioning from an older surgical technique to a newer one, we expect improved treatment outcomes and fewer complications. However, direct comparative studies to confirm these advantages are often lacking. Tubular minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MISTLIF) has been widely [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: When transitioning from an older surgical technique to a newer one, we expect improved treatment outcomes and fewer complications. However, direct comparative studies to confirm these advantages are often lacking. Tubular minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MISTLIF) has been widely used, but limitations in visualization and endplate preparation may compromise fusion quality. Biportal endoscopic TLIF (BETLIF), a more recent alternative, offers enhanced magnification and superior hemostasis. Still, CT-based comparative data on fusion integrity remain limited. To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes following a chronological transition from MISTLIF to BETLIF, using thin-slice CT to assess fusion integrity. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 179 patients treated by a single surgeon between January 2018 and May 2021. The first 90 cases underwent MISTLIF, followed by 89 BETLIF procedures. Clinical outcomes included Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores. Radiological assessments at one year postoperatively (X-ray and thin-slice CT) included disc height, segmental lordosis, Bridwell fusion grade, cage subsidence, and subchondral osteolysis. Results: BETLIF was associated with significantly shorter hospital stays (5.7 vs. 7.4 days) and fewer transfusions (0% vs. 14.7%). BETLIF showed significantly better ODI (12.7 vs. 23.5), JOA scores (26.4 vs. 20.6), and comparable VAS improvement. Radiologically, BETLIF had significantly higher fusion rates (93.3% vs. 82.4%), greater disc height restoration, and lower rates of cage subsidence (5.0% vs. 13.7%) and osteolysis (13.3% vs. 52.9%). Conclusions: BETLIF demonstrated superior clinical and radiological outcomes, likely due to enhanced endoscopic visualization and precise endplate preparation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diagnosis and Management of Spinal Diseases)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 481 KB  
Review
Resident Training in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review
by Michael C. Oblich, James G. Lyman, Rishi Jain, Dillan Prasad, Sharbel Romanos, Nader Dahdaleh, Najib E. El Tecle and Christopher S. Ahuja
Brain Sci. 2025, 15(9), 936; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15090936 - 28 Aug 2025
Viewed by 993
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) is complex and requires proficiency with a variety of technological and robotic modalities. Acquiring these skills is a long and involved process, often with a steep learning curve. This paper seeks to characterize the state of [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) is complex and requires proficiency with a variety of technological and robotic modalities. Acquiring these skills is a long and involved process, often with a steep learning curve. This paper seeks to characterize the state of MISS training in neurosurgical and orthopedic residency programs, focusing on their effectiveness at minimizing substantial learning curves in the field, as well as highlighting potential areas for future growth. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases utilizing the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. Results: Of the 100 studies initially identified, 16 were included in our final analysis. MISS training types could be broadly grouped into four categories: virtual simulation (including AR and VR), physical models, hybrid didactic and simulation, and mentored training. Training with these modalities led to improvements in resident performance across multiple different MISS techniques, including percutaneous pedicle screw fixation, MIS dural repair, MIS-TLIF, MIS-LLIF, MIS-ULBD, microscopic discectomy/disk herniation repair, percutaneous needle placement, and surgical navigation. Specific improvements included reduced error rate, operation time, and fluoroscopy exposure, as well as increased procedural knowledge, accuracy, and confidence. Conclusions: The incorporation of MISS training modalities in spine surgery residency leads to increases in simulated performance and could serve as a means of overcoming significant learning curves in the field. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurosurgery: Minimally Invasive Surgery in Brain and Spine)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1995 KB  
Review
Optimizing TLIF Approach Selection: An Algorithmic Framework with Illustrative Cases
by Alyssa M. Bartlett, Summer Shabana, Caroline C. Folz, Mounica Paturu, Christoper I. Shaffrey, Parastou Quist, Olumide Danisa, Khoi D. Than, Peter Passias and Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(12), 4209; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14124209 - 13 Jun 2025
Viewed by 1153
Abstract
Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a commonly employed surgical technique for managing lumbar degenerative disease and spinal instability. While it offers advantages over posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), traditional TLIF often involves prolonged recovery and morbidity due to muscle retraction. To improve [...] Read more.
Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a commonly employed surgical technique for managing lumbar degenerative disease and spinal instability. While it offers advantages over posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), traditional TLIF often involves prolonged recovery and morbidity due to muscle retraction. To improve outcomes, several alternative techniques have emerged, including minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), trans-Kambin percutaneous TLIF (PE-TLIF), and transfacet TLIF (TF-TLIF). Each approach presents distinct anatomical and technical advantages, yet no standardized framework exists to guide their selection based on individual patient anatomy. In this study, we review the evolution of TLIF techniques and propose a novel algorithm that integrates patient-specific imaging, anatomical variability, and segmentation data to guide surgical decision-making. By analyzing the surgical corridors, indications, and limitations of each approach, and presenting representative clinical cases, we demonstrate how this algorithm can be applied in practice. For instance, TF-TLIF may be optimal in patients requiring direct decompression without major deformity, while PE-TLIF may be appropriate for those with Kambin’s triangles measuring ≥ 9 mm, allowing for indirect decompression. This tailored framework aims to optimize outcomes and reduce complications. Further prospective validation and incorporation of AI-driven segmentation tools are needed to support broader clinical implementation. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

14 pages, 690 KB  
Article
Spinal Anesthesia Results in Lower Costs Compared to General Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion—A Matched Cohort Study
by Favour C. Ononogbu-Uche, Abdullah Wael Saleh, Felix Toussaint, Taylor Wallace, Joshua Woo, Matthew T. Morris, Christopher I. Shaffrey, William M. Bullock, Nicole R. Guinn and Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(11), 3851; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14113851 - 30 May 2025
Viewed by 2784
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Degenerative lumbar spine disease (DLSD) is increasingly managed with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and evolving anesthesia methods. While general anesthesia (GA) remains standard, spinal anesthesia (SA) may offer faster recovery and fewer side effects. This study compares the clinical and economic [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Degenerative lumbar spine disease (DLSD) is increasingly managed with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and evolving anesthesia methods. While general anesthesia (GA) remains standard, spinal anesthesia (SA) may offer faster recovery and fewer side effects. This study compares the clinical and economic outcomes of GA versus SA in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Methods: A retrospective review of 18 TLIF patients (2018–2022) was performed, with 9 patients in each cohort. Patients were matched by demographics and procedure type. Data collected included operative time, blood loss, complications, postoperative opioid utilization, and 30-day readmissions. Costs were analyzed in categories: anesthesia, implants, inpatient care, operating room (OR) supplies, OR time, and PACU fees, using Wilcoxon Rank T-tests and Pearson Chi-Squared tests. Results: Clinical outcomes such as blood loss, and operative time were similar between groups. However, SA patients had significantly shorter LOS compared to GA (SA: 12 h vs. GA: 84 h, % difference: −150%, p = 0.04). Additionally, SA patients had lower total direct costs ($27,881.85 vs. $35,669.01; p = 0.027). Significant cost reductions with SA were noted in OR supplies/medications ($7367.93 vs. $10,879.46; p = 0.039) and inpatient costs ($621.65 vs. $3092.66; p = 0.027). Within these categories, reductions were observed for intravenous solutions, sedatives/anesthetics, pressure management, labs, imaging, evaluations, hospital care, and medications. Although costs for implants, anesthesia care, OR time, and PACU fees were lower with SA, these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: In TLIF for DLSD, SA provides significant economic advantages over GA while yielding comparable clinical outcomes. These results support SA as a cost-effective alternative, warranting further prospective studies to confirm these findings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Spine Surgery: Current Practice and Future Directions)
Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 589 KB  
Systematic Review
Current Trends and Future Directions in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Review of Emerging Techniques and Evolving Management Paradigms
by Gianluca Galieri, Vittorio Orlando, Roberto Altieri, Manlio Barbarisi, Alessandro Olivi, Giovanni Sabatino and Giuseppe La Rocca
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(10), 3390; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14103390 - 13 May 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3291
