Basivertebral nerve ablation with concurrent lumbar laminotomy.

Lumbar radiculopathy due to impingement of nerve roots from facet hypertrophy and/or disc herniation can often coincide with vertebrogenic low back pain. This is demonstrated on MRI with foraminal stenosis and Modic changes. We examine the potential of using a combination of basivertebral nerve ablation (BVNA) and lumbar laminotomy as an alternative to traditional spinal fusion in specific patient populations. This unique combination of surgical techniques has not been previously reported in the medical literature. We report a man in his late 30s with chronic low back pain and lumbar radiculopathy, treated with BVNA and concurrent laminotomy. The patient reported progressive improvements in his mobility and pain over the next 2 years. We discuss the advantages of using this technique for lumbar radiculopathy and Modic changes compared with conventional surgical modalities.

[Progress of intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation for symptomatic Modic alterations].

Chronic lumbar and back pain caused by degenerative vertebral endplates presents a challenging issue for patients and clinicians. As a new minimally invasive spinal treatment method, radiofrequency ablation of vertebral basal nerve in bone can denature the corresponding vertebral basal nerve through radiofrequency ablation of degenerative vertebral endplate. It blocks the nociceptive signal transmission of the vertebral base nerve, thereby alleviating the symptoms of low back pain caused by the degenerative vertebral endplate. At present, many foreign articles have reported the operation principle, operation method, clinical efficacy and related complications of radiofrequency ablation of the vertebral basal nerve. The main purpose of this paper is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the current relevant research, and provide a reference for the follow-up clinical research.

Disc herniation associated with butterfly vertebra anomaly.

Butterfly vertebra anomaly is a rare condition where the vertebral body fails to fuse during embryogenesis. In this case report, we present a 32-year-old male with progressive lower back pain and paralysis in both lower extremities. CT- and MR-scan showed an isolated L3 butterfly vertebra with a fusion of L2 and L3 discus through the defect and a discus prolapse compressing the spinal canal. The patient underwent successful decompressive surgery and experienced relief in symptoms post-operatively.

Confirmatory study of the usefulness of quantum molecular resonance and microdissectomy for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy in a prospective cohort at 6 months follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Low back pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint and while prognosis is usually favorable, some patients experience persistent pain despite conservative treatment and invasive treatment to target the root cause of the pain may be necessary. The aim of this study is to evaluate patient outcomes after treatment of lumbar radiculopathy (LR) with quantum molecular resonance radiofrequency coblation disc decompression and percutaneous microdiscectomy with grasper forceps (QMRG). METHODS: This prospective cohort study was carried out in two Spanish hospitals on 58 patients with LR secondary to a contained hydrated lumbar disc hernia or lumbar disc protrusion of more than 6 months of evolution, which persisted despite conservative treatment with analgesia, rehabilitation, and physiotherapy, and/or epidural block, in the previous 2 years. Patients were treated with QMRG and the outcomes were measured mainly using the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions, Numeric Rating Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, SF12: Short Form 12 Health Survey, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impression of Improvement, and Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale. RESULTS: Patients who received QMRG showed significant improvement in their baseline scores at 6 months post-treatment. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold was met by 26-98% of patients, depending on the outcome measure, for non-sleep-related outcomes, and between 17 and 62% for sleep-related outcome measures. Of the 14 outcome measures studied, at least 50% of the patients met the MCID threshold in 8 of them. CONCLUSION: Treatment of LR with QMRG appears to be effective at 6 months post-intervention.

Middle cluneal nerve entrapment sites in the surgical field.

INTRODUCTION: Middle cluneal nerve (MCN) entrapment around the sacroiliac joint elicits low back pain (LBP). For surgical decompression to be successful, the course of the MCN must be known. We retrospectively studied the MCN course in 15 patients who had undergone MCN neurolysis. METHODS: Enrolled in this retrospective study were 15 patients (18 sides). We inspected their surgical records and videos to determine the course of the entrapped MCN. The area between the posterior superior- and the posterior inferior iliac spine was divided into areas A-D from the rostral side. The MCN transit points were identified at the midline and the lateral edge connecting the posterior superior- and posterior inferior iliac spine. Before and 6 months after surgery, the patients recorded the degree of LBP on the numerical rating scale and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. RESULTS: We decompressed 24 MCNs. The mean number was 1.3 nerves per patient (range 1-2). The MCN course was oblique in the cranio-caudal direction; the nerve tended to be observed in areas C and D. In six patients (40%), we detected two MCN branches, they were in the same area and adjacent. Postoperatively, LBP was improved significantly in all patients. CONCLUSION: Between the posterior superior- and the posterior inferior iliac spine, the MCN ran obliquely in the cranio-caudal direction; it was prominent in areas on the caudal side. In six (40%) patients, we decompressed two adjacent MCNs. Our findings are useful for MCN decompression surgery.

