[Efficacy analysis of OLIF combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with or without redundant nerve roots].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion(OLIF) combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with or without redundant nerve roots(RNRs). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 92 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated by oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation from June 2019 to June 2022 was performed. There were 32 males and 60 females, aged from 44 to 82 years old with an average of (63.67±9.93) years old. All patients were divided into RNRs positive group and RNRs negative group according to redundancy or not before operation. There were 38 patients in RNRs positive group, including 15 males and 23 females. The age ranged from 45 to 82 years old with an average of (65.45±10.37) years old. The disease duration was 24.00(12.00, 72.00) months. There were 54 patients in RNRs negative group, including 17 males and 37 females. The age ranged from 44 to 77 years old with an average of (62.42±9.51) years old. The disease duration was 13.50(9.00, 36.00) months. The general data of patients were recorded, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss and complications. The imaging parameters before and after operation were observed, including the number of stenosis segments, intervertebral space height, lumbar lordosis angle and dural sac area. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the back and lower extremity pain, and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) was used to evaluate the activities of daily living. RESULTS: All patients were followed up for 8 to 18 months with an average of (11.04±3.61) months, and no complications were found during the follow-up period.The number of stenosis segments in RNRs positive group (1.71±0.46) was more than that in RNRs negative group(1.17±0.38). In RNRs positive group, intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS, lower extremity pain VAS, ODI score were (1.11±0.19) cm, (0.46±0.17) cm2, (5.39±1.00) scores, (5.05±1.01) points, (55.74±4.05) points, respectively. RNRs negative groups respectively (0.97±0.23) cm, (0.69±0.26) cm2, (4.50±0.77) scores, (4.00±0.58) scores, (47.33±3.43) %. In RNRs positive group, intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS, leg pain VAS, ODI score were (1.60±0.19) cm, (0.74±0.36) cm2, (3.39±0.72) scores, (3.05±1.01) scores, (46.74±4.82) scores, respectively. RNRs negative groups respectively (1.48±0.25) cm, (1.12±0.35) cm2, (3.00±0.82) scores, (3.00±0.82) scores, (37.67±3.58) %. The postoperative intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS score, lower extremity pain VAS and ODI score of the patients in the RNRs positive group and the negative group were significantly improved compared with those before operation, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). There were statistically significant differences in the number of stenosed segments, preoperative intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS, lower extremity pain VAS, and ODI between the two groups(P<0.05). There were significant differences in postoperative intervertebral space height and postoperative ODI between the two groups(P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in intervertebral space height before and after operation and ODI score before and after operation(P>0.05). There were significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative dural sac area, difference of dural sac area before and after operation, postoperative low back pain VAS, difference of low back pain VAS score before and after operation, difference of lower extremity pain VAS before and after operation between the two groups(P<0.05). CONCLUSION: OLIF combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation has a good effect on patients with or without RNRs. Multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis and decreased dural sac area may lead to the occurrence of RNRs, and LSS patients with RNRs have more severe symptoms. LSS patients with RNRs have worse surgical outcomes than those without RNRs.

Biomechanical Finite Element Analysis of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy via a Transforaminal Approach.

OBJECTIVE: Based on the previously established 3-dimensional model, this study uses the finite element analytical method to observe the effects of superior articular process resection and intervertebral discectomy on the stress of the surgical segment under different motion states. METHODS: A validated L3-S1 finite element model was modified for simulation. And on the basis of the normal lumbar spine model, the superior articular process and discs of different parts of L4-L5 were simulated for resection. The resection models were divided into 6 groups, and the stress characteristics of articular process and discs of the lumbar spine under different postoperative motion conditions were examined under the same loading conditions. RESULTS: Simultaneous resection of the tip and base of the superior articular process increased the stress on the facet joint under various motion states compared with separate resections. In addition, the fewer herniated discs that are removed, the smaller the increase in facet joint stress. excision of the tip of the superior articular process caused a smaller stress increase in the facet joint than excision of the base under the forward bending and right-lateral flexion, and the opposite results were found under left-lateral flexion, posterior extension, and rotation. Resection of the tip of the superior articular process increases disc stress more than resection of the base of the superior articular process. CONCLUSIONS: Select resection of the superior articular process base as much as possible to expose the target of the disc. And minimize annulus damage and disc removal.