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Lumbar spine surgery has undergone significant technological transformation in recent years, driven by the goals of minimizing invasiveness, improving precision, and enhancing clinical outcomes. Emerging tools—including robotics, augmented reality, computer-assisted navigation, and artificial intelligence—have complemented the evolution of minimally invasive surgical [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Lumbar spine surgery has undergone significant technological transformation in recent years, driven by the goals of minimizing invasiveness, improving precision, and enhancing clinical outcomes. Emerging tools—including robotics, augmented reality, computer-assisted navigation, and artificial intelligence—have complemented the evolution of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches, such as endoscopic and lateral interbody fusions. Methods: This systematic review evaluates the literature from February 2020 to February 2025 on technological and procedural innovations in LSS. Eligible studies focused on degenerative lumbar pathologies, advanced surgical technologies, and reported clinical or perioperative outcomes. Randomized controlled trials, comparative studies, meta-analyses, and large case series were included. Results: A total of 32 studies met the inclusion criteria. Robotic-assisted surgery demonstrated high accuracy in pedicle screw placement (~92–94%) and reduced intraoperative blood loss and radiation exposure, although long-term clinical outcomes were comparable to conventional techniques. Intraoperative navigation improved instrumentation precision, while AR enhanced ergonomic workflow and reduced surgeon distraction. AI tools showed promise in surgical planning, guidance, and outcome prediction but lacked definitive evidence of clinical superiority. MIS techniques—including endoscopic discectomy and MIS-TLIF—offered reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery, with equivalent pain relief, fusion rates, and complication profiles compared to open procedures. Lateral and oblique approaches (XLIF/OLIF) further optimized alignment and indirect decompression, with favorable perioperative metrics. Conclusions: Recent innovations in lumbar spine surgery have enhanced technical precision and perioperative efficiency without compromising patient outcomes. While short-term benefits are clear, long-term clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness require further investigation. Integration of robotics, navigation, AI, and MIS into spine surgery reflects an ongoing shift toward personalized, data-driven, and less invasive care. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives in Lumbar Spine Surgery: Treatment and Management)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 3420 KB  
Article
Implementation and Feasibility of Mechanomyography in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery
by Fabian Sommer, Ibrahim Hussain, Noah Willett, Mousa K. Hamad, Chibuikem A. Ikwuegbuenyi, Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez, Sertac Kirnaz, Lynn McGrath, Jacob Goldberg, Amanda Ng, Catherine Mykolajtchuk, Sam Haber, Vincent Sullivan, Pravesh S. Gadjradj and Roger Härtl
J. Pers. Med. 2025, 15(2), 42; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm15020042 - 23 Jan 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1695
Abstract
Background: Mechanomyography (MMG) is a neurodiagnostic technique with a documented ability to evaluate the compression of nerve roots. Its utility in degenerative spine surgery is unknown. Objective: To assess the utility of intraoperative MMG during cervical posterior foraminotomy, minimally invasive transforaminal [...] Read more.
Background: Mechanomyography (MMG) is a neurodiagnostic technique with a documented ability to evaluate the compression of nerve roots. Its utility in degenerative spine surgery is unknown. Objective: To assess the utility of intraoperative MMG during cervical posterior foraminotomy, minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), and tubular lumbar far lateral discectomy. Methods: A prospective feasibility study was conducted during which MMG was applied during three procedures. Adhesive accelerometers were placed on two muscle groups per procedure. Stimulus threshold in mA was recorded before and after the decompression of the nerve root. Differences in stimulation thresholds were correlated with operative findings. Results: In total, 22 patients were included in this study; 5 patients underwent cervical foraminotomies, 3 underwent MIS-TLIFs, and 14 underwent tubular far lateral discectomies. For the foraminotomies, all cases showed a reduction in stimulation threshold (mean of 3.4 mA) after decompression. For MIS-TLIF cases, there was a limited reduction in the stimulation threshold after decompression (mean 1.7 mA). For far lateral discectomy, there was a mean reduction of 4.3 mA in the stimulation threshold following decompression. Conclusions: MMG is a method that may provide intraoperative feedback on the decompression of nerve roots. In the context of MIS-TLIF, MMG showed a limited decrease in stimulus threshold. This may be due to the identification of the nerve occurring after decompression is already underway. For cervical foraminotomies and far lateral discectomies, MMG showed promising results in determining adequate decompression of the nerve root. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Clinical Research of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 4364 KB  
Review
Evolution of the Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): From Open to Percutaneous to Patient-Specific
by Peter N. Drossopoulos, Favour C. Ononogbu-uche, Troy Q. Tabarestani, Chuan-Ching Huang, Mounica Paturu, Anas Bardeesi, Wilson Z. Ray, Christopher I. Shaffrey, C. Rory Goodwin, Melissa Erickson, John H. Chi and Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(8), 2271; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13082271 - 14 Apr 2024
Cited by 13 | Viewed by 4503
Abstract
The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has seen significant evolution since its early inception, reflecting advancements in surgical techniques, patient safety, and outcomes. Originally described as an improvement over the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), the TLIF began as an open surgical procedure, [...] Read more.