Multifidus lesions: A possible pathological component in patients with low back pain after posterior lumbar surgery.

There are few histological studies on multifidus after lumbar surgery, and it is not clear whether multifidus changes affect the clinical outcome after lumbar surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between multifidus changes and clinical outcomes after lumbar surgery. Patients underwent internal fixation removal after lumbar posterior surgery were enrolled. Patients were divided into a low back pain (LBP) group (n = 15) and a non-low back pain (non-LBP) group (n = 10).The Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) were completed. 18 patients with lumbar fracture surgery were included as the control group. Multifidus morphological changes were observed by hematoxylin and eosin and Masson staining. The expression of TGF-ß1 was observed by immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence and Western blot. The cross-sectional area (CSA) of the multifidus in the non-LBP group and the control group were greater than those in the LBP group. TGF-ß1 expression and gray value ratio in the non-LBP group and the control group were lower than those in the LBP group. The multifidus CSA and TGF-ß1 expression in multifidus were strongly correlated with ODI and VAS. Patients with LBP after posterior lumbar surgery suffered from atrophy and fibrosis lesions in the multifidus, and the degree of multifidus lesions was closely related to dysfunction and pain, which might be one of the causes of LBP after posterior lumbar surgery.

[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic and uniportal interlaminar endoscopic decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness between unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression (ULBD) with unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and uniportal interlaminar endoscopy (UIE) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: A clinical data of 52 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, who met the selection criteria and treated with ULBD between March 2021 and November 2022, was retrospectively analyzed. The patients were allocated into UBE group (23 cases) and UIE group (29 cases) according to the surgical methods. There was no significant difference ( P>0.05) in age, gender, body mass index, surgical segment, type of lumbar stenosis, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), disc height, and dural sac area between the two groups. Perioperative indexes (incision length, operation time, hospital stay, and surgical complications), clinical indicators (VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, and ODI before operation and at 3 days, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months after operation), and imaging indicators (disc height and dural sac area before operation and at 1, 12 months after operation, and dural sac expansion area) were recorded and compared between the two group. Results: All operations in both groups were successfully completed. Compared with the UIE group, the UBE group had shorter operation time and longer incision length, with significant differences ( P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in hospital stay and incidence of complications between the two groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-20 months (mean, 14 months). The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI after operation significantly improved when compared with preoperative values ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the above indicators between different time points after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at different time points ( P>0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in disc height between the two groups at different time points after operation ( P>0.05). However, the dural sac area and dural sac expansion area were significantly larger in the UBE group than in the UIE group ( P<0.05). Conclusion: ULBD with UBE and UIE can achieve satisfactory effectiveness in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. But the former has more thorough decompression and better dural sac expansion than the latter.

Conjoined lumbosacral nerve root: a case report.

BACKGROUND: In patients with conjoined nerve roots, hemilaminectomy with sufficient exposure of the intervertebral foramen or lateral recess is required to prevent destabilization and ensure correct mobility of the lumbosacral spine. To the best of our knowledge, no case reports have detailed the long-term course of conjoined nerve roots after surgery. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 51-year-old Japanese man with a conjoined nerve root. The main symptoms were acute low back pain, radiating pain, and right leg muscle weakness. Partial laminectomy was performed with adequate exposure to the conjoined nerve root. The symptoms completely resolved immediately after surgery. However, the same symptoms recurred 7 years postoperatively. The nerve root was compressed because of foraminal stenosis resulting from L5-S disc degeneration. L5-S transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was performed on the contralateral side because of an immobile conjoined nerve root. At 44 months after the second surgery, the patient had no low back pain or radiating pain, and the muscle weakness in the right leg had improved. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of the long-term course of conjoined nerve root after partial laminectomy. When foraminal stenosis occurs after partial laminectomy, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion from the contralateral side may be required because of an immobile conjoined nerve root.