Clinical significance of redundant nerve roots in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with percutaneous internal fixation.

BACKGROUND: While there have been previous studies on the surgical efficacy of patients with redundant nerve roots (RNRs), a persistent issue is that some patients continue to experience redundancy even after surgery. Furthermore, the clinical significance of RNRs remains unclear. Notably, there is a lack of research regarding RNRs within the context of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with percutaneous internal fixation. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to investigate the correlation between RNRs and clinical outcomes following OLIF combined with percutaneous internal fixation. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) who underwent single-segment OLIF combined with percutaneous internal fixation were categorized into three groups. Group 1 comprised patients with positive RNRs both before and after the operation. Group 2 included patients with positive RNRs preoperatively but negative RNRs postoperatively. Group 3 consisted of patients with consistently negative RNRs before and after the operation. Comprehensive patient data were collected, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and any recorded complications. Radiographic parameters, both pre- and post-operative, were assessed, encompassing the number of stenosis segments, disc height (DH), lumbar lordotic angle, dural sac cross-sectional area, and the placement of the fusion cage. Furthermore, the Visual Analogue Scale was applied to gauge back and leg pain, while the Oswestry Disability Index was employed to appraise daily living activities. A comparative analysis was carried out among the three patient groups. RESULTS: In this study, all 87 LSS patients successfully underwent surgery. Among them, 35 patients (40.2%) showed preoperative MRI assessment indicating positive RNRs. In the postoperative MRI assessment, 14 of these patients maintained positive RNRs status, and they were grouped into Group 1. The remaining 21 patients saw a transition to negative RNRs status and were included in Group 2. Among the 52 patients who had preoperative MRI assessments showing negative RNRs, their postoperative RNRs status remained negative, forming Group 3. All patients received follow-up, which ranged from 8 to 18 months, and no complications occurred during this period. In this study, the postoperative efficacy and parameters such as DH and Dural Sac CSA significantly improved compared to preoperative values for all 87 patients. Patients with preoperative RNRs had more stenosis segments, smaller dural sac CSA, and more severe symptoms. In all three groups, postoperative efficacy scores significantly improved compared to preoperative scores. Group 2 patients had their fusion cages placed more in the middle, while Group 1 patients had their fusion cages more anteriorly located. Group 2 patients exhibited greater recovery in dural sac CSA postoperatively compared to Group 1 patients. Additionally, Group 2 patients had better ODI efficacy scores compared to Group 1 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of the presence or absence of RNRs, patients experienced improvement after undergoing OLIF combined with percutaneous internal fixation. Preoperative RNRs appear to be linked to multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis, a reduction in dural sac CSA, and symptom severity. Patients with negative postoperative RNRs demonstrated better treatment efficacy. Furthermore, the placement of the fusion cage appears to have a significant impact on postoperative efficacy and RNRs outcomes.