The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has seen significant evolution since its early inception, reflecting advancements in surgical techniques, patient safety, and outcomes. Originally described as an improvement over the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), the TLIF began as an open surgical procedure, that notably reduced the need for the extensive neural retractation that hindered the PLIF. In line with the broader practice of surgery, trending toward minimally invasive access, the TLIF was followed by the development of the minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), a technique that further decreased tissue trauma and postoperative complications. Subsequent advancements, including Trans-Kambin’s Triangle TLIF (percLIF) and transfacet LIF, have continued to refine surgical access, minimize surgical footprint, and reduce the risk of injury to the patient. The latest evolution, as we will describe it, the patient-specific TLIF, is a culmination of the aforementioned adaptations and incorporates advanced imaging and segmentation technologies into perioperative planning, allowing surgeons to tailor approaches based on individual patient anatomy and pathology. These developments signify a shift towards more precise methods in spine surgery. The ongoing evolution of the TLIF technique illustrates the dynamic nature of surgery and emphasizes the need for continued adaptation and refinement. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 10226 KB  
Case Report
Using Augmented Reality Technology to Optimize Transfacet Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Case Report
by Anas Bardeesi, Troy Q. Tabarestani, Stephen M. Bergin, Chuan-Ching Huang, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Walter F. Wiggins and Muhammad M. Abd-El-Barr
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(5), 1513; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13051513 - 6 Mar 2024
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2632
Abstract
The transfacet minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is a novel approach available for the management of lumbar spondylolisthesis. It avoids the need to manipulate either of the exiting or traversing nerve roots, both protected by the bony boundaries of the approach. [...] Read more.
The transfacet minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is a novel approach available for the management of lumbar spondylolisthesis. It avoids the need to manipulate either of the exiting or traversing nerve roots, both protected by the bony boundaries of the approach. With the advancement in operative technologies such as navigation, mapping, segmentation, and augmented reality (AR), surgeons are prompted to utilize these technologies to enhance their surgical outcomes. A 36-year-old male patient was complaining of chronic progressive lower back pain. He was found to have grade 2 L4/5 spondylolisthesis. We studied the feasibility of a trans-Kambin or a transfacet MIS-TLIF, and decided to proceed with the latter given the wider corridor it provides. Preoperative trajectory planning and level segmentation in addition to intraoperative navigation and image merging were all utilized to provide an AR model to guide us through the surgery. The use of AR can build on the safety and learning of novel surgical approaches to spine pathologies. However, larger high-quality studies are needed to further objectively analyze its impact on surgical outcomes and to expand on its application. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Developments in Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 2900 KB  
Article
Clinical and Radiologic Analysis of Minimally Invasive Anterior–Posterior Combined Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) versus Transforaminal Interbody Fusion
by Yoshihisa Kotani, Atsushi Ikeura, Takahiro Tanaka and Takanori Saito
Medicina 2024, 60(1), 107; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60010107 - 6 Jan 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2111
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Although adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery brought about improvement in the quality of life of patients, it is accompanied by high invasiveness and several complications. Specifically, mechanical complications of rod fracture, instrumentation failures, and pseudarthrosis are still unsolved issues. To [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Although adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery brought about improvement in the quality of life of patients, it is accompanied by high invasiveness and several complications. Specifically, mechanical complications of rod fracture, instrumentation failures, and pseudarthrosis are still unsolved issues. To better improve these problems, oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) was introduced in 2015 at my institution. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of anterior–posterior combined surgery for ASD between the use of OLIF51 and transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) at L5/S1. Materials and Methods: A total of 117 ASD patients received anterior–posterior correction surgeries either with the use of OLIF51 (35 patients) or L5/S1 TLIF (82 patients). In both groups, L1–5 OLIF and minimally invasive posterior procedures of hybrid or circumferential MIS were employed. The sagittal and coronal spinal alignment and spino-pelvic parameters were recorded preoperatively and at follow-up. The quality-of-life parameters and visual analogue scale were evaluated, as well as surgical complications at follow-up. Results: The average follow-up period was thirty months (13–84). The number of average fused segments was eight (4–12). The operation time and estimated blood loss were significantly lower in OLIF51 than in TLIF. The PI-LL mismatch, LLL, L5/S1 segmental lordosis, and L5 coronal tilt were significantly better in OLIF51 than TLIF. The complication rate was statistically equivalent between the two groups. Conclusions: The introduction of OLIF51 for adult spine deformity surgery led to a decrease in operation time and estimated blood loss, as well as improvement in sagittal and coronal correction compared to TLIF. The circumferential MIS correction and fusion with OLIF51 serve as an effective surgical modality which can be applied to many cases of adult spinal deformity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Orthopedics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 1618 KB  
Article
The Effects of Interbody Device Design and Placement on Lumbar Lordosis and Disc Height in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
by Ian J. Wellington, Caroline R. Kaufman, Christopher L. Antonacci, Ergin Coskun, Mark P. Cote, Hardeep Singh, Scott S. Mallozzi and Isaac L. Moss
Prosthesis 2023, 5(3), 752-762; https://doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis5030053 - 10 Aug 2023
Cited by 16 | Viewed by 2976
Abstract
There are a wide variety of interbody devices available for use in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). While traditionally these interbodies are bullet-shaped, crescent-shaped cages have become increasingly common. There is a paucity of literature comparing the effect of cage geometry with substratification [...] Read more.
There are a wide variety of interbody devices available for use in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). While traditionally these interbodies are bullet-shaped, crescent-shaped cages have become increasingly common. There is a paucity of literature comparing the effect of cage geometry with substratification for surgical approach (minimally invasive (MIS) vs. open). The aim of this study was to determine the effect of implant geometry, positioning, and surgical approach on the correction of different spinal alignment parameters in patients undergoing TLIF. A retrospective chart and imaging review was performed on 103 patients with a total of 131 instrumented segments performed by a single surgeon. Preoperative, initial postoperative, and final postoperative standing lateral lumbar radiographs were evaluated for lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), anterior disc height (ADH), and posterior disc height (PDH). Anterior-posterior implant positioning was recorded for initial and final postoperative radiographs. These measurements were compared among four groups: open bullet (OB), MIS bullet (MB), open crescent (OC), and MIS crescent (MC). SL increased in all groups by a mean of 2.9° at initial imaging and 2.2° at final imaging. The OC group had greater initial improvement in SL compared to the MB group (p = 0.02), though this effect was lost at final follow-up (p = 0.11). The OB and OC groups conferred greater initial improvement in ADH (p = 0.02; p = 0.04), while the OC group had greater final improvement in ADH compared to the MB and MC groups (p = 0.01; p = 0.01). The OC group had less initial improvement in PDH compared with the other groups (p = 0.03, p = 0.02, p < 0.01). The MB group provided greater final improvement in PDH compared with the MC and OC groups (p = 0.04, p = 0.01). Cage geometry, surgical approach, and implant position all demonstrated a statistically significant but clinically minor impact on segmental alignment for TLIF procedures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Spine Implants – Materials and Mechanics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 12914 KB  
Article
Free-Hand MIS TLIF without 3D Navigation—How to Achieve Low Radiation Exposure for Both Surgeon and Patient
by Roberto Doria-Medina, Ulrich Hubbe, Christoph Scholz, Ronen Sircar, Johannes Brönner, Herbert Hoedlmoser and Jan-Helge Klingler
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(15), 5125; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12155125 - 4 Aug 2023
Viewed by 2116
Abstract
Background: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is one of the most frequently performed spinal fusion techniques, and this minimally invasive (MIS) approach has advantages over the traditional open approach. A drawback is the higher radiation exposure for the surgeon when conventional fluoroscopy (2D-fluoroscopy) [...] Read more.