Retrospective Study to Compare the Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Microscopic Unilateral Laminotomy with Microscopic Bilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression in the Early Postoperative Period in 142 Patients with Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

BACKGROUND We aimed to compare the effectiveness of microscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) and microscopic bilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (BLBD) in the early postoperative period among patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with LSS who underwent ULBD or BLBD between January 2020 and December 2023, including 94 patients who underwent ULBD and 58 who underwent BLBD. Patient demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, and data related to LSS were reviewed. Preoperative and postoperative assessments on day 10 included back pain visual analog scale (VAS), walking distance, and Odom criteria. Disability was evaluated using the self-assessment Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and on day 30. Additionally, wound infection, postoperative modified MacNab criteria, and pain (back, leg, and hip) were recorded. RESULTS Age and sex were similar in the 2 groups. Both surgeries significantly reduced low back pain, increased walking distance, and improved Odom category on day 10, compared with baseline (P<0.001 for all). A significant decrease in 30-day ODI, compared with baseline, was observed in both groups (P<0.001 for both). The ULBD group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with wound infection (P=0.014); however, the ODI score among ULBD recipients was significantly lower (better) on day 30 (P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS ULBD may represent a less invasive, more effective, and safer surgical alternative than BLBD and classical laminectomy in patients with single-level LSS, but precautions are essential concerning wound infection.

Navigated Simultaneous Lateral Minimally Invasive Tubular and Posterior Mini-Open Access for Removal and Revision of Triangular Sacroiliac Joint Implants: A Technical Note.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) fusion, to treat back pain caused by SIJ dysfunction, can employ open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and either cylindrical (screw-shaped) or triangular (wedge-shaped) implants. Fusion nonunion sometimes explains recurrent SIJ pain following fusion and occasionally requires hardware revision. MIS revision minimizes patient pain, infection, and disability, but due to the triangular implant size and form factor, implant removal can present challenges for MIS access during the explantation and achieving good bony purchase for reinstrumentation. Here, we report a prone single-position lateral MIS/posterior mini-open procedure for triangular-implant SIJ fusion revision. METHODS: The patient is a 72-year-old female who underwent right SIJ fusion for lower back and leg pain sustained after a fall 2 years prior but experienced recurrent pain over the subsequent 2 years, with imaging findings of right SIJ peri-hardware lucencies and diagnostic injections confirming persistent right-sided sacroiliitis. RESULTS: The patient underwent hardware removal using the lateral MIS incision with table-mounted tubular access and image-guided navigation to maintain exposure, plus simultaneous reinstrumentation using a navigated S2-alar-iliac screw and iliac bolt construct with connecting rod through the posterior mini-open incision made for the navigation reference frame spinous process clamp. CONCLUSIONS: The use of navigation and MIS access can significantly decrease the complexity of lateral hardware removal, and mini-open navigated screw-and-rod constructs offer reinstrumentation options accessible to surgeons unfamiliar with specialized posterior SIJ systems.

[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for degree â degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) in the treatment of degreeⅠdegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods: A clinical data of 58 patients with degreeⅠDLS who met the selection criteria between October 2021 and October 2022 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 28 cases were treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (decompression group) and 30 cases with ULIF (ULIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05) in the gender, age, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), disk height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and other baseline data. The operation time, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative ambulation time, VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, ODI, laboratory examination indexes (CRP, ESR), and imaging parameters (DH, SL) were compared between the two groups. Results: Compared with the ULIF group, the decompression group had shorter operation time, less postoperative drainage, and earlier ambulation ( P<0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as nerve root injury, epidural hematoma, or infection occurred. All patients were followed up 12 months. Laboratory tests showed that ESR and CRP at 3 days after operation in decompression group were not significantly different from those before operation ( P>0.05), while the above indexes in ULIF group significantly increased at 3 days after operation compared to preoperative values ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of ESR and CRP before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Except that the VAS score of low back pain at 3 days after operation was not significantly different from that before operation in decompression group ( P>0.05), there were significant differences in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P<0.05). The VAS score of low back pain in ULIF group was significantly higher than that in decompression group at 3 days after operation ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). The ODI of the two groups significantly improved after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 3 days and 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at the two time points after operation ( P<0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in DH and SL between pre-operation and 12 months after operation in decompression group ( P>0.05). However, the above two indexes in ULIF group were significantly higher than those before operation ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of DH and SL before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Conclusion: Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression can achieve good effectiveness in the treatment of degree Ⅰ DLS. Compared with ULIF, it can shorten operation time, reduce postoperative drainage volume, promote early ambulation, reduce inflammatory reaction, and accelerate postoperative recovery. ULIF has more advantages in restoring intervertebral DH and SL.