[Clinical significance and risk factors of redundant nerve root in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical significance and screen the risk factors of redundant nerve roots(RNRs) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: The clinical data of 196 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis in the department of Spinal Surgery, Yijishan Hospital, Wannan Medical College from April 1, 2015 to November 30, 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were divided into RNRs positive group and RNRs negative group according to the presence of RNRs. The differences in general clinical data, imaging parameters, visual analogue scale(VAS), Oswestry disability index(ODI), and other indicators between the two groups were compared. The risk factors which are highly correlated with RNRs were screened by binary Logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: There were 59 cases in the RNRs positive group, with an occurrence rate of 29.95% (59/137), and 137 cases in the RNRs negative group. The incidence rate of RNRs in 196 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis was 30.10% (59/196). VAS and ODI scores of patients in the two groups were statistically significant (P<0.05), and clinical symptoms of patients in the RNRs positive group were more severe than those in the RNRs negative group. There were significant differences in age, number of stenosis segments, average area of lumbar dural sac, area of the narrowest segment and the narrowest segment(P<0.05). Binary logistic regression analysis showed that the number of stenosis segments, the average median sagittal diameter of spinal canal, and the average area of dural sac in lumbar intervertebral space were correlated with the generation of RNRs (P<0.05). The regression coefficient of the number of stenosis segments was -1.115, the regression coefficient of the median sagittal diameter of the spinal canal was -1.707, and the regression coefficient of the mean dural sac area of the lumbar intervertebral space was 7.556. CONCLUSION: The clinical symptoms of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis accompanied by RNRs are more severe than those without them. The number of narrow segments, median sagittal diameter of the spinal canal, and the area of the lumbar intervertebral dural sac are the high-risk factors for RNRs, with the area of the lumbar intervertebral dural sac has the highest correlation.

Comparison of the efficacy of fully endoscopic spine surgery using transforaminal and interlaminar approaches in the treatment of prolapsed lumbar 4/5 disc herniation.

BACKGROUND: There is still much controversy about whether transforaminal or interlaminar fully endoscopic spine surgery can better treat lumbar 4/5 disc herniation. Therefore, this study intends to compare the clinical efficacy of fully endoscopic spine surgery through transforaminal and interlaminar approaches in the treatment of lumbar 4/5 disc herniation. METHODS: Seventy-six patients with lumbar 4/5 disc herniation admitted from March 2019 to June 2020 were divided into the transforaminal approach group (endoscopic transforaminal lumbar discectomy, ETLD; 54 cases) and the interlaminar approach group (endoscopic interlaminar lumbar discectomy, EILD; 22 cases) according to different surgical methods. The general clinical data and clinical evaluation scale of the patients were compared. RESULTS: The post-operative ODI and VAS scores were significantly better in the EILD group (P < 0.05). The VAS and ODI scores of patients with upper-shoulder and sub-axillary types in the EILD group were superior to those in the ETLD group (P < 0.05), while the VAS and ODI scores of patients with the pre-radicular type were better when they underwent ETLD rather than EILD (P < 0.05). Patients with Lee zone III type in the EILD group had better post-operative ODI scores than those in the ETLD group (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference in VAS scores (P > 0.05). Patients with Lee zone IV type who underwent EILD had better VAS and ODI scores than those who underwent ETLD (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with a prolapsed intervertebral disc that belongs to the upper-shoulder type, sub-axillary type, or Lee III or IV type, EILD can achieve better outcomes.

Full-endoscopic spine surgery treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis after osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Few reports have described lumbar foraminal stenosis-induced radiculopathy after treatment by full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) combined with percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) in patients with vertebral compression fractures. We herein report such a case, including the patient's treatment process and doctor's surgical experience. CASE SUMMARY: A 79-year-old man presented with symptoms of radiculopathy after sustaining L4 vertebral compression fractures. Imaging and physical examination revealed L4 vertebral compression fractures combined with L3/4 Lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS). The patient's symptoms were low back pain with pain in the lateral left leg. Although many reports have described radiculopathy induced by osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, the use of FESS combined with PVP has rarely been reported. This case report indicates that the combination of FESS and PVP is a safe and effective approach for the treatment of LFS-induced radiculopathy after vertebral compression fractures. This minimally invasive technique has great potential to replace traditional lumbar fixation and decompression surgery. Thus, we suggest the continued accumulation of similar cases to discuss the wider application of FESS. CONCLUSION: For patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) and LFS, PVP and FESS can be used to restore the vertebral height and reduce the pressure around the intervertebral foramen. Additionally, the combination of FESS and PVP can treat the pain or numbness of the low back and lower limbs and allow for recovery in a short time with excellent postoperative effects. In general, FESS is a good treatment for radiculopathy caused by foraminal stenosis after OVCF.