Background: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is one of the most frequently performed spinal fusion techniques, and this minimally invasive (MIS) approach has advantages over the traditional open approach. A drawback is the higher radiation exposure for the surgeon when conventional fluoroscopy (2D-fluoroscopy) is used. While computer-assisted navigation (CAN) reduce the surgeon’s radiation exposure, the patient’s exposure is higher. When we investigated 2D-fluoroscopically guided and 3D-navigated MIS TLIF in a randomized controlled trial, we detected low radiation doses for both the surgeon and the patient in the 2D-fluoroscopy group. Therefore, we extended the dataset, and herein, we report the radiation-sparing surgical technique of 2D-fluoroscopy-guided MIS TLIF. Methods: Monosegmental and bisegmental MIS TLIF was performed on 24 patients in adherence to advanced radiation protection principles and a radiation-sparing surgical protocol. Dedicated dosemeters recorded patient and surgeon radiation exposure. For safety assessment, pedicle screw accuracy was graded according to the Gertzbein–Robbins classification. Results: In total, 99 of 102 (97.1%) pedicle screws were correctly positioned (Gertzbein grade A/B). No breach caused neurological symptoms or necessitated revision surgery. The effective radiation dose to the surgeon was 41 ± 12 µSv per segment. Fluoroscopy time was 64 ± 34 s and 75 ± 43 radiographic images per segment were performed. Patient radiation doses at the neck, chest, and umbilical area were 65 ± 40, 123 ± 116, and 823 ± 862 µSv per segment, respectively. Conclusions: Using a dedicated radiation-sparing free-hand technique, 2D-fluoroscopy-guided MIS TLIF is successfully achievable with low radiation exposure to both the surgeon and the patient. With this technique, the maximum annual radiation exposure to the surgeon will not be exceeded, even with workday use. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1246 KB  
Article
Latest Developments in Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment in Slovakia and Its Comparison with an Open Approach for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases
by Marina Potašová, Peter Filipp, Róbert Rusnák, Eva Moraučíková, Katarína Repová and Peter Kutiš
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(14), 4755; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12144755 - 18 Jul 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1631
Abstract
The study describes the benefits of MIS-TLIF (minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion) and compares them with OTLIF (open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion). It compares blood loss, length of hospitalization stays (LOS), operation time, and return of the patient to the environment. A [...] Read more.
The study describes the benefits of MIS-TLIF (minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion) and compares them with OTLIF (open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion). It compares blood loss, length of hospitalization stays (LOS), operation time, and return of the patient to the environment. A total of 250 adults (109 males and 141 females), mean age 59.5 ± 12.6, who underwent MIS-TLIF in the Neurosurgery Clinic (NSC) Ruzomberok, Slovakia, because of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD), participated in this retrospective study. Data were obtained from the patients’ medical records and from the standardized Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) index questionnaire. To compare ODI in our study sample, we used the Student’s Paired Sample Test. To compare the MIS-TLIF and OTLIF approaches, a meta-analysis was conducted. Confidence intervals were 95% CI. The test of homogeneity (Chi-square (Q)) and the degree of heterogeneity (I2 test) among the included studies were used. Statistical analyses were two-sided (α = 0.05). All monitored parameters were significantly better in MIS-TLIF group: blood loss (p < 0.001), operation time (p < 0.001), and ODI changes (p < 0.001). LOS (p < 0.042) were close to the significance level. ODI in the study sample decreased by 33.44% points after MIS-TLIF, and it significantly increased as well (p < 0.001). The percentage of patients who were satisfied with the surgery they underwent was 84.8%. The study confirmed that the MIS-TLIF method is in general gentler for the patient and allows the faster regeneration of patient’s health status compared to OTLIF. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Developments in Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1458 KB  
Article
Is Advanced Age a Factor That Influences the Clinical Outcome of Single- or Double-Level MIS-TLIF? A Single-Center Study with a Minimum Two-Year Follow-Up on 103 Consecutive Cases
by Daniele Bongetta, Camilla de Laurentis, Raffaele Bruno, Alessandro Versace, Elena Virginia Colombo, Carlo Giorgio Giussani and Roberto Assietti
Life 2023, 13(6), 1401; https://doi.org/10.3390/life13061401 - 16 Jun 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1708
Abstract
As life expectancy rises, more elderly people undergo spinal fusion surgery to treat lumbar degenerative diseases. The MIS-TLIF technique, which minimizes soft tissue manipulation, is a promising fusion technique for frailer patients. The aim of this study was to investigate if older age [...] Read more.