Identification and decompression of superior cluneal nerve implicated in low back pain.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) can be attributable to entrapment of the superior cluneal nerve (SCN) around the iliac crest. Surgical decompression is a useful treatment; however, finding all entrapped SCNs involved in patients with LBP can be difficult. We performed a retrospective study to help identify entrapped SCNs in the narrow surgical field. METHODS: We enrolled 20 LBP patient (22 sides) with SCN entrapment. They were 9 males and 11 females; their mean age was 72.5 years. We developed a 3-step procedure for successful SCN decompression surgery. In step 1, the thoracolumbar fascia is exposed and the SCN penetrating the fascia is released. In step 2, the fascia is opened and the SCN is released. In step 3, the fascia above the iliac crest is opened and the SCN is released. RESULTS: We successfully released 66 nerves; the average was 3.0 ± 0.8 (1-4) per patient. Step 1 detected 18 nerves (27.3%), step 2 identified 35 (53.0%), and in step 3, 13 (19.7%) were recognized. By tracing the thin nerves branching off the SCN, we found 7 nerves (10.6%). We performed 22 operations; step 1 identified 16 SCNs (72.7%), step 2 identified 21 (95.5%), and step 3 found 12 nerves (54.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The SCN is most readily identified upon opening of the thoracolumbar fascia. To identify as many SCN branches as possible, our 3-step method may be useful.

Effect of revision sacroiliac joint fusion on unresolved pain and disability: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The sacroiliac (SI) joint is recognized as a source of low back pain in 15-30% of patients. Though randomized controlled trials have shown clinical improvement following SI joint fusion in 83.1% of patients, revision rates of 2.9% within 2 years have been reported. There is a paucity of literature reviewing this small yet significant population of patients requiring revision surgery. METHODS: Following IRB approval, retrospective review of patients, who underwent a revision SI joint fusion from 2009 to 2021 was completed. Patient-reported outcomes were measured before and at each clinic visit after surgery with visual analoge scale (VAS) for back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Patient characteristics (chronic opiate use and prior lumbar fusion) and surgical factors (operative approach, type/number of implants and use of bone graft) were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with Paired t and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression determined if patients met the minimally clinical important differences (MCID) for VAS-back pain and ODI scores at 1 year. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients (77% female) with an average age of 49.1 (SD ± 11.1) years met inclusion criteria. Forty-four had single sided revisions and eight bilateral revisions. At 1 year follow-up there was no significant improvement in VAS-Back (p = 0.06) or ODI (p = 0.06). Patients with chronic opioid use were 8.5 times less likely to achieve the MDC for ODI scores (OR 0.118, p = 0.029). There was no difference in outcomes when comparing the different surgical approaches (p = 0.41). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates patients undergoing revision surgery have moderate improvement in low back pain, however, few have complete resolution of their symptoms. Specific patient factors, such as chronic opiate use and female sex may decrease the expected improvement in patient-reported outcomes following surgery. Failure to obtain relief may be due to incorrect indications, lack of biologic fusion and/or presence of co-pathologies. Further clinical examination and consistent long-term follow-up, clarify the role revision surgery plays in long-term patient outcomes.

Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion using triangular titanium implants versus nonsurgical management for sacroiliac joint dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive sacroiliac joint (MISIJ) fusion is a surgical option to relieve SIJ pain. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare MISIJ fusion with triangular titanium implants (TTI) to nonoperative management of SIJ dysfunction. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included prospective clinical trials that compared MISIJ fusion to nonoperative management in individuals with chronic low back pain attributed to SIJ dysfunction. We evaluated pain on visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 8 articles representing 3 trials that enrolled 423 participants were deemed eligible. There was a significant reduction in pain score with MISIJ fusion compared with nonoperative management (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.03 to -1.39). Similarly, ODI scores (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.81), SF-36 PCS scores (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19), SF-36 MCS scores (SMD 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.9), and patient satisfaction (odds ratio 6.87, 95% CI 3.73 to 12.64) were significantly improved with MISIJ fusion. No significant difference was found between the 2 groups with respect to adverse events (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.23). CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that MISIJ fusion with TTI shows a clinically important and statistically significant improvement in pain, disability score, HRQoL, and patient satisfaction with a similar adverse event profile to nonoperative management in patients with chronic low back pain attributed to SIJ dysfunction.

Association between cup orientation and low back pain after total hip arthroplasty in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative low back pain (LBP) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is classified as secondary hip-spine syndrome. The purpose of this study was to explore the correlations between cup orientation of THA and postoperative LBP in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included 364 ONFH patients who underwent bilateral THA between January 2011 and December 2020. Among them, 53 patients (14.6%) experienced postoperative LBP at the end of follow-up and were designated as pain group (PG). A control group (CG) consisting of 106 patients with similar age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) to those in the PG was selected. Postoperative LBP in the PG was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Demographic data, clinical information, and radiographic criteria were evaluated as potential predictors of LBP. RESULTS: Patients in PG (mean age, 47.3 years [range, 27 to 75 years]; 42 [79%] male) had a mean VAS score of 4.6 (range, 1 to 9) compared with 0 for the patients in CG (mean age, 47.6 years [range, 19 to 77 years]; 84 [79%] male). There were no significant differences in clinical data between the two groups (p > 0.05). Preoperative radiographic variables also showed no significant differences between the PG and CG (p > 0.05). However, the postoperative inclination, anteversion, and standing ante-inclination (AI) were significantly lower in the PG compared to the CG, whereas the sitting and standing sacral slope (SS) were significantly higher (p < 0.05). Moreover, the variations in standing AI, standing and sitting pelvic tilt (PT) were significantly lower in the PG compared to the CG, while the variations in standing and sitting SS and lumbar lordosis (LL) were significantly higher (p < 0.05). The variation in standing AI in the PG showed a significantly correlation with the variation of standing SS, standing PT, and LL (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Postoperative LBP in ONFH patients after bilateral THA is significantly associated with the intraoperative cup orientation. The variation in standing AI is correlated with the variations in standing SS, standing PT, and LL, potentially contributing to the development of postoperative LBP.

Predictive Factors for Residual Low Back Pain Following Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation.

BACKGROUND Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is a mature and popular surgery for treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). The main objective of our study was to identify risk factors for residual low back pain after PELD and to improve postoperative management. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed the clinical and imaging data of 251 patients who underwent PELD for LDH. We defined residual LBP as visual analog scale (VAS) score for LBP ≥3 at 2 years postoperatively, and severe LBP was defined as VAS for LBP ≥7.5. The clinical and imaging data were analyzed by comparing patients with VAS scores ≥3 and <3, and univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis were applied to predict the risk factors for residual LBP. RESULTS There were 56 (22.3%) patients with LBP VAS ≥3 at 2 years postoperatively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that severe baseline VAS for LBP (P<0.001), MCs type I (P=0.006), and severe fatty infiltration of the paravertebral muscles (P<0.001) were independent risk factors for residual LBP after PELD. CONCLUSIONS In patients with LDH, MCs type I, severe baseline LBP, and fatty infiltration of the paravertebral muscles were predictive factors for residual LBP after PELD. Our study suggests that spine surgeons should pay more attention to these imaging parameters, which may be a helpful indicator for the choice of surgical modality.

Clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion and modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease.

BACKGROUND: To compare the early clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PE-PLIF) and modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion (MPLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease (LDD). METHODS: A total of 37 patients who underwent PE-PLIF and 58 patients who underwent MPLIF from March 2019 to January 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, post-operative hospitalization time, and post-operative bedrest time were recorded. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of leg pain and low back pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were evaluated and compared before the operation, 3 days after the operation, 1 week after the operation, 1 month after the operation, 6 months after the operation and at the last follow-up. The modified MacNab's criteria were applied at the last follow-up. The fusion rate and surgical-related complications during follow-up were recorded. RESULTS: The average operation time in the PE-PLIF group was highly significant longer than that in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). The intraoperative blood loss, post-operative hospitalization time, and post-operative bedrest time were significantly less in the PE-PLIF group than those in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). There were highly significant differences in VAS scores of leg pain, VAS scores of low back pain, JOA scores, ODI scores at the last follow-up compared with those before the operation in the two groups (P < 0.01). Three days after the operation and 1 week after the operation, the VAS scores for low back pain and ODI were highly significant less in the PE-PLIF group than that in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). Three days after the operation, the JOA scores were highly significant higher in the PE-PLIF group than that in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). All patients showed intervertebral fusion at 6 months after the operation. Two patients (5.4%) in the PE-PLIF group experienced complications. CONCLUSION: Both PE-PLIF and MPLIF surgery were clinically effective and safe for patients with single-segment LDD. PE-PLIF surgery is a promising technique that can be used as an alternative treatment for single-segment LDD.

Establishment of a risk prediction model for residual low back pain in thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures after percutaneous kyphoplasty.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify potential independent risk factors for residual low back pain (LBP) in patients with thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) following percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) treatment. Additionally, we aim to develop a nomogram that can accurately predict the occurrence of residual LBP. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the medical records of thoracolumbar OVCFs patients who underwent PKP treatment at our hospital between July 2021 and December 2022. Residual LBP was defined as the presence of moderate or greater pain (VAS score ≥ 4) in the low back one day after surgery, and patients were divided into two groups: the LBP group and the non-LBP group. These patients were then randomly allocated to either a training or a validation set in the ratio of 7:3. To identify potential risk factors for residual LBP, we employed lasso regression for multivariate analysis, and from this, we constructed a nomogram. Subsequently, the predictive accuracy and practical clinical application of the nomogram were evaluated through a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, a calibration curve, and a decision curve analysis (DCA). RESULTS: Our predictive model revealed that five variables-posterior fascial oedema, intravertebral vacuum cleft, time from fracture to surgery, sarcopenia, and interspinous ligament degeneration-were correlated with the presence of residual LBP. In the training set, the area under the ROC was 0.844 (95% CI 0.772-0.917), and in the validation set, it was 0.842 (95% CI 0.744-0.940), indicating that the model demonstrated strong discriminative performance. Furthermore, the predictions closely matched actual observations in both the training and validation sets. The decision curve analysis (DCA) curve suggested that the model provides a substantial net clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS: We have created a novel numerical model capable of accurately predicting the potential risk factors associated with the occurrence of residual LBP following PKP in thoracolumbar OVCFs patients. This model serves as a valuable tool for guiding specific clinical decisions for patients with OVCFs.

Comparison of safety and efficacy of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (M-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment lumbar degenerative diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (M-TLIF) with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of single-segment lumbar degenerative disorders in order to assess its safety and effectiveness. METHODS: From January 2016 to January 2021, 74 patients who received single-segment M-TLIF were examined. A total of 74 patients having single-segment PLIF during the same time period were included in a retrospective controlled study using the same inclusion and exclusion criteria. The two groups were compared in terms of the fusion rate, the Oswestry disability index (ODI), the visual analogue scale of low back pain (VAS), the perioperative condition, the postoperative complications, and the postoperative neighbouring segment degeneration. RESULTS: All patients had surgery satisfactorily and were monitored for at least a year afterwards. The baseline values for the two groups did not significantly differ. The interbody fusion rate between PLIF (98.65%) and M-TLIF (97.30%) was not significantly different. In the follow-up, the M-TLIF group's VAS score for low back and leg pain was lower than that of the PLIF group. The ODI score of the M-TLIF group was lower than that of the PLIF group at 7 days and 3 months following surgery. Both groups' post-op VAS and ODI scores for low back and leg pain were much lower than those from before the procedure. In M-TLIF group, the operation time, drainage tube extraction time, postoperative bed rest time and hospital stay time were shorter, and the amount of intraoperative blood loss was less. Compared with those before operation, the height of intervertebral space and intervertebral foramen were significantly increased in both groups during postoperative follow-up (P < 0.05). The postoperative complications and adjacent segment degeneration of M-TLIF were significantly lower than those of PLIF. CONCLUSIONS: M-TLIF is a safe and effective treatment for lumbar degenerative disorders, with a high fusion rate and no significant difference between M-TLIF and PLIF. M-TLIF's efficacy and safety are comparable to that of PLIF, particularly in terms of early relief of low back pain and improvement in quality of life following surgery. Therefore, M-TLIF technology can be popularized and applied in clinic.