As life expectancy rises, more elderly people undergo spinal fusion surgery to treat lumbar degenerative diseases. The MIS-TLIF technique, which minimizes soft tissue manipulation, is a promising fusion technique for frailer patients. The aim of this study was to investigate if older age is a significant factor in the clinical outcome of single- or double-level MIS-TLIF. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 103 consecutive patients. Data were compared between younger (<65 y.o.) and older (≥65 y.o.) patients. We observed no significant differences between baseline characteristics of the two groups apart from the frequency of disk space treated, with a relative predominance of L3-L4 space treated in the elderly (10% vs. 28%, p = 0.01) and L5-S1 space in younger patients (36% vs. 5%, p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in complication rate, surgical satisfaction, EQ 5D-5L, or Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) global or specific scores, with the exception of the EQ 5D-5L “mobility” score, where older patients fared worse (1.8 ± 1.1 vs. 2.3 ± 1.4; p = 0.05). The minimal invasiveness of the surgical technique, age-related specific outcome expectations, and biomechanical issues are all potential factors influencing the lack of age group differences in outcome scores. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Advances in Spine Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 4919 KB  
Article
Marker Screw Utilization for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MS-MIS TLIF): Promises and Advantages
by Mohammed Khashab, Moyassar Karami, Muath Alswat and Mohamed Elkhalifa
Medicina 2023, 59(3), 585; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59030585 - 16 Mar 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2523
Abstract
Background and Objective: Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) has been investigated and shown excellent short- and long-term outcomes. In this paper, we describe a new MIS-TLIF technique and pedicle screw insertion using a marker screw as a guidance method. Moreover, [...] Read more.
Background and Objective: Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) has been investigated and shown excellent short- and long-term outcomes. In this paper, we describe a new MIS-TLIF technique and pedicle screw insertion using a marker screw as a guidance method. Moreover, we report perioperative, postoperative, and patient-related outcomes. In addition, this paper outlines major differences in radiation exposure, cost effectiveness and accuracy of Marker Screw Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion (MS-MIS TLIF) compared to other techniques. We report our technique to share our knowledge and experience with the aim of achieving a better MIS-TLIF that would help both surgeons and patients. Materials and Methods: A prospective case series was conducted between October 2018 and February 2021. Patients undergoing MS-MIS TLIF with marker screws were consecutively included. The surgery did not exceed two levels. The patients’ medical records were reviewed, and the included patients were asked to complete two outcome-questionnaires before surgery and at the six-month visit. The surgical technique is described in this paper. Results: A total of 37 patients were recruited. The mean age was 57.35 ± 12.8 years, and more than half of the patients were females. The most common indications for surgery were degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis, with the typical level at L4–5. The operative time was 3.02 ± 0.83 h, while the estimated blood loss was 127.7 ± 71.1 mL. The average time for ambulation and hospitalization was 1 ± 1.1 and 2.84 ± 1.4 days, respectively. The patients described significant improvement in both questionnaires. No screw-related complications or screw revisions were needed up to two years of follow-up. Conclusions: The use of marker screws for pedicle screw placement through a minimally invasive fashion is shown to be a promising technique that can overcome many drawbacks, including cost, operative time, and radiation exposure. Performing MS-MIS TLIF can achieve a 360- degree fusion compared to percutaneous MIS-TLIF. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Lumbar Spine Